• Victorino goes to the remove of Alcaraz in full censorship campaign for going to the bulls: "He is a free citizen and this is a way of harassing"

Tennis and bullfighting share some important things. Years ago, the great Curro Romero was asked which audience he preferred, if that of Las Ventas in Madrid or that of the Maestranza in Seville; He ruled that he preferred the tennis public, which is the one that best knows how to be silent.

More recently, tennis, through bullfighting, has served in an excellent way to detect those who yearn to live in a homogeneous society and would like to reinstate that old and degrading penalty that was civil death, to impose it on those who dared to behave in a way different from what is required by the unwritten precepts of political correctness.

Last Monday, the young Murcian tennis player Carlos Alcaraz, number 2 in the world in his own, attended one of the bullfights of the Murcia fairaccompanied by two other illustrious Murcia: the former national football coach José Antonio Camacho and the bullfighter Pepín Liria.

The dissemination of several photographs of his presence in a bullfighting celebration unleashed in the media and social networks reactions of the most diverse. The most curious, for me, is that of those who showed their capital surprise because a 20-year-old was in a bullring, ignoring the notable increase in young spectators that bullfighting has had for some years.

But, as usual, the one that has had more diffusion is the virulent, offensive and threatening criticism that the animalists have orchestrated. For them, it was not enough to show their displeasure with the bullfighting hobby of Alcaraz, it was about trying to stigmatize him in such a way that his name and dignity were condemned forever. If possible, ostracism. And if not, to bear the perpetual guilt of a sin against the values of Wokismo (sins, as is known, for which there is no forgiveness or redemption possible).

We live in strange times. Times in which our societies are made up of people from more diverse backgrounds than ever before and religions, cultural expressions, ideologies, forms of family are more different,... all around us. Most of the dogmas, taboos and common feelings widely shared until not long ago have disappeared and are in many cases ridiculed. However, under the apparent diversity has grown a pagan religion that anathematizes and condemns in a more virulent way than ever all those who dare to publicly dissent from its commandments. Cancel culture is spreading its censorious tentacles relentlessly.

It is paradoxical that these postulates, and in particular those of animalism and antispeciesism, are defended from positions that claim to be progressive. First, because since the Enlightenment progress has been based on placing man (read, to avoid other controversies, the "human being") as the center and reference of all things and their dignity, the common dignity of all men, as the fundamental element on which to build ethics. To assimilate animals with human beings, to try to attribute "rights" to them, is nothing but degrading the human being to a lower stage of dignity and undermining the ethical conformation of humanism.

But, in addition, because the supposedly progressive positions have always claimed the need to defend local traditions and customs, small businesses, the rights of individuals, against the great monopolistic centers of power that build ideologies and with overwhelming imperialist extension. And animalism and antispeciesism, if anything, is a construct born within ultra-developed societies that try to impose themselves on everyone to generate uniform patterns of thought and behavior in many areas that allow a few companies (global and absolutely powerful) to sell their products and services (meals, series,...) indiscriminately around the world. because everyone (a lady from Calcula, an executive from New York or a tennis player from Murcia) think alike, have the same cultural references and share the same consumption habits. Curious progressivism is to strengthen two or three world monopolies and do away with everything small and diverse in each country, region or cultural tradition.

And, finally, because if something characterized progressivism is the vindication of dissidence in the way of thinking. The demand for respect, space and public voice for those who do not abide by the dogmas or taboos of the moment. This, in its origin, was essential for the very birth and growth of the social, ideological and political movements that now champion causes that try to make hegemonic by eliminating any hint of dissident thought. Beyond the anti-democratic, anti-enlightenment and anti-liberal nature of this behavior, they forget that if the custom of civilly annulling the dissenting party is extended, they can once again be the ones who are expelled from public life when social trends are contrary to their postulates, as the result of pendulum movements to which history has us so accustomed.

For all that, the insults and threats to Alcaraz, the attempt to stigmatize and annul him civilly (to him, and as a warning, to any other famous athlete or artist who tries to go to a bullring) are not an innocuous tantrum of a few exalted. Nor a beneficent tendency of sensitive souls who are horrified by the harm inflicted on an animal. These are facts that any democrat must condemn. Because respect for others is at the basis of a democratic, liberal and open society. Even if the other thinks differently or has different cultural references (as long as their behaviors, obviously, are within the law).

  • Carlos Alcaraz
  • New York
  • Murcia
  • Bulls