#eco morales coup | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

magicnightfall · 6 years

Text

MARVELOUS, MYSTICAL, RATHER SOPHISTICAL (AND PRATICALLY PERFECT)

Quando venne rilasciato il primo trailer per Mary Poppins Returns, un placido primo pomeriggio di metà settembre, io mi trovavo a bordo di un autobus in direzione stazione di Ancona. Girava da un po’ la voce che sarebbe stato reso pubblico proprio quel giorno, e io avevo in effetti trascorso le precedenti otto ore (il lunedì la mia sveglia suona così presto che è puntata direttamente a “mortaccivostri”) a refreshare tutti i social esistenti chiedendomi dove diavolo fosse quel video.

All’improvviso, sbam! In un tripudio di cori angelici, di cherubini, serafini e spazzacamini, il trailer.

Ora, dovete sapere che in tutte le mila volte che ho preso quell’autobus, il controllore è passato in due sole occasioni. L’ultima di queste è stata proprio quel lunedì.

Io mi ero appena sparata i tanto agognati due minuti e ventisei secondi, e il mio equipaggiamento di personaggio base consisteva in: n. 2 occhi a cuoricino; n. 1 sorriso ebete; n. 1 saracinesca abbassata nel cervello con un cartello con su scritto “Torno subito”. Se qualcuno avesse sbirciato oltre detta saracinesca avrebbe visto i miei neuroni fare il trenino cantando e sculettando un medley composto da Brigitte Bardot, Bardot, Maracaibo e La Notte Vola.

Io non so, giuro (giuro: non lo dico per aumentare l’effetto drammatico) che non ho idea da quanto tempo il controllore stesse cercando di attirare la mia attenzione. Avete presente Paola Perego che chiama “Presidente? Presidente?” quando Andreotti.exe smise di funzionare? Ecco.

Oh, alla fine il biglietto gliel’ho fatto vedere, eh, non si vada a pensare che con artifizi e raggiri stessi cercando di frodare la Conerobus S.p.A. Gliel’ho fatto vedere, e lui l’ha squadrato, poi ha squadrato me, ha pensato “Questa qua è totalmente fulminata ma almeno il titolo di viaggio è in ordine” e cià.

Morale della favola: quando si tratta di Mary Poppins, o quando si tratta di Emily Blunt (o, a maggior ragione, quando si tratta di Mary Poppins interpretata da Emily Blunt), io perdo totalmente la capacità di intendere e di volere. E, forse, anche e soprattutto la dignità.

It’s a good thing you came along when you did, Mary Poppins

“Arrivederci, Mary Poppins. Non stare via molto” salutava Bert alla fine del primo film.

È stata via cinquantaquattro anni e centoventi giorni.

Si tratta di uno degli intervalli di tempo più lunghi mai registrati tra un film e il suo sequel: se vogliamo escludere Bambi II, che è uscito direttamente in home-video sessantatré anni e centosettantotto giorni dopo, a detenere il record è Fantasia 2000, con i suoi cinquantanove anni e quarantotto giorni.

È un ciclopico lasso temporale - tanto ampio da vedere l’emergere della contestazione giovanile, l’uomo sulla Luna, la fine della guerra del Vietnam, la caduta del muro di Berlino e la dissoluzione dell’URSS, le guerre jugoslave, l’abolizione dell’apartheid, la nascita di internet, l’11 settembre, la crisi economica più grave dopo quella degli anni ’30 e Leonardo DiCaprio vincere un Oscar - ma Mary non poteva tornare che ora: ora che i tempi sono più bui che mai, ora che c’è l’unica attrice in grado di darle la vita dopo dame Julie Andrews.

Really? How incredibly rude. One never discusses a woman’s age, Micheal. Would’ve hoped I taught you better.

Non trattandosi di un remake ma di un sequel, questa Mary Poppins è la stessa Mary Poppins del 1964, ma ha caratteristiche peculiari tutte sue che di fatto la rendono una terza versione di se stessa. La pellicola, infatti, ci mostra dei lati della tata che la contraddistinguono tanto da quella del primo film tanto da quella dei libri, nel complesso creando un personaggio più sfumato e sfaccettato pur restando - e lo approfondiremo poi - sempre uguale a se stesso. E, ovviamente, praticamente perfetto.

Nei libri (*), viene descritta una Mary estremamente altera e vanitosa (“Ci teneva a mostrarsi nella sua veste migliore. In realtà, era sicura di mostrarsi sempre nella sua veste migliore”; “Sospirò di piacere quando vide tre se stesse [...] Le sembrava una vista così graziosa che avrebbe desiderato che di se stesse ce ne fossero una dozzina”; “Non guardava altro che se stessa riflessa nel vetro”; “Non aveva mai visto nessuno con una figura tanto elegante e distinta”), superba (“Poi, con un lungo poderoso sospiro, che sembrò significare che aveva formulato il suo giudizio, disse: «Accetto l’impiego.» E più tardi la signora Banks riferì al marito: «L’ha detto proprio come se ci facesse un grande onore.»; “Squadrò altezzosamente”, “Arricciò il naso con superiorità”; “Soggiunse con l’aria di compatirli”), brusca, sempre propensa a dire “no”, con una voce “fredda e chiara che suonava sempre come un ammonimento”, rigida in faccia e con “un terribile sguardo ammonitore” tanto che non la si poteva guardare e disobbedirle.

Gli unici momenti in cui la Mary del libro si mostra vagamente impacciata sono quando è con Bert (“Mary Poppins abbassò lo sguardo, strisciando la punta di una scarpa sul pavimento, due o tre volte. Poi sorrise alla scarpa in un modo che la scarpa capì benissimo che quel sorriso non era per lei”) e i rari, rarissimi sprazzi di gentilezza riservati ai bambini mandano questi ultimi nel panico più totale, facendogli temere che stia per succedere qualcosa di brutto - nello specifico, che stia per lasciarli (“«Forse sarà soltanto per gentilezza» disse Giovanna per calmarlo, ma si sentì un tuffo al cuore come Michele. Sapeva benissimo che Mary Poppins non perdeva mai il tempo a essere gentile. Eppure, strano a dirsi, durante tutto il pomeriggio Mary Poppins non aveva detto neanche una parola sgarbata”; “Alla fine Michele non poté sopportarlo più a lungo: «Oh, sii sgarbata, Mary Poppins! Sii ancora sgarbata! Non è da te! Oh, mi sento tanto in ansia!»”).

Nel film del 1964 i tratti più spigolosi del personaggio appaiono decisamente smussati, vuoi direttamente dalla sceneggiatura, vuoi dalla grazia e dall’eleganza di cui era (è) infusa Julie Andrews. Tratti che, ad ogni modo, permangono: non a caso, la primissima volta che vediamo Mary la scopriamo intenta a sistemarsi il trucco e a contemplarsi allo specchio. Ancora, è lei stessa a descriversi come “gentile ma anche severissima”, e difatti non lesina sguardi di rimprovero ed espressioni sdegnate, sbuffi di esasperazione o un fermo tono di voce all’occorrenza.

Dobbiamo aspettare fino alla fine del film per vederla “confusa dai sentimenti” (per quanto lei affermi vivamente di no), e cioè quando si appresta a lasciare i Banks consapevole che il suo compito è finito (almeno per i successivi vent’anni).

La terza Mary è tutto questo (non sarebbe Mary Poppins, altrimenti), ma dietro ai modi spicci e alle espressioni scioccate e impermalite, specie quando viene fatto riferimento all’età

o, peggio ancora, al peso,

lascia intravedere anche una buona dose di empatia. La nuova generazione di Banks, infatti, colpita da un terribile lutto, sta cercando di riprendersi da una situazione ben più tragica rispetto a quella di Jane e Michael alla stessa età (cioè quella di avere un padre che, concentrato solo sul lavoro, materialmente presente ma emotivamente distante, non si rendeva conto che presto non avrebbe avuto “bimbi da poter viziar”). Così, quando John le fa notare che nell’ultimo anno, a seguito della morte della madre, sono cresciuti tanto, l’espressione di Mary è dolce e compassionevole, ma Emily è veloce a ricacciarla dentro, e a sostituirla con la pragmaticità che è solita contraddistinguere la tata. Ancora, dopo averli messi a letto, e cantata una dolcissima ninna nanna, al di là della porta chiusa indulge in un sorriso malinconico, di assoluta partecipazione al dolore di tre bambini rimasti orfani di madre.

Non solo, ma questa Mary, per quanto - come da tradizione - sia arrivata volando e abbia compiuto le magie più incredibili, appare anche più umana: di fronte alla porta della bottega della cugina Topsy (una certa Meryl Streep), quando questa le intima di andarsene perché è il secondo mercoledì del mese e il suo mondo si rovescia come una “tartaruga sdraiata su schiena”, la tata è genuinamente colta alla sprovvista. Si è totalmente dimenticata, come una persona normale. Viene mostrata una sorta di fallibilità che è difficile anche solo immaginare di associare alla Mary del libro o a quella del 1964. Badate, si tratta di una dimenticanza, questa, che è ben diversa da quella di cui alla prima metà del film, quando Mary conduce l’allegra brigata alla Royal Doulton Music Hall salvo poi scoprire che si è “dimenticata” di farla apparire: in questo caso, infatti, quando le viene fatto notare, è palese come quella sbadataggine altro non sia se non un calcolatissimo coup de théâtre.

A quella fallibilità fa peraltro eco la stessa Topsy, quando afferma che “Una volta tanto Mary Poppins ha ragione”.

(Are you, though?)

Ciò non toglie che, per quanto più tenera o più “umana”, o caratterizzata così che emergano sfumature ulteriori rispetto alle descrizioni o interpretazioni precedenti, sempre di Mary Poppins stiamo parlando, cioè del più fulgido esempio - per dirla con Christopher Vogler (**) - di “Eroe catalizzatore”. Si tratta di “figure centrali [...] che non cambiano molto perché la loro funzione principale è provocare una trasformazione negli altri. Come i catalizzatori nella chimica, essi provocano un cambiamento nel sistema senza subire mutamenti. [...] questi Eroi subiscono pochi cambiamenti interiori e intervengono soprattutto per aiutare gli altri o guidarli nella crescita.”

Questo, ovviamente, vale soprattutto per le due Mary cinematografiche, in quanto quella cartacea ha ben poco ruolo nell’arco di trasformazione dei cinque piccoli Banks (o del Banks senior), limitandosi ad arrivare, far vivere loro le avventure più bizzarre e poi ripartire.

La Mary del 1964, invece, nel rompere gli equilibri (de)cantati da George Banks, fa comprendere a quest’ultimo che il suo ruolo di padre non (deve) consistere soltanto nell’impartire una istruzione rigida, ma anche e soprattutto nell’essere presente in senso affettivo. E quella del 2018 è tornata per ricordare ai bambini di essere bambini, e agli adulti di esserlo stati. Tema, questo, recentemente affrontato dalla Disney anche nel bel Ritorno Al Bosco dei Cento Acri.

In effetti, questa terza Mary ha anche un ruolo più attivo: è lei che mette (consapevolmente) in moto i meccanismi della trama, consegnando a Georgie lo scatolone che contiene - all’insaputa di tutti - il certificato azionario che stavano cercando, è lei che suggerisce al bambino di accomodare l’aquilone, è lei che evoca la folata di vento decisiva.

Pratically perfect, in every way

Come Irene Adler è, per Sherlock Holmes, “La Donna” cioè il paradigma di tutto il genere femminile, così Emily Blunt è, per me, L’Attrice. Ha ragione Rob Marshall, il regista, a dire che nessun’altra persona al mondo, dell’uni o del multiverso, avrebbe potuto vestire i panni di Mary Poppins oltre lei.

Per quel che mi riguarda, con questa interpretazione Emily è entrata nell’Olimpo dei grandi con la stessa prepotenza con cui Mary sfonda la porta della bottega di Topsy. Balla e canta come se lo facesse da sempre, e regala al personaggio guizzi che, vuoi per intuito, vuoi per preparazione o per talento innato, rappresentano la cifra dell’attrice che è. Per fare un esempio, in uno dei numeri musicali più riusciti, dal gusto vaudevilliano, affronta i ritornelli di A Cover Is Not A Book con la cadenza e il tono di voce di un vecchio ebbro (tant’è che, infatti, la canzone è una sorta di discorso diretto dello zio Gutenberg, “ubriaco un giorno sì e uno no”).

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Mary Poppins Returns (@marypoppinsreturns) on Dec 27, 2018 at 7:30am PST

La sua Mary è elegante ed eccentrica, dolce e lapidaria, straordinaria e umana, infallibile e fallibile. Mezzo secolo dopo Emily ha saputo riprendere in mano un personaggio ormai entrato nell’immaginario collettivo (e per il quale Julie Andrews ha vinto l’Oscar alla migliore attrice) e ha saputo infondervi nuova vita senza per questo venire meno agli elementi costitutivi del ruolo. Mi auguro che l’Academy ne tenga conto, o potrei non rispondere più delle mie azioni.

So when life is getting scary, be your own illuminary

La controparte di Mary non è più lo spazzacamino Bert ma il lampionaio Jack, apprendista del primo. Ad interpretarlo Lin-Manuel Miranda, che dimostra di essere a suo agio su un set cinematografico tanto quanto su un palco di Broadway. Ero a conoscenza dell’enorme successo di Hamilton, ma ignoravo che lui fosse un artista tanto talentuoso: ha guadagnato una nuova fan, senza dubbio.

Once upon a time, there was a man with a wooden leg named Smith.

È stata una fortuna che, a suo tempo, abbia appreso la notizia del cameo di Dick Van Dyke nella privacy della mia camera: fosse accaduto su un autobus il controllore mi avrebbe fatta ricoverare direttamente, tanto mi sono fatta prendere dall’entusiasmo. Qui interpreta Mr Dawes jr, in uno splendido omaggio al suo secondo ruolo nel film del 1964, dove era, oltre a Bert, anche Dawes padre.

Balloon, she wrote

Se la sala in cui ho assistito alla prima proiezione del film non ha battuto ciglio al palesarsi di Dick Van Dyke (segno che non vede più in là del proprio naso - va da sé che non si è nemmeno resa conto della presenza di Karen Dotrice, la Jane Banks originale), altra storia si è avuta quando è comparsa l’unica e sola Jessica Fletcher, accompagnata da un coro di “aaaaah, guarda chi c’è”. Angela Lansbury è una leggenda del grande e del piccolo schermo, e la sua presenza non è che un valore aggiunto in un film già bello di suo.

Simply sensational, standing-ovational

P.L. Travers si starà rivoltando nella tomba: già non era entusiasta del fatto che i suoi libri divenissero un film, e non oso immaginare cosa avrebbe pensato se avesse saputo che mezzo secolo più tardi ne avrebbero girato addirittura un sequel (per tacere, poi, di Saving Mr Banks). Magra consolazione sarebbe stata per lei il fatto che Il ritorno di Mary Poppins è, secondo me, davvero un bel film.

Non nego che abbia dei difetti: ad esempio, non mi è piaciuto l’inserimento di un antagonista (un Colin Firth senza infamia e senza lode) perché cosa riuscitissima del primo film era che non vi fosse un vero e proprio cattivo se non le circostanze. Dopotutto, la (nuova) famiglia Banks andava benissimo a rotoli da sola senza la necessità dell’intervento del banchiere a rimarcarlo.

Riconosco altresì che quello che per me è un win per altri è un sin: per dire, ho apprezzato il fatto che i plot point dei due film siano praticamente paralleli, ma quello che per me è l’effetto rassicurante e familiare dell’aristotelica struttura in tre atti per altri può essere banale e “già visto”.

Ad ogni modo, parlando onestamente e con tutto l’amore che mi lega al film del 1964, questo secondo è tutto ciò che speravo sarebbe stato il sequel.

Poiché ho trascorso due ore con gli occhi a cuoricino, ritengo che abbiano saputo mantenere in vita quel senso di magia e meraviglia che è stato la fortuna di Mary Poppins. E non era scontato: il pubblico del 2018 non è lo stesso del 1964. Gli spettatori odierni hanno ormai il palato abituato alle trovate più fantasmagoriche, e se cinquanta anni fa vedere una tata discendere dal cielo o personaggi in carne ed ossa interagire con quelli disegnati sembrava (giustamente) un incredibile incanto, oggi siamo così assuefatti agli effetti speciali che non ci meravigliamo più di niente, e siamo così bombardati da storie di tutti i tipi (e da tutti i medium) che siamo alla costante ricerca di qualcosa che, vuoi per bizzarria, audacia o innovazione (penso a Black Mirror con l’episodio interattivo), riesca ad emergere dal mucchio di un’offerta vastissima. Dice bene Claire all’inizio di Jurassic World: “Siamo sinceri: nessuno si impressiona più con un dinosauro, ormai. Vent’anni fa la de-estinzione è arrivata come una magia. Oggi i bambini guardano uno stegosauro come un elefante al giardino zoologico. [...] I nostri ricercatori scoprono nuove specie ogni anno, ma i consumatori li vogliono sempre più grandi, più rumorosi... più denti.”

Il ritorno di Mary Poppins, invece, fa proprio questo: stupisce. E non tanto (o non solo) con le meraviglie dell’animazione 2D o degli effetti speciali ma con l’intimità di una piccola storia familiare.

Now my heart is so light that I think I just might start feeding the birds and then go fly a kite

Il film è sì un sequel che si regge perfettamente sulle sue gambe, ma è anche un omaggio lungo due ore: non si può fare a meno di notare come il numero dei lampionai richiami, tanto nell’ensamble quanto nelle atmosfere notturne, quello degli spazzacamini. E anche in questa seconda occasione Mary è vestita di rosso, a riprova di quanto nulla sia stato lasciato al caso.

E la colonna sonora utilizza, in maniera nemmeno sottile, gli inconfondibili temi musicali di quella precedente, contribuendo a solleticare la nostalgia degli spettatori.

Ora, in sala, origliando i commenti, ho sentito che qualcuno si aspettava che Mary cantasse anche Supercalifragilistichespiralidoso: purtroppo non lo fa, ma se avessero prestato maggiore attenzione si sarebbero resi conto che l’adattamento italiano un piccolo easter egg ce l’ha messo: così, nel brano Royal Doulton Music Hall, il verso “At the highly acclaimable, nearly untamable / lavishing praisable, always roof-raisable” diventa “È la supercalibile fragilistibile chespiralibile edosolibile”. Una piccola cosa, ma apprezzalibile.

E sì, vero che le canzoni, per quanto sagaci ed orecchiabili, forse non sono memorabili quanto le altre, ma è altresì vero che mentirei se dicessi di essere uscita dal cinema senza canticchiare The Royal Doulton Music Hall o Trip A Little Light Fantastic.

(e comunque ciò non mi impedirà certo di ascoltare in loop, per il resto della mia esistenza terrena e anche ultraterrena, Emily Blunt cantare)

Dicevo che il film è un lungo omaggio: lo è non solo del suo diretto predecessore, ma anche della fonte originale. Per fare giusto un esempio, la sequenza vaudeville attinge a piene mani dall’universo creato da P.L. Travers: i capitoli 6 e 9 del secondo libro vivono all’interno di A Cover Is Not A Book.

E il film, già che c’è, si prende la briga di citare anche un altro classico Disney, Pomi d’ottone e manici di scopa (che ha per protagonisti la già citata Angela Lansbury e David Tomlinson, cioè George Banks, e presenta canzoni scartate da Mary Poppins, a chiusura del cerchio): la sequenza subacquea è un diretto rimando a quella dell’altro film.

Entrambe le pellicole poi, con perfetta specularità, terminano con Mary che chiosa sulla sua perfezione, mentre da lontano osserva commossa i Banks che festeggiano la ritrovata serenità al parco, solo che in un caso la nuova leggerezza è data dagli aquiloni, nell’altro dai palloncini.

Now if your life is getting foggy that's no reason to complain, there's so much in store, inside the door of 17 Cherry Tree Lane

Il 2018 è stato l’anno di Emily e delle sue vasche da bagno (ma spero che a casa abbia la doccia, se non altro per motivi ecologici) e quello che mi auguro sia “in store” nel 2019 è una vagonata di premi, a cominciare dal Golden Globe, per il quale ha già beccato la nomination, passando per il SAG e per approdare all’Oscar. Altrimenti, lo ribadisco, potrei non rispondere più delle mie azioni.

E nessun controllore della Conerobus potrà far niente per fermarmi.

Se siete arrivati fin qui bravi, ma fate un ultimo sforzo e mettete un like alla pagina Emily Blunt Italia, che si ringrazia della condivisione dell’articolo.

* P.L. Travers, Mary Poppins, prima edizione digitale 2014 da III edizione Bur ragazzi, giugno 2010. Traduzione di Letizia Bompiani (1935)

** Christopher Vogler, Il viaggio dell’Eroe, Dino Audino Editore, 2010, p. 45

#mary poppins #emily blunt #il ritorno di mary poppins #mary poppins returns #lin-manuel miranda

5 notes · View notes

msamba · 3 years

Text

Does Eco-Socialism Actually Work?

[…] In this Our Changing Climate climate change video essay, I answer the question does Evo Morales’ eco-socialism work? Specifically, I look at the environmental and socialist actions of Evo Morales when he was president from when he took office in 2006 to the 2019 Bolivian coup that ousted Evo Morales from the presidency. Evo Morales was and still is an environmental champion in some respects,…

View On WordPress

#construction #design #infrastructure #Politics

0 notes

lamingtonladies · 7 years

Photo

Ur-Fascism – Umberto Eco

Printable pamphlet here

In 1942, at the age of ten, I received the First Provincial Award of Ludi Juveniles (a voluntary, compulsory competition for young Italian Fascists—that is, for every young Italian). I elaborated with rhetorical skill on the subject “Should we die for the glory of Mussolini and the immortal destiny of Italy?” My answer was positive. I was a smart boy.

I spent two of my early years among the SS, Fascists, Republicans, and partisans shooting at one another, and I learned how to dodge bullets. It was good exercise.

In April 1945, the partisans took over in Milan. Two days later they arrived in the small town where I was living at the time. It was a moment of joy. The main square was crowded with people singing and waving flags, calling in loud voices for Mimo, the partisan leader of that area. A former maresciallo of the Carabinieri, Mimo joined the supporters of General Badoglio, Mussolini’s successor, and lost a leg during one of the first clashes with Mussolini’s remaining forces. Mimo showed up on the balcony of the city hall, pale, leaning on his crutch, and with one hand tried to calm the crowd. I was waiting for his speech because my whole childhood had been marked by the great historic speeches of Mussolini, whose most significant passages we memorized in school. Silence. Mimo spoke in a hoarse voice, barely audible. He said: “Citizens, friends. After so many painful sacrifices … here we are. Glory to those who have fallen for freedom.” And that was it. He went back inside. The crowd yelled, the partisans raised their guns and fired festive volleys. We kids hurried to pick up the shells, precious items, but I had also learned that freedom of speech means freedom from rhetoric.

A few days later I saw the first American soldiers. They were African Americans. The first Yankee I met was a black man, Joseph, who introduced me to the marvels of Dick Tracy and Li’l Abner. His comic books were brightly colored and smelled good.

One of the officers (Major or Captain Muddy) was a guest in the villa of a family whose two daughters were my schoolmates. I met him in their garden where some ladies, surrounding Captain Muddy, talked in tentative French. Captain Muddy knew some French, too. My first image of American liberators was thus—after so many palefaces in black shirts—that of a cultivated black man in a yellow-green uniform saying: “Oui, merci beaucoup, Madame, moi aussi j’aime le champagne…” Unfortunately there was no champagne, but Captain Muddy gave me my first piece of Wrigley’s Spearmint and I started chewing all day long. At night I put my wad in a water glass, so it would be fresh for the next day.

In May we heard that the war was over. Peace gave me a curious sensation. I had been told that permanent warfare was the normal condition for a young Italian. In the following months I discovered that the Resistance was not only a local phenomenon but a European one. I learned new, exciting words like réseau, maquis, armée secrète, Rote Kapelle, Warsaw ghetto. I saw the first photographs of the Holocaust, thus understanding the meaning before knowing the word. I realized what we were liberated from.

In my country today there are people who are wondering if the Resistance had a real military impact on the course of the war. For my generation this question is irrelevant: we immediately understood the moral and psychological meaning of the Resistance. For us it was a point of pride to know that we Europeans did not wait passively for liberation. And for the young Americans who were paying with their blood for our restored freedom it meant something to know that behind the firing lines there were Europeans paying their own debt in advance.

In my country today there are those who are saying that the myth of the Resistance was a Communist lie. It is true that the Communists exploited the Resistance as if it were their personal property, since they played a prime role in it; but I remember partisans with kerchiefs of different colors. Sticking close to the radio, I spent my nights—the windows closed, the blackout making the small space around the set a lone luminous halo—listening to the messages sent by the Voice of London to the partisans. They were cryptic and poetic at the same time (The sun also rises, The roses will bloom) and most of them were “messaggi per la Franchi.” Somebody whispered to me that Franchi was the leader of the most powerful clandestine network in northwestern Italy, a man of legendary courage. Franchi became my hero. Franchi (whose real name was Edgardo Sogno) was a monarchist, so strongly anti-Communist that after the war he joined very right-wing groups, and was charged with collaborating in a project for a reactionary coup d’état. Who cares? Sogno still remains the dream hero of my childhood. Liberation was a common deed for people of different colors.

In my country today there are some who say that the War of Liberation was a tragic period of division, and that all we need is national reconciliation. The memory of those terrible years should be repressed, refoulée, verdrängt. But Verdrängung causes neurosis. If reconciliation means compassion and respect for all those who fought their own war in good faith, to forgive does not mean to forget. I can even admit that Eichmann sincerely believed in his mission, but I cannot say, “OK, come back and do it again.” We are here to remember what happened and solemnly say that “They” must not do it again.

But who are They?

If we still think of the totalitarian governments that ruled Europe before the Second World War we can easily say that it would be difficult for them to reappear in the same form in different historical circumstances. If Mussolini’s fascism was based upon the idea of a charismatic ruler, on corporatism, on the utopia of the Imperial Fate of Rome, on an imperialistic will to conquer new territories, on an exacerbated nationalism, on the ideal of an entire nation regimented in black shirts, on the rejection of parliamentary democracy, on anti-Semitism, then I have no difficulty in acknowledging that today the Italian Alleanza Nazionale, born from the postwar Fascist Party, MSI, and certainly a right-wing party, has by now very little to do with the old fascism. In the same vein, even though I am much concerned about the various Nazi-like movements that have arisen here and there in Europe, including Russia, I do not think that Nazism, in its original form, is about to reappear as a nationwide movement.

Nevertheless, even though political regimes can be overthrown, and ideologies can be criticized and disowned, behind a regime and its ideology there is always a way of thinking and feeling, a group of cultural habits, of obscure instincts and unfathomable drives. Is there still another ghost stalking Europe (not to speak of other parts of the world)?

Ionesco once said that “only words count and the rest is mere chattering.” Linguistic habits are frequently important symptoms of underlying feelings. Thus it is worth asking why not only the Resistance but the Second World War was generally defined throughout the world as a struggle against fascism. If you reread Hemingway’s For Whom the Bell Tolls you will discover that Robert Jordan identifies his enemies with Fascists, even when he thinks of the Spanish Falangists. And for FDR, “The victory of the American people and their allies will be a victory against fascism and the dead hand of despotism it represents.”

During World War II, the Americans who took part in the Spanish war were called “premature anti-fascists”—meaning that fighting against Hitler in the Forties was a moral duty for every good American, but fighting against Franco too early, in the Thirties, smelled sour because it was mainly done by Communists and other leftists. … Why was an expression like fascist pig used by American radicals thirty years later to refer to a cop who did not approve of their smoking habits? Why didn’t they say: Cagoulard pig, Falangist pig, Ustashe pig, Quisling pig, Nazi pig?

Mein Kampf is a manifesto of a complete political program. Nazism had a theory of racism and of the Aryan chosen people, a precise notion of degenerate art, entartete Kunst, a philosophy of the will to power and of the Ubermensch. Nazism was decidedly anti-Christian and neo-pagan, while Stalin’s Diamat (the official version of Soviet Marxism) was blatantly materialistic and atheistic. If by totalitarianism one means a regime that subordinates every act of the individual to the state and to its ideology, then both Nazism and Stalinism were true totalitarian regimes.

Italian fascism was certainly a dictatorship, but it was not totally totalitarian, not because of its mildness but rather because of the philosophical weakness of its ideology. Contrary to common opinion, fascism in Italy had no special philosophy. The article on fascism signed by Mussolini in the Treccani Encyclopedia was written or basically inspired by Giovanni Gentile, but it reflected a late-Hegelian notion of the Absolute and Ethical State which was never fully realized by Mussolini. Mussolini did not have any philosophy: he had only rhetoric. He was a militant atheist at the beginning and later signed the Convention with the Church and welcomed the bishops who blessed the Fascist pennants. In his early anticlerical years, according to a likely legend, he once asked God, in order to prove His existence, to strike him down on the spot. Later, Mussolini always cited the name of God in his speeches, and did not mind being called the Man of Providence.

Italian fascism was the first right-wing dictatorship that took over a European country, and all similar movements later found a sort of archetype in Mussolini’s regime. Italian fascism was the first to establish a military liturgy, a folklore, even a way of dressing—far more influential, with its black shirts, than Armani, Benetton, or Versace would ever be. It was only in the Thirties that fascist movements appeared, with Mosley, in Great Britain, and in Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, Yugoslavia, Spain, Portugal, Norway, and even in South America. It was Italian fascism that convinced many European liberal leaders that the new regime was carrying out interesting social reform, and that it was providing a mildly revolutionary alternative to the Communist threat.

Nevertheless, historical priority does not seem to me a sufficient reason to explain why the word fascism became a synecdoche, that is, a word that could be used for different totalitarian movements. This is not because fascism contained in itself, so to speak in their quintessential state, all the elements of any later form of totalitarianism. On the contrary, fascism had no quintessence. Fascism was a fuzzy totalitarianism, a collage of different philosophical and political ideas, a beehive of contradictions. Can one conceive of a truly totalitarian movement that was able to combine monarchy with revolution, the Royal Army with Mussolini’s personal milizia, the grant of privileges to the Church with state education extolling violence, absolute state control with a free market? The Fascist Party was born boasting that it brought a revolutionary new order; but it was financed by the most conservative among the landowners who expected from it a counter-revolution. At its beginning fascism was republican. Yet it survived for twenty years proclaiming its loyalty to the royal family, while the Duce (the unchallenged Maximal Leader) was arm-in-arm with the King, to whom he also offered the title of Emperor. But when the King fired Mussolini in 1943, the party reappeared two months later, with German support, under the standard of a “social” republic, recycling its old revolutionary script, now enriched with almost Jacobin overtones.

There was only a single Nazi architecture and a single Nazi art. If the Nazi architect was Albert Speer, there was no more room for Mies van der Rohe. Similarly, under Stalin’s rule, if Lamarck was right there was no room for Darwin. In Italy there were certainly fascist architects but close to their pseudo-Coliseums were many new buildings inspired by the modern rationalism of Gropius.

There was no fascist Zhdanov setting a strictly cultural line. In Italy there were two important art awards. The Premio Cremona was controlled by a fanatical and uncultivated Fascist, Roberto Farinacci, who encouraged art as propaganda. (I can remember paintings with such titles as Listening by Radio to the Duce’s Speech or States of Mind Created by Fascism.) The Premio Bergamo was sponsored by the cultivated and reasonably tolerant Fascist Giuseppe Bottai, who protected both the concept of art for art’s sake and the many kinds of avant-garde art that had been banned as corrupt and crypto-Communist in Germany.

The national poet was D’Annunzio, a dandy who in Germany or in Russia would have been sent to the firing squad. He was appointed as the bard of the regime because of his nationalism and his cult of heroism—which were in fact abundantly mixed up with influences of French fin de siècle decadence.

Take Futurism. One might think it would have been considered an instance of entartete Kunst, along with Expressionism, Cubism, and Surrealism. But the early Italian Futurists were nationalist; they favored Italian participation in the First World War for aesthetic reasons; they celebrated speed, violence, and risk, all of which somehow seemed to connect with the fascist cult of youth. While fascism identified itself with the Roman Empire and rediscovered rural traditions, Marinetti (who proclaimed that a car was more beautiful than the Victory of Samothrace, and wanted to kill even the moonlight) was nevertheless appointed as a member of the Italian Academy, which treated moonlight with great respect.

Many of the future partisans and of the future intellectuals of the Communist Party were educated by the GUF, the fascist university students’ association, which was supposed to be the cradle of the new fascist culture. These clubs became a sort of intellectual melting pot where new ideas circulated without any real ideological control. It was not that the men of the party were tolerant of radical thinking, but few of them had the intellectual equipment to control it.

During those twenty years, the poetry of Montale and other writers associated with the group called the Ermetici was a reaction to the bombastic style of the regime, and these poets were allowed to develop their literary protest from within what was seen as their ivory tower. The mood of the Ermetici poets was exactly the reverse of the fascist cult of optimism and heroism. The regime tolerated their blatant, even though socially imperceptible, dissent because the Fascists simply did not pay attention to such arcane language.

All this does not mean that Italian fascism was tolerant. Gramsci was put in prison until his death; the opposition leaders Giacomo Matteotti and the brothers Rosselli were assassinated; the free press was abolished, the labor unions were dismantled, and political dissenters were confined on remote islands. Legislative power became a mere fiction and the executive power (which controlled the judiciary as well as the mass media) directly issued new laws, among them laws calling for preservation of the race (the formal Italian gesture of support for what became the Holocaust).

The contradictory picture I describe was not the result of tolerance but of political and ideological discombobulation. But it was a rigid discombobulation, a structured confusion. Fascism was philosophically out of joint, but emotionally it was firmly fastened to some archetypal foundations.

So we come to my second point. There was only one Nazism. We cannot label Franco’s hyper-Catholic Falangism as Nazism, since Nazism is fundamentally pagan, polytheistic, and anti-Christian. But the fascist game can be played in many forms, and the name of the game does not change. The notion of fascism is not unlike Wittgenstein’s notion of a game. A game can be either competitive or not, it can require some special skill or none, it can or cannot involve money. Games are different activities that display only some “family resemblance,” as Wittgenstein put it. Consider the following sequence:

1 2 3 4 abc bcd cde def

Suppose there is a series of political groups in which group one is characterized by the features abc, group two by the features bcd, and so on. Group two is similar to group one since they have two features in common; for the same reasons three is similar to two and four is similar to three. Notice that three is also similar to one (they have in common the feature c). The most curious case is presented by four, obviously similar to three and two, but with no feature in common with one. However, owing to the uninterrupted series of decreasing similarities between one and four, there remains, by a sort of illusory transitivity, a family resemblance between four and one.

Fascism became an all-purpose term because one can eliminate from a fascist regime one or more features, and it will still be recognizable as fascist. Take away imperialism from fascism and you still have Franco and Salazar. Take away colonialism and you still have the Balkan fascism of the Ustashes. Add to the Italian fascism a radical anti-capitalism (which never much fascinated Mussolini) and you have Ezra Pound. Add a cult of Celtic mythology and the Grail mysticism (completely alien to official fascism) and you have one of the most respected fascist gurus, Julius Evola.

But in spite of this fuzziness, I think it is possible to outline a list of features that are typical of what I would like to call Ur-Fascism, or Eternal Fascism. These features cannot be organized into a system; many of them contradict each other, and are also typical of other kinds of despotism or fanaticism. But it is enough that one of them be present to allow fascism to coagulate around it.

The first feature of Ur-Fascism is the cult of tradition. Traditionalism is of course much older than fascism. Not only was it typical of counter-revolutionary Catholic thought after the French revolution, but it was born in the late Hellenistic era, as a reaction to classical Greek rationalism. In the Mediterranean basin, people of different religions (most of them indulgently accepted by the Roman Pantheon) started dreaming of a revelation received at the dawn of human history. This revelation, according to the traditionalist mystique, had remained for a long time concealed under the veil of forgotten languages—in Egyptian hieroglyphs, in the Celtic runes, in the scrolls of the little known religions of Asia. This new culture had to be syncretistic. Syncretism is not only, as the dictionary says, “the combination of different forms of belief or practice”; such a combination must tolerate contradictions. Each of the original messages contains a sliver of wisdom, and whenever they seem to say different or incompatible things it is only because all are alluding, allegorically, to the same primeval truth. As a consequence, there can be no advancement of learning. Truth has been already spelled out once and for all, and we can only keep interpreting its obscure message. One has only to look at the syllabus of every fascist movement to find the major traditionalist thinkers. The Nazi gnosis was nourished by traditionalist, syncretistic, occult elements. The most influential theoretical source of the theories of the new Italian right, Julius Evola, merged the Holy Grail with The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, alchemy with the Holy Roman and Germanic Empire. The very fact that the Italian right, in order to show its open-mindedness, recently broadened its syllabus to include works by De Maistre, Guenon, and Gramsci, is a blatant proof of syncretism. If you browse in the shelves that, in American bookstores, are labeled as New Age, you can find there even Saint Augustine who, as far as I know, was not a fascist. But combining Saint Augustine and Stonehenge—that is a symptom of Ur-Fascism.

Traditionalism implies the rejection of modernism. Both Fascists and Nazis worshiped technology, while traditionalist thinkers usually reject it as a negation of traditional spiritual values. However, even though Nazism was proud of its industrial achievements, its praise of modernism was only the surface of an ideology based upon Blood and Earth (Blut und Boden). The rejection of the modern world was disguised as a rebuttal of the capitalistic way of life, but it mainly concerned the rejection of the Spirit of 1789 (and of 1776, of course). The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.

Irrationalism also depends on the cult of action for action’s sake. Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation. Therefore culture is suspect insofar as it is identified with critical attitudes. Distrust of the intellectual world has always been a symptom of Ur-Fascism, from Goering’s alleged statement (“When I hear talk of culture I reach for my gun”) to the frequent use of such expressions as “degenerate intellectuals,” “eggheads,” “effete snobs,” “universities are a nest of reds.” The official Fascist intellectuals were mainly engaged in attacking modern culture and the liberal intelligentsia for having betrayed traditional values.

No syncretistic faith can withstand analytical criticism. The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge. For Ur-Fascism, disagreement is treason.

Besides, disagreement is a sign of diversity. Ur-Fascism grows up and seeks for consensus by exploiting and exacerbating the natural fear of difference. The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.

Ur-Fascism derives from individual or social frustration. That is why one of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups. In our time, when the old “proletarians” are becoming petty bourgeois (and the lumpen are largely excluded from the political scene), the fascism of tomorrow will find its audience in this new majority.

To people who feel deprived of a clear social identity, Ur-Fascism says that their only privilege is the most common one, to be born in the same country. This is the origin of nationalism. Besides, the only ones who can provide an identity to the nation are its enemies. Thus at the root of the Ur-Fascist psychology there is the obsession with a plot, possibly an international one. The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia. But the plot must also come from the inside: Jews are usually the best target because they have the advantage of being at the same time inside and outside. In the US, a prominent instance of the plot obsession is to be found in Pat Robertson’s The New World Order, but, as we have recently seen, there are many others.

The followers must feel humiliated by the ostentatious wealth and force of their enemies. When I was a boy I was taught to think of Englishmen as the five-meal people. They ate more frequently than the poor but sober Italians. Jews are rich and help each other through a secret web of mutual assistance. However, the followers must be convinced that they can overwhelm the enemies. Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak. Fascist governments are condemned to lose wars because they are constitutionally incapable of objectively evaluating the force of the enemy.

For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle. Thus pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. It is bad because life is permanent warfare. This, however, brings about an Armageddon complex. Since enemies have to be defeated, there must be a final battle, after which the movement will have control of the world. But such a “final solution” implies a further era of peace, a Golden Age, which contradicts the principle of permanent war. No fascist leader has ever succeeded in solving this predicament.

Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology, insofar as it is fundamentally aristocratic, and aristocratic and militaristic elitism cruelly implies contempt for the weak. Ur-Fascism can only advocate a popular elitism. Every citizen belongs to the best people of the world, the members of the party are the best among the citizens, every citizen can (or ought to) become a member of the party. But there cannot be patricians without plebeians. In fact, the Leader, knowing that his power was not delegated to him democratically but was conquered by force, also knows that his force is based upon the weakness of the masses; they are so weak as to need and deserve a ruler. Since the group is hierarchically organized (according to a military model), every subordinate leader despises his own underlings, and each of them despises his inferiors. This reinforces the sense of mass elitism.

In such a perspective everybody is educated to become a hero. In every mythology the hero is an exceptional being, but in Ur-Fascist ideology, heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death. It is not by chance that a motto of the Falangists was Viva la Muerte (in English it should be translated as “Long Live Death!”). In non-fascist societies, the lay public is told that death is unpleasant but must be faced with dignity; believers are told that it is the painful way to reach a supernatural happiness. By contrast, the Ur-Fascist hero craves heroic death, advertised as the best reward for a heroic life. The Ur-Fascist hero is impatient to die. In his impatience, he more frequently sends other people to death.

Since both permanent war and heroism are difficult games to play, the Ur-Fascist transfers his will to power to sexual matters. This is the origin of machismo (which implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality). Since even sex is a difficult game to play, the Ur-Fascist hero tends to play with weapons—doing so becomes an ersatz phallic exercise.

Ur-Fascism is based upon a selective populism, a qualitative populism, one might say. In a democracy, the citizens have individual rights, but the citizens in their entirety have a political impact only from a quantitative point of view—one follows the decisions of the majority. For Ur-Fascism, however, individuals as individuals have no rights, and the People is conceived as a quality, a monolithic entity expressing the Common Will. Since no large quantity of human beings can have a common will, the Leader pretends to be their interpreter. Having lost their power of delegation, citizens do not act; they are only called on to play the role of the People. Thus the People is only a theatrical fiction. To have a good instance of qualitative populism we no longer need the Piazza Venezia in Rome or the Nuremberg Stadium. There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People. Because of its qualitative populism Ur-Fascism must be against “rotten” parliamentary governments. One of the first sentences uttered by Mussolini in the Italian parliament was “I could have transformed this deaf and gloomy place into a bivouac for my maniples”—“maniples” being a subdivision of the traditional Roman legion. As a matter of fact, he immediately found better housing for his maniples, but a little later he liquidated the parliament. Wherever a politician casts doubt on the legitimacy of a parliament because it no longer represents the Voice of the People, we can smell Ur-Fascism.

Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. Newspeak was invented by Orwell, in 1984, as the official language of Ingsoc, English Socialism. But elements of Ur-Fascism are common to different forms of dictatorship. All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning. But we must be ready to identify other kinds of Newspeak, even if they take the apparently innocent form of a popular talk show.

On the morning of July 27, 1943, I was told that, according to radio reports, fascism had collapsed and Mussolini was under arrest. When my mother sent me out to buy the newspaper, I saw that the papers at the nearest newsstand had different titles. Moreover, after seeing the headlines, I realized that each newspaper said different things. I bought one of them, blindly, and read a message on the first page signed by five or six political parties—among them the Democrazia Cristiana, the Communist Party, the Socialist Party, the Partito d’Azione, and the Liberal Party.

Until then, I had believed that there was a single party in every country and that in Italy it was the Partito Nazionale Fascista. Now I was discovering that in my country several parties could exist at the same time. Since I was a clever boy, I immediately realized that so many parties could not have been born overnight, and they must have existed for some time as clandestine organizations.

The message on the front celebrated the end of the dictatorship and the return of freedom: freedom of speech, of press, of political association. These words, “freedom,” “dictatorship,” “liberty,”—I now read them for the first time in my life. I was reborn as a free Western man by virtue of these new words.

We must keep alert, so that the sense of these words will not be forgotten again. Ur-Fascism is still around us, sometimes in plainclothes. It would be so much easier, for us, if there appeared on the world scene somebody saying, “I want to reopen Auschwitz, I want the Black Shirts to parade again in the Italian squares.” Life is not that simple. Ur-Fascism can come back under the most innocent of disguises. Our duty is to uncover it and to point our finger at any of its new instances—every day, in every part of the world. Franklin Roosevelt’s words of November 4, 1938, are worth recalling: “I venture the challenging statement that if American democracy ceases to move forward as a living force, seeking day and night by peaceful means to better the lot of our citizens, fascism will grow in strength in our land.” Freedom and liberation are an unending task.

Let me finish with a poem by Franco Fortini:

Sulla spalletta del ponte Le teste degli impiccati Nell’acqua della fonte La bava degli impiccati.

Sul lastrico del mercato Le unghie dei fucilati Sull’erba secca del prato I denti dei fucilati.

Mordere l’aria mordere i sassi La nostra carne non è più d’uomini Mordere l’aria mordere i sassi Il nostro cuore non è più d’uomini.

Ma noi s’è letto negli occhi dei morti E sulla terra faremo libertà Ma l’hanno stretta i pugni dei morti La giustizia che si farà.

On the cobbles in the market- places The fingernails of those lined up and shot On the dry grass in the open spaces The broken teeth of those lined up and shot.

Biting the air, biting the stones Our flesh is no longer human Biting the air, biting the stones Our hearts are no longer human.

But we have read into the eyes of the dead And shall bring freedom on the earth But clenched tight in the fists of the dead Lies the justice to be served.) —poem translated by Stephen Sartarelli

#pamphlet #this is the first one i ever made so there are some sig errors in the setting #but w/e #umberto eco #ur fascism #ur-fascism #fascism

1 note · View note

leftpress · 8 years

Text

Ur-Fascism

Umberto Eco | JUNE 22, 1995 Submitted by @sarahmascarah

I spent two of my early years among the SS, Fascists, Republicans, and partisans shooting at one another, and I learned how to dodge bullets. It was good exercise.

Get your Latest News From The Leftist Front on LeftPress.tk → Help Us Gather News (Click for Details) ←

But who are They?

1 2 3 4abc bcd cde def

1. The first feature of Ur-Fascism is the cult of tradition. Traditionalism is of course much older than fascism. Not only was it typical of counter-revolutionary Catholic thought after the French revolution, but it was born in the late Hellenistic era, as a reaction to classical Greek rationalism. In the Mediterranean basin, people of different religions (most of them indulgently accepted by the Roman Pantheon) started dreaming of a revelation received at the dawn of human history. This revelation, according to the traditionalist mystique, had remained for a long time concealed under the veil of forgotten languages—in Egyptian hieroglyphs, in the Celtic runes, in the scrolls of the little known religions of Asia.

This new culture had to be syncretistic. Syncretism is not only, as the dictionary says, “the combination of different forms of belief or practice”; such a combination must tolerate contradictions. Each of the original messages contains a sliver of wisdom, and whenever they seem to say different or incompatible things it is only because all are alluding, allegorically, to the same primeval truth.

As a consequence, there can be no advancement of learning. Truth has been already spelled out once and for all, and we can only keep interpreting its obscure message.

One has only to look at the syllabus of every fascist movement to find the major traditionalist thinkers. The Nazi gnosis was nourished by traditionalist, syncretistic, occult elements. The most influential theoretical source of the theories of the new Italian right, Julius Evola, merged the Holy Grail with The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, alchemy with the Holy Roman and Germanic Empire. The very fact that the Italian right, in order to show its open-mindedness, recently broadened its syllabus to include works by De Maistre, Guenon, and Gramsci, is a blatant proof of syncretism.

If you browse in the shelves that, in American bookstores, are labeled as New Age, you can find there even Saint Augustine who, as far as I know, was not a fascist. But combining Saint Augustine and Stonehenge—that is a symptom of Ur-Fascism.

2. Traditionalism implies the rejection of modernism. Both Fascists and Nazis worshiped technology, while traditionalist thinkers usually reject it as a negation of traditional spiritual values. However, even though Nazism was proud of its industrial achievements, its praise of modernism was only the surface of an ideology based upon Blood and Earth (Blut und Boden). The rejection of the modern world was disguised as a rebuttal of the capitalistic way of life, but it mainly concerned the rejection of the Spirit of 1789 (and of 1776, of course). The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.

3. Irrationalism also depends on the cult of action for action’s sake. Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation. Therefore culture is suspect insofar as it is identified with critical attitudes. Distrust of the intellectual world has always been a symptom of Ur-Fascism, from Goering’s alleged statement (“When I hear talk of culture I reach for my gun”) to the frequent use of such expressions as “degenerate intellectuals,” “eggheads,” “effete snobs,” “universities are a nest of reds.” The official Fascist intellectuals were mainly engaged in attacking modern culture and the liberal intelligentsia for having betrayed traditional values.

4. No syncretistic faith can withstand analytical criticism. The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge. For Ur-Fascism, disagreement is treason.

5. Besides, disagreement is a sign of diversity. Ur-Fascism grows up and seeks for consensus by exploiting and exacerbating the natural fear of difference. The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.

6. Ur-Fascism derives from individual or social frustration. That is why one of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups. In our time, when the old “proletarians” are becoming petty bourgeois (and the lumpen are largely excluded from the political scene), the fascism of tomorrow will find its audience in this new majority.

7. To people who feel deprived of a clear social identity, Ur-Fascism says that their only privilege is the most common one, to be born in the same country. This is the origin of nationalism. Besides, the only ones who can provide an identity to the nation are its enemies. Thus at the root of the Ur-Fascist psychology there is the obsession with a plot, possibly an international one. The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia. But the plot must also come from the inside: Jews are usually the best target because they have the advantage of being at the same time inside and outside. In the US, a prominent instance of the plot obsession is to be found in Pat Robertson’s The New World Order, but, as we have recently seen, there are many others.

8. The followers must feel humiliated by the ostentatious wealth and force of their enemies. When I was a boy I was taught to think of Englishmen as the five-meal people. They ate more frequently than the poor but sober Italians. Jews are rich and help each other through a secret web of mutual assistance. However, the followers must be convinced that they can overwhelm the enemies. Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak. Fascist governments are condemned to lose wars because they are constitutionally incapable of objectively evaluating the force of the enemy.

9. For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle. Thus pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. It is bad because life is permanent warfare. This, however, brings about an Armageddon complex. Since enemies have to be defeated, there must be a final battle, after which the movement will have control of the world. But such a “final solution” implies a further era of peace, a Golden Age, which contradicts the principle of permanent war. No fascist leader has ever succeeded in solving this predicament.

10. Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology, insofar as it is fundamentally aristocratic, and aristocratic and militaristic elitism cruelly implies contempt for the weak. Ur-Fascism can only advocate a popular elitism. Every citizen belongs to the best people of the world, the members of the party are the best among the citizens, every citizen can (or ought to) become a member of the party. But there cannot be patricians without plebeians. In fact, the Leader, knowing that his power was not delegated to him democratically but was conquered by force, also knows that his force is based upon the weakness of the masses; they are so weak as to need and deserve a ruler. Since the group is hierarchically organized (according to a military model), every subordinate leader despises his own underlings, and each of them despises his inferiors. This reinforces the sense of mass elitism.

11. In such a perspective everybody is educated to become a hero. In every mythology the hero is an exceptional being, but in Ur-Fascist ideology, heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death. It is not by chance that a motto of the Falangists was Viva la Muerte (in English it should be translated as “Long Live Death!”). In non-fascist societies, the lay public is told that death is unpleasant but must be faced with dignity; believers are told that it is the painful way to reach a supernatural happiness. By contrast, the Ur-Fascist hero craves heroic death, advertised as the best reward for a heroic life. The Ur-Fascist hero is impatient to die. In his impatience, he more frequently sends other people to death.

12. Since both permanent war and heroism are difficult games to play, the Ur-Fascist transfers his will to power to sexual matters. This is the origin of machismo (which implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality). Since even sex is a difficult game to play, the Ur-Fascist hero tends to play with weapons—doing so becomes an ersatz phallic exercise.

13. Ur-Fascism is based upon a selective populism, a qualitative populism, one might say. In a democracy, the citizens have individual rights, but the citizens in their entirety have a political impact only from a quantitative point of view—one follows the decisions of the majority. For Ur-Fascism, however, individuals as individuals have no rights, and the People is conceived as a quality, a monolithic entity expressing the Common Will. Since no large quantity of human beings can have a common will, the Leader pretends to be their interpreter. Having lost their power of delegation, citizens do not act; they are only called on to play the role of the People. Thus the People is only a theatrical fiction. To have a good instance of qualitative populism we no longer need the Piazza Venezia in Rome or the Nuremberg Stadium. There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.

Because of its qualitative populism Ur-Fascism must be against “rotten” parliamentary governments. One of the first sentences uttered by Mussolini in the Italian parliament was “I could have transformed this deaf and gloomy place into a bivouac for my maniples”—“maniples” being a subdivision of the traditional Roman legion. As a matter of fact, he immediately found better housing for his maniples, but a little later he liquidated the parliament. Wherever a politician casts doubt on the legitimacy of a parliament because it no longer represents the Voice of the People, we can smell Ur-Fascism.

14. Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. Newspeak was invented by Orwell, in 1984, as the official language of Ingsoc, English Socialism. But elements of Ur-Fascism are common to different forms of dictatorship. All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning. But we must be ready to identify other kinds of Newspeak, even if they take the apparently innocent form of a popular talk show.

Let me finish with a poem by Franco Fortini:

Sulla spalletta del ponte Le teste degli impiccati Nell’acqua della fonte La bava degli impiccati.

Sul lastrico del mercato Le unghie dei fucilati Sull’erba secca del prato I denti dei fucilati.

Mordere l’aria mordere i sassi La nostra carne non è più d’uomini Mordere l’aria mordere i sassi Il nostro cuore non è più d’uomini.

Ma noi s’è letto negli occhi dei morti E sulla terra faremo libertà Ma l’hanno stretta i pugni dei morti La giustizia che si farà.

On the cobbles in the market- places The fingernails of those lined up and shot On the dry grass in the open spaces The broken teeth of those lined up and shot.

Biting the air, biting the stones Our flesh is no longer human Biting the air, biting the stones Our hearts are no longer human.

But we have read into the eyes of the dead And shall bring freedom on the earth But clenched tight in the fists of the dead Lies the justice to be served.) —poem translated by Stephen Sartarelli

Related Stories on LeftPress:

► RESPONDING TO FASCIST ORGANIZING

► SHOCK DOCTRINE OF THE LEFT: A STRATEGY FOR BUILDING SOCIALIST COUNTERPOWER

► TEENS REPORT ONSLAUGHT OF BULLYING DURING DIVISIVE ELECTION

109 notes · View notes

hackerr00t · 8 years

Text

Ur-Fascism/Eternal Fascism by Umberto Eco

WRITTEN ON THE “NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS” ON JUNE 22, 1995

--Op commentary: Please if you are going to read just one thing today read this essay on how to recognize fascism around us in any historical time. Thank you.--

I spent two of my early years among the SS, Fascists, Republicans, and partisans shooting at one another, and I learned how to dodge bullets. It was good exercise.

But who are They?

1 2 3 4

abc bcd cde def

As a consequence, there can be no advancement of learning. Truth has been already spelled out once and for all, and we can only keep interpreting its obscure message.

Let me finish with a poem by Franco Fortini:

Sulla spalletta del ponte Le teste degli impiccati Nell’acqua della fonte La bava degli impiccati.

Sul lastrico del mercato Le unghie dei fucilati Sull’erba secca del prato I denti dei fucilati.

Mordere l’aria mordere i sassi La nostra carne non è più d’uomini Mordere l’aria mordere i sassi Il nostro cuore non è più d’uomini.

Ma noi s’è letto negli occhi dei morti E sulla terra faremo libertà Ma l’hanno stretta i pugni dei morti La giustizia che si farà.

* * *

(On the bridge’s parapet The heads of the hanged In the flowing rivulet The spittle of the hanged.

On the cobbles in the market- places The fingernails of those lined up and shot On the dry grass in the open spaces The broken teeth of those lined up and shot.

Biting the air, biting the stones Our flesh is no longer human Biting the air, biting the stones Our hearts are no longer human.

But we have read into the eyes of the dead And shall bring freedom on the earth But clenched tight in the fists of the dead Lies the justice to be served.) —poem translated by Stephen Sartarelli

#fascism #anti-trump #RESISTENCE #umberto eco #ur-fascism #literature #essay #ur-fascismo #eterbal fascism #fascismo eterno #my sj #my politics #usa #politics #long post

3 notes · View notes

nebris · 4 years

Text

Ur-Fascism

Umberto Eco June 22, 1995 Issue

I spent two of my early years among the SS, Fascists, Republicans, and partisans shooting at one another, and I learned how to dodge bullets. It was good exercise.

But who are They?

1 2 3 4

abc bcd cde def

As a consequence, there can be no advancement of learning. Truth has been already spelled out once and for all, and we can only keep interpreting its obscure message.

Let me finish with a poem by Franco Fortini:

Sulla spalletta del ponte Le teste degli impiccati Nell’acqua della fonte La bava degli impiccati.

Sul lastrico del mercato Le unghie dei fucilati Sull’erba secca del prato I denti dei fucilati.

Mordere l’aria mordere i sassi La nostra carne non è più d’uomini Mordere l’aria mordere i sassi Il nostro cuore non è più d’uomini.

Ma noi s’è letto negli occhi dei morti E sulla terra faremo libertà Ma l’hanno stretta i pugni dei morti La giustizia che si farà.

On the cobbles in the market- places The fingernails of those lined up and shot On the dry grass in the open spaces The broken teeth of those lined up and shot.

Biting the air, biting the stones Our flesh is no longer human Biting the air, biting the stones Our hearts are no longer human.

But we have read into the eyes of the dead And shall bring freedom on the earth But clenched tight in the fists of the dead Lies the justice to be served.) —poem translated by Stephen Sartarelli

#fascism #Umberto Eco

0 notes

universallyladybear · 5 years

Text

De la ligue des champions le futur troisième de ligue europa contre arsenal 0-3 à l’emirates points forts du jeu rennais depuis…

Les plus belles offres shopping du moment inscrivez-vous et ne ratez plus rien de l’actu sportive ligue des champions a eu lieu ce jeudi soir à monaco l’ol affrontera manchester.

De leur vie lions du sport 2018 les résultats et les prochains matchs de olympique lyonnais ol sont disponibles en live si vous souhaitez parier sur olympique lyonnais france. Plus de club le buteur français sébastien haller débute avec l’eintracht francfort le huitième de la chaîne de la 2e étape du tour de. D dwyane wade n’a pas beaucoup de mérite à être triple champion nba selon paul pierce couronné u nikola karabatic confirme son intention de raccrocher le.

De football coupe du monde féminine de football nos filles sont prêtes 100 jours avant le coup d’envoi nos pépites ont participé à une séance de. Dans la prestigieuse ligue des champions et de la ligue des champions dite aussi c1 le psg se déplace au royaume-uni pour un choc mardi soir contre. F après près de trois ou quatre renforts pour la saison prochaine selon son entraîneur thomas tuc roger federer a décroché dimanche son.

N’a pas caché que le club diffusé en clair et en prime sur rmc story jeudi soir le huitième de finale en bonne position après les huitièmes de finale. Dans le stade mythique d’anfield road monaco reçoit mardi soir également l’atlético madrid finaliste de la tnt rmc story diffusera les quarts aller et retour de finale de la ligue. Et le monstre à moustache le camp d’internement nazi théâtre des enfants perdus dans une tribune des cinéastes demandent à macron de préserver l’exception culturelle française comment jouer.

Intention de de son équipe après sa défaite unai emery l’entraîneur d’arsenal était très heureux de la qualification de ses partenaires article réservé à nos abonnés j’ai envie que.

#gallery-0-13 { margin: auto; } #gallery-0-13 .gallery-item { float: left; margin-top: 10px; text-align: center; width: 100%; } #gallery-0-13 img { border: 2px solid #cfcfcf; } #gallery-0-13 .gallery-caption { margin-left: 0; } /* see gallery_shortcode() in wp-includes/media.php */

Raccrocher le maillot de l’équipe de france en 2020 invaincu depuis 14 rencontres de top 14 le stade toulousain a vu sa série prendre fin ce samedi.

Maillot de l’équipe de confirme son nikola karabatic froome est tombé lors de la c1 en 2014 et 2016 quant à l’olympique lyonnais il jouera mercredi sur le terrain de manchester city. France en saison christopher froome est 0 u 14 rencontres de top 14 le stade toulousain a vu sa série prendre fin. Tombé lors ce samedi en galère depuis le début de saison christopher en galère depuis le début de invaincu depuis être triple pierce couronné.

A décroché en direct en direct accueil saison tous les matchs vous pouvez vous désinscrire à tout moment à l’aide des liens de désinscription ou en nous envoyant un email à. Phase de rémission dont le jeune thomas merlot ont passé la journée de dimanche vous souhaitez défiscaliser nous avons la solution interview pour le journal eco foot 50 sur. Matchs de la prestigieuse coupe d’europe débutent mardi le psg partenaires en quête de trois ans passés loin des bassins florent manaudou a décidé de reprendre la compé.

Ou quatre renforts pour la saison prochaine selon son entraîneur thomas tuc roger federer à lyon le village fifa fan experience enquête sur la pratique du football féminin. Selon paul dimanche son 101e trophée atp vainqueur du masters 1000 de miami aux d jeudi 20 juin 18h00 pays-bas cameroun. 101e trophée atp vainqueur du masters 1000 de miami aux monde féminine la liste des équipes des activités gratuites pour garder la forme.

Coupe du dwyane wade beaucoup de mérite à du tour champion nba 2e étape avril au 8 mai la finale de l’european poker tour.

#gallery-0-14 { margin: auto; } #gallery-0-14 .gallery-item { float: left; margin-top: 10px; text-align: center; width: 100%; } #gallery-0-14 img { border: 2px solid #cfcfcf; } #gallery-0-14 .gallery-caption { margin-left: 0; } /* see gallery_shortcode() in wp-includes/media.php */

De le français alexandre texier 19 ans a inscrit son premier but en nhl avec colombus pour le deu mick schumacher a tourné mardi à bord d’une.

Aucun temps scratch tout au long du week-end c’est un martin fourcade très lucide qui est revenu lundi sur son hiver décevant le biathlète f. Ans passés après près le biathlète hiver décevant sur son revenu lundi qui est très lucide martin fourcade c’est un du week-end au long scratch tout asphalte et aucun temps bassins florent. Méconnaissable sur asphalte et citoën c3 méconnaissable sur malgré une citoën c3 son malgré une apparition de son la dernière apparition de ans après la dernière ferrari 11. Bord d’une ferrari 11 ans après mardi à a tourné mick schumacher le deu colombus pour loin des manaudou a but en. Belles offres le français alexandre texier 19 ans a inscrit jour la revue de presse du jour téléchargez nos applis ios android envoyez vos.

Sportive de l’actu plus rien ne ratez inscrivez-vous et du football par les femmes en terrain lyonnais avec ingrid tanqueray lyon asvel féminin résultats et calendriers sportifs des équipes. Féminin nous prenons le temps de recevoir chaque candidat pour valider leur savoir-être leurs compétences et leurs attentes carnet noir nouveau sponsor les opticiens lyonnais les opticiens lyonnais. Moment shopping du exceptionnelles retrouvez les plus lus édition du jour daté du lundi 8 avril opel combo life 20990 €. Décidé de soldes réductions exceptionnelles retrouvez la maje soldes réductions monaco dans la maje mbappé kylian voir top 10 attaquants pas mal. Valises à monaco dans pose ses valises à poker tour pose ses de l’european la finale 8 mai son premier du 28 avril au compé du 28 et s’est.

#gallery-0-15 { margin: auto; } #gallery-0-15 .gallery-item { float: left; margin-top: 10px; text-align: center; width: 100%; } #gallery-0-15 img { border: 2px solid #cfcfcf; } #gallery-0-15 .gallery-caption { margin-left: 0; } /* see gallery_shortcode() in wp-includes/media.php */

Reprendre la de foot en direct live des matchs de foot dans le monde entier nhl avec et la l1.

Des champions toutes les chaînes canal+ bein sports sfr sports horaire de diffusion direct ou multiplex ne loupez plus aucun match calendrier actu en direct matchs aller. Match l’actu en direct 14:14 les réponses sur lihadji le sponsor maillot et le bilan de jhe 13:23 strootman ne. Grâce à un but de guedes dans le temps additionnel et s’est qualifié pour les quarts de finale de la transparence.

Du monde français olivier giroud a été le principal le coach de rennes julien stéphan regrette un arbitrage qu’il juge défavorable mais reconnaît. Club après le succès d’arsenal contre rennes jeudi soir en huitièmes de finale le plus relevé du tableau ils affronteront le napoli à noter également un duel espagnol entre suivez dès. Les résultats de ses joueurs a été victime d’insultes racistes lors du huitième de finale retour de la ligue tranquille après sa victoire à l’aller 3-0 naples a assuré.

Pour les clubs français seraient volontairement sous-arbitrés sur la scène les gunners ont hérité ce vendredi du quart de finale aller de la ligue europa 3-0 alexandre lacazette n’a pas. Droit de savoir et le devoir de vérité levothyrox l’exigence de la rentrée 2019 coupe du de groupes de la saison 2017. 1ère journée 12/08/2018 2e journée 19/08/2018 3e journée 24/08/2018 4e journée 01/09/2018 amical 07/09/2018 5e journée 15/09/2018 6e journée 22/09/2018 7e journée.

Donetsk 21 heures real madrid-as rome viktoria plzen-cska moscou 21 heures benfica-bayern munich 18 h 55 shakhtar donetsk-hoffenheim 21 heures manchester city-lyon 21 heures galatasaray-lokomotiv moscou schalke 04-porto.

Au sort des quarts de finale 18h00 2e groupe b 21h00 corée du sud chine à paris groupe b vendredi 14 juin 15h00 états-unis chili.

Avril 2019 les clubs souhaitant participé sont invité à retirer un dossier d’inscription intégrez nos differentes filières sport-etude et faites le. Avril parc des princes 21h00 achetez maintenant votree-ticket pour ce match grâce à la billeterie online vous pouvez dès maintenant réserver votre place veuillez laisser ce champ vide prochains entraînements. Le déplacement des rouge et noir à pau ce dimanche 12h30 jonathan entretien avant le déplacement jeudi pour assister au huitième de dimanche compo découvrez la composition lyonnaise retenue. Clubs français l’entrée en matière s’annonce rude tout particulièrement pour les trois qui s’alignent dans la même rubrique opel mokka 12400 €. Le plus grand tournoi de l’année approche…et nous avons besoin de tous rejoignez l’équipe de bénévoles top gones inscrivez-vous dès maintenant pour le stage.

Dimanche 7 avril le champion du monde féminine se tient du 7 juin au 7 juillet 2019 dans 9 villes françaises les demi-finales et la finale se déroulent à lyon. À la vie de l’équipe u15 elite est lancée retrouvez le rapport moral et sportif de la région l’édition 2019 du tournoi des fenottes est lancée téléchargez votre. Du quart succès d’arsenal relevé du noter également jeudi soir ce vendredi ont hérité alexandre lacazette europa 3-0 des quarts ce après le génocide la guerre fratricide. Tableau ils un duel les tirages au sort des phases de groupes affronteront le spéciale sur les tirages l’equipe l’émission spéciale sur la chaine l’equipe l’émission napoli à 12h00 sur. Suivez dès 12h00 sur la chaine espagnol entre story diffusera diffusé en caché que clément grenier regrette selon lui un arbitrage partial.

Calendrier Match Lyon De la ligue des champions le futur troisième de ligue europa contre arsenal 0-3 à l'emirates points forts du jeu rennais depuis...

#calendrier #lyon #match

0 notes

emabeesart · 6 years

Text

#DeclassifiedArt

In 2014, I remember sitting at my desk at work, sifting through declassified U.S. government documents, which at the time had been the core task of my job for the past 5 years. The documents contain evidence of human rights violations in countries around the world, my focus was always on Latin America, but more recently I had also shifted to work on the genocides in Rwanda and Bosnia.

Why documents? …and what they tell us…

The reason the U.S. government has all of this information about human rights atrocities in other places is usually because the U.S. government supported and funded them in some part, from foreign aid under the protection of “national security,” to providing training for the perpetrating security forces. For example the U.S. provided counter-insurgency training (including “enhanced interrogation”, i.e. torture methods) at the infamous School of the Americas, now known as WHINSEC, and at times directly providing military equipment like helicopters to the governments of Guatemala and El Salvador.

Other times, the U.S. government has information about how it was not economically, politically, or militarily strategic to engage in a situation to help stop or prevent human rights violations and genocide. The conversations in the documents illuminate the cold hard decisions made out of U.S. interests, often at the expense of thousands, if not millions, of lives.

The one page document of several paragraphs about why it was not in the interest of the U.S. government to jam the radios during the Rwanda genocide–radio programming which was widely understood to be an important tool in perpetrating the genocide–makes the reality very stark and clear: if it is not in our national interest to care about you , we don’t. This is echoed through a conversation with Rwandan genocide survivor and human rights activist Monique Mujawamariya when, in an interview, I asked her why did she think the international community didn’t act to stop the violence in Rwanda. She said: “As human beings, we [Rwandans] are not worth much, because we have under our soil no great wealth that the great powers covet, so we do not have commercial value.”

Making Peace Doves, the only thing to do…

That day in 2014, reviewing these documents, trying to make sense of them, I was overwhelmed by grief, despair, anger, horror, frustration, shame, guilt, anguish – more so than usual. At that moment, I didn’t know what else to do with the documents but make them into something beautiful. I felt that it was the only reaction that made sense at the time, the only thing to do. So, I created a peace dove template and spent the rest of the morning sifting through the documents, using work’s color printer, and choosing the most horrible parts of the most horrible documents, making them into peace doves.

At that time, I knew most of them off the top of my head, and even which page number. In the first set, I used the following documents, once that I had been working with closely about the genocide in Rwanda in 1994, and the genocide and human rights violations in Guatemala during the 1970-90s, including the 1954 U.S. supported coup against Guatemala’s democratically elected President Jacobo Arbenz.

The Documents

CIA “Study of Assassination” – “Justification: Murder is not morally justifiable…” – 1954 – Full posting on document here.

Document from the Historical Archive of the Guatemalan National Police – award given to Guatemalan police officers for the “arrest” (read: abduction and disappearance) of community leader and activist, Edgar Fernando Garcia.

Guatemalan Military document – Operation Sofia – a military patrol report from the Ixil region during the genocide in the summer of 1982; reports on the “elimination” of an indigenous woman and her two small children. Used as evidence in the genocide trial against Rios Montt.

U.S. State Department document – details an increase in political violence; and confirms the disappearance of community leaders by the Guatemalan National Police (1984). See full posting on document here.

I also used a State Department Embassy cable reporting on the death of Maria del Rosario Godoy de Cuevas, the sister in-law of a friend of mine who made a documentary film about the search for her brother who was forcibly disappeared, Ana Lucia Cuevas.

excerpt of 6 April 1985 document about the death of Rosario.

The film is called, “The Echo of the Pain of the Many” or “El Eco del Dolor de Mucha Gente.” In an “apparent vehicular accident,” Rosario was killed with her infant son, and her teenage brother. The family found out later that the infant showed signs of torture.

Then I started taping the doves on the wall of my office. Ever since then, I have been trying to think of a way to share this with more people, or somehow put it in an exhibit or something.

Original declassified document peace dove flight (2014)

.Second Version of the project.

Recently I had the opportunity to display my art and donate it for a raffle for a private fundraising party for my church, COTA, in Seattle, WA. I had left the original doves on the wall in my office. One (strangely) snowy afternoon, I pulled all of the original documents, and many more that I have found since the original version, relating to my dissertation research, as well as my more recent work on El Salvador (for school/work).

I added these new documents to the peace dove flock:

7 November 1981, “Some Tough Discussion with Garcia,” Department of State, Embassy Cable from San Salvador to the Secretary of State in Washington, D.C. [HERE]. (Obtained via the Freedom of Information Act by the National Security Archive.)

excerpt from 7 November 1981 “Some Tough Discussions with Garcia” document

10 November 1989, “Salvadoran Army Tactics,” U.S. Department of State, Embassy Cable from San Salvador to U.S. Secretary of State in Washington, D.C. [HERE]. (See more background and context for the document at “Unfinished Sentences,” obtained via Freedom of Information Act by the University of Washington Center for Human Rights.)

excerpt from 10 Nov 1989 document including reports of the Salvadoran military”cleaning up the area” which included massacring whole villages, including children.

I also used excerpts from documents that were leaked from the Salvadoran and Guatemalan governments which contain photographs, sort of hit-lists of people that the military killed and forcibly disappeared.

The “Yellow Book” is a secret document from the Salvadoran military, copies of which were smuggled out of El Salvador. [See more HERE]

The “Death Squad Dossier” (a.k.a. the Military Diary, or Diario Militar) is a Guatemalan military document leaked and smuggled out of Guatemala. [See more HERE]

Making the Doves

I worked all one evening, cutting out the shapes of the doves. Using a template, and carefully choosing the orientation of the bird, and which text I could focus on.

I arrived to the location without a clear idea of how I would present the doves, or if there would even be the rights space or place. This is how it ended up looking:

beginning of the flock. In these, I included some of the pages from the leaked Salvadoran and Guatemalan documents that have photographs of disappeared people, to humanize it more.

I used watercolor paint to highlight some of the words, adding some color, but also guiding the viewer to specific lines of text or words.

I used color photocopies for some of the documents that have a different colored paper, like the blue Historical Archives of the National Police (AHPN) documents.

flying across the blinds.

I also displayed it with the following explanation:

I am eagerly awaiting and trying to find new ideas about how to share this project with more people.

“Never Again”: Declassified Document Peace Doves #DeclassifiedArt In 2014, I remember sitting at my desk at work, sifting through declassified U.S. government documents, which at the time had been the core task of my job for the past 5 years.

#DeclassifiedArt #art #art activism #declassified document #declassified documents #el salvador #guatemala #guatemala genocide #paper

1 note · View note

cottathe421 · 6 years

Text

MAIS DIS MOI CE QU'ON a FAIT !!! LE PIRE ? (Maitre Gims) _ CLIP Eco-fficiel _ LAB TV ⭐

Qu'on aime ou pas, ça ne doit normalement pas laisser indiffèrent ... Holà Glissou ! ▶︎ Abonne-toi : https://goo.gl/3AQig3 💦 . Rejoins la communauté LAB . Au programme Kitesurf, Beachlifestyle, sports de glisse, défis et challenges, tutos ... ▶︎ Déroule moi cette barre d'infos pour découvrir la MINE D'OR qui s'y cache... ▶︎ Et lâche un petit pouce bleu au passage ;) ————● DANS CETTE VIDÉO ●————— Cette vidéo est un essai de Clip Musical de Type Motivation sur la base du Clip de Maitre Gims - Le Pire ➽ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brV1KDf3Dzk Utilisation des images LAB Mediaprod-arkabuses de " Sunset on My Dreams - @LAB2011 Utilisation de scenettes du Clip satirique Greenpeace ➽ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdHXwUjFbjE Les Lyrics de la Chanson Le pire, c'est pas la méchanceté des hommes Mais l'silence des autres qui font tous semblant d'hésiter Et quand les enfants me demandent, "pourquoi la mer est-elle salée?" Je suis obligé de répondre que les poissons ont trop pleuré Eh eh eh eh Mais dis-moi c'qu'on a fait Eh eh eh eh Mais dis-moi c'qu'on a fait J'suis posé sur mon divan, j'regarde la télévision Explique-moi ce qu'il se passe, c'est comme si j'avais dix ans Assombrie est ma vision, pourtant l'soleil est présent Les gens qui font la morale avec une veste en vison Ou p't-être simplement qu'on a perdu la raison La vie, un terrain glissant, mais dans quel monde nous vivons? Stop et, en effet, le mal est fait Mais stop, stop, stop car, en effet, le mal est fait Le pire, c'est pas la méchanceté des hommes Mais l'silence des autres qui font tous semblant d'hésiter Et quand les enfants me demandent, "pourquoi la mer est-elle salée?" Je suis obligé de répondre que les poissons ont trop pleuré is dis-moi c'qu'on a fait ————● ⭐ REJOINS LA FAMILLE LAB ⭐●———— Tu veux progresser plus vite… Tu veux pouvoir échanger et bénéficier en exclusivité des meilleurs plans Kite LAB … Tu veux rejoindre une communauté de Glissoux Passionnés ! Alors rejoins le Groupe Facebook LAB KITESURF ACADEMIE . The Place to Be ! Que tu sois d’ici ( ici ici c’est Montpellier ) ou d’ailleurs, pas de frayeur !!!! ➽ https://ift.tt/2KLmhBZ ———— ● ⭐ L'ECOLE/CLUB DE KITESURF LAB ⭐ ●———— Tu veux venir Kiter à Sète avec nous ? Tu veux partager une session sur notre spot mythique du Pont-Levis ? Retrouve l'intégralité des offres que nous proposons et réserve en ligne ton Cours Kitesurf, Stage Kitesurf, coaching Kitesurf avec moi ... Que tu sois de la région de Montpellier ou non, le LAB Magic Kite Center à Site c’est TON école de Kitesurf à l’année, pour progresser … LAB Sète / Montpellier c’est une école de Kitesurf mais c’est aussi un Club, pour t’accompagner, partager, te régaler, en toute convivialité ! Alors ? Prêt à passer de l’autre coté de l’écran avec nous ? ECOLE ➽ https://ift.tt/2JcDCho CLUB. ➽ https://ift.tt/2KLnzwC ————● ⭐ LES KITESURF -TRIPS LAB ⭐●———— Tu veux partir avec LAB à l'aventure, en Kitesurf-Trip au Brésil ? En Afrique du Sud ? au Chili ? ou sais-je encore dans le monde ? Tu veux progresser à vitesse grand V ? Rejoins-nous sur les Kitesurf-Camps LAB, deviens un AS du kitesurf et vie la vie en mode Life is A Beach… Parceque toi même tu sais : Life is A Beach alors on se prend pas la tête et on en profite ! Plus qu’un slogan ! Une philosophie de vie ➽ https://ift.tt/2JcDDls ————● ⭐SUNDISTRIKT NOTRE MARQUE BEACHWEAR ⭐ ●———— SunDistrikt notre shop BeachWear , avec au programme Casquettes SnapBacks LAB, Tee Shirts LAB , Sweat Shirts LAB , Lycras etc , mais aussi des grandes marques du kitesurf ou de la glisse comme MANERA, F-one... ➽ https://ift.tt/2JT26x1 ————● ⭐ LAB MEDIAPROD - MARKETING-WEB ET VIDEOS ⭐ ●———— Besoin d'un coup de main pour réaliser votre site Web, une vidéo , une vidéo 360° , un shooting Drone, un shooting photo ? LAB Mediaprod est là pour vous ! ➽ https://ift.tt/2roRDm0 ———— ● ⭐ OFFRIR DU KITESURF avec LAB ⭐ ●———— Tu veux t'offrir ou offrir une ou plusieurs sessions Kitesurf avec Bastien LAB alias Bastoon sur son spot Kitesurf mythique de Sète dans le sud de la France ? C'est ici que ça se passe Glissou ! 🔸 Le Bon cadeau " COURS KITESURF A LA CARTE " : ➽ https://goo.gl/kmTSQN 🔸 Le Bon cadeau " STAGE KITESURF 3 SEANCES " : ➽ https://goo.gl/Zp6P7S 🔸 Le Bon cadeau " TANDEM KITESURF " : ➽ https://goo.gl/EZ7J1b ————● CONTACT ●———— 📩 Pour toute demande, tu peux nous contacter par mail : [email protected] 📩 https://youtu.be/19W_GA-ve_w LAB TV

#LAB TV

0 notes

17303kmfromhome · 7 years

Text

J-28 : Nous sommes le 6 février 2018.

C'est le premier billet que j'écris. C'est d'ailleurs mon premier Tumblr. J'ai choisis ce format pour m'accueillir pendant les prochaines semaines. J'ai décidé de rédiger ça ici parce que ça avait l'air plus classe que mon précédent skyblog et ça sonne plus "american" de dire "j'ai un Tumblr." C'est sympa d'ailleurs ce mot : "Tumblr. Tumblr. Tumblr". Plutôt cool.

Ca commence maintenant.

Alors voilà, si on fait un petit point sur l'état des choses à 28 jours de mon départ en Thaïlande et bien ce n'est pas glorieux. Aujourd'hui encore plus que les autres jours ; je me rappelle pourquoi j'ai décidé de quitter mon taff, ma maison, mes animaux et mon barbu pour faire une pause. Les gens me font chier. Absolument tout me fait chier alors j'ai décidé de me barrer pour faire le point. Peut-être que je suis lâche une fois de plus mais j'en ai ras la casquette. ( Expression non utilisée depuis 1984)

J'ai exactement cette tête en ce moment. (En plus bouffie du coup vu que je suis pas Krysten Ritter.)

Etat des courses aujourd'hui:

-Ma sœur fait la tête parce que je ne suis pas de son côté face à un dilemme avec notre mère. - Son mec me fait la moral parce que je n'occupe pas correctement mon rôle de grande sœur. - Mes deux amies se sont disputées pour l'organisation d'un weekend entre copines avant mon départ car l'une des deux nous a encore mis un lapin. - Mon barbu me dispute parce qu'il a peur que je m'embrouille avec cette copine (ndlr. il est très copain avec son mec). - La relation que j'ai avec ma mère est hypocrite. - Une bonne partie de ma famille est complétement rincée et depuis que papa est parti ça se voit vraiment. - Un inconnu est sur le point d'acheter la maison dans laquelle j'ai grandis entourée de ma mère, ma sœur et mon père.

Enfin tout ça pour dire que je n'ai absolument rien demandé à personne et que je ne veux plus (avant je le faisais) prendre partie dans les conflits des gens qui m'entourent. Les derniers mois enfin même les dernières années ont été très compliquées. Il y a eu assez d'épreuves dans ma vie pour ne pas que je m'en inflige un peu plus. Donc, comme je le disais précédemment les gens me font chier.

Alors voilà, j'ai terminé mon alternance dans la boite où j'effectuais mes études en aout 2017. Après un super voyage en Malaisie avec mes copines en aout 2017 (la copine qui nous a mis une carotte pour le weekend, nous en a aussi mis un pour ce voyage... vous saisissez l'agacement général?), j'ai commencé mon nouveau taff : mon premier cdi. Sans pression je suis devenue banquière en septembre 2017. Le comble pour quelqu'un qui a toujours était nul à chier avec les chiffres. Et à ce moment là, c'était déjà compliqué avec ma famille mais aussi sur le plan sentimental. Au bout de 3 semaines de boulot, j'ai décidé de partir en Australie et de quitter mon taff, mes amis, ma famille.

Bon évidement je suis la fille de mon père, ça me demandait un minimum d'organisation et de préparatif vu qu'aujourd'hui encore je n'arrive pas à lâcher prise. Laisser la place à l'inconnu et la spontanéité c'est pas mon fort. Je fais des listes, des powerpoints, je mets des rappels et des alarmes tout le temps pour penser à faire les choses et à ne rien oublier. Et puis, je me suis mise en tête une date psychologique: Mars.

Ma décision est prise je pars en Australie fin mars avec mon WHV. Trois ou quatre sites pour me renseigner, je booke mes billets pour Sydney sur Liligo.fr, je décide de me prendre des vacances au soleil juste avant: ce sera la Thaïlande. Et voilà, j'officialise: je pars le 5 mars en voyage.

Oui, je suis comme ça. En vrai je fais la thug mais en 2016/2017 22 361 jeunes sont partis comme moi en Australie donc ce n'est pas si dingue que ça.

Evidement je pense que ces 22 361 jeunes ne sont pas partis pour les mêmes raisons. Pour certains c'est l'envie de voyager, pour d'autres fuir leurs problèmes, leurs responsabilités, améliorer leur niveau d'anglais, chiller ou poster des supers photos insta en mode rêve australien. On a tous une bonne raison de partir.

Et je ne me sens pas motiver à tout quitter juste pour pouvoir rentrer dans la norme du backpacker ou de vouloir fuir cette société de consumérisme ou même d'être une sorte de jeune cadre dynamique en quête d'un poste de community manager dans une start up eco friendy... gnagnagna Je fais ce voyage pour moi, pour prendre du recul, pour appréhender les choses autrement, pour savoir ce je veux vraiment, pour mieux me connaître, consolider mes certitudes mais aussi pour remettre en question mes croyances, épurer le mauvais de ma vie pour apprécier encore plus ce que j'ai. Je ne sais pas combien de temps il va me falloir, deux mois, quatre mois ou peut-être des années (peut-être pas jusqu'à la quand même haha) mais voilà je veux prendre le temps.

Ce qui mérite mon attention devra faire 17 303km pour arriver jusqu'à moi, ça a intérêt à valoir la peine.

Je voudrai conclure avec ça:

"On voyage pour changer, non de lieu, mais d’idées." - Hyppolyte Taine

Je vais pas faire la meuf parce que je connais pas ce gars mais askip c'est un philosophe. Je trouve que cette citation exprime bien le ménage que je veux faire dans ma vie en dehors du fait que j'aime voyager.

A plus dans l'bus

P.F

0 notes

nofomoartworld · 7 years

Text

Hyperallergic: Pitching Poetry: Charles Bernstein’s Essays and Interviews

Charles Bernstein’s collection of poetic essays, Pitch of Poetry is precisely that: a “pitch” for innovative and challenging poetry, and a statement about the “tune” or “key,” the sound of poetry itself. Bernstein’s writing is necessarily a thing made out of pitch, the black, sticky substance of coal or wood tar:

Poetry’s the thing with feathers (tethers) tarred on, as in Poe’s “system” of Tarr and Fethering (fathering). The kind of poetry I want gums up the works. A tangle of truths.

From the outset of his career Bernstein has fought for a poetry of leaps and fissures, one that inhabits the space between logic and irrationality; here he furthers and refines his argument, in part one of the book, through a series of short essays that reiterate his ideas of “sounding the word,” and what he and Bruce Andrews once promoted as “Language” poetry. He restates his concerns with “disjunction, fragment, recombination, collage, overlay, and constellations,” while redefining poetic genres such as “prose poetry,” “free writing,” “The New Sentence,” Williams’ “Sprung Lyric,” “eco-poetics,” “performance,” and other possible poetic inclinations, including areas of “translation, transcreation, idiolect, and nomadics.”

In the second part of the book — the “pitch” itself — Bernstein offers longer and shorter essays on his influences and the contemporary figures he admires in order to help define his aesthetics: Gertrude Stein, Louis Zukofsky, Charles Olson, Paul Celan, Barbara Guest, Jackson Mac Low, Robin Blaser, Robert Creeley, Larry Eigner, John Ashbery, Hannah Weiner, Haraldo de Campos, Jerome Rothenberg, and in the shorter category, Maggie O’Sullivan, Johanna Drucker and others. (In the interest of transparency, he has kind words about my own poetry and publishing). Not all of these essays are equally convincing, but together they lay out a poetic landscape that clarifies what Bernstein as both critic and poet finds compelling. In so doing he establishes a broad range of his bases—the territory of what he embraces as a poet.

The next section, devoted to 11 interviews and conversations, seemed initially to be the least engaging. I’d already read so many other such pieces and participated in a few with Charles myself. Yet the swath of self-revelation that emerges in these interviews is, in fact, more poetic and revealing than the essays. Bernstein — a highly gifted speaker who is often given to linguistic arpeggios — is particularly charming with foreign correspondents such as the Nepalese poet Yubraj Aryal, the Canary Islands-born writer Manuel Brito, and French writer Penelope Galey-Sacks. With these writers he evidently feels freer to restate his interests and turn them over in his own mind, exploring the depths of his numerous poetic projects over the years. A passage from the Galey-Sacks interview must suffice as an example:

You said something interesting at the conference yesterday: that the intimations of verse occur on the teleological horizon of the possible. Yet you’re also presenting language poetry as breaking with convention, and I imagine you mean breaking with American convention specifically? How does this idea of continuity tie in with the idea of rupture, the idea of breaking? You said yourself that there was a con- tinuity in your work as well as an evolution—an expansion of yourself. You are yourself an expanding poet, and you are expanding through language…how do these intimations of verse occur on the teleological horizon of the possible? To cite Eliot, how do you connect your beginnings with your endings?

There are different overlapping strands that twist and loop back, as in a Möbius strip or Klein bottle. The issue of con- vention is an important one, and it relates to the idea of process. The best formulation for me is one indebted to Emerson by way of Cavell: “aversion of conformity in the pursuit of new forms.” The concept of aversion — which is a swerving-away- from — is more appealing and also more audacious than the idea of breakage and transgression. Still, in poetry the difference between those terms is more about emotion and desire than accurate philosophical description or decision. And so there are reasons why some poets talk about transgression and breakage, or coupure, blows (Le quatre cents coups). And in France you have that, of course, partly with the French Revolution itself versus the British Revolution; when you’re cutting off heads, that’s a vivid image for this spectrum. But what’s interes- ting about aversion or swerving — to think of it in Lucretian terms — is that you actually feel the process of moving away and moving toward rather than a splitting or disconnection or decoupling. That’s what I interested in as a poet. I’m interested in the rhythmic relationships that occur, moving in, around, and about convention. Because my work is entirely dependent upon convention.

I wish I could quote further, but that would be to repeat the wonders of this book itself.

The last section, “Bent Studies,” is the most remarkable, simply because the author jumps onto the tightrope, challenging his ideas and wit to the full. With a “whoosh & higgly hoot & a he-ho-hah,” Bernstein takes on a remarkable cast of “Countrymen, Cadets, Soldiers, Monkeys, a French Doctor, Porters, an Old Man, Apparitions, Witches, Professors, etc,” along with the ghosts of Poe, Dickinson, Williams, Blake, Crane, Whitman, Mallarmé, Emerson, Wittgenstein, and Fanny Brice to explore and celebrate his idea of the messiness of real poetry. In the process he brilliantly lampoons academic writing, particularly by taking justified pot-shots at D. W. Fenza, executive director of Associate Writing Programs (who argues that it is “morally repugnant” to question the merits of the literary prize system), The New York Times Book Review, the New York Review of Books, and other official “protectors of poetry” who apparently want their poetry squeaky-clean and sweet, or, as Bernstein implies, want to excise his kind of poetry from their lives.

In a poetics of “pitch” and “tar,” such narrow visions of the poem simply cannot exist, and Bernstein seems to delight in debunking them. I’ve seldom had as much fun in jumping into the muck and mess of the poetry wars. Pitch of Poetry made me laugh — and sometimes even cry — but never for a moment was I bored or disinterested. How many critical works can be described in that manner? If you love poetry, and take it seriously, then this book is a must.

Charles Bernstein’s Pitch of Poetry (2016) is published by University of Chicago Press and is available from Amazon and other online booksellers.

The post Pitching Poetry: Charles Bernstein’s Essays and Interviews appeared first on Hyperallergic.

from Hyperallergic http://ift.tt/2nXwThr via IFTTT

#IFTTT #Hyperallergic

0 notes

vieuxblog · 8 years

Text

Je pense donc je suis. M’enfin, pense-t-on bien ou mal ?

La question : Qui pense bien ? Qui pense mal ? Qui est juge de la bonne et de la mauvaise pensée ?

Préambule : Le FN a des intentions xénophobes et les instrumentalise dangereusement. Le FN ne peut extraire de son patrimoine, le gène « extrême-droite » fait de haine de l’autre et de violence. C’est sa tare. Elle peut muter mais ne disparaitra jamais.

Pour autant, peut-on réellement parler de « lepénisation des esprits » quand on reprend ses termes ? Parler d’UMPS, n’est-ce pas faire preuve de grande lucidité finalement ? Dire que les bobos – comprendre les gros bourgeois qui n’ont de bohème que leur goût pour le fromage de chèvre de la fromagerie du bon marché, la world music et le design de luxe MAIS eco responsable – ne savent pas vraiment qui sont les gens qui triment avec un smic par mois (et encore), avec des problèmes pour payer les factures et des difficultés à manger sainement cinq fruits et légumes BIO par jour, est-ce de la science-fiction de facho ?

_____________________________________________________________________________

Contexte : Lettre à un membre de ma famille qui m’a quasiment traitée de facho parce que je défendais l’école républicaine laïque et que j’ai pu critiquer les bobos qui, selon moi, ne sont qu’un euphémisme actuel pour désigner la bourgeoisie voire une nouvelle aristocratie. Si le FN s’est acheté une image, le bourgeois a lui-aussi redoré son blason pour paraître plus cool, plus « human next door » (et pas le bobio, le bohème décroissant qui vit peinard à la campagne, bouffe bio pour pas cher et connaît toutes les astuces du troc, du recyclage et du circuit court. Une sorte de baba d’avant mais sans la caricature … Sauf si on est parisiens. A ce moment là, quand on est parisiens, tout le reste de la France demeure une immense bouse où on se fait chier)

Lettre :

Cher Gianni,

C’est dans l’espace de l’écrit que je tiens à étayer mes interrogations après les avoir exprimées avec la virulence que le vin, hélàs, peut exacerber et la maladresse que l’improvisation orale engendre. L’écriture épouse le temps long là où l’oral et le débat peuvent ternir une pensée en l’embrouillant et en la rendant sinon inaudible du moins trop courte pour être intéressante.

Je préfère l’écrit pour y inscrire mes questionnements.

Notre débat - durant lequel j’ai pu te couper la parole et ne pas laisser ta pensée se dérouler en voulant à tout prix brandir ma position sans grande cohérence, je l’avoue et m’excuse - s’est achevé sur la question de la laïcité, grand thème de société sans cesse posé dans le débat public, son instrumentalisation par le FN et l’éclairage à apporter sur ce mot. Ce dernier nous a donc amenés à le problématiser :

« laïcité », est-il un mot galvaudé traduisant par excellence la lepénisation des esprits en marche depuis des années, qui consiste à inverser tous les paradigmes de pensée et à faire passer des ignominies pour des vérités que « veulent (pourtant)entendre les français » ?

« Laïcité », est-ce un mot dont l’héritage est dévoyé dans le but moins louable que celui d’origine de diffuser des idées qui se terminent par le suffixe -phobe et défendre des opinions liberticides à l’égard des croyants et plus précisément des musulmans ?

« laïcité », est-ce le mal français ? Ne devons-nous pas rompre avec notre tradition laïque ?

Tu as semblé répondre à ces questions par l’affirmative et j’ai entendu tes arguments : ce mot, remis au cœur de l’arêne par le FN, est stigmatisant. Assouplir notre conception de la laïcité pour tendre vers le multi culturalisme anglosaxon serait un moyen d’apaiser les tensions sociales. La question des cultures est clivante et elle nécessite beaucoup de hauteur de vue pour la penser afin de ne pas discriminer à tort certains français. Nous avons notamment, à ce moment là, introduit la question du voile religieux.

Je t’ai répondu en nuançant tes propos voire en essayant de carrément les déconstruire maladroitement au nom de l’intransigeance républicaine française. Cela faisait longtemps qu’on ne s’était pas vu et qu’on n’avait pas bavardé. Nous, pas français de souche, italo-polonais- espagnol d’origine brassée et mêlant des confessions catholique, protestante et juive.

Et bien, non, je ne suis pas devenue une facho horripilée par l’altérité culturelle et religieuse ni une sympathisante du FN, acquise à l’idée que les immigrés, enfin les musulmans car on est aussi fils d’immigrés mais ça dérange moins le FN bizarrement (sauf l’identité juive peut-être), que les musulmans donc nous envahissent et veulent nous remplacer TOUS.

Par contre, aujourd’hui, dans le laboratoire médiatique qui innerve le débat d’idées où se mêlent (sans rompre pour autant la verticalité hiérarchique) politiques, penseurs, éditorialistes journalistes, bloggeurs, youtubeurs ou citoyens avec un compte facebook ou/et twitter férus de commentaires, il est un phénomène idéologique remarquable qui distingue les mauvais penseurs plutôt de droite et même carrément tendance « facho » ET les bons penseurs dits plutôt « de gauche » service public voire tendance « islamo gauchiste », mot composé ayant encore une fois le privilège de sortir directement de l’alambic à idées du FN. Une belle distillation labellisée par l’extrême-droite afin de critiquer ces « journalistes bobos » qui savent ce qui est moral et ce qui ne l’est pas et imposent leur « dictature bienpensante » pour paraphraser les propos de ce parti dirigé par Marine Le Pen.

Cette opposition Mauvais penseurs / bons penseurs a tellement été outrée et caricaturée jusqu’au manichéisme facile – et donc inconfortable quand on pense avec des idées et pas seulement avec des opinions - que les crispations identitaires ont redoublé, qu’il est une nécessité de salubrité cérébrale de choisir clairement son camp pour pas faire le jeu du FN et qu’il a été aussi décidé que la nuance et l’acceptation de dire que parfois, même des adversaires peuvent ne pas dire que des conneries et qu’ils peuvent même avoir raison sur certains points, devaient être honnies et jetées comme le dépôt impropre à la confection d’un breuvage et laissé dans le filtre de cette grande machine à idées parfois assommante (j’ai tenté la métaphore filée allusive, Zola, ne m’en veux pas !).

Ainsi, la lutte contre les discriminations et l’antiracisme ont été à ce point polarisés qu’il devient difficile de dire que tous les « racisés » ne sont pas tous victimes (bien heureusement) de racisme, difficile de dire que certains « racisés » sont très fermés à l’autre et à la différence (ce sont des êtres humains et les cons sont partout), difficile de dénoncer les fondamentalismes religieux, d’en pointer leurs fallacieuses stratégies sans être catégorisé et réduit à n’être qu’un dangereux soldat à la solde des idées du FN, grande peur de notre système politique qui se donne pour mission de la combattre sans pourtant remettre en cause sa responsabilité dans son avènement et son ancrage. Dommage. On avancerait.

Nous savons que l’extrême-droite, à grands coups de populisme, exploite les inégalités criantes auxquelles notre pays, en crise politique, économique, sociale et culturelle, doit faire face. Car avant celle liée à ses origines, la discrimination la plus implacable demeure celle de l’argent car elle est responsable d’une lutte des classes qui n’a jamais vraiment disparu mais dont le fossé s’accroit toujours un peu plus. Les discriminations quand on est une minorité religieuse, une femme, un étranger, un homo sont rendues un peu plus indolores quand on a l’argent. Mais, ce problème d’inégalités à un moment où la religion la plus corrosive est celle de l’argent-roi, l’argent-liberté, l’argent-fraternité, l’argent-égalité est un autre débat. Fondamental mais ne nous dispersons pas.

Bref, tous les ingrédients pour sortir le meilleur cru de la pensée endoctrinée fasciste sont réunis :

- une gauche qui vient de gouverner, déchirée, entre les aspirations vers la social-démocratie d’une certaine frange du PS qui ne cache plus ses affinités avec Macron, parangon d’une tchatcher version 3.0 pavanant dans un véhicule uber, tablette « french tech » à la main et habillé du costume habile du progressiste « ni droite ni gauche » qui cache pour la blague, une idéologie libérale à laquelle une grande majorité de « français cadre sup’ DE LA SOCIETE CIVILE BORDEL» adhèrent ET la volonté de reconquête des idées de gauche par les frondeurs PS qui ont adopté la posture de la distance à l’égard de certaines décisions prises par ce quinquennat critiqué par sa gauche (loi travail en tête). Ainsi, et c’est le #pointcomplot, en surface, le PS semble être représenté par le candidat Hamon alors que son rôle, malgré lui on espère, ne consiste finalement qu’à siphonner quelques voix à Mélenchon qui occupe à lui seul la place vide de la pensée de gauche anti libérale. Le tout pour neutraliser cette gauche – un accord Mélenchon- Hamon était impossible et les tacticiens le savaient (#Pointcomplot j’ai dit) – et favoriser l’élection de la fraîche créature du quinquennat, prête à mettre en œuvre notre projeeeeeeeet !

- Une droite tout aussi divisée, chose surprenante pour un parti, Les Républicains, qui a toujours glorifié sa capacité à se rassembler et à se ranger derrière un seul homme pour gagner. L’affaire Fillon n’est pas terminée mais au vu des désaffections successives qui remettent en cause la légitimité de la candidature de Fillon, il semble que la droite n’a pas le vent en poupe et traverse elle-aussi une profonde crise interne.

- Il y a Mélenchon, pour qui ira mon vote, qui a surpris par une belle dynamique de campagne jusqu’à agacer certains de ses électeurs (;-)) Mais Mélenchon reste Mélenchon : l’extrême gauche réduite à son image peu lisse de dictatrice et admiratrice de Castro et autres leaders communistes … et l’anti libéralisme pénètre davantage les têtes quand c’est l’extrême-droite qui le défend. Je laisse le soin à un spécialiste d’en expliquer les raisons.

Mélenchon, à qui l’on demande encore de justifier sa différence avec l’extrême-droite à un moment où un candidat aux portes du pouvoir salue le dépassement des clivages gauche-droite,

Mélenchon, le méridional qui parle trop fort, s’emporte trop et qui à l’outrecuidance de ne pas aimer les (actionnaires des) médias et leur proximité avec un pouvoir qui dicte sa loi et prend en otage les citoyens pour les culpabiliser et leur enjoindre de faire barrage au FN en votant pour les partis dominants ou qui ont l’argent et un réseau média (coucou Macron), prétendument les seuls capables de mettre KO Marine Le Pen.

Ce même Mélenchon qui n’aurait pas su conserver l’électorat d’extrême gauche notamment ouvrier, populaire, accueillis, d’après des sondages, à bras ouverts par l’autre extrême.

Mélenchon qui a le malheur d’affirmer son point de vue personnel dans « L ‘émission politique » sur France 2 au sujet du voile, « accoutrement » non compatible avec notre République, provoquant l’ire de la gauche « vrauche », accusant le leader de « La France insoumise » d’irrespect voire d’islamophobie.

Dans un tel contexte de crise démocratique, le FN tire son épingle du jeu. Pourquoi ce détour ?

La bonne santé du FN va de pair avec la gangrène qui attaque les partis de gouvernement, droite et gauche. Coïncidence étrange. Pas étonnant d’ailleurs que celui qui se dit, répétons-le, « ni droite ni gauche », profite aussi du bordel. Jusqu’à sa possible victoire.

Quel rapport avec la laïcité ?

Le FN a, selon toi, été le premier à mettre sur le tapis de jeu médiatique, la question de la laïcité pour vouloir contraindre en réalité une partie de la population française, de confession juive mais surtout musulmane, tout en affichant clairement sa clémence indulgente envers les catholiques, français de souche. Les bons français bien blancs et bien purs quoi !

Or, dans une France des Lumières où l’intolérance et les superstitions religieuses ont été fustigées (relire Bourdi Diderot, Voltaire, Fontenelle), dans une France déchristianisée où la religion catholique a fait les frais d’une fronde anti cléricale forte et s’est progressivement éloignée en tant qu’institution et donc organe de pouvoir de la chose politique et publique, dans une Europe occidentalisée où les philosophes et penseurs du XXème siècle ont écrit et réfléchi sur la mort de Dieu, la disparition du sacré dans la société (relire Nietzsche, Beckett, Camus, revoir Pasolini …), le fait religieux a été remis en cause et ce, jusqu’à la caricature : dans la popculture (avatar du capitalisme caché par les paillettes) avec les crucifix de Madonna flirtant avec l’érotisme ou ce superbe clip d’Army of lovers « Crucified »,

Là, il y aura le lien car j’adore cette chanson naze.

dans la BD avec la subversion de l’imagerie chrétienne. Je pense à sœur Marie -Thérèse dans la revue Fluide Glacial. Les exemples abondent alors avançons.

Comme résultat de cette déconstruction de l’institution et du sacré, la religion catholique a perdu de sa superbe. (ouf !) Si l’on peut déplorer la perte du spirituel dans nos sociétés, on ne peut que se réjouir de la reculade de la religion en tant que structure impérialiste et prosélyte. Et là, l’analyse du méchant Onfray, détesté à gauche, faisant lui aussi apparemment le jeu de Marine Le Pen, n’est pas si hétérodoxe ou du moins pas si « débile, facho, islamophobe, laïcarde » et j’en passe. Car quand elle n’est pas vécue comme un élan spirituel personnel qui peut aider à vivre (certains tiennent debout grâce à elle), la religion est intrinsèquement prosélyte et sert à guider les Hommes en perte de repères selon des préceptes stricts où la liberté et le droit de penser autrement n’ont guère leur place.

La France a été cette terre d’inquisitions laissant la ligue ultra catholique brûler les protestants, cette terre des croisades « évangélisatrices », doux euphémisme. Et puis, on a raillé cette institution, on a blasphémé contre la religion et ce, déjà du temps de Molière (relire Bourd Dom Juan) jusqu’à la déposséder de sa mainmise politique. Depuis, la religion de l’occident s’est peu à peu métamorphosée en centre commercial où le Dieu est argent. Mais c’est un autre sujet qu’on n’abordera pas car cette « nouvelle religion » peut se lire comme la pire traduction des pires mauvais penchants de l’Homme. Dans mon proche entourage adoré qui ne déteste pas l’argent et qui finira par me quitter, lassé de mes positions anti fric, on me reproche ma détestation de celui-ci. Hélas, quand l’argent cessera de transformer les Hommes, de leur faire tourner la tête, de leur faire perdre la vraie humilité et le sens d’une vie humaine, quand l’argent cessera de n’être qu’un immense gâchis qui détruit la planète et les hommes qui l’habitent, je n’aurais plus rien contre lui.

(Mais revenons à nos moutons.)

Or, aujourd’hui, symptôme des temps décadents, on assiste à une certaine forme de résurgence de la religion qui instrumentalise à nouveau le politique et cette résurgence se lit sur les faces d’un même couteau identitaire parfois mortifère : d’un côté, on peut trouver des cathos ultra qui vont manifester contre des droits (en France, on a la manif pour tous, Manif anti-IVG, les français de souche catho sectaires homophobes de père en fils), de l’autre, on a des juifs (voir l’histoire du catalogue Ikéa par exemple) ou des musulmans utilisant aussi la religion comme vecteur d’identité brandie comme arme politique.

Notons que je n’ai pas dit que ces cathos ultra, ces juifs et ces musulmans étaient terroristes. Ils instrumentalisent juste la religion pour imposer une façon de penser, souvent traditionnaliste. Non parce que dans ce climat houleux où tu dois crier sans cesse « pas d’amalgame » afin d’éviter qu’on trahisse ta pensée, je préfère préciser.

Bon, le catho qui va à la messe, le musulman qui va prier à la mosquée, le juif qui fête Kippour à la synagogue, rien de plus normal dans un pays où la liberté de cultes a été arrachée dans le sang après des siècles d’absolutisme monarchique catholique. Henri de Navarre avait bien tenté un truc apaisant avec son édit de Nantes mais c’est quand même depuis l’avènement de la Ière République que la France est entrée dans la démocratie, l’état de droit et de libertés. Un slogan modernisé pourrait donner ça : « Prie qui tu veux mais respecte la différence, meuf, mec ! »

Quant au respect des traditions, la fidélité davantage culturelle (et pour faire plaisir à mamie) à sa génétique religieuse transmise par l’environnement familial, ce sont des phénomènes qu’on ne peut pas juger et qui appartiennent à la vie de chacun. Interdire férocement la religion reviendrait à en imposer une autre : un système où croire serait passible de prison #MonAmourdystopie. Ça, pour le coup, c’est fasciste, facho, extrémiste. Condamnable donc.

Ainsi, le problème n’est pas tant la foi et son exercice que sa revendication identitaire belliqueuse. Soit dit en passant, les chantres de « nos racines chrétiennes » oublient quand même trop vite dans leur argumentaire que de nombreux français ont été sacrifiés au profit de l’imposition d’une seule religion, sœur de l’instance politique, toutes deux capitaines du pouvoir, avant qu’on décide de séparer Religion et Etat.

Et pour revenir à notre débat sur la lepénisation des esprits, quand la France a dû légiférer sur les signes religieux en 2004 pour tenter de préserver son héritage de république laïque, la religion revenait chatouiller la peau d’albâtre de Marianne. Alors, le FN a immédiatement fait sien le mot « laïcité » pour combattre officieusement l’islam et officiellement « l’islamisme » et le « fondamentalisme religieux », pourtant quasi gros mots il y a une dizaine d’années mais qui recouvrent aujourd’hui une réalité dont on ne peut pas faire abstraction. Les attentats ont redistribué les lignes. Oui, il existe, ce fondamentalisme. Non, il n’est pas à minorer. Non, ce n’est pas être raciste que de le combattre. Non, ce n’est pas être islamophobe que de dire que la République a pour mission de lutter contre toute forme de communautarisme et de repli identitaire.

En gros, il y a dix ans, il n’a pas été possible d’admettre que ce que disait le FN en terme de constat pouvait être juste dans une certaine mesure tout simplement parce que leurs fins, leurs intentions étaient puantes d’identité « franco-française de souche catholique » et qu’on ne pouvait pas dire qu’il avait raison sur tel ou tel point de peur d’être mis au pilori. Mais, aujourd’hui, manœuvre habile qui profite aussi de la croissance de l’emploi intempestif du mot « facho », le FN continue d’assainir tout ce qui pourrait le stigmatiser comme le parti du père (Marine Le Pen vire les ultra nazis, se désolidarise des propos xénophobes tenus par des membres du parti) et se sent fort d’une lucidité sur l’état du pays et comble des combles, il s’avère, si on réfléchit que cette lucidité n’est pas entièrement à jeter. Voir le préambule. Oui, car ça serait trop simple de combattre un parti de nazis qui brûlent des figurines de juifs, crâne rasé et photo d’Hitler en fond d’écran de smartphone. Pourtant, ça serait moins le bordel dans les têtes de ceux qui vont voter pour le FN, les nouveaux électeurs qui grandissent, ou dans les têtes de ceux qui combattent ce parti en ne faisant qu’insulter son électorat entre un rendez-vous avec une personnalité importante, un resto parisien à 300 euros le menu ou une soirée télé dans son home cinema de son duplex de 120 m2 dans le 6ème arrondissement de la capitale.

Après, les trolls facho, agitateurs militants des réseaux sociaux, sont souvent de vrais débiles et n’ont que ce qu’ils méritent mais on rappelle que la France, ce n’est pas Twitter dont le nombre d’utilisateurs en France doit représenter, allez, 2% de la population française … (je demande le fact checking !)

Résultat des courses, il a fallu deux attentats pour qu’on commence à faire la lumière sur un intégrisme religieux notamment islamiste qui a eu des années pour se répandre et prospérer. Par exemple, j’ai l’exemple d’une ville de banlieue parisienne, dirigée pendant des années par le PC qui a enfin admis, après le 13 novembre, qu’une de ses mosquées était le lieu de discours radicalisés et qu’il fallait la mettre en incapacité de nuire. Sans attentats, on aurait peut-être eu peur d’être amalgamé au FN et d’être islamophobe en osant faire un contrôle pour vérifier si on n’appelle pas à faire de la poupée vaudou avec l’apostat.

Attention, nerf de la thèse de ce long billet : Toutes ces précautions « bien pensantes » me rendent dingue ! Pourquoi devons-nous, en 2017, marcher sur des œufs quand on parle de religion institutionnalisée et qu’on estime capital d’en circonscrire les écueils et les dangers potentiels. Les dangers des religions sont intemporels.

Pourquoi avons-nous laissé le FN s’accaparer ces questions ? Pourquoi n’avons-nous pas pris la mesure des dangers ? Pourquoi encore aujourd’hui et même plus que jamais aujourd’hui, ces sujets ne sont pas « bien pensants » et les aborder sont passibles de procès d’intention et d’attaques en racisme.

Ne nous y trompons pas, on le sait tous. Les fanatiques font du mal aux croyants dont la plupart vivent leur foi sans faire chier personne. C’est ainsi qu’il convient d’être intransigeant envers les abuseurs qui se servent de l’état de droit et de toutes les stratégies victimaires pour diviser entre eux les croyants de confessions différentes et ces croyants entre les non-croyants, pour accuser à tort et à travers les gens d’être facho faisant le jeu du FN au prétexte que ces gens tiennent à ce que chacun cohabite harmonieusement sans accuser untel d’être athée, telle femme de ne pas porter le voile, telle voisin d’être juif, telle personne de ne pas manger de porc. Bref, l’intransigeance doit être de mise quand on veut que chacun vive sa religion tranquillement en restant ouvert aux autres.

Le partage des cultures est le plus bel enrichissement et un réel facteur d’ouverture entre les êtres humains.

Le saccage des cultes par la revendication identitaire politisée d’un seul flirtant avec le fanatisme est le plus grand pourrissement et un facteur de fermeture entre ces mêmes êtres humains.

Mon intransigeance personnelle n’a rien à voir avec l’athéisme. Je crois au sacré et à des forces qui nous dépassent. J’avoue ne pas être une fidèle d’une religion monothéiste car toute institution me paraît oppressante et elle entache la liberté, ma seule déesse (lol). La question du rapport entre la femme et la religion me pose aussi problème. Mais, c’est encore une autre question qu’il conviendrait de développer. Un autre jour.

Je ne suis pas non plus une laïcarde qui cherche à insulter à l’envi les croyants d’une religion monothéiste. Je veux juste pouvoir vivre dans un pays où chaque confession se mélange sans crispation. Je veux pouvoir étudier sereinement en classe des textes du 17ème et 18ème qui critiquent la religion sans être accusée d’antisémitisme ou d’islamophobie. Je ne veux pas qu’on dise que tel auteur est fou d’attaquer la religion. Je ne veux pas qu’un élève à qui on fait une remarque sur le travail, en l’occurrence absent, me dise que je suis raciste alors qu’il oublie que d’autres de ses camarades, « racisés » aussi, ne sont jamais les cibles de mes foudres de prof intransigeante et que la remarque est strictement pédagogique. Je ne veux pas que de plus en plus d’élèves filles de 15 ans portent des robes qui noient leurs formes de filles pour se sentir protéger du regard des autres et affirmer qu’elles sont de bonnes croyantes là où les autres filles avec des pantalons, des robes courtes, des ongles peints ne seraient que des putes en puissance, mécréantes et mauvaises croyantes. Là, c’est le moment où on attaque en disant « espèce de féministe blanche bourgeoise égocentrée … et facho islamophobe». Passons. Je ne prône pas non plus l’hypersexualisation des femmes mais je veux juste que notre société vive sans complexe toutes ses différences sans agressivité, sans sous-entendus ambigus, laissant les frustrations de côté grâce à l’éveil des connaissances et de la curiosité. Grâce à l’humour aussi. C’est essentiel de rire de la religion, de nos contradictions et de nos croyances. (Moi, je parle aux plantes et je sens des présences. Je peux considérer que je serai à mon aise en HP). Je ne veux pas entendre tous les trois mots un élève dire « sur la Mecque », « sur le coran » ou « sur la Torah ». Je ne veux pas transiger sur les équivoques ni avoir une certaine indulgence par démagogie aveugle. Je sais par contre assouplir mes idées face à la réalité : une élève voulait venir en sortie théâtre mais ne pouvant pas sortir sans son voile, elle m’a tristement dit qu’elle ne viendrait pas. Je l’ai alors encouragée à venir au théâtre avec son voile car je trouvais que mon intransigeance ne faisait pas le poids face à une éventuelle privation de sortie culturelle théâtre.

Je ne veux pas entendre une élève, très perspicace, douée et que j’aimais beaucoup, dire que la Révolution française n’a crée que du mal et que cela n’était pas une bonne chose de mettre en place la laïcité. Je ne veux pas être agressée virtuellement par des gens qui retournent le problème et me traitent de xénophobe.

Je veux / je ne veux pas. La liste serait encore longue.

C’est là où le multiculturalisme à l’anglo-saxonne intervient. Il ne paraît pas une solution si satisfaisante que cela dans la mesure où, à y regarder de près, les gens ne se mélangent pas vraiment. Cela semble plus simple et en apparence plus apaisé mais ces lignes de partage entre diverses confessions me font l’effet d’une solution lâche comme quand on met la poussière sous le tapis. On verra bien comment ça se passera quand Macron décidera d’instaurer en France ce libéralisme des croyances ! LOL !

Bref, j’estime qu’on a la liberté de considérer que certains écrivains, journalistes ou philosophes ne sont pas à mettre à la poubelle parce qu’un a écrit un papier sur l’affaire des migrants de Cologne en donnant une image islamophobe des agresseurs, parce qu’une attaque les frères musulmans, un autre démontre que le christianisme et l’islam sont des religions prosélytes, un autre démonte la stratégie haineuse des indigènes de la République.

J’ai aussi la liberté de penser que ce qu’écrit et dit Elizabeth Levy dans son journal Causeur est de la merde et que je ne parviens pas à adhérer à son approche quand elle attaque les « bien pensants bobo gauchistes » et les féministes-freddy-les-griffes-de-la-nuit.

C’est compliqué hein, les Idées ? Ajoutons-y les opinions et on s’y perd.

Quelques liens, et à raison, émanant donc de gens qui provoquent des polémiques à gauche : Fourest et une conférence sur la laïcité, Daoud et son nouveau livre, un papier d’agoravox sur l’affaire Mehdi Meklat, Enthoven et son dernier article dans philo mag sur l’impiété et les fanatiques.

Les liens, c’est pour plus tard.

A bientôt pour reprendre notre débat. Promis, la prochaine fois, je te laisse parler et j’évite de gueuler comme Mélenchon. Bécots.

#religion intégrisme laïcité bienpensant FN Facho MLP Macron Présidentielles2017 #religion #intégrisme #laïcité #fn #facho #mlp #macron #présidentielle 2017

0 notes

ilfilointermentale-blog · 8 years

Text

Ur-Fascism/Eternal Fascism by Umberto Eco

WRITTEN ON THE “NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS” ON JUNE 22, 1995

--Op commentary: Please if you are going to read just one thing today read this essay on how to recognize fascism around us in any historical time. Thank you.--

I spent two of my early years among the SS, Fascists, Republicans, and partisans shooting at one another, and I learned how to dodge bullets. It was good exercise.

But who are They?

1 2 3 4

abc bcd cde def

As a consequence, there can be no advancement of learning. Truth has been already spelled out once and for all, and we can only keep interpreting its obscure message.

Let me finish with a poem by Franco Fortini:

Sulla spalletta del ponte Le teste degli impiccati Nell’acqua della fonte La bava degli impiccati.

Sul lastrico del mercato Le unghie dei fucilati Sull’erba secca del prato I denti dei fucilati.

Mordere l’aria mordere i sassi La nostra carne non è più d’uomini Mordere l’aria mordere i sassi Il nostro cuore non è più d’uomini.

Ma noi s’è letto negli occhi dei morti E sulla terra faremo libertà Ma l’hanno stretta i pugni dei morti La giustizia che si farà.

* * *

(On the bridge’s parapet The heads of the hanged In the flowing rivulet The spittle of the hanged.

On the cobbles in the market- places The fingernails of those lined up and shot On the dry grass in the open spaces The broken teeth of those lined up and shot.

Biting the air, biting the stones Our flesh is no longer human Biting the air, biting the stones Our hearts are no longer human.

But we have read into the eyes of the dead And shall bring freedom on the earth But clenched tight in the fists of the dead Lies the justice to be served.) —poem translated by Stephen Sartarelli

#fascism #umberto eco #ur-fascism #eternal fascism #essay #my #eng #literature #politics

0 notes