Ok

En poursuivant votre navigation sur ce site, vous acceptez l'utilisation de cookies. Ces derniers assurent le bon fonctionnement de nos services. En savoir plus.

dimanche, 01 juin 2014

Japanese Politicians Hoping to Kick Start a Natural Gas Pipeline with the Russian Federation

WO-AK966_JURUSG_G_20120904181211.jpg

Japanese Politicians Hoping to Kick Start a Natural Gas Pipeline with the Russian Federation

Michiyo Tanabe and Nuray Lydia Oglu

Modern Tokyo Times

Ex: http://moderntokyotimes.com

If America is taken out of the equation in relation to geopolitical meddling then Japan and the Russian Federation would have a blooming relationship based on mutual shared interests. These interests apply to greater cultural interaction, economic development, geopolitical issues, greater partnership in the area of energy and other natural resources, closer military ties – and other powerful areas. Therefore, it is hoped that the government of Prime Minister Abe will listen deeply to thirty-three Japanese lawmakers that desire a new important gas pipeline that will link both nations.

Lee Jay Walker at Modern Tokyo Times states: “Indeed, the Russian Federation in the area of energy and natural resources is of major significance to all nations in Northeast Asia. This reality is abundantly clear to China and this also ties in with Central Asia where the influence of the Russian Federation remains significant, to say the least. Of course, for China the military angle and space technology in relation to the Russian Federation is also of major importance for the power brokers in Beijing. Likewise, both North Korea and South Korea understand the importance of developing good relations with Moscow. Indeed, unlike other nations throughout the region, the Russian Federation is viewed to be a neutral power throughout the region whereby political elites in Moscow can play a very important role in times of tension throughout Northeast Asia.”

The proposed new gas pipeline will link the Sakhalin Island (Russian Federation) with the prefecture of Ibaraki (Japan). Obviously, this will boost the regional economy of Northern Japan and Ibaraki because many companies will gain in various ways. Also, given the internal crisis in Japan in the area of energy in relation to the nuclear crisis that erupted after a powerful 9.0-magnitude earthquake triggered a brutal tsunami; then clearly the thirty-three Japanese lawmakers have a valid point. Not only this, with the Russian Federation signing a major energy deal with China then it is equally essential that Japan increases its economic, political and geopolitical interests with power brokers based in Moscow.

Naokazu Takemoto, an influential individual within the lawmakers group, is making it known that he will discuss this issue with the leader of Japan. It also bodes well that the leaders of Japan and the Russian Federation have a firm relationship therefore it is hoped that Abe will not succumb to any possible meddling from Washington. After all, while Japan and America have a special relationship it is equally clear that you should never put all your eggs in one basket. Therefore, Japan needs to focus on developing stronger ties with the Russian Federation and likewise political elites in Moscow must become more understanding of the interests of Japan.

President Vladimir Putin is scheduled to visit Japan this autumn therefore it is a great opportunity for both leaders to cement ties between both nations to a much higher degree. This reality means that Takemoto needs to build up fresh momentum and it is hoped that other Japanese lawmakers will come on board. The deal may appear minor after China and the Russian Federation recently agreed to a $400 billion deal whereby Russia’s gas will help to boost the economy of China by enabling a natural flow of energy to this nation over the next 30 years in this deal. Despite this, the $5.9 billion plan being proposed between Japan and the Russian Federation may unleash other fresh projects in the near future.

In the last three years after the nuclear crisis in Fukushima it is known that spending on liquefied imports of natural gas is now just over double the costs of pre-March 11. Of course, the Ministry of Finance fully understands the need to implement a new energy policy in order to meet the demands of business companies. It is hoped that Abe will listen to Takemoto and all members of the group that supports a deal between Japan and the Russian Federation.

In another article by Modern Tokyo Times it was stated: “The Russian Federation is a binding force in uniting Eurasia and Central Asia therefore political elites in Tokyo need to focus on geopolitics and national interests. At the same time, with China and Japan relations being frosty to say the least it is clear that Moscow desires to be an honest broker. Likewise, the Korean Peninsula is very complex but once more the Russian Federation is viewed positively because of being diplomatic towards all regional powers. Similarly, Northern Japan needs greater economic investment and the natural linkages between the Russian Far East and Northern Japan is clear for all to see. Therefore, the above realities and the significance of energy issues and other natural resources that Japan needs must be weighed up heavily by political elites in Tokyo.”

The Foreign Minister of Japan, Fumio Kishida, commented in the past that “… Cooperation between Japan and Russia, as key players in the Pacific Ocean region, is important for fortifying peace and stability in the region.”

Therefore, it is hoped that the thirty-three Japanese lawmakers within the ruling parties of Japan will impact greatly on Abe. After all, Japan must always put national interests first rather than succumbing to the whims of America.

Lee Jay Walker gave support to both main writers

leejay@moderntokyotimes.com

Contra Faustian Man

1008506-Charles_Gounod_Faust.jpg

Contra Faustian Man

By Eugène Montsalvat

Ex: http://www.counter-culture.com

 “The history of mankind as a whole is tragic. But the sacrilege and the catastrophe of the Faustian are greater than all others, greater than anything Æschylus or Shakespeare ever imagined. The creature is rising up against its creator. As once the microcosm Man against Nature, so now the microcosm Machine is revolting against Nordic Man. The lord of the World is becoming the slave of the Machine, which is forcing him — forcing us all, whether we are aware of it or not — to follow its course. The victor, crashed, is dragged to death by the team.”

— Oswald Spengler, Man and Technics 

060724_Faust_VL.widec.jpgThe unique characteristics of Faustian civilization, as Spengler described it, are now leading Europe to destruction. The Faustian is characterized by a drive towards the infinite, a will to break through the boundaries that limit man, whether they be intellectual or physical. Spengler calls the prime symbol of the Faustian soul “limitless space.”[1] Like Goethe’s Faust, Faustian civilization seeks infinite knowledge.

However, as this civilization declines, limitless space becomes an all-consuming maw that threatens the survival of all traditions, the all-encompassing extension of the Faustian soul ensnaring all the peoples of the world in its decline. Faustian man, detached from the earth, is on course to share the fate of Icarus. The fruits of the Faustian mind — rationalism, universalism, liberalism, industrialism, and globalization — threaten identity and heritage on a global scale.

While it is true that all civilizations, no matter what their particulars are, are bound to die as all living organisms are bound to die, the unique characteristics of the Faustian decline are uniquely disastrous. Whereas the ethnic Romans and Persians survived the collapse of the Roman and Persian empires, Western man’s dying civilization threatens to physically eliminate him, while also spreading the contagion of liberalism to non-Western cultures.

The Faustian tendency to break down barriers has transmogrified into the toxic global homogenization of cultures and peoples in the waning stages of Western civilization, that enables foreign and internal threats to multiply. The Faustian mindset must be discarded if Western Europeans and their descendants ever hope to create another great civilization in the ruins of this one.

One of the root causes of the current situation is universalism, which does not respect the particular qualities of an ethnos. The Faustian concept of space necessitates universalism. We may take the Faustian embrace monotheism as a starting point for this tendency. As Spengler wrote, “The plurality of separate bodies which represents Cosmos for the Classical soul, requires a similar pantheon — hence the antique polytheism. The single world-volume, be it conceived as cavern or as space, demands the single god of Magian or Western Christianity.”[2] Instead of separate moral universes, the Faustian worldview accepts only one.

While this monotheistic worldview is not unique to Faustian civilization, the Magian soul’s cavern infers a certain limit to its sovereignty, as we see in Islamic theology, where the world is divided separate houses, one of which is the house of Islam, Dar al-Islam. The unbounded space of the Faustian soul merges seamlessly into the Hebrew Bible’s conception of space. In On Being A Pagan, Alain de Benoist characterizes the latter, “The universe is thus conceived in the Bible as a world with no spatial boundaries.”[3]

National borders, borders between religions, between ethnic groups, are erased in the Faustian mind, indeed no group has embraced biblical universalism to the extent that Faustian civilization has. No other civilization has ranged so far and so wide in their efforts to impose their morality upon the entirety of the world. Even the most ferocious of the Islamic expansions, including the Salafist trends of our day, pale in comparison to the sustained attempt of the West to convert the rest of the globe. We see these efforts in the Crusades of the Teutonic Knights against the pagan Balts, the Swedes waging war on the Orthodox Slavs of Novgorod, the Spaniards’ attempts to convert the Indian populations of the Americas, the civilizing mission of the British Empire, and into this day and age with America’s global War on Terror.

While some men may look upon these events as great triumphs of Western Civilization, they are really milestones in a trend of globalization reaching its pinnacle now. Faustian civilization, in many ways like the most Salafist strains of Islam, sees the need to impose a single moral vision upon the world, whether it be a colonial nation’s particular strain of Christianity, or liberal democracy.

Under Roman rule, different customs and beliefs could coexist within certain moral boundaries, a cosmos of separate moral planets. In contrast, the Faustian man believes that his particular morality extends to the ends of the earth. Hence Kant’s dictum, “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law without contradiction.”

Thus international organizations and courts trample upon the sovereignty of peoples. The particulars of a man himself are stripped away, he is no longer German, an English, or Chinese, he is “man,” in the abstract. Any attempts to resists this alleged universal morality common to mankind are deemed criminal. Those who do not fall into line are primitives, heretics, or, to use more modern parlance, rogue states.

On the opposite end, the Faustian civilization is rendered rootless. There is nothing that could stand in the way of limitless space for there is no law without a universal character according to him. There can no longer be different standards of morality for different classes, genders, or any other social division. No longer is there a way of action and a way of contemplation, a way of kings and a way of priests, a way of men and a way of women, there is simply a universal way. Faustian civilization turned towards egalitarianism.

Political liberalism can be seen as the extension of a certain Anglo-Saxon mindset that grew under Christianity. Alain de Benoist states in The Problem of Democracy, “liberal democracies are rooted not so much in the spirit of ancient democracy as in Christian individualism, the rationalism of the Enlightenment, and the Anglo-Saxon Protestant spirit. In these democracies, the ‘citizen’ is not he who inhabits a history and a destiny through his belonging to a given people, but a rather an abstract, atemporal, and universal being, which regardless of any belonging, is the holder of ‘human rights’ decreed to be unalienable.”[4] Hence, politics ceased to be defined by the conditions of the polis itself. In the democracies of Ancient Greece, political freedoms were derived from being a member of a specific community, generally that which one was born into from autochthonous stock. In contrast to Classical civilization, Faustian civilization invented the universal rights of man, which appear to guarantee freedom from the bonds of community. Once again the theme of the replacement of the particular by the universal is evident. The rooted pillar of classical civilization is replaced by the infinite field of the Faustian.

The rootless political existence develops into rootless personal existence. The Faustian tendency towards uprooted modes of existence finds expression in postmodern philosophy. The boundless space of Faustian man is the home of the rhizome of Deleuze and Guattari, “It has neither beginning nor end.” The rhizome shares with Faustian physics a focus on motion and dynamics as opposed to discrete static objects, “It is composed not of units but of dimensions, or rather directions in motion.” Compare this with the Faustian focus on force, “There is no Western statics — that is, no interpretation of mechanical facts that is natural to the Western spirit bases itself on the ideas of form and substance, or even, for that matter, on the ideas of space and mass otherwise than in connexion with those of time and force.”[5] In both cases, the focus on actual substance, being, is reduced.

The criticism of being in their seminal text A Thousand Plateaus, displays certain Faustian characteristics as well. Here the rhizome is contrasted with the tree. Once again the symbol of rootedness is attacked by Faustian thought, with its additive and expansive qualities. “The tree imposes the verb ‘to be’, but the fabric of the rhizome is the conjunction, ‘and…and…and…’. This conjunction carries enough force to shake and uproot the verb ‘to be’.”

James_Tissot_-_Faust_and_Marguerite_in_the_Garden.jpg

The contrast between the dynamic and the static becomes open conflict in the postmodernity of declining Faustian civilization where its expansiveness becomes full deterritorialization. What seems like abstract philosophy has a very real presence in the world. In the nomadic lifestyles imposed by many careers, where relocation across the face of the globe has become normal, in the fluid identities and fragmented subcultures of American youth, in global electronic networks, in globalization’s erosion of local economies, the rhizome dominates. Faustian dynamism and limitlessness has resulted in a world of scattered and broken spirits.

Due to the inherently limited nature of the physical world, the Faustian mind tends toward abstraction. Spengler’s discussion of the different conceptions of mathematics in instructive in this instance. “The beginning and end of the Classical mathematic is consideration of the properties of individual bodies and their boundary-surfaces; thus indirectly taking in conic sections and higher curves. We, on the other hand, at bottom know only the abstract space-element of the point, which can neither be seen, nor measured, nor yet named, but represents simply a centre of reference. The straight line, for the Greeks a measurable edge, is for us an infinite continuum of points.”[6] Classical mathematics is rooted in physical reality. It focuses on measurable quantities and physical shapes and surfaces. In contrast, Faustian mathematics is not constrained by what humans can touch, measure, or observe. We cannot count an infinite number of objects, nor have i (the square root of -1) of them, yet these concepts are integral to our mathematical system.

This retreat into the mind exacerbates the conflict between the physical and the intellectual. Instead of balance between mind and body, the Faustian mind gravitates towards logocentrism, a term most would associate with Derrida, but was coined by Conservative Revolutionary philosopher Ludwig Klages in his work The Intellect As Antagonist of the Soul.[7]

This movement towards the mental abstraction moves man away from the instinctive, the vital. Thus the Faustian tendency towards starry eyed idealism. Otto Reche speaks of “the powerfully rousing and simultaneously tragic song about the Nordic race and its idealism.”[8] At its worst it becomes a world denying tendency. Instead of experiencing the world in its mystery and majesty, we reduce it to what D. H. Lawrence termed a “thought form” a construct of abstract laws and facts existing only in our minds. As he says in “Introduction to the Dragon,”

. . . our sun and our moon are only thought-forms to us, balls of gas, dead globes of extinct volcanoes, things we know but never feel by experience. By experience, we should feel the sun as the savages feel him, we should ‘know’ him as the Chaldeans knew him, in a terrific embrace. But our experience of the sun is dead, we are cut off. All we have now is the thought -form of the sun. He is a blazing ball of gas, he has spots occasionally, from some sort of indigestion, and he makes you brown and healthy if you let him.[9]

Nietzsche correctly identified the retreat into the world of reason as a symptom of weakness. He states in the essay “Reason in Philosophy” from Twilight of the Idols, “To divide the world into a ‘real’ and ‘apparent’ world … is only a suggestion of decadence – symptom of declining life.” It is no great surprise that the West has wholeheartedly endorsed the Enlightenment program of rationalism, and its political emanation, liberalism. While rationalism is the mark of all declining civilizations throughout history, it aligns most intensely with the Faustian, whose affinity for abstraction was present at its birth. Indeed, we see in no other civilization an ideology like Enlightenment liberalism. Liberalism is a uniquely Western illness emerging from the Faustian decline.

oswald-spengler-l-homme-et-la-technique.jpgRelated to the Faustian tendency towards abstraction is the technical sophistication of Faustian civilization. Inventions spring from the unbounded Faustian mind. From the tools of abstract mathematics Faustian man has constructed the most precise and powerful theories of physical forces known to man. The combination of unlimited thought and dynamism enabled never before seen technological breakthroughs.

Indeed, not content with being in the world, Faustian man sought to create an artificial paradise. Spengler characterizes this attitude in Man and Technics “To build a world oneself, to be oneself God — that is the Faustian inventor’s dream, and from it has sprung all our designing and re-designing of machines to approximate as nearly as possible to the unattainable limit of perpetual motion.”

Spengler was keenly aware of the consequences of this mechanical world. In industrial societies the rise of alienation is seen, “And now, since the eighteenth century, innumerable ‘hands’ work at things of which the real role in life (even as affecting themselves) is entirely unknown to them and in the creation of which, therefore, they have inwardly no share. A spiritual barrenness sets in and spreads, a chilling uniformity without height or depth.”

No longer is the producer a traditional craftsman who handles the creation of goods from start to finish. He is merely performing one action of many required for the assembly of an object. The laborer’s dignity is diminished on the factory floor. This in turn breeds social conflict between the laborers and the managerial class. “The tension between work of leadership and work of execution has reached the level of a catastrophe. The importance of the former, the economic value of every real personality in it, has become so great that it is invisible and incomprehensible to the majority of the underlings. In the latter, the work of the hands, the individual is now entirely without significance.”

In addition to the social consequences, there are irreversible and wide-ranging ecological consequences. The depletion of natural resources, the elimination of species, the poisoning of our food, and water supplies, anthropogenic climate change. It is not alarmist to state that technology threatens life on earth. Spengler noted in 1931, “All things organic are dying in the grip of organization. An artificial world is permeating and poisoning the natural.”

In addition to the existential threat posed by technology, it greatly enhances the foreign threats against Faustian civilization. The expansive nature of Faustian man to spread to all the corners of the map, is mimicked by his technology. In the quest for ever greater profits and power, industry has spread all over the world. We may think this to be a late 20th-century problem linked with globalization, but it was already in motion in Spengler’s time, with Japan emerging as an industrial power in Asia. It has only increased in our time, with the outsourcing of industry and the spread of advanced weaponry to peoples who could not have possibly invented them. Global industrialization simultaneously has strengthened the power of non-Western peoples, while sapping the strength of the native working class in the West. Faustian technology, operating hand-in-hand with the forces of capital, has enabled the mass movement of foreign peoples into formerly homogeneous nations. While mass immigration has no one single cause, it is effectively, to use Alain de Benoist’s notable turn of phrase, “the reserve army of capital.” In his essay of the same title, Benoist notes how the French construction and automobile industries deployed trucks in the Maghreb to recruit immigrant labor. While it is true that other civilizations have imported foreign labor, only the late Faustian civilization has done it on such a scale as to threaten the survival of their national ethnic integrity. The combination of borderless thought and high technology now threatens the survival of the very people who dreamed up such ideas, as the threat of Europeans becoming minorities in their own homelands grows.

Perhaps a stronger descriptor than Faustian for the civilization that is our subject would be Titanic. Titanic in the sense of the Italian Traditionalist philosopher Julius Evola, who uses the term Titanism to refer to a particular type of usurpation of divine power. It accentuates the Faustian revolt against the divine order. Evola characterizes the Titanic civilization as such:

The first type of civilization is the Titanic one, in a negative sense, and refers to the spirit of a materialistic and violent race that no longer recognized the authority of the spiritual principle corresponding to the priestly symbol or to the spiritually feminine “brother” (e.g., Cain vs. Abel); this race affirmed itself and attempted to take possession, by surprise and through an inferior type of employment, of a body of knowledge that granted control over certain invisible powers inherent to things and people. Therefore, this represented an upheaval and a counterfeit of what could have been the privilege of the previous “glorious men,” namely, of the virile spirituality connected to the function of order and of domination “from above.” It was Prometheus who usurped the heavenly fire in favor of the human races, and yet he did not know how to carry it; thus the fire became his source of torment and damnation.[10]

Faustian man, like Prometheus, has stolen fire from the gods, reordering nature to suit his purpose. The Faustian man revolted against nature, as Spengler notes, “The creature is rising up against its creator. As once the microcosm Man against Nature, so now the microcosm Machine is revolting against Nordic Man.”

The expansive Faustian mind seeks to eliminate the barriers imposed by nature itself. Hegel characterizes it as thus, “The principle of the European mind is self-conscious reason which is confident that for it there can be no insuperable barrier and which therefore takes an interest in everything in order to become present to itself therein.” What we see is the drive of Faustian science to “know the mind of God,” which English physicist Stephen Hawking equated with “the ultimate triumph of human reason.” And if it is uncovered perhaps it will do more harm than good. The Spenglerian horror writer H. P. Lovecraft states prophetically in his story “The Call of Cthulhu”:

We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the deadly light into the peace and safety of a new dark age.

The ecological devastation and social chaos sown by the scientific advances of Western civilization seem to validate Lovecraft. However, the Promethean narrative offers a glimmer of hope, a way out. The hero Heracles, son of the Olympian Zeus, frees Prometheus from his torture. Evola states that Heroism, as represented by Heracles in the Titanic cycle, is “the restoration of the Olympian solar spirituality and overcoming of both the Mother and Titan figures.” Considered from the spiritual position of Tradition, the overcoming of Titanic Faustian civilization is possible. However, let us not forget the role of man in fulfilling destiny and let us recognize the need for a new spirit to transcend our declining civilization before it destroys us.

This restoration need not be a return to the “dark ages” of obscurantism. Indeed oriented in the proper direction, the traits we associate with Faustian civilization, such as constant self-overcoming, intrepidity, rising to challenges, are tools for spiritual growth that predate Faustian civilization. From a Traditional viewpoint, they predate humanity itself, they are transcendent, beyond space and time. Evola’s “esoteric reading” of Nietzsche makes this clear:

The cutting of all bonds, the intolerance of all limits, the pure and incoercible impulse to overcome without any determined goal, to always move on beyond any given state, experience, or idea, and naturally and even more beyond any human attachment to a given person, fearing neither contradictions nor destructions, thus pure movement, with all that that implies of dis- solution — “advancing with a devouring fire that leaves nothing behind itself,” to use an expression from an ancient wisdom tradition, though it applies to a very different context — these essential characteristics that some have already recognized in Nietzsche can be explained precisely as so many forms in which the transcendent acts and manifests.[11]

However, these tendencies need to be directed vertically, towards transcendence, not horizontally in the realm of sheer materialism, not manifesting in the need to dominate the world’s physical being. Evola attributes Nietzsche’s mental collapse to the fact that his energy remained on a non-transcendent level, burning him out like a circuit whose current is too strong. Continuing with the contrast between the horizontal plane of life, and the vertical axis of “more than life,” in the sense of George Simmel’s “more than living” (mehrs als leben), we can envision two symbols, the ocean, and the mountain. The divine order stands with the mountain, whereas Faustian Titanism is the realm of the ocean. Western man is faced with a choice. He can conquer himself and ascend the peaks of the spirit, or he conquer the world and disappear past the water’s horizon.

Notes

1. Oswald Spengler, The Decline of the West, vol. 1, Form and Actuality, trans. Charles Francis Atkins (New York: Knopf, 1926), p. 337.

2. Ibid. p. 187.

3. Alain de Benoist, On Being a Pagan, trans. Jon Graham, ed. Greg Johnson (Atlanta: Ultra, 2004), p. 84.

4. Alain de Benoist, The Problem of Democracy (London: Arktos, 2011), p. 43

5. Spengler, The Decline of the West, vol. 1, p. 414.

6. Ibid. p. 82.

7. Richard Wolin, The Seduction of Unreason: The Intellectual Romance with Fascism from Nietzsche to Postmodernism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006), p. 155

8. See Kevin MacDonald’s Foreword to Vladimir Avdeyev’s Raciology, http://velesova-sloboda.vho.org/antrop/macdonald-foreword-to-raciology.html [2]

9. D. H. Lawrence, Apocalypse and The Writings on Revelation (London: Penguin, 1996), p. 51.

10. Julius Evola, Revolt Against the Modern World, trans. Guido Stucco (Rochester, Vt.: Inner Traditions, 1995), p. 219.

11. Julius Evola, Ride the Tiger, trans. Joscelyn Godwin and Constance Fontana (Rochester, Vt.: Inner Traditions, 2003), p. 51.

 

 


 

Article printed from Counter-Currents Publishing: http://www.counter-currents.com

 

URL to article: http://www.counter-currents.com/2014/05/contra-faustian-man/

 

URLs in this post:

[1] Image: http://www.counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/fri_wand.jpg

[2] http://velesova-sloboda.vho.org/antrop/macdonald-foreword-to-raciology.html: http://velesova-sloboda.vho.org/antrop/macdonald-foreword-to-raciology.html

 

Eclairages de Bruno Drweski sur la situation en Ukraine

Eclairages de Bruno Drweski sur la situation en Ukraine

Ex: http://www.cercledesvolontaires.fr

Le Cercle des Volontaires a sollicité les éclairages de Bruno Drweski sur la situation ukrainienne. Maître de conférence à l’Institut National des Langues et Civilisation Orientales, ce spécialiste de l’Europe de l’Est nous éclaire sur les événements des dernières semaines, du coup de force du 22 février au massacre d’Odessa du 2 mai.

C’est également l’occasion de revenir avec lui sur le traitement de l’information par les grands médias. Son analyse est sans appel : en une vingtaine d’années, l’objectivité a changé de camp ! Loin d’être totalement impartiale, l’information russe est aujourd’hui plus crédible que la presse occidentale.

 

Et selon lui,  cette dernière n’est pas la seule victime de la mainmise des néoconservateurs sur le monde occidental, la crise ukrainienne marquant une étape dans le processus de déconstruction du droit international.

 

Propos recueillis par Jérôme Pasdelou et Baptiste

J. Evola: Metafisica del sesso e idealismo magico

 

samedi, 31 mai 2014

LA NUEVA DERECHA RUSA EURASIÁTICA

ELEMENTOS Nº 70:

ALEXANDER DUGIN Y LA CUARTA TEORÍA POLÍTICA

LA NUEVA DERECHA RUSA EURASIÁTICA

 

 
Descargar con issuu.com

Descargar con scribd.com


Descargar con google.com


Sumario
 

Alexander Dugin: la Nueva Derecha rusa, entre el Neo-Eurasianismo y la Cuarta Teoría Política, por Jesús J. Sebastián
 
 
Más allá del liberalismo: hacia la Cuarta Teoría Política, por Alexander Dugin


Necesidad de la Cuarta Teoría Política, por Leonid Savin


La Cuarta Teoría Política y la “Otra Europa”, por Natella Speranskaya


El Liberalismo y la Guerra Rusia-Occidente, por Alexander Dugin


Alexander Dugin, o cuando la metafísica y la política se unen, por Sergio Fritz


La Cuarta Teoría Política, entrevista a Natella Speranskaya, por Claudio Mutti

 
El quinto estado: una réplica a Alexander Dugin, por Marcos Ghio


La Tercera Teoría Política. Una crítica a la Cuarta Teoría Política, por Michael O'Meara


La gran guerra de los continentes. Geopolítica y fuerzas ocultas de la historia, por Alexander Dugin


La globalización para bien de los pueblos. Perspectivas de la nueva teoría política, por Leonid Savin


Alianza Global Revolucionaria, entrevista a Natella Speranskaya


Contribución a la teoría actual de la protesta radical, por Geidar Dzhemal

 
El proyecto de la Gran Europa. Un esbozo geopolítico para un futuro mundo multipolar, por Alexander Dugin


Rusia, clave de bóveda del sistema multipolar, por Tiberio Graziani


La dinámica ideológica en Rusia y los cambios del curso de su política exterior, por Alexander Dugin


Un Estado étnico para Rusia. El fracaso del proyecto multicultural, por Vladimir Putin


Reportaje sobre Dugin (revista alemana Zuerst!), por Manuel Ochsenreiter

 
Dugin: de la Unión Nacional-Bolchevique al Partido Euroasiático, por Xavier Casals Meseguer

Le rejet d'une Europe qui n'est ni puissante, ni souveraine, ni solidaire

Capture d’écran 2014-02-15 à 15.48.25.png

Elections européennes

Le rejet d'une Europe qui n'est ni puissante, ni souveraine, ni solidaire

par Jean Paul Baquiast
Ex: http://www.europesolidaire.eu
 
Les interprétations du vote français aux élections européennes seront dès ce soir nombreuses. Nous présentons ici la nôtre, sans prétendre bien entendu qu'elle soit préférable à d'autres.

1. Les bons scores du FN et de l'abstention pourraient laisser croire qu'une majorité de Français rejettent désormais le projet européen. Nous pensons en fait qu'ils rejettent une Europe incarnée par les actuelles institutions et politiques européennes. Les Français sentent très bien que cette Europe n'est ni puissante, ni souveraine, ni solidaire.

Elle n'est pas puissante dans la mesure où elle refuse tout ce qui fait la puissance dans le monde actuelle:
- de grands programmes technologiques et industriels.
- d'importantes ressources budgétaires au service de la recherche scientifique fondamentale et appliquée, des formations universitaires compétitives, des investissements visant spécifiquement la croissance et l'emploi pour le développement durable.
- une armée européenne modernisée et sous le seul contrôle des gouvernements européens.

Elle n'est pas autonome parce qu'elle est à la remorque :
- sur le plan économique des intérêts financiers internationaux, qui sont principalement sous le contrôle du capital américain.
- sur le plan géopolitique, des stratégies militaires et diplomatique des Etats-Unis. Ceux-ci ont depuis 60 ans enrôlé l'Europe pour leur servir d'avant-garde dans la lutte contre la Russie et bientôt contre la Chine. Il faudrait au contraire mobiliser l'Europe dans ce grand projet qui a été nommé l'euroBRICS.

Elle n'est pas solidaire parce qu'elle admet:
- que les Etats européens les moins riches supportent presque seuls le coût de la crise, ce qui pousse leurs citoyens dans la misère ou la délinquance.
- qu'une étroite minorité européenne d'ultra-riches et d'ultra-puissants mettent 90% des populations à leur service exclusif.
- que les services publics européens seuls susceptibles d'imposer des équipements collectifs au service de tous, soient privatisés, souvent au profit d'intérêts non européens.

2. Or, que peuvent faire les électeurs européens, notamment en France et dans les pays du Sud, pour que les institutions européennes soient modifiées, à la fois sur le plan juridique et dans la pratique quotidienne ? Ceci afin qu'une Europe puissante, autonome et solidaire, dans le sens indiqué ci-dessus, soit substituée à l'Europe actuelle.

- Ils ne peuvent pas compter sur une modification des majorités au Parlement européen, lequel est contrôlé par les Etats nationaux via les Conseils de Chefs d'Etat et les conseils des ministres, quand ce n'est pas par des lobbies représentant tous les intérêts nationaux et internationaux voulant affaiblir et coloniser l'Europe.

- Ils ne peuvent pas compter sur les majorités et les gouvernements nationaux actuellement en place pour conférer à l'Europe la puissance, la souveraineté et la solidarité que l'on attendrait d'un grand ensemble tel que l'Europe. Ces gouvernements ont montré qu'ils étaient sous la tutelle plus ou moins étroite, soit des intérêts financiers internationaux, soit de l'Empire américain. Cette tutelle, entre autres formes, se manifeste tous les jours davantage par l'espionnage auquel cet Empire se livre sur Internet.

3. Une seule solution demeure, pour ceux qui ne satisfont pas de la décadence européenne programmée. Il faut rejeter ce que l'on nomme dorénavant le Système.

- Ce rejet se fera inévitablement, si rien ne change, sous la forme de manifestations violentes. Elles seront durement réprimées mais sans doute en sortiront-elles renforcées.

- Dans l'immédiat, le rejet se manifeste sous une forme démocratique, lors des élections européennes et nationales. L'abstention peut tenter certains électeurs, mais sa signification est trop floue pour qu'elle ait beaucoup de succès. Reste alors le vote pour des partis de rejet. L'extrême gauche n'attire pas, pour diverses raisons. Nous le regrettons. Beaucoup voudront donc se rabattre sur les extrêmes droites, dont en France le Front national. Les électeurs ayant fait ce choix ne partagent pas nécessairement les valeurs de ces partis. Ils veulent seulement, par un geste fort, signifier, tant à l'attention des gouvernements qu'à celle des institutions européennes, leur refus de plus en plus radical du Système. Ceci ne veut pas dire ici que nous les soutenons, et moins encore l'état-major du FN, mais il serait contre-productif de ne pas analyser leurs raisons.

Si les gouvernements au pouvoir en Europe, notamment en France, ne comprennent pas que, pour récupérer du crédit, ils doivent dorénavant se battre pour une Europe puissante, indépendante et solidaire, ils seront vite balayés.

Le comprendront-ils? On peut en douter. Alors, les crises s'aggravant, un chaos durable s'installera dans la grande majorité des Etats européens ainsi qu'à Bruxelles. Il serait illusoire de penser que ce chaos puisse être créateur.

 

Jean Paul Baquiast

Nos élites n’ont pas de stratégie

Nos élites n’ont pas de stratégie

Philippe Baumard : "Le vide stratégique"

Pourrait-on imaginer titre plus explicite que celui de « vide stratégique » ? Assurément non. On doit donc être reconnaissant à Philippe Baumard, professeur à Polytechnique, figure emblématique de la discipline de l’intelligence économique d’avoir aussi clairement mis les mots sur nos maux actuels.

Ce serait donc l’incompétence des élites qui serait l’un des facteurs explicatifs déterminants de la crise que nous vivons depuis bientôt 7 ans… si ce n’est plus.

 

* * *

Christian Harbulot : "Le sabordage de la puissance française"

Xerfi Canal a reçu Christian Harbulot, directeur de l’École de Guerre Économique et directeur associé du cabinet Spin Partners, pour nous parler de son dernier ouvrage “Sabordage – Comment la France détruit sa puissance” (Éditions François Bourin).

Via le blog de Boreas

Comment on justifie les “interventions”...

somalia_1925147b.jpg

Bernhard TOMASCHITZ:

Comment on justifie les “interventions”...

De la notion d’Etat failli en Afrique

Depuis plus de vingt ans, on évoque les “Etats faillis” dans tous les débats internationaux. Les Etats menacés de faillite sont souvent des Etats dont les frontières sont incertaines et ont été jadis fixées par les puissances coloniales. Pourtant les “Etats faillis” ou “affaiblis” recèlent de bonnes opportunités pour les puissances mondiales. Ils offrent autant d’opportunités à intervenir, à s’incruster sur d’autres continents; ensuite, le processus de “nation building” s’avère très lucratif, permet de faire de très bonnes affaires.

Dans le Sud-Soudan, le conflit, qui y sévissait depuis décembre 2013, a subitement gagné en intensité fin avril 2014: ce conflit oppose l’ancien vice-président Riek Machar au président en exercice Salva Kiir. Les rebelles, pour la plupart partisans de Machar, avaient commis un massacre dans la ville de Bentiu (plus de 200 morts), comme le rapporte l’ONU. Ces turbulences nous amènent à nous poser une question: le Sud-Soudan, devenu indépendant en juillet 2011, doit-il déjà être considéré comme un Etat failli?

Généralement, on parle d’Etat failli, de “failed state”, quand on évoque un Etat qui ne peut plus remplir ses fonctions fondamentales. La Somalie, l’Afghanistan, le Yémen, la République Démocratique du Congo, la République centrafricaine et Haïti sont des exemples emblématiques d’Etats qui, de facto, n’existent plus que sur le papier et où le gouvernement central a perdu le contrôle de larges portions du territoire national ou n’y exerce plus qu’une autorité limitée.

Le concept d’Etat failli est apparu pour la première fois en 1992 dans une revue américaine spécialisée en relations internationales, “Foreign Policy”, où l’on trouvait un article de Gerald Helman et Steven Ratner, qui disait: “Un phénomène inquiétant émerge, celui de l’Etat national failli, devenu totalement incapable sur le long terme de devenir un membre à part entière de la communauté internationale. Des troubles intérieurs, l’effondrement des structures gouvernementales et la misère économique débouchent, ensemble, sur une destruction complète, pareille à celle que connaissait l’Allemagne après la seconde guerre mondiale”.

Lorsque Helman et Ratner ont publié leur article, c’était la Somalie, pays de la Corne de l’Afrique, qui faisait la une de l’actualité internationale. Après la chute en 1991 du dictateur marxiste Siad Barré, auparavant soutenu par l’Union Soviétique, le pouvoir central s’était progressivement érodé; des chefs de guerre locaux et, plus tard, des bandes d’islamistes (qu’on disait proches du réseau terroriste Al Qaeda) se sont emparé du pouvoir. En 1993, sous la direction des Etats-Unis, l’ONU est intervenue mais la mission a lamentablement échoué.

Depuis lors, les Américains font une véritable fixation sur les “Etats faillis”, mais leurs préoccupations ne sont pas pour autant humanitaires. En effet, le concept d’Etat failli a une utilité: on décrit de tels Etats comme autant de dangers pour les Etats-Unis mais leur existence permet, simultanément, de maintenir les budgets très élevés de la défense après l’effondrement du rival géopolitique soviétique, de justifier ces dépenses face aux contribuables américains. La définition de l’Etat failli va toutefois de paire avec l’idée de “nation building”, soit de reconstruction des structures étatiques. Pour affronter et combattre les problèmes soulevés par la diffusion du terrorisme, par la “chaotisation” de régions entières ou par les catastrophes écologiques et leurs causes, le Professeur Michael Mazarr du “National War College” (une université de l’armée américaine) avance la thèse suivante depuis les années 90: “Les Etats-Unis doivent aller de l’avant et aider les pays dont question”. Mazarr évoque dans ce contexte un “engagement d’ampleur néo-impériale”. Il ajoute: “Les Etats-Unis sont allés de l’avant, surtout, et de manière bien visible, dans les longues campagnes menées en Afghanistan et en Irak”.

George W. Bush, au début de sa carrière, n’aimait pas trop les interventions militaires dans les “Etats faillis”: “Laissez-moi vous dire ce qui m’inquiète; je suis inquiet devant tous mes interlocuteurs qui utilisent les notions de ‘reconstruction étatique’ et d’’intervention militaire’ dans la même phrase”. Ce sont ces termes mêmes qu’il a utilisés, un jour, pendant la campagne électorale de 2000, en faisant allusion aux idées du candidat démocrate à la présidence, Al Gore, qui était partisan de telles interventions “reconstructrices”. Pourtant, après les attentats du 11 septembre 2001, Bush, sous l’influence des néo-conservateurs ancrés dans son gouvernement et dans l’équipe de ses proches conseillers, va changer radicalement d’avis. Ainsi, dans le texte fixant “la stratégie nationale de sécurité” de 2002, on peut lire: “L’Amérique n’est plus tant menacée aujourd’hui par des Etats conquérants que par des Etats faillis”.

Tout en haut de la liste des Etats, dont émanait soi-disant un danger pour la “sécurité nationale” des Etats-Unis, se trouvait bien entendu l’Afghanistan. Ce pays montagneux de l’Hindou Kouch était campé comme un “havre sûr” pour les terroristes islamistes et comme un repère pour Al Qaeda: tels étaient les arguments américains pour envahir le pays en octobre 2001. Les “Etats faillis” sont donc des “havres sûrs” pour les terroristes: cette équation est encore et toujours posée aujourd’hui. Par ce tour de passe-passe, on camoufle les véritables intérêts qui sont en jeu.

Michael Mazarr montre que l’index des Etats faillis, dressé par “Foreign Policy”, et auquel on fait si souvent référence dans les débats, ne constitue pas pour autant une liste de priorités pour la sécurité nationale des Etats-Unis. Seuls trois Etats parmi les vingt premiers de la liste (l’Afghanistan, l’Irak et le Pakistan) détiennent une importance géostratégique, à cause, précisément, de “leurs liens avec le terrorisme”. Quant à la “menace terroriste”, Mazarr écrit: “Ce n’est pas vraiment le danger terroriste qui est mis en exergue dans la liste des Etats affaiblis: seul un Etat parmi les vingt premiers de la liste, le Soudan, se retrouve sur une autre liste, celle du Ministère des Affaires étrangères, qui reprend les Etats qui financent le terrorisme; la plupart des autres Etats affaiblis n’ont qu’un rapport très marginal avec le terrorisme”.

En mars 2003, la guerre d’agression est déclenchée contre l’Irak qui, sous la férule de Saddam Hussein, n’était nullement un Etat failli mais, au contraire, un Etat qui fonctionnait bien. Aujourd’hui, après sa “libération”, l’Irak est menacé d’effondrement définitif et des attentats sanglants ponctuent la vie quotidienne, devenue bien précaire, de ses habitants. La construction d’un Etat démocratique de modèle occidental, pour autant qu’elle ait été même envisagée, a échoué sur toute la ligne. Cependant, la destruction délibérée des structures de cet Etat a permis au complexe militaro-industriel américain de faire de substantiels bénéfices.

Très éclairante à ce propos est une étude réalisée par William D. Hartung en 2008. Dans son introduction, ce spécialiste des dépenses militaires, actif au sein de la boîte-à-penser “New America Foundation”, constate que le coût des dépenses pour la défense après le 11 septembre 2011 n’a cessé d’augmenter et que cet accroissement ininterrompu s’est poursuivi tout au long de la décennie 2000-2010. Dans son ensemble, le budget régulier alloué au Pentagone et les dépenses complémentaires pour les opérations en Afghanistan et en Irak ont atteint la somme annuelle de 700 milliards de dollars, le chiffre le plus élevé depuis la seconde guerre mondiale.

Plus de la moitié de ces 700 milliards de dollars, soit 400 milliards de dollars, ont abouti dans l’escarcelle de partenaires contractuels privés du ministère américain de la défense. Hartung se fait alors plus précis: “Les grands partenaires contractuels du Pentagone ont pu quasiment doubler leurs chiffres d’affaires et leurs carnets de commande pendant les années fiscales de 2001 à 2008”. Il s’agit bien entendu des industries de l’armement. L’entreprise Lockheed Martin a encaissé à elle seule, rien qu’en 2008, la somme de 29 milliards de dollars sur base de contrats signés avec le Pentagone. Cette entreprise a dès lors reçu plus d’argent des contribuables américains que l’agence pour la protection de l’environnement (7,5 milliards de dollars), que le ministère du travail (11,4 milliards) ou que le ministère de la mobilité (15,5 milliards).

Même après les guerres sans succès menées en Afghanistan et en Irak, Washington demeure obnubilé par les Etats faillis ou fragilisés, qui doivent recevoir de l’aide pour éviter la faillite totale. Dans le document “Global Trends 2030”, émis par le “National Intelligence Council” (une organisation chapeautant les seize services de renseignement américains) en décembre 2012, on peut lire: “Le modèle que nous avons élaboré montre que bon nombre d’Etats fragiles ou faibles, comme l’Afghanistan, la République Démocratique du Congo et la Somalie, demeureront encore et toujours très fragiles dans les quinze ou vingt années à venir”.

Les Etats faillis ou affaiblis demeureront dans l’avenir une menace pour la sécurité nationale des Etats-Unis comme l’atteste notamment la “Quadrennial Defence Review” (QDR) de 2014. Cette publication consiste en un rapport, établi tous les quatre ans, sur les plans de défense américains. On y constate: “Troubles et violences ne cessent pas d’exister, créant un environnement fertile pour l’extrémisme violent et pour les conflits sectaires, surtout dans les Etats faibles, qui s’étendent du Sahel à l’Asie méridionale, où les citoyens américains expatriés courent des dangers”. Le Pentagone cherche à éliminer ce type de situation en “ré-équilibrant ses efforts dans la lutte contre le terrorisme”, stratégie qui doit se déployer prioritairement en suscitant des “capacités de partenariat”, surtout dans les Etats affaiblis. Les Etats-Unis ne veulent pas seulment renforcer les partenariats existants mais aussi et surtout créer de “nouveaux partenariats innovateurs”.

dagaal.jpg

Dans la pratique, cela signifie que Washington tentera désormais d’installer de nouvelles bases militaires à l’étranger. En 2005, on estimait que les Etats-Unis entretenaient environ 750 installations de plus ou moins grande ampleur dans le monde. La concentration de leurs efforts sur la zone du Sahel nous permet de conclure que c’est désormais en Afrique que le déploiement militaire américain aura lieu dans les années à venir. Ce n’est toutefois qu’en 2007 que l’AFRICOM fut mis sur pied, soit le commandement militaire américain pour l’ensemble de l’Afrique, sauf l’Egypte. Or ce sont précisément les Etats “faillis” ou “faibles” qui ont été déterminants pour la création de ce commandement régional africain des forces armées américaines. Parmi les tâches que s’assigne l’AFRICOM et ses partenaires, il y a bien sûr, “contrer le danger que représente les agissements d’Al Qaeda et d’autres groupes extrémistes, les empêcher d’avoir des havres sûrs et de poursuivre leurs activités déstabilisatrices”.

Si l’on veut donner un bon exemple d’Etat failli qui a servi de prétexte aux Américains pour s’incruster dans la région, on doit immanquablement citer la Somalie. Dans ce pays, les Etats-Unis et l’Union Européenne soutiennent la mission AMISOM de l’Union Africaine et combattent, avec leurs forces navales, la piraterie dans le Golfe d’Aden. La pièce maîtresse des Etats-Unis dans la région est le fameux Camp Lemonnier à Djibouti, petit Etat situé au nord de la Somalie. Le 16 avril 2014 le journal militaire américain “Army Times” écrit, à propos de cette base américaine: “Les dangers qui ont émergé dans cette région nous ont aidé à transformer le point d’appui américain de Camp Lemonnier, sur la côte orientale de l’Afrique, à Djibouti, qui n’était plus qu’un poste éloigné à moitié en ruines et n’abritant que deux centaines de soldats, en une plaque tournante pour les missions de l’AFRICOM et en une base capable d’accueillir plusieurs milliers de soldats américains”.

En Afrique, l’Union Européenne, elle aussi, tente de s’implanter, sous l’impulsion de la France; elle cherche ainsi à stabiliser d’autres “Etats faillis”. Au début de l’année 2013, Paris a forcé la main de ses partenaires européens pour qu’ils acceptent le principe d’une mission de l’UE au Mali, où, un an auparavant, des islamistes avaient pris le contrôle du Nord du pays et avaient proclamé l’indépendance de l’Etat dit d’Azawad, non reconnu par la communauté internationale.

Au Mali, l’enjeu n’était pas tant la sauvegarde de l’unité du pays et la lutte contre le terrorisme islamiste: il s’agissait bien plutôt d’intérêts autres dans ce pays d’Afrique occidentale, notamment de sécuriser l’exploitation de richesses naturelles car le Mali est le troisième producteur d’or en Afrique et dispose également d’importantes réserves d’uranium, de cuivre et de bauxite. Qui plus est, bon nombre d’indices semblent indiquer que le Mali recèlerait en son sous-sol des réserves pétrolières. Dans un rapport établi par le ministère malien de l’énergie et des mines, on peut lire: “Le Mali pourrait bien devenir un espace de transit stratégique pour l’exportation de pétrole et de gaz provenant de la région du Sud-Sahara et qu’il s’agira d’acheminer vers le monde occidental; de plus, il sera sans doute possible de relier le bassin de Taoudeni au marché européen via l’Algérie”.

Les “Etats faillis” sont donc principalement perçu par les stratégistes sous l’angle de la géostratégie et de la géoéconomie. Cependant, si l’on s’en tient à ces seules réalités géographiques et économiques, on oublie les véritables racines des troubles qui secouent toute l’Afrique. Ces turbulences incessantes révèlent l’impossibilité de “construire des nations” (“nation building”) dans les Etats actuels du continent noir. Très souvent sinon toujours, les “Etats faillis” sont des constructions arbitraires dont les frontières artificielles remontent à l’ère coloniale, quand on ne tenait absolument pas compte des équilibres entre ethnies et tribus. La vague de décolonisation a, elle, apporté d’autres problèmes.

Gerald Helman et Steven Ratner attiraient déjà notre attention en 1992: l’ONU et ses Etats membres ont accordé plus de poids au droit à l’autodétermination des anciennes colonies qu’à leurs chances de survie. “Tous étaient d’accord pour dire que les nouveaux Etats avaient besoin d’aides économiques; l’ONU a donc incité des institutions comme la Banque mondiale et l’UNDP (“United Nations Development Programme”), à aider ces pays (...). A cette époque, dans l’euphorie de la décolonisation, à laquelle on voulait donner du sens, on considérait comme totalement inconvenant de penser que des Etats pouvaient faillir, qu’ils seraient à terme incapables de fonctionner en tant qu’entités indépendantes”.

Pour résoudre les problèmes endémiques d’un grand nombre d’Etats africains, il ne faut plus construire des Etats artificiels, imaginés par l’idéologie universaliste, mais il faudrait bien plutôt procéder à une modification généralisée du tracé des frontières inter-africaines, sous l’égide de comités internationaux.

Bernhard TOMASCHITZ.

(article paru dans “zur Zeit”, Vienne, n°19/2014, http://www.zurzeit.at ).

Tradizione e rivoluzione: intervista con Renato Del Ponte

Tradizione e rivoluzione: intervista con Renato Del Ponte

In occasione della scorsa festa nazionale di CasaPound Italia, il professor Renato del Ponte ci ha gentilmente concesso la presente intervita. Presente alla festa di CPI per presentare in anteprima un libro da lui curato su Adriano Romualdi e il periodo della contestazione negli anni '70: "Lettere ad un amico" Ed. Arya.
 
Il Professore è tornato per noi sul suo percorso universitario, metapolitico e culturale. Ha trattato del suo rapporto con Julius Evola, della sua visione del mondo, delle vie che l'uomo differenziato può ancora percorrere nella presente epoca di fine ciclo.
 
Un'intervista introduttiva per chi vuole conoscere il lavoro di chi ha dedicato le proprie energie a vivificare e trasmettere quella fiamma mai assopita nella nostra identità: la Tradizione Romana.
 
Questo è il nostro primo video in italiano.
 
Un ringraziamento alle sezioni di CasaPound Liguria e Cuneo per aver reso possibile il presente incontro.
 
I Non Allineati.
 
Inizio :
Dalla Tradizione allo studio delle religioni.
4 min 30 : 
L'incontro con Julius Evola. 
7 min 15 :
L'influenza e il ruolo di Evola.
15 min 59 :
Tradizione e politica

 

Julius Evola

00:05 Publié dans Evénement | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : événement, italie, julius evola | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

vendredi, 30 mai 2014

Elections européennes 2014. Succès du souverainisme, échec du nationalisme ?

Elections européennes 2014. Succès du souverainisme, échec du nationalisme ?

par Thomas Ferrier

Ex: http://thomasferrier.hautetfort.com

 

http://thomasferrier.hautetfort.com/media/01/00/449511605.3.png

1195901.jpgLe Front National a obtenu 24.85% des voix aux élections européennes, avec un taux de participation d’environ 43%, légèrement meilleur qu’en 2009 mais tout de même très faible. Alors que 88% de ses électeurs ont fait le choix de ce vote à cause de l’immigration, sous-entendue non-européenne, la direction du FN a considéré au contraire que le peuple avait validé ses options UE-phobes et €urophobes, ce qui n’était pas du tout le cas.

A chaque victoire de ce parti, à cause du ras le bol croissant de plus en plus d’électeurs français face à la problématique migratoire, Marine Le Pen y voit un succès de son nouveau positionnement souverainiste. C’est une erreur, une erreur qui aurait été sanctionnée dans les urnes si les media avaient fait un véritable travail d’information en révélant la vérité sur ce parti, au lieu de continuer de le diaboliser et de dramatiser sa récente réussite. Car enfin, si les électeurs du FN découvraient que le positionnement « nouveau » de ce parti sur cette question qui les taraude reposait sur la même utopie universaliste suicidaire que partage toute la classe politique, sans doute chercheraient-ils ailleurs une solution politique.

Même si le FN progresse, il ne faut pas oublier que le camp souverainiste et nationaliste a souvent été aux alentours de 23% aux européennes. Malgré la présence de Dupont-Aignan, qui obtient 3,82%, ce qui n’est pas si mal, le FN a bénéficié du report de voix des électeurs du RPF et du MPF, orphelins cette année. Cette progression n’est donc pas au final si spectaculaire, même si le camp eurosceptique (FN+DLR) obtient sept points de plus que son niveau le plus élevé.

Néanmoins, il faut reconnaître que les partis souverainistes ou post-nationalistes ont réussi à s’imposer au détriment d’un nationalisme ethnique plus classique, et en l’absence de candidats européistes identitaires, seule véritable réponse politique à la crise de civilisation que connaît l’Europe.

1. Victoire des souverainistes europhobes.

Avec près de 25% des voix pour le FN et 27,5% des voix pour UkiP, les souverainistes triomphent en France et au Royaume-Uni, envoyant à eux deux 48 députés eurosceptiques à Strasbourg. En revanche, le PVV de Wilders avec 13.2% (-3.8) connaît une sérieuse déconvenue, même si le score reste relativement élevé. Surtout, il devient le quatrième parti du pays, ce qui est un déclassement douloureux. Wilders paye sans doute la crise interne de son parti suite à des déclarations perturbatrices sur les Marocains vivant aux Pays-Bas.

Autre succès, cette fois au Danemark, où le DFP multiplie par deux son score, en atteignant 26,6% des voix, obtenant quatre députés, devenant le premier parti du pays, ce qui ne saurait préjuger d’une possible victoire électorale aux prochaines législatives. Le DFP, parti d’un pays n’ayant pas l’euro, a toutefois un positionnement eurosceptique modéré. C’est aussi le cas des Sverigedemokraterna qui, avec 9,7%, multiplient leur score par trois. Leur euroscepticisme n’est pas radical, ce parti ne souhaitant pas nécessairement que son pays quitte l’UE. Les SD, connus pour des positions beaucoup plus dures par le passé, ont recentré leur discours.

Le FPÖ autrichien, avec 20,5% des voix, retrouve un niveau électoral tout à fait correct, même si loin des 27% d’Haider, alors que le BZÖ de feu Haider tombe à 0,5% des voix, disparaissant ainsi totalement du champ politique. Strache peut se féliciter d’avoir été récompensé par son action militante, même s’il a bénéficié aussi de l’absence de Stronach et de celle de la liste Martin.

Le parti des Vrais Finnois, « Perussuomalaiset », avec 12,9% des voix, progresse de plus de trois points, mais est bien en-dessous des 19% qu’il avait obtenus aux législatives. Timo Soini n’a pas réussi à faire de son parti le premier du pays, dans un contexte certes d’abstention forte. Cela semble annoncer un léger reflux.

Plus étonnants sont l’émergence d’un parti populiste tchèque dirigé par un tchéco-japonais et cette « coalition de la nouvelle droite » (KNP) d’un riche excentrique, formation eurosceptique qui obtient 7,06% des voix. La disparition de la Ligue des Familles et de Samoobrona explique sans doute le succès de nouveaux partis. On sait que Marine Le Pen pense au KNP comme septième membre de la coalition parlementaire qu’elle souhaite créer à Strasbourg.

Il faut néanmoins relativiser ce succès des formations eurosceptiques, même si l’AfD allemande a obtenu 7,04% des voix, ce qui est un score très satisfaisant pour un parti récent qui avait échoué à obtenir les 5% aux élections législatives. L’AfD devrait sans doute rejoindre le groupe conservateur autour des Tories de Cameron.

En Italie, la Ligue du Nord, avec 6,16% des voix, a su remonter la pente en raison d’une nouvelle direction et d’un choix eurosceptique plus affirmé. Frères d’Italie (Fratelli d’Italia) de Giorgia Meloni échouent en revanche aux portes du parlement avec 3,66% des voix.

Enfin, la Lituanie de la liste menée par Rolandas Paksas (TT) obtient 14,27% tandis que la liste patriote LNKK de la Lettonie voisine obtient 14,25% des voix. Paksas est convoité lui aussi par le groupe « Alliance européenne de la liberté » de Wilders et Le Pen.

2. Echec relatif des nationalistes.

Cet échec relatif des nationalistes est à nuancer car 7 députés nationalistes radicaux font leur entrée au parlement européen de Strasbourg. Avec 9,3% des voix et 3 élus, l’Aube Dorée continue son ascension électorale malgré la répression judiciaire contre ses dirigeants, une campagne internationale contre ce mouvement, et finit à la troisième place des partis, devant le PASOK social-démocrate. D’autres listes nationalistes, dont le retour du Front National grec, obtiennent 1,6% des voix, dont le Laos (1,44%) qui connaît là un effondrement complet. Les Grecs Indépendants, souverainistes, échouent également avec 3,46% des voix mais obtiennent néanmoins un député. L’homologue chypriote de l’Aube Dorée, l’ELAM, se contente de 2,69% des voix.

De même, avec 14,77% des voix, loin des 20% obtenus aux législatives, le Jobbik fait rentrer trois députés et se permet de devancer le MSZP socialiste.

On notera enfin, à titre anecdotique, que la NPD n’a obtenu qu’1% des voix, score dérisoire lui permettant néanmoins de disposer d’un élu en raison d’une modification de la loi électorale faisant sauter aux élections européennes, et à elles seules, le seuil. Avec 0,6% des voix, il était possible d’avoir un député. Avec 0,4% des voix, les REP échouent néanmoins, la droite nationale n’obtenant que 1,4% en tout en Allemagne.

En revanche, partout ailleurs, les nationalistes connaissent une sérieuse déconvenue. Le BNP s’effondre à 1,14% (contre 6,5% en 2009), littéralement dévoré par UkiP. Les autres nationalistes atteignent en tout 0,93% des voix. Ataka n’obtient que 2,97% des voix en Bulgarie, concurrencé par le Front National pour le Salut de la Bulgarie (3,07%). Le PRM roumain est réduit à 2,71% des voix. Le SNS slovaque, dont le FN espérait des élus, est à 3,61% des voix, brisé par l’existence d’un SNS « chrétien » (0,64%) des voix et surtout par un parti ultra-nationaliste, le LSNS de l’élu local Marian Kotleba, présenté dans la presse française comme « néo-nazi », avec 1,73% des voix. Quant au voisin tchèque, aucun parti nationaliste n’était candidat, les « républicains » ayant sombré corps et âme.

La coalition nationaliste croate, « Alliance pour la Croatie », autour des différents HSP, et en l’absence du HCSP, obtient 6,88% et un élu. Ce parti reste mineur. Quant au SNS slovène, avec 4,04% des voix, il échoue de peu. Le SNS reste néanmoins un parti nationaliste très modéré.

Dans la péninsule ibérique, la droite nationale continue d’être abonnée à des scores ridiculement bas, 0,26% en faisant la somme des voix de « Démocratie nationale », du MSR et de la Phalange. Au Portugal, le PNR se contente d’un 0,37% des voix, avec une légère progression si on peut dire. En Pologne, le « mouvement national » (Ruch Narodowy) obtient 1.4% des voix, ce qui est un échec pour cette coalition de partis ultra-nationalistes dont le congrès avait pourtant été une réussite.

3. Le cas belge.

En Flandre, la NVA de Bart de Wever est le grand vainqueur des élections avec 26,7% des voix et quatre sièges. Ce parti patriote, « nationaliste flamand » modéré, mais aucunement europhobe, réussit à s’implanter à Strasbourg. Il écrase le Vlaams Belang, qui n’obtient que 6,8% des voix et un élu, ce qui est très faible. Le VB paye son ralliement à la ligne eurosceptique de son nouvel allié, Marine Le Pen. Il a également pris sur les questions d’immigration des positions très modérées. Le néo-souverainisme du VB est puni en faveur de la NVA.

En Wallonie, le Parti Populaire, de droite conservatrice, obtient 6% des voix, ce qui n’est pas négligeable mais en l’absence des « Fronts Nationaux » belges, dissous sur demande expresse de Le Pen. La liste « La Droite » obtient 1,6% des voix et la liste grotesque de « Debout les belges », le parti de Laurent Louis avec comme tête de liste Abdesselam Laghmich, a obtenu 3% des voix, sans doute dans certaines banlieues « dieudonnesques ».

Conclusion.

Même si les formations eurosceptiques renforcent leurs positions, avec le triple succès Royaume-Uni/France/Danemark, on ne peut pas affirmer qu’une « vague brune » (au-delà de la question de cette coloration diabolisante totalement inadéquate) a déferlé sur le vieux continent. Les eurosceptiques en Belgique, en Finlande ou aux Pays-Bas reculent même d’une manière significative. Le score du FPÖ autrichien est bon mais c’est son niveau habituel dans les grandes périodes. En Italie, on est encore loin des scores d’Alliance Nationale et de la Ligue du Nord des années 1990. Enfin, en Suède, la progression des SD est nette mais pas forcément significative.

Le succès du FN, néanmoins, recréant la surprise à des élections européennes après l’émergence de 1984, mérite une analyse plus poussée qui fera l’objet d’un second article volontairement plus polémique et que je publierai cette semaine.

Thomas FERRIER (PSUNE/LBTF)

Memory Holes in the American Right

MemoryHole.jpg

Memory Holes in the American Right

By

GaryNorth.com

Ex: http://www.lewrockwell.com

We all know about the memory hole. That was the unofficial name of a department of government in George Orwell’s novel, Nineteen Eighty-Four. It was devoted to re-writing history. It destroyed historical documents to make this re-writing easier. This was its motto: “He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.”

Orwell used the Soviet Union as his model. The USSR was famous for using photo editing techniques to remove past leaders from old photos. These people became non-persons. Photoshop is simply a low-cost tool for modern media organizations to do similar sorts of things. They do it to sell more products. The USSR did it to maintain power.

These techniques are still being used inside what Mrs. Clinton calls the vast Right-wing conspiracy. Today’s leaders want to erase all traces of the earlier leaders.

Why? Because the time-servers who collect their salaries are nonentities. They do not want to be compared to the founders. They do not want the evidence of decline available for all to see. Max Weber had a phrase for this almost a century ago: the routinization of charisma. The bureaucrats inherit the earth.

PRESERVING THE PAST

One of the saddest aspects in the history of the post-World War II conservative movement is the fact that it is almost impossible to trace its history at the grass roots level.

Part of this problem is this: the little organizations used mimeograph machines to publish their message. This was a shoestring movement until at least the mid-1950′s. These materials were tossed out by survivors after the blue-haired ladies died. These women collected newspaper clippings, scoured the Congressional Record, published their newsletters, and had meetings. They left few traces.

The newsletters have disappeared. Think of the Dan Smoot Report. Think of the early years of Human Events. Think of Hilaire DuBarrier’s HduB Report. Think of Don Bell Report. They are gone with the wind.

I have a complete set of the HduB Report on a CD-ROM. I do not think it is possible to trace the history of the European Union without reading these reports. But they are not online. I do not know who owns the copyrights. Neither does the man who created the CD-ROM.

To construct the history of the conservative movement, the various organizations that published newsletters, magazines, and books should go into their files, send them to a specialist in producing searchable PDF’s, and then post all of that information online free of charge. This is the minimal commitment necessary to keep old ideas alive.

If an organization has spent decades asking for donations from its supporters in order to get out the message, and then it suppresses or ignores that message through the 80% of the history of the organization, then something is fundamentally wrong with the thinking of the present directors. Any organization that raises money for years to publish the true word, and then decides to deep-six the true word, has abandoned the true word.

All of that money was raised, all of that enthusiasm was generated, all of that information was published, yet the organization’s present salaried directors decide that it’s not worth preserving online free of charge.

Something is deeply wrong with any idea-based organization that does not post its entire body of published materials online.

I cannot imagine any ideological organization’s senior staff this shortsighted, yet I know it’s the case. I have seen it over and over. There is simply no strong commitment to preserving the legacy of the organization. The present directors implicitly dismiss all of the work of the previous directors, as if all that money, all those ideas, all that effort in publishing the material was not really worth it. It is as if all of this material is worthless today. The senior directors of the organization have self-consciously made a decision not to preserve this information for the present members of the organization.

I’m thinking of a particular organization. Let’s see if you can figure this out. It has been around for over 50 years. It published a great deal of material. It published a magazine every month. It published newsletters from the organization’s senior director. It raised money for years to try to get this information out to the public. It was one of the fundamental organizations in the history of the conservative movement. But its present directors have refused for over 15 years to put this information online.

I know a man who has put all of the material into PDF’s, and he even put it up on a website. But he doesn’t have the copyright to the publications, so he is not allowed by the organization to post this material publicly. I have seen it. I have used it. But you can’t find by searching for it online, because the individual has not posted it where the general public can get at it. The reason for this is simple: he does not own the copyright.

Could this be an organization that you have committed money to? Have you even asked this about the organizations that you do commit money to. Have you made sure that you are not donating a dime to any organization that has a body of material like this, but which has not put all of this material online, free of charge?

If the organization is self-consciously suppressing this, then you should not donate to it. If the organization is run by men who are so shortsighted that they want to ignore 50 years of publication, then why should you continue to send money to it? The publication can be scanned in and converted to PDFs for about 35 cents a page. “We just can’t afford this!” Some minimum-wage intern could run copies through a standard copy machine, which will convert pages to searchable PDF’s if it has Adobe Acrobat installed. But the senior decision-makers in the organization have no vision of the future, because they have no vision of the past. If they think the past is irrelevant, then they think the future is irrelevant. All they care about is this month’s “scare ‘em and skin ‘em” fundraising effort.

One organization that does things right is the Mises Institute. All of the old materials in the Austrian school movement are available free of charge here: https://mises.org/Literature

Years ago, I put up the money for the Mises Institute to post all of the issues of American Affairs online. It had been edited by Garet Garrett. It was long forgotten. No organization owned them. This was not a matter of dropping materials down the organization’s memory hole. There was no succession. The Mises Institute believes in preserving legacies like this. The Mises Institute understands the importance of the past in building the future.

My recommendation: do not donate a dime to any ideological outfit that has not posted all of its past publications online for free. Simple. “No searchable PDF’s online for free — no donation.” This should be an unbreakable rule.

I did this over 15 years ago with the publications of my Institute for Christian Economics. I shut it down in December 2001, because I realized that I no longer needed to raise money to publish books. I can publish a book in 90 seconds in PDF form. I keep these materials, 1975-2001, online for free here:http://www.garynorth.com/public/department78.cfm.

DOES ANYONE CARE?

I understand the problem. Most people are not interested in history. Most people are not interested in the stories of how the movement or an organization got started. Most people care about the present mainly, and they barely care about the future. They surely do not care about the past.

The conservative movement is grounded philosophically on a vision of history that asserts the legitimacy of historical process. Conservatives believe that the past is important. They believe that preserving the memory of the past is important. They understand that the world today is the product of the past, and that he who does not understand the past is not going to have a coherent plan for shaping the future. But the leaders of the conservative movement have tended not to believe this. They have not been committed to preserving the past. They had been political activists, and the political activist has a vision not much longer than the next congressional election. This has been a deep-seated problem within the conservative movement ever since it began after World War II. It began mainly as anti-Communism, and interest in the past was limited to studies of how the communist infiltrated this or that organization. It was not in any way committed to pass conservative ideas, which had lost their power to persuade people by 1946.

So, the modern conservative movement began as an “anti-” movement. Such movements are inherently reactionary. They react to present crazies and present crises. They react to whatever the Establishment is doing, or plans to do, or might possibly do, in the near future. The conservative movement has always been 80% committed to putting out fires. You cannot build a movement, let alone a society, based on continual fire drills. But this is what the conservative movement has attempted to do.

Frankly, I don’t think it’s much different today. Conservatives may be worried about whether Hillary Clinton is going to run, or whether she can win, but they are not at all concerned about what the world will be like after one term of whoever is elected president in 2016. I call this a lack of 2020 vision.

People whose time perspective does not extend beyond the next presidential election are not concerned with building up a body of materials that can serve as a foundation for restoring liberty. They are unfamiliar with how the American Republic became the American Empire, and they are basically committed to extending the American Empire through military means. Then they want to make things better by a few reforms, none of which stands a political chance. They want clean up the mess in government. They want to sweep the bad guys out.

We know where this leads.

When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none. Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished. Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first. Even so shall it be also unto this wicked generation (Matthew 12:43-45).

CONCLUSION

If your favorite conservative organization does not have all of its previous magazines, newsletters, special reports, and so forth online, do not send it any more money.

Drop a note to the head of the organization. Explain your desire to get the organization’s old materials posted where Google can find them. Say that you are willing to make a donation to fund such a publication project.

If you get an explanation that “at the present time, we do not have the funds,” send your money elsewhere.

The Mises Institute is a good choice.

Paniek Engelse en Franse regeringen na overwinning anti-EU partijen

Paniek Engelse en Franse regeringen na overwinning anti-EU partijen

Britten zijn massa-immigratie helemaal zat

Le Figaro: Regering Hollande ‘bedrukt en radeloos’

Nederland uitzondering in EU met winst eurofielen


Sombere gezichten bij premier David Cameron (R) en Nick Klegg, wiens Liberaal-democratische partij (de Britse D66) compleet werd weggevaagd.

In Groot Brittannië en Frankrijk lijkt er paniek uitgebroken in de zittende regeringen na de enorme overwinningen van de anti-EU partijen. De Britse UKIP van Nigel Farage en het Franse Front National van Marine Le Pen werden in hun thuislanden de grootste partij, terwijl de zittende regeringspartijen een verpletterende nederlaag leden. De boodschap van de kiezers is overduidelijk: wij willen niet meer, maar minder Brussel – véél minder, en wij willen onafhankelijk en democratisch blijven.

Geschokt na overwinning Farage

Voor het eerst sinds 1910 werd in het Verenigd Koninkrijk een andere partij dan de Conservatieven of socialisten (Labour) de winnaar van de nationale verkiezingen. De UKIP, die zo snel mogelijk uit de EU wil treden, kreeg de meeste afgevaardigden, terwijl de liberaal-democratische regeringspartij (de Britse D66) bijna al zijn zetels in het Europarlement kwijtraakte.

Premier David Cameron was zichtbaar geschokt. Hij probeerde Farage te beledigen, maar zijn woorden kwamen eerder als een compliment over. Hij noemde Farage ‘geen eenvoudige gozer uit de pub’, zoals hij zichzelf graag afschildert, maar een ‘geslepen politicus die voor alles een politieke tactiek gebruikt’.

Dat is nu juist de kracht van Nigel Farage. Hij weet hoe het politieke systeem werkt, profiteert er zelf ook van, en is juist vanwege die kennis zo gevaarlijk voor de gevestigde globalistische orde. Bovendien beloofde Farage de Britten dat ‘dit nog niet alles is’, en hij ook bij de parlementsverkiezingen in 2015 op een overtuigende overwinning aast.

‘Het volksleger heeft gesproken’

‘Het volksleger van de UKIP heeft vanavond gesproken en heeft het meest verbazingwekkende resultaat dat we in de afgelopen 100 jaar hebben gezien geleverd,’ aldus de EU-criticus. Verwacht wordt dat de roep om een referendum over de EU na zijn klinkende overwinning alleen maar krachtiger zal worden. Cameron had reeds ingestemd met een referendum, maar pas in 2017, in de hoop dat de ergste anti-Brusselse storm dan voorbij zal zijn.

Britten zijn massa-immigratie helemaal zat

Volgens het UKIP, dat zich baseert op onafhankelijke onderzoeken, zal de welvaart in Groot Brittannië door het verlaten van de EU weer toenemen. Ook zal het land democratisch(er) worden. Belangrijkste reden waarom de Britten massaal op hem stemden was de enorme onvrede over de massa-immigratie. Zo kwamen er dankzij de Brusselse wetten vorig jaar 27% meer migranten uit arme EU-landen zoals Roemenië en Bulgarije. Hierdoor is de sociale zekerheid onder grote druk komen te staan, en voelen de Britten zich bedreigd in hun nationale identiteit.

Om kiezers terug te winnen hebben de Conservatieven nu maatregelen aangekondigd om de toestroom van arme EU-burgers tegen te houden. Volgens de Sunday Telegraph zullen werklozen voortaan na 6 maanden het land uit worden gezet. Daarnaast moeten immigranten aantonen dat ze voldoende eigen vermogen hebben. (1)

Regering Hollande ‘radeloos’ na overwinning Le Pen

In Frankrijk heeft president Francois Hollande een heuse crisisbijeenkomst met zijn belangrijkste ministers georganiseerd vanwege de verpletterende nederlaag die zijn socialistische partij leed. Nieuwe verkiezingen, zoals Front National leider Marine Le Pen als absolute winnaar eist, wil Hollande dan ook ten koste van alles voorkomen.

Premier Manuel Valls beloofde de Fransen onmiddellijk forse belastingverlagingen. Wie dat moet gaan betalen is echter volstrekt onduidelijk. De Franse staatsfinanciën zijn een ongekende puinhoop, reden waarom Parijs regelmatig eist dat de Europese Centrale Bank de geldkranen nog verder opendraait.

Volgens de oudste Franse krant Le Figaro is de stemming in de regering Hollande ‘bedrukt en radeloos’, en hangen er spreekwoordelijke ‘zwarte sluiers’ voor het Champs Élysée. De afstraffing door de kiezers kwam bij de socialisten zó hard aan, dat ze niet eens proberen deze goed te praten. Le Figaro: ‘Dit is een oorvijg voor Europa, een verdere terugslag voor ons en een motie van wantrouwen tegen Hollande. De keizer is zijn kleren kwijt (lett. de koning is naakt).’

Hele EU zelfde beeld, uitgezonderd Nederland

In bijna heel Europa boekten de anti-EU partijen winst. Het extreemlinkse Griekse Syriza kreeg 26%-28% van de stemmen en werden de grootste partij. In Spanje verloren de conservatieven en socialisten zoveel, dat ze voor het eerst in de geschiedenis samen minder dan 50% van de stemmen kregen. Twee linkse partijen kregen kwamen op respectievelijk 10% en 8% uit.

In Italië behaalde Beppe Grillo’s M5S 25,5% en werd daarmee de tweede partij van het land, achter de sociaaldemocraten (34,5%) (3). Ook in België (NV-A), Oostenrijk (FPÖ), en Duitsland (AfD, 7%) wonnen de eurosceptici in meer of mindere mate. In Finland verdubbelden de ‘Ware Finnen’ hun Europese zetels weliswaar van 1 naar 2, maar vergeleken met de 20% bij de parlementsverkiezingen in 2011 was dat een flinke tegenvaller.

Nederland was feitelijk het enige land waar de meest eurofiele partij, D66, stemmen won, en de enige anti-EU partij PVV juist een zetel kwijtraakte. Om een bekende uitspraak van Louis van Gaal te parafraseren: ‘Zijn jullie nou zo slim, of zijn wij nou zo dom?’ Zijn wij Nederlanders het slimste jongetje van de EU-klas, zoals Den Haag zich doorgaans graag presenteert, of presenteert ons volk zich toch weer als die klassieke ‘dumme Holländer’, die altijd alles beter menen te weten, maar feitelijk van klok noch klepel weten?

Xander

(1) Deutsche Wirtschafts Nachrichten
(2) Deutsche Wirtschafts Nachrichten
(3) Deutsche Wirtschafts Nachrichten
(4) Deutsche Wirtschafts Nachrichten

Konservative Revolution (par Robert Steuckers)

Konservative Revolution

(par Robert Steuckers)

 

Entretien radiophonique avec Robert Steuckers au sujet de la sortie de son ouvrage

"La Révolution conservatrice allemande - Biographie de ses principaux acteurs et textes choisis"

(éditions du Lore).

Emission : Libre Journal des lycéens du 3 mai 2014, sur Radio Courtoisie

L'ouvrage est disponible sur le site des éditions du Lore : Editions du Lore

* * *

Table des matières


Les leçons de la « Révolution Conservatrice »


La « Révolution Conservatrice » en Allemagne (1918-1932)


Le mouvement métapolitique d’Engelbert Pernerstorfer à Vienne
à la fin du XIXe siècle, précurseur de la « Révolution Conservatrice »


Munich ou Athènes-sur-l’Isar : ville de culture et matrice
d’idées conservatrices-révolutionnaires


Les thèmes de la géopolitique et de l’espace russe
dans la vie culturelle berlinoise de 1918 à 1945
Karl Haushofer, Oskar von Niedermayer & Otto Hoetzsch


L’impact de Nietzsche dans les milieux politiques de gauche et de droite


Les matrices préhistoriques des civilisations antiques
dans l’oeuvre posthume de Spengler :Atlantis, Kasch et Turan


Révolution Conservatrice, forme catholique et « ordo æternus » romain


Rudolf Pannwitz : « mort de la terre », imperium Europæum
et conservation créatrice


Sur l’entourage et l’impact d’Arthur Moeller van den Bruck


Le visionnaire Alfred Schuler (1865-1923),
inspirateur du Cercle de Stefan George


Décision et destin soldatique durant la Première Guerre mondiale :
le cas Schauwecker


Annulation magique de la crise et « méthode physiognomique »
chez Ernst Jünger


Eugen Diederichs et le Cercle « Sera »


Boehm, Max Hildebert 1891-1968


Introduction à l’oeuvre de Ludwig Ferdinand Clauss (1892-1974)


Jakob Wilhelm Hauer (1881-1962) :
le philosophe de la rénovation religieuse


Edgar Julius Jung (1894-1934)


Friedrich-Georg Jünger (1898-1977)


Erwin Guido Kolbenheyer (1878-1962)


Alfred Schuler (1865-1923)


Christoph Steding (1903-1938)


Herman Wirth (1885-1981)

Remembering Louis-Ferdinand Céline

Remembering Louis-Ferdinand Céline:
May 27, 1894 – July 1, 1961

By Greg Johnson 

celine à Meudon.jpgLouis-Ferdinand Céline was the pen name of French novelist, essayist, and physician Louis-Ferdinand-Auguste Destouches, who was born on this day in 1894. Céline is one of the giants of 20th-century literature. And, like Ezra Pound and so many other great writers of the last century, he was an open and unapologetic racial nationalist. For more on Céline, see the following works on this website: 

The best online resource about Céline is Le Petit Célinien, http://lepetitcelinien.blogspot.com/ [12]


Article printed from Counter-Currents Publishing: http://www.counter-currents.com

URL to article: http://www.counter-currents.com/2014/05/remembering-louis-ferdinand-celine-3/

La bioéconomie, c’est le stade ultime du capitalisme

La bioéconomie, c’est le stade ultime du capitalisme

Ex: http://fortune.fdesouche.com

claf.pngDans son livre “Le Corps-Marché”, la sociologue canadienne Céline Lafontaine, professeure à l’université de Montréal, dénonce la “bioéconomie”, une économie fondée sur la marchandisation du corps.

S’attachant en particulier à l’industrie biomédicale, Céline Lafontaine délivre une  enquête documentée et pragmatique sur les enjeux de la bioéconomie. Elle éclaire les règles d’un marché mondialisé du corps humain, dont les éléments (sang, ovules, cellules, tissus…) sont de plus en plus marchandisés, comme dans l’industrie de la procréation. Par-delà les clivages éthiques que tous ces débats suscitent entre les citoyens – par exemple au sujet de la gestation pour autrui –, elle consigne précisément les enjeux réels de cette bioéconomie souveraine. Un éclairage à partir duquel les positions éthiques de chacun peuvent s’ajuster en fonction de plusieurs conceptions possibles de la liberté et de l’égalité…

 

Le monde vivant est devenu aujourd’hui, selon vous, “une mine à exploiter”. Une mine qui définit ce que vous appelez la “bioéconomie” ? Qu’est-ce qui la caractérise ?

Céline Lafontaine – La bioéconomie, c’est le nouveau modèle de développement économique, promulgué par l’OCDE. La bioéconomie est au cœur du processus de globalisation. L’origine du concept se rattache à l’écologie et au modèle de la décroissance. Face à l’épuisement des ressources naturelles, la bioéconomie, dans sa première version, devait tenir compte des limites imposées par la planète, des limites du vivant.

Historiquement, la bioéconomie est directement liée à la crise du pétrole du début des années 70, à l’abandon de l’étalon-or, au moment où le rapport du Club de Rome annonçait l’épuisement de l’énergie fossile.

Les Etats-Unis ont alors réagi en développant un nouveau modèle de l’économie qui place les processus vivants au centre de tout. Dès le début des années 80, le pays a investi massivement dans les biotechnologies. La bioéconomie, c’est donc un mode de production qui touche tous les secteurs économiques (agriculture, industrie, santé…), qui prend les processus vitaux, au niveau de l’ADN et des cellules, pour les transformer et leur conférer une nouvelle productivité.

Ces processus biologiques sont à la source d’une nouvelle productivité. Plutôt que d’utiliser la force de travail des ouvriers, la bioéconomie est fondée sur l’exploitation du vivant, la manipulation des gènes, des processus cellulaires et des processus vitaux. La vie elle-même est devenue la source de la productivité économique.

La bioéconomie est-elle consubstantiellement liée à l’économie financiarisée ?

Oui, c’est très clair ; il y a un lien entre le corps des femmes et la monnaie. L’abandon de l’étalon-or au début des années 70 – la dématérialisation de la monnaie, donc –, c’est la dématérialisation du rapport à la nature, au corps. L’économie informationnelle transforme le rapport au corps avec une vision décomposée du corps. On a l’impression, dans cette économie dématérialisée, que les ovules poussent dans les arbres. Il faut, je pense, revenir aux bases matérielles, biologiques, de ces corps.

Existe-t-il un marché constitué autour du corps humain ?

Le marché du corps humain existe de fait depuis les débuts de la médecine occidentale. Mais, le marché de la bioéconomie s’est internationalisé, avec notamment le développement des recherches sur les cellules souches embryonnaires. La bioéconomie, centrée sur le corps féminin se nourrit en fait de l’industrie de la procréation in vitro. Ce premier modèle d’industrialisation permet de comprendre la logique de la globalisation. Cette industrie a créé une demande, la fécondation in vitro, avec des banques d’ovules et des banques de sperme, apparues dès les années 80 aux Etats-Unis. Le phénomène s’est démocratisé de par le monde. Le travail reproductif des corps s’est exporté.

Les ovules des femmes américaines se vendent et s’exportent. Les mères porteuses se trouvent surtout en Inde : les femmes indiennes coûtent moins cher que les mères porteuses américaines. Mais on ne prend pas les ovules des femmes indiennes, car on ne veut pas du matériel génétique “racialisé” ; on en est là.

Comment comprendre le développement de ce marché du corps ? A quoi imputez-vous ce développement : aux progrès scientifiques, à la demande sociale qui évolue, aux intérêts marchands… ?

Il y a d’abord une volonté des Etats de développer la recherche biomédicale. Après la Seconde Guerre mondiale, la santé est devenue le fondement de la citoyenneté en s’inscrivant dans le corps de la nation à travers la mise en place des systèmes de santé publique ou le système du don du sang. Un système que le scandale du sang contaminé a effrité, en France comme au Canada dans les années 80.

Le modèle du don a été transposé aux ovules. Mais dans les faits, il n’y a pas de don d’ovules sans rémunération, sauf en France et au Canada où les banques sont vides. C’est une technologie invasive qui a des effets importants sur la santé, malgré la banalisation de l’in vitro, la stimulation ovarienne, la mise en production du corps… Ce sont des traitements pénibles. Pour donner, il faut qu’il y ait de l’argent en retour. Des femmes, dans le besoin, vendent leurs ovules, avec des effets catastrophiques pour leur santé, souvent. Même si c’est un échange financier, on le camoufle dans la rhétorique du don : le don de vie.

Le don vous semble donc un faux-semblant ?

Cette rhétorique du don de sang est à la base des Etats-nations. Or, j’insiste, le don camoufle aujourd’hui des logiques d’appropriation. On parle de compensation financière aux Etats-Unis, pour masquer la réalité d’une relation marchande. Les défenseurs des mères porteuses parlent du don de vie ; les femmes seraient censées se valoriser à travers ce don.

Pour moi, il faut questionner ce don qui est plus proche d’un sacrifice. Dans une société très capitaliste, la valorisation du don des femmes est problématique. Les bio-banques qui se développent dans le monde symbolisent ce travestissement du don, sous couvert du consentement éclairé. Les gens donnent pour faire avancer la recherche, mais les mécanismes de recherche mis en place font en sorte que les retombées de ces recherches sont privatisées et reviennent dans le corps social sous forme d’une médecine privatisée, tellement chère qu’elle met en péril le système de santé publique. On naturalise le don des femmes aujourd’hui ; or, l’économie du don se nourrit du corps de la population et privatise les retombées.

Tous les éléments du corps humain, qui font l’objet d’un trafic marchand – les organes, le sperme, le sang, les cellules… doivent-ils être mis sur le même plan, d’un point de vue moral?

Avec les organes, on est aux limites de l’illicite. On est là dans une forme de “cannibalisme”, dans une forme d’appropriation de l’autre. Le don d’organes a donné lieu à une rhétorique de la pénurie qui a nourri ainsi le “tourisme médical”. Les femmes donnent par exemple leur rein, plus que les hommes. Il y a une survalorisation du don des femmes dans une société qui proclame l’autonomie.

Je ne me situe pas sur un plan moral s’agissant des mères lesbiennes désirant un enfant. Mais le sperme n’est pas l’équivalent biologique de l’ovule ; il y en a un qu’on doit récolter, c’est une ressource renouvelable ; l’autre est une ressource rare, puisque le nombre d’ovocytes est limité à la naissance. Donner du sperme ou des ovules, ce n’est pas pareil ; cela n’a pas les mêmes répercussions ; il y a une intrusion dans le corps qui n’est pas du même ordre.

Comment définissez-vous votre approche sociologique dans le cadre de ces questions complexes, où les positions morales et éthiques s’opposent souvent violemment?

Ma perspective est celle d’un féminisme matérialiste, qui consiste à prendre au sérieux la matière du corps. L’un des problèmes des “gender studies” est selon moi d’avoir oublié la matérialité des corps. Faire croire à un équivalent du masculin et du féminin nous fait oublier que dans les faits, un ovule, ce n’est pas du sperme. L’enjeu de la bioéconomie, c’est précisément la valeur de ces produits reproductifs.

Vous parlez d’un renversement entre le “zoe” et le “bios”; c’est-à-dire?

Selon la thèse du philosophe Giorgio Agamben, il y a une distinction entre la vie nue, purement biologique, zoe, et bios, la vie sociale, politique. Dans l’époque contemporaine, il y a ce renversement car les processus biologiques deviennent la valeur politique. Le projet du politique devient le projet du bios, du prolongement de la vie. L’individu investit maintenant dans son capital biologique, porté par une vision “biologisante” du rapport à soi. C’est cette distinction que je fais entre le corps-objet et le corps-sujet.

L’idée du post-humain, l’idée de faire de son corps un projet de vie se sont imposées : plus on subjectivise le corps, plus on l’objectivise à travers ses différents produits. On reprend les mêmes logiques d’exploitation que l’industrie manufacturière.

C’est pire encore car on s’appuie sur des logiques de domination des femmes.

Vous parlez même d’un “cannibalisme technoscientifique”.

Oui, dans le sens où le corps des plus pauvres nourrit le corps des plus riches. Le corps des femmes les plus jeunes et pauvres nourrit le corps des femmes ménopausées. La médecine régénératrice vise à contourner la pénurie d’organes à partir de traitements à base de cellules. La cellule ne sert plus exclusivement d’expérimentation : elle devient un produit thérapeutique. Avec les cellules souches embryonnaires, issues de l’industrie de la procréation in vitro, on est dans une économie de la promesse, de spéculation.

L’idée de régénérer le corps est née avec l’annonce de la Banque mondiale d’un rapport sur le lien entre la décroissance et le vieillissement de la population. On a alors investi dans cette médecine régénératrice, avec cette idée de vaincre le vieillissement en tant que tel. Les logiques de marché sont liées à des politiques gouvernementales. On investit donc publiquement dans une médecine qui ne concerne que les riches.

Même en France ?

Il n’y a pas d’exception française sur ce point. Certes, il y a en France une bioéthique développée, mais les biobanques et le modèle de recherche et la médecine régénératrice se développent tout autant, c’est le même modèle que dans les pays anglo-saxons. On observe la même logique de privatisation ; on présuppose que les prélèvements sont opérés pour le corps de la nation ; or, ce n’est pas le cas ; le modèle du don, très politique, n’est qu’apparent. On est passé d’un don de corps à corps, comme dans le cas de la greffe d’organes, au corps pour la recherche, comme si c’était la même logique, comme si le corps politique faisait corps avec la recherche biomédicale. Je ne veux pas critiquer la recherche en tant que telle, mais discuter de la place qu’a prise la médecine dans nos vies. La bioéconomie, c’est le stade ultime du capitalisme ; on est dans la promesse d’une régénération infinie des processus vitaux.

Où placez-vous l’éthique dans votre travail ? L’argument de la marchandisation ne vous semble-t-il pas parfois détourné par tous ceux qui, au nom de normes morales conservatrices contestent, le droit pour ceux qui le désirent à la procréation médicale assistée ou à la gestation pour autrui ?

Il n’y a pas, selon moi, d’ambiguïté, on est vraiment dans une marchandisation au sens de mise en marché. Là où il y a un glissement possible, c’est quand le débat dérive vers un point de vue moral ou religieux. Mais mon point de vue est celui d’une sociologue attentive aux inégalités que cela engendre. La distinction faite entre conservateurs de droite et libéraux de gauche me semble erronée. Pour moi, être de gauche, ce n’est pas militer pour le in vitro, qui reste une industrie. C’est du libéralisme pur. Ceux qui manifestent pour le droit à la PMA ne questionnent pas la pression faite sur les femmes, le modèle de la maternité…

L’accès aux nouvelles technologies, c’est réclamer l’accès à d’autres corps. Qu’on le veuille ou non, cela repose sur un marché. Est-ce conservateur de rappeler qu’il existe du masculin et du féminin ? Les mères porteuses, c’est une pratique d’exploitation. C’est du même ordre que le travail des enfants en Chine. Les mères porteuses sont toujours des femmes dominées, pauvres, qui le font toujours en échange d’argent. Le don de soi se rapproche d’un sacrifice.

Ma perspective, c’est de réfléchir au maintien des systèmes de santé publique, à la réduction des inégalités. Et surtout, je pense que les corps sont reliés les uns aux autres. Il y a un corps social, il faut réfléchir à une nouvelle politique de la vie  et penser le corps social dans sa finitude.

________________________________________________

Céline Lafontaine, Le corps-marché. La marchandisation de la vie humaine à l’ère de la bioéconomie (Seuil, 288 p, 21,50 €)

LE SOUVERAINISME, UN SUICIDE POUR L'EUROPE

france-europe-souverainisme.jpg

LE SOUVERAINISME, UN SUICIDE POUR L'EUROPE
 
Une tribune libre de circonstance

Yann Louarn
Ex: http://metamag.fr

Alors qu'une vague dite « souverainiste » s'apprêterait à déferler lors des élections Européennes de dimanche prochain, les défenseurs d'une Europe unie semblent avoir du mal à se faire entendre tant l'idée Européenne est actuellement incarnée par la Commission de Bruxelles  ,constituée de membres nommés par les gouvernements souverains des Etats d'Europe , et par une alliance économique et politique inféodée aux intérêts américains et aux marchés économiques mondiaux.


Pourtant, cette construction européenne possède une légitimité notamment au regard de l'histoire de sa civilisation pluri-millénaire. Celle-ci a vu en permanence les peuples d'Europe s'unir, partager, inventer, construire ensemble, découvrir le monde, sans empêcher toutefois les guerres fratricides et les conflits de pouvoir. Ainsi, le siècle de 1914 aura connu deux guerres civiles qui ont anéanti des millions d'Européens, dont une bonne partie de l'élite du début du siècle dernier. Il aura pourtant été à la fois le siècle du grand suicide des peuples Européens par la guerre et celui porteur d'une volonté d'apaisement et de construction d'un ensemble politique et économique cohérent, enraciné, fort. C'est contre cela que se sont opposés les gouvernements français, anglais et allemands, pourtant censés être les moteurs de l'Europe et cela depuis des décennies. C'est le fruit de leur asservissement économique sans conditions aux USA depuis la fin de la deuxième guerre mondiale.


Ils s'y sont opposés en fabriquant des institutions technocratiques, sans légitimité populaire , mais surtout en effaçant toute trace de leur passé commun, leurs traditions, leur civilisation, leurs religions ce qui devrait pourtant constituer la base de l'Union des Européens.


Ils s'y sont opposés en élargissant sans cesse un espace considéré comme uniquement économique et en affichant, depuis plusieurs décennies, la volonté de faire entrer la Turquie, c'est à dire en réalité l'empire Ottoman, ennemi historique de la civilisation européenne, dans cet ensemble « sans âme ».
Ils s'y sont opposés en laissant l'Amérique mener plusieurs guerres et même en y collaborant sur le sol Européen, comme en Serbie, au Kosovo, mais aussi des guerres d'influence, comme en Ukraine, au détriment de la Russie.


Ils s'y sont opposés en ouvrant grand les frontières de l'Europe, en favorisant l'immigration massive venue prioritairement de l'Afrique ou du Maghreb pour la France, de Turquie pour l'Allemagne et d'Asie pour l'Angleterre. Une immigration qui, petit à petit, est apparue aux peuples d'Europe comme la volonté d'une minorité de les remplacer purement et simplement par d'autres populations. Il est ainsi devenu courant de Birmingham à Bruxelles en passant par certains quartiers parisiens ou berlinois, que les Européens de souche soient minoritaires.


Ils s'y sont opposés car, au final, ces dirigeants des pays européens n'étaient que des souverainistes défendant leurs intérêts économiques propres et ceux d'une petite oligarchie dominante aujourd'hui. Mme Le Pen, M. Mélenchon ou M. De Villiers, comme M. Farage au Royaume-Uni, ne sont en fait que leurs enfants.


Des enfants contestataires certes : mais que défendent-ils au juste ?


La souveraineté de leur petite Nation en tant qu'espace géographique et entité historique face à l'union nécessaire des peuples Européens en vue de constituer une Europe souveraine et puissante. Celle-la même qu'ils refusent aux petites patries qui constituent la France ou l'Angleterre, comme en témoigne la volonté de Madame Le Pen de supprimer les régions, de ne pas reconnaître les langues régionales ou celle de M. Farage d'appeler à voter contre l'indépendance de l'Ecosse.


Ces « souverainistes » pour lesquels de nombreux européens s'apprêtent à voter et qui disent être le dernier rempart de leur peuple ( contre qui ? contre quoi ? ) sont en réalité le couteau qui pourrait provoquer le suicide de tout un continent. Un suicide pour lequel, néanmoins, les principaux responsables se trouvent au sein de la Commission de Bruxelles et dans les milieux qui ont construit cette Europe technocratique.


Ce que veut M. Farage aujourd'hui ? Empêcher les immigrés d'Europe de l'Est de se rendre en Angleterre, leur enlever tous droits sociaux, les « mettre à la mer ». Mais où était ce Monsieur à l'époque où toute l'Angleterre s'indignait contre les propos d'Enoch Powell, qui avait prédit «  l'invasion du pays » par les peuples du Tiers-Monde ? Où était M. Farage lorsque des pans entiers de la Grande-Bretagne sont tombés sous la coupe islamique et asiatique ? Il ne parlait pas. Il se taisait. Et aujourd'hui, c'est une pakistanaise responsable des jeunes de son parti, l'UKIP, qui demanderait aux citoyens anglais d'aller voter pour renvoyer « chez eux » des Européens de l'Est.


Tout comme aujourd'hui, des dirigeants du Front National, vont prôner une « tolérance zéro » envers les Roms et une restriction de l'immigration venant de l'Europe de l'Est. C'est également le parti de Marine Le Pen qui s'accroche aux DOM-TOM français, derniers vestiges d'un colonialisme dont toute l'Europe paye aujourd'hui les conséquences, et qui dans le même temps refuse qu'un Grec ou qu'un Allemand participe aux décisions collectives de l'Union des Européens.


Lorsque Jean-Luc Mélenchon, leader du Front de gauche et souverainiste jacobin lui aussi, déclare que les Français sont plus proches culturellement de la Méditerranée, du Maghreb et de l'Afrique que de l'Estonie ou de l'Ukraine et qu'ils ont un avenir commun, il ne dit pas autre chose que ces souverainistes « de droite », nostalgiques d'une époque révolue, accrochés à leurs dogmes ( et notamment celui de la France universelle ou celui de l'Angleterre conquérante ) et aveugles aux grands bouleversements, notamment démographique, de l'histoire à venir.


Quelles conséquences, quel impact sur la vie des Européens auraient une victoire ou une percée des souverainistes aux élections ? Le taux de chômage massif diminuera t-il parce que Madame Le Pen et M. Farage vont s'asseoir un peu plus souvent et avec un plus grand nombre de députés au Parlement européen ? Les banques cesseront-elles de prêter à intérêt à des Etats qui assurent pourtant leur survie ? Les millions d'étrangers extra-européens, qui souhaitent pénétrer en Europe dans ce qu'ils croient être un Eldorado, y renonceront t-ils spontanément ? Les mosquées qui fleurissent dans toute l'Europe fermeront t-elles leurs portes ? Les campagnes se repeupleront-elles par miracle ?


Non bien entendu. Car le Parlement européen ne possède aucun pouvoir mais surtout parce que ces souverainistes n'entendent aucunement renverser les élites qu'elles jugent pourtant à raison illégitimes.
Ces mêmes souverainistes n'entendent pas non plus inverser le processus migratoire qui conduit au grand remplacement en cours en Europe, puisque et Mme Le Pen et M. Farage sont des partisans acharnés de l'assimilation et d'une société dans laquelle le drapeau National est plus important que l'identité régionale, ethnique, religieuse ou culturelle.


Penser le contraire, croire dans une sortie de l'Europe qui briserait irrémédiablement l'avenir commun des peuples qui la constituent, c'est se mentir à soi-même, c'est accepter simplement et fatalement qu'après la chute de l'Empire Romain, après les guerres fratricides du 20ème siècle, l'Europe et les Européens en finissent définitivement avec leur histoire et leur civilisation dans un magma à côté duquel la guerre des Balkans ressemblerait au paradis sur terre.


Changer l'Europe telle qu'elle est aujourd'hui, cela va de soi. Mais pour cela, encore faut t-il aimer les peuples qui la constituent et épouser l'idée d'une Europe-puissance.


« Quand les barbares étaient aux portes de l'Empire, les Romains discutaient du sexe des anges  ».

 

jeudi, 29 mai 2014

Propositions pour une nouvelle Union européenne

europe_painted_on_hands.png

Propositions pour une nouvelle Union européenne

par Guillaume Faye

Ex: http://www.gfaye.com

La position exprimée ici est  différente de celle des anti-européistes (style FN ou UPR) ou de celle des fédéralistes qui sont trop entachées d’idéologie. On connaît les  énormes inconvénients de l’UE : bureaucratie, Commission qui outrepasse ses droits, ”machin” constitutionnel illisible, déficit de démocratie, usine à gaz institutionnelle, impuissance à défendre l’intérêt des peuples, etc. 

Pourtant l’UE a procuré nombre d’avantages dont ne parle jamais parce qu’ils sont intégrés dans le quotidien, notamment l’accroissement des échanges intereuropéens et la régulation bancaire. Affirmer, comme le fait le FN, que la ”crise” débutée en 2008 a été provoquée par la politique de l’UE, n’est pas sérieux. Elle a eu comme cause principale le système financier américain spéculatif, virtuel et dérégulé. Sans oublier l’endettement irresponsable de certains États.

Sortir de l’euro pour la France ? Pas très malin…D’abord, cela prendrait beaucoup de temps et pourrait provoquer un choc international de récession  incontrôlable.  Les USA et la Chine seraient d’ailleurs ravis d’un retour aux monnaies nationales en Europe, afin de rétablir le dollar et d’établir le yuan comme seules monnaies de transaction planétaire.

 L’euro est trop cher et nuit aux exportations ? Pas si simple…. La France est déficitaire dans ses exportations/ importations même vis-à-vis des  pays de la zone euro, qui sont largement majoritaires dans nos échanges extérieurs ! Et les pays de l’Eurozone (pas seulement l’Allemagne !) sont excédentaires dans leur balance commerciale avec le reste du monde. Donc le problème n’est pas l’euro surévalué – ne rejetons pas toujours la responsabilité sur les autres – mais la politique économique de la France, anti-compétitive : fiscalisme écrasant, découragement des investisseurs, charges sociales excessives, rigidité du marché du travail, marges des entreprises trop faibles pour assurer R&D et innovation, etc. Bref, le socialisme, générateur de chômage et de paupérisation, pratiqué par la droite comme par la gauche, est responsable du déclassement économique français, et non pas l’euro ou l’ ” austérité ” imposée par Bruxelles, comme le rabâchent les perroquets incompétents.

D’autre part, une sortie de l’euro et un retour aux monnaies nationales, en l’occurrence au franc, outre que le processus serait très difficile techniquement, auraient quatre inconvénients majeurs : 1) Baisse par dévalorisation, de 15% à 40% des retraites et des sommes épargnées placées en banque, pour tout le monde. 2) Doublement ou triplement des intérêts de la dette nationale et augmentation du principal d’au moins 10%, libellé en ”néofranc”. 3) Coût très important pour les PME du retour au Franc, administratif et comptable d’abord, en frais de change ensuite. 4) Explosion de l’inflation.  

L’euro, en effet, garantit un faible niveau d’inflation et la stabilité des revenus d’épargne. Inconvénient : une monnaie unique pour des pays économiquement très différents, l’euro étant en fait l’”euro-mark”. En réalité, il ne fallait pas y entrer comme on l’a fait, pour des raisons politiques, mais il est très difficile d’en sortir, comme un chien dans le terrier d’une taupe. Alors que faire, pour changer de fond en comble l’UE, sans jeter le bébé avec l’eau du bain ?     

J’ai longtemps cru qu’une Europe fédérale était possible, sur le modèle américain des États Unis d’Europe, voire sur la destruction des nations au profit des régions. Il faut savoir renoncer aux utopies en fonction de l’expérience. L’Europe historique n’a rien à voir avec la construction des USA. Voici (1) quelles pourraient être les bases d’une nouvelle Europe des Nations, beaucoup plus souple, pragmatique et concentrée sur l’essentiel que l’usine à gaz de l’actuelle UE, qui ne sait pas où elle va : 

1) Suppression du Parlement européen, instance inutile, simulacre de démocratie.

 2) L’Union européenne est dirigée par le Conseil de Gouvernement de l’Union qui comprend les chefs d’État et/ ou de gouvernement démocratiquement élus, qui décide à la majorité des 2/3. Il nomme les membres de la Commission européenne qui ne peut plus imposer aucune ”directive” de son initiative ni décider quoi que ce soit et se contente d’appliquer ses décisions.

3) Les compétences du CGU sont strictement limitées aux domaines suivants : a) la concurrence intérieure et le marché intérieur ; b) le commerce extérieur ; c) l’agriculture et la pêche ; d) l’industrie, les transports et les infrastructures ; e) la politique énergétique et l’environnement ; f) la politique fiscale et sociale ;  g) la recherche, l’économie numérique et la coopération universitaire ; h) la politique monétaire des États ayant choisi l’euro et la réglementation bancaire. La politique étrangère, la politique d’immigration, les normes judiciaires et pénales, les questions ”sociétales” ne relèvent que des États.

4) Les décisions du CGU ne sont applicables dans les pays membres (transposables dans leurs lois et règlements) qu’après une approbation par chaque Parlement national. Les Parlements nationaux prévalent en tout domaine.

5) Suppression de la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne (CJUE) et de la Cour européenne des Droits de l’homme (CEDH), ainsi que des postes de Président de l’UE et de délégué aux Affaires étrangères. 

6) Tout État peut sortir des accords de Schengen et rétablir les contrôles de personnes aux frontières et les règles d’admission, y compris pour les personnes provenant de l’UE. De même, chaque État est totalement libre de définir ses règles d’acquisition de la nationalité et de régime social pour les étrangers.

7) La Banque centrale européenne (BCE) n’est plus indépendante. Elle applique la politique monétaire vis à vis de l’ euro définie par le CGU, limité aux États membres de l’Eurogroupe.

8) L’élaboration d’une politique étrangère commune comme d’une politique de défense indépendante s’étant révélée, par expérience, impossible, il est créé entre les États qui le veulent une Communauté européenne de Défense (CED) totalement indépendante de l’OTAN ; elle est dotée de moyens militaires classiques, à l’exclusion de la dissuasion nucléaire.  

9) Vote unanime du CGU et de tous les Parlements nationaux pour l’adhésion d’un nouveau membre.

Dans cette perspective, quels seraient les objectifs principaux d’une nouvelle UE, d’une Europe des Nations ?

1) Assurer l’existence  d’un marché intérieur de libre-échange de biens, de services et de capitaux – mais pas obligatoirement de travailleurs, sauf accords libres interétatiques – dans l’espace de la nouvelle UE.

2) Instituer une préférence économique européenne (”espace économique européen”), avec protectionnisme et contingentements aux frontières communes et obligation de réserver 60% des marchés publics aux entreprises européennes. (2) 

3) Laisser libres les États souverains de négocier entre eux tous les autres modes de coopération et d’initiatives.

 4) Développer une vision de l’Union européenne découplée de Washington (sans hostilité) mais cherchant une alliance privilégiée avec la Russie et se préservant de toute immigration extérieure invasive. 

Ces propositions s’inscrivent dans une vision souple et pragmatique de l’Europe des Nations, très éloignée du système illisible de l’UE actuelle qui est l’otage de l’eurocratie, c’est-à-dire d’une oligarchie transnationale, composée de réseaux politiciens, médiatiques et technocratiques alliés. L’idée d’une Europe fédérale avec une trentaine d’États et autant de langues (3) appartient au domaine de l’utopie, comme le fut l’Union soviétique. L’idée européenne possède une portée historique exceptionnelle (4), mais elle été mal initiée et pervertie, comme une potion qui rend malade et ne guérit pas. Voilà pourquoi, il faut tout reprendre à zéro, sans démagogie, avec patience et détermination. 

Notes:

(1)  Cf. Mon Programme. Éd. du Lore.

(2) Comme cela a cours aux USA, en Chine, au Japon, etc.

(3) Sauf le basic English comme idiome commun

(4) Cf. mon ancien essai Nouveau discours à la Nation européenne, réédité.

Posthuman Prospects: Artificial Intelligence, Fifth Generation Warfare, & Archeofuturism

artificial-intelligence-ai-588x400.jpg

Posthuman Prospects:
Artificial Intelligence, Fifth Generation Warfare, & Archeofuturism

By Christopher Pankhurst

Ex: http://www.counter-currents.com

The speed of technological development can be dizzying, and it has become natural for us to expect a never-ending stream of faster, more powerful devices. The future development of such technologies promises increasingly sophisticated machines that will challenge the very notion of man’s supremacy. The dystopian future of intelligent machines endowed with astonishing capabilities, whose very existence might cause them to supersede humanity, is being enthusiastically pursued.

Some thinkers have sought to address the implications of such technologies, and have described models that integrate these technologies within a wider future scenario. Two such models, and their treatment of future technologies, will be discussed here: fifth generation warfare (5GW); and Archeofuturism.

Fifth Generation Warfare

The 5GW model had its genesis in a paper published in the Marine Corps Gazette in 1989 entitled “The Changing Face of War: Into the Fourth Generation.” In this paper, Lind et al. developed a model of modern warfare described in terms of four generations of evolutionary development. The first generation of modern warfare (1GW) was characterized by the use of line and column, and muskets. This generation was exemplified in the Napoleonic wars. The second generation (2GW) utilized more ruthless technology, e.g. machine guns and rifles, and was tactically more mobile. World War I represents the peak of 2GW. The third generation (3GW) was the dominant model for most of the remainder of the twentieth century. It attempted to bypass the enemy’s front line through infiltration and rapid movement, and again utilized more deadly technology such as tanks. It is characterized by Blitzkrieg.

The article then argued that a fourth generation of warfare (4GW) was emerging. 4GW “seems likely to be widely dispersed and largely undefined; the distinction between war and peace will be blurred to the vanishing point. It will be non-linear, possibly to the point of having no definable battlefields or fronts. The distinction between ‘civilian’ and ‘military’ may disappear.”[1] 4GW operatives will not necessarily be identifiable as combatants; instead they will blend into the enemies’ society until they strike. Obviously, the 9/11 attacks fit this model very well.

Since the publication of “The Changing Face of War” there have been attempts to update the generational model to include a fifth generation. In 5GW, the battlefield encompasses the entirety of social, political, ideological, scientific, economic, and military spheres. It is possible, and in many respects desirable, for the combatants in 5GW to not know whom they are fighting, nor to even know that they are fighting. The full range of Nano-Bio-Info-Cogno (NBIC) technologies are expected to be deployed in 5GW, though in ways that will be highly unpredictable, and perhaps even invisible. A characteristic feature of 5GW is the manipulation of the context of the observers of conflict. Rather than focusing on the physical defeat of an enemy, 5GW recognizes the potential for new technologies to manipulate the belief systems of observers who may support or oppose conflict.

It will be seen that the generational model of warfare is characterized by advances in both technology and tactics. Although the technologies particular to the fifth generation are still emerging, there is already a great deal of international conflict taking place in a 5GW context. As is characteristic of 5GW, these conflicts are somewhat subliminal to exoteric politics.

Cyber Warfare

One element of 5GW that is becoming increasingly important is cyber warfare. In 2008 an American army officer stationed in the Middle East found a discarded memory stick. When he put it into his laptop it appeared to be empty. In fact, it contained a Trojan virus which embedded itself into the American military computer network and was able to send secret information for weeks before being discovered. It is believed to have originated in China. In 2009 there were coordinated cyber-attacks launched against military, banking and media sources in South Korea. The obvious guilty party would be North Korea, but these attacks can be impossible to trace to the source. When the South Koreans investigated the matter they found that the attacks were launched from six computers scattered around the world, with the order to attack coming from a server in Brighton, England. Also in 2009 the American National Grid became infected with a virus from China designed to shut it down. And, in an incident in 2010, 15% of the world’s internet traffic was hijacked by Chinese servers where it will have been copied.[2]

One of the biggest cyber threats of recent years is, as yet, unattributable to any source. The Conficker worm first appeared in 2008. A worm is a type of malware that spreads across computer networks of its own accord. Whereas a virus can only infect a computer by being downloaded by the user (in an email attachment, for example), a worm is designed to exploit flaws in the operating system to spread itself. The Conficker worm was designed to create a botnet, which is a network of infected PCs that are effectively under the control of the worm’s creator, although individual PC users will not even realize that their machine is infected. Botnets can be used to disrupt websites or other systems that rely on internet communication by issuing Dedicated Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks. A DDoS occurs when a particular target is overwhelmed with a massive number of requests causing it to crash. The larger the botnet, the more effective it can be at taking down substantial targets.

Cyber warfare need not be aimed at bringing down large scale networks; it can be much more focused. The Stuxnet worm is believed to have been created by either Israel or the United States. In all probability it was a joint project, but the impossibility of determining who actually created the worm is characteristic of these sorts of cyber attacks and of 5GW. Although Stuxnet infected PCs around the world it only caused damage to certain machines in Iran. Stuxnet works by exploiting a known weakness in the Windows operating system. It was designed to disrupt a specific piece of software designed by Siemans AG. This software was used in Iran to separate weapons grade isotopes from uranium. Stuxnet caused the centrifuges used in this process to lose control, thus ruining the effort at processing uranium. This has obviously caused a setback to Iran’s nuclear ambitions.[3]

Transhumanism and Archeofuturism

These are the sorts of 5GW conflicts taking place right now using existing technologies. It is expected that the future development of 5GW will involve transhuman, super-empowered actors whose capabilities, enhanced through NBIC technologies, are so far in advance of anything that we could recognize that they will be effectively post-human. The technological convergence of computer applications and genetic modifications, it is argued, will blur the definition of “human” to such an extent that it will no longer be possible to conceive of the world from an anthropocentric viewpoint at all. As one writer on transhuman politics puts it:

The convergence of these fields comes from the fact that at the nanometer scale the differences between living and nonliving systems become indistinguishable. The body (including the brain, and whatever we might call ‘mind’) can be restructured. Medical devices can be implanted that will produce as well as dispense drugs inside of the host, including the brain. Supercomputers the size of a cell may be introduced, monitoring for and preventing disease. More generally, while at one time the physical evolution of the human species relied upon the random mutation, distribution, and environmental selection of genes, NBIC technologies make it possible to conceive of a self-designed and self-modified organism.[4]

This “transhuman” 5GW model of the future fits very well with the “Archeofuturist” model as presented by Guillaume Faye. Faye’s manifesto for a post-catastrophic age presents a future world of radical inequality, where non-Europeans have been expelled from Europe, and where technological innovation and development have progressed to such an extent that the boundaries between man and machine are no longer clear. In this Archeofuturist world, which even now still seems like science fiction, European man has to confront the challenges presented by advanced technologies by returning to an archaic value system predicated on hierarchical structures.

Things such as artificial births in incubators; intelligent, ‘quasi-sensitive’ and quasi-human biotronic robots; chimeras (crossbreeds between humans and animals, a patent for which has already filed in the United States); genetic manipulations or ‘transgenic humans’; new artificial organs that increase the faculties tenfold; the creation of hyper-endowed and ultra-resistant individuals through positive eugenics; and cloning – all risk shattering the old egalitarian and religious idea of man even more than Darwin and evolutionary theories have done.[5]

Faye paints a plausible and compelling picture of a “post-human” world where advanced technologies will destroy the existing humanist presuppositions. The only response to this situation will be to return to archaic, pre-humanist ways of thinking, and to turn metaphysical shock to our advantage by creating elites of post-human Europeans.

 

robot-artificial-intelligence.jpg

 

The merit of both the 5GW and Archeofuturist models derives from the fact that they anticipate paradigmatic technological advances, and provide a means to understand this impending scenario, thus enabling us to prepare for the shock of the new. In this respect both models are essential for understanding the way in which power struggles are likely to play out in the coming decades. Nonetheless, the neophilia of both models may cause us to expect advances in technology that might never happen. Both models assume that certain futuristic technologies are imminent and that those technologies will have fundamental consequences for our societies. But it is by no means certain that such technologies will ever, or indeed can ever, be created. The natural barriers to paradigmatic advances in technology in the near future are peak oil and the impossibility of achieving artificial intelligence.

Peak Oil 

The phenomenon of peak oil has been discussed extensively in recent years, but there is little sign that industrialized economies are waking up from the dream of unlimited progress that has beguiled them for so long. It is believed that the peak of planetary oil production has just about been reached, or perhaps even passed. This means that industrialized economies will find it more and more difficult and expensive to continue using oil. As oil becomes more scarce there will be profound effects on all levels of society, not least of which will be food shortages caused by the breakdown of food distribution networks, all of which are entirely dependent on oil, and the consequent violence and population displacements that will follow as a necessary corollary.

Critics of peak oil often argue that new, and cleaner, fuel sources will be developed to pick up the slack that declining oil production will leave. In fact, Faye himself is guilty of this in that he advocates nuclear energy as a clean alternative to oil.[6] He also considers a range of other alternative energy sources such as solar and windmills. The problem with this scenario is that existing alternative energy sources only produce a fraction of the energy that is currently being consumed. While the entire political establishment continues to maintain that economic growth is an unquestionable panacea, it will be necessary to continue using greater quantities of energy year after year for the system to continue. Worse still, the existing alternative energy sources rely on the existence of an oil economy to help subsidise their production. When oil starts to run out, these sources will have to begin relying more heavily on using alternative energy in their production, thus reducing further the net efficiency of such sources. Oil is the cheapest source of energy to produce. Even renewable sources are expensive to exploit. In The Long Descent, John Michael Greer writes:

Making a solar cell, for instance, requires large infusions of diesel fuel first to mine the raw materials and then to ship them to the factory. Even larger doses of natural gas or coal are needed to generate the electricity that powers the complex process of turning the raw materials into a cell that will make electricity out of sunlight. . . Not even the most optimistic calculations show solar cells yielding anything in the same ballpark as the net energy routinely produced by all but the poorest fossil fuels. The same, as it turns out, is true of every other alternative resource.[7]

With declining oil production, and with alternative sources unable to fulfill the shortfall, we are left relying on some new, radically efficient, source being developed. Without such a miraculous development occurring, industrial society will inevitably break down.

Greer writes of four facets of collapse that will follow on from peak oil:

  1. Declining energy availability.
  2. Economic contraction.
  3. Collapsing public health.
  4. Political turmoil.[8] 

These four scenarios should be considered in conjunction with the convergence of catastrophes described by Guillaume Faye. Faye identifies seven fracture lines of modernity that are predicted to come into effect in the years between 2010 and 2020:

  1. Metastasis of the European social fabric.
  2. Economic and demographic crisis.
  3. The chaos of the South.
  4. Global economic crisis.
  5. The surge in fundamentalist religious fanaticism.
  6. Confrontation between North and South.
  7. Unchecked pollution of the planet.[9]

All of these factors when taken together point to a radical collapse of the post-industrial lifestyles that all Westerners have come to regard as axiomatic. Faye foresees an elite, technologically advanced minority of Europeans developing futuristic advanced technologies based on inegalitarian, elitist principles. The technologies available to this minority would become occult: hidden from the view of outsiders like the secrets of a mystery school; shared only with initiated members. The majority of Europeans outside of big cities would revert to a more agrarian and essentially pre-industrial lifestyle.

While it is likely that the technological regression of the majority will come to pass, it is far from certain that the futuristic technologies of the elite will ever be developed.

Artificial Intelligence

In addition to peak oil, there is another barrier to such technologies. Any futuristic technology will be limited by the extent to which artificial intelligence (AI) can be created in computers or robots. In the transhuman future predicted we will be able to utilize such technologies to design and fast-track our own evolutionary development. This, combined with the expected advances in AI, will lead to a post-human world where the very category of “human” will have been superseded to such an extent that it will only make sense in the neo-medieval rural areas. This predicted future, if it is to come, will have to overcome the obstacles that have hampered research into the development of AI.

One of the most skeptical voices concerning the scope of AI research is that of Hubert Dreyfus. In 1965 Dreyfus was asked to write a paper on the future of AI research for the RAND Corporation. He produced a document called Alchemy and AI[10] which likened the research of contemporary AI researchers to the medieval alchemists’ attempts to turn base metals into gold. Dreyfus was convinced that the problems facing AI were not problems of processing power, size of memory capacity, or any other practical difficulties. He claimed that there were fundamental problems in principle with the claim that human intelligence could be reproduced in a digital computer.

Dreyfus continued to explore these ideas in his later works.[11] He went on to identify four assumptions which he believed were uncritically, and often unconsciously, being utilized by AI workers to underpin research into AI. Dreyfus believed that the goal of achieving artificial intelligence in a computer could only be achieved if these four assumptions were correct but that, in fact, they were all false. These assumptions were the biological assumption, the psychological assumption, the epistemological assumption, and the ontological assumption.

The biological assumption is based on the fact that neural firings in the brain are “all or nothing” bursts of energy. This observation from neuroscience has been extrapolated to imply that such firings therefore correspond to bits of information in a digital computer, which operate in a binary “all or nothing” manner. In a computer, each bit of information is a discrete unit that has a particular symbolic function. But in the brain, Dreyfus argues, the neural firings that superficially resemble such bits of information are modified and “interpreted” according to many other localized conditions, such as rate of pulsing, frequency of pulsing along particular pathways, and interaction with other neurons. In short, the biology of the brain appears to be more analogue than digital in character.

The psychological assumption prompts a somewhat philosophical treatment from Dreyfus. Researchers in AI usually assume that human psychology is a process that operates rather like a computer program, that is, that it is essentially an exercise in information processing. The problem for AI researchers is how to translate the physical properties of the brain into the higher level intellectual concepts of the mind. As long as the brain is described in terms of its physical behavior there is no problem; seeing a chair can be described as the presence of light waves on the retina causing a sequence of chemical reactions in the brain, all of which can be described quite precisely. But to speak of really “seeing” a chair it is necessary to use a different sort of language, language which is more appropriate to the mind than the brain. AI researchers, according to Dreyfus, attempt to bridge this gap by suggesting that there is a level of information processing that occurs in the brain that can organize neuro-chemical bits of information into higher-level concepts. Unfortunately, there is no evidence that this is the case; in fact, in the absence of evidence AI researchers postulate as yet unknown information processing functions of the brain, merely based on the supposed analogy with computers.

The epistemological assumption is concerned with the way in which humans know how to perform particular actions. It describes the belief that all non-arbitrary behavior can be formalized, and therefore can be reproduced. Dreyfus argues that any such formalization of human behavior, which would enable it to be programmed into a computer, would merely result in an imitation, ratherthan a reproduction, of that behavior. The computer would need to follow discrete stages of processing in order to perform any particular function and Dreyfus is far from convinced that this is in fact how humans behave in practice. AI researchers assume that behavior must follow certain heuristic steps, and that where someone is unaware of following such steps that they must be being carried out unconsciously. Against this view, Dreyfus argues that human behavior is always rooted in a particular situation and orientated towards certain goals. Because of this, people effortlessly grasp the particular local aspect of any subject under consideration due to their experience in the situation. A computer has to work through all possible interpretations, discard those that are irrelevant, and focus on those that are relevant. Human beings do not follow such procedures due to their being located in a particular existential situation.

artificialintelligence-615x345.jpg

The ontological assumption concerns a fundamental problem for AI research. As Dreyfus notes, “the data with which the computer must operate if it is to perceive, speak, and in general behave intelligently, must be discrete, explicit, and determinate; otherwise it will not be the sort of information which can be given to the computer so as to be processed by rule.”[12] Because computers must operate in terms of such discrete data it has become habitual for AI researchers to make the assumption that these data are actually present as an aspect of the world; that we, in fact, perceive the world through such data. Contrary to such researchers Dreyfus posits that, even where we are able to make explicit our perceptions of certain objects, any such fact is itself contextualized by its particular human situation: “Even a chair is not understandable in terms of any set of facts or ‘elements of knowledge.’ To recognize an object as a chair, for example, means to understand its relation to other objects and to human beings. This involves a whole context of human activity of which the shape of our body, the institution of furniture, the inevitability of fatigue, constitute only a small part.”[13] Moreover, this situation cannot itself be reduced to isolated, context-free facts; it is colored by influences from the preceding situation, so that we build up associations and interpretations over time.

For a computer, this learning-through-time model presents a problem. If data can only be interpreted according to a situation, and if that situation relies for its meaning on the previous situation, then it seems to lead to an infinite regress. At some point a programmer has to decide what information to give to a computer to begin with, and this will be based on the programmer’s own human situation; it will not arise naturally from the computer’s “consciousness.” In humans, this paradox is avoided by the fact that we are, in Dreyfus’ words, “wired genetically as babies” to recognize certain stimuli as positive and nurturing, and others as harmful. This appeal to genetics provides a powerful argument for the unique nature of human consciousness.

This is a fundamental problem facing some of the technologies predicted by the 5GW transhumanist model, and by the Archeofuturist model. The development of advanced bio-engineering, genetic manipulation and post-evolutionary technologies will be limited by the fact that human consciousness is not replicable. Its functionality is not reducible to discrete bits of information. The sophistication of human consciousness comes from the fact that it has been developed and improved upon over inconceivably long periods of time, through genetic evolution. This process of evolution has developed certain survival mechanisms that have become purely instinctual over time, so that they now appear to be natural, innate qualities. These instinctual qualities are not marginal accretions that can be input into a computer program. They are the foundational qualities on which consciousness has been built over millennia of millennia. While it is possibly to initiate certain genetic developments through eugenics or miscegenation, for example, and while computer programs can imitate evolutionary pressures, these are not the same thing as evolution itself. Evolution is not concerned with innovation for its own sake, nor for the sake of man, but with the survival of the gene. The survival benefits of any organism can only be tested through time; there can be no short cut.

Asymmetric Warfare Against Technology

Regardless of the considerations given above, effective political action in the future will not be dependent upon advanced technologies. A distinguishing characteristic of the 4GW scenario is asymmetric warfare. The 9/11 hijackers used small knives to disrupt the functioning of the world’s leading superpower in profound ways that are still being felt more than a decade later. In the 5GW model such asymmetry is still a factor; if anything its effects will be exacerbated.

The oil-rich Niger Delta has been the scene of perhaps the most successful 5GW campaign of the last decade. Henry Okah has been referred to as “one of the most important people alive today, a brilliant innovator in warfare. A true global guerrilla.”[14] He is the mastermind behind the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND), an organisation dedicated to retaining a greater share of the oil wealth for Nigerians. In furtherance of this aim MEND have sabotaged oil fields, siphoned off oil, and taken oil workers hostage. These actions are all intended to make it difficult for Shell to continue its oil operations in the Delta. MEND have managed to curtail $29 billion of oil production by Shell. The financing of MEND is minuscule in comparison, as it operates as a 5GW actor. Mercenaries are hired via text messaging for specific jobs, so the membership is nebulous. The publicity for MEND’s attacks is generated through e-mails to news outlets claiming responsibility; the organisation itself remains invisible. This type of system-disruption is easily copied by sympathetic followers, so the arrest of Okah in 2008 did not lead to the demise of MEND. Instead, Okah has provided a model of 5GW that enables otherwise unconnected groups to carry out actions in the name of MEND.

This type of asymmetric 5GW warfare does not depend upon highly advanced, futuristic technologies for its success. While some operations, such as the Conficker and Stuxnet worms, will utilize highly technical means, others will require no more than mobile phones, or e-mail. Or even the old fashioned techniques of sea piracy which are already beginning to make some oil fields prohibitively expensive to protect. It should also be noted that although cyber warfare utilizes cutting edge computer programming, its intention is to destroy existing technological systems. Large scale technically advanced societies come to rely on such technological systems for their survival. Energy grids, social security payments, food distribution networks, are all highly vulnerable systems. In fact, in a modern, technologically dependent society the vulnerability becomes ubiquitous.

The successful 5GW operative will not be dependent upon super-empowered technologies, as these technologies will be subject to similar vulnerabilities as existing ones. Instead, he will be a genuinely super-empowered individual, motivated by deep, archaic loyalties such as Islam or nationalism. While he will be willing to utilise any technologies to his own advantage he cannot afford the visibility that would be inherent in dependency on large scale systems.

A Return to Limits

The post-human technologies that Faye is expecting will not be sustainable, but it should be borne in mind that many people do in fact expect science to continue progressing towards more and more sophisticated solutions. The idea of AI, for example, is something that most people regard as a matter of “when,” not “if.” The successful 5GW operative will not expect technology to deliver his solutions but he will recognize that most people are still slaves to such dependency. As the convergence of catastrophes plays out people will become more dependent on failing governments and unsustainable technologies at exactly the time when they should be becoming more self-sufficient.

The desire to find short cuts and to invent technical solutions is indicative of the impatience of the present age. The utilization of fossil fuels that led to the creation of industrialized societies benefited from the fact that such fuels had accrued their energy potential over millions of years:

All the fossil fuels, in energy terms, are stored sunlight heaped up over geologic time. . . No human being had to put a single day’s work or a single gallon of diesel fuel into growing the tree ferns of the Carboniferous period that turned into Pennsylvanian coal beds, nor did they have to raise the Jurassic sea life that became the oil fields of Texas. The second half of Nature’s energy subsidy took the form of extreme temperatures and pressures deep within the Earth. Over millions of years more, these transformed the remains of prehistoric living things into coal, oil, and natural gas and, in the process, concentrated the energy they originally contained into a tiny fraction of their original size.[15]

These resources, if they had been developed in more sustainable ways, and used to serve more balanced societies, could have benefited us for many years to come, but we have squandered them with our impatience and greed. In an analogous way, we are highly impatient with the technologies that we wish to invent. We are unsatisfied with the intelligence that has been bequeathed to us through millions of years of evolution and we wish to create a copy of it, as soon as possible.

What has been lost is a certain sense of balance, and a knowledge of natural limitations. Ambitious innovation is certainly a virtue but when it relies upon the false premise of unlimited natural resources, or the belief that we can short cut evolution by recreating intelligence at will, it becomes the vice of hubris. Undoubtedly, we will face challenges in the future provoked by advanced technologies. And, equally certain, as we run out of natural resources, governments will increasingly ring fence such resources for themselves to continue with unsustainable military research programs. In this sense, Faye’s two tier system will come to pass although it is unlikely to operate in the interests of European man. Instead, there will be a return to more sustainable, more rural, societies that will have to learn once again what it means to live in accord with natural limitations, and that will be forced to become reacquainted with the slow passing of the seasons.

Notes

1. William S. Lind, Colonel Keith Nightengale, et al., “The Changing Face of War: Into the Fourth Generation,” Marine Corps Gazette, 1989, pp. 22-26.

2. Fraser Nelson, “China’s Spy Network,” The Spectator, December 4, 2010, pp. 12-13.

3. Mark Bowden, Worm: The First Digital War (New York: Grove Press, 2011).

4. Daniel McIntosh, “Transhuman Politics and Fifth Generation War,” in Daniel H. Abbott, ed., The Handbook of 5GW: A Fifth Generation of War? (Nimble Books, 2010).

5. Guillaume Faye, Archeofuturism (London: Arktos, 2010), pp. 109-10.

6. Ibid., p.146.

7. John Michael Greer, The Long Descent: A User’s Guide to the End of the Industrial Age (New Society Publishers, 2008), pp. 18-19.

8. Ibid., pp. 82-83.

9. Faye, Archeofuturism, pp. 59-66.

10. Hubert Dreyfus, Alchemy and AI (RAND Corporation, 1965).

11. See, e.g., Hubert Dreyfus, What Computers Still Can’t Do: A Critique of Artificial Reason (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1992).

12. Ibid., p. 206.

13. Ibid., p. 210.

14. John Robb, “Henry Okah,” Global Guerrillas, February 28, 2008, http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2008/02/henry-okah.html [2]

15. Greer, The Long Descent, p. 19.

An earlier version of this essay appeared in Le Salon: Journal du Cercle de la Rose Noir, Volume 1 (London: Black Front Press, 2012).

 


Article printed from Counter-Currents Publishing: http://www.counter-currents.com

URL to article: http://www.counter-currents.com/2014/05/posthuman-prospects/

URLs in this post:

[1] Image: http://www.counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/chirico.jpg

[2] http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2008/02/henry-okah.html: http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2008/02/henry-okah.html

Western Cracks appear on Ukraine and Russian Sanctions

Ukraine Russia and USA.jpg

Author: Jim

Western Cracks appear on Ukraine and Russian Sanctions

Ex: http://journal-neo.org

“Because the United States itself has a long record of supporting terrorists and using terrorist tactics, the slogans of today’s war on terrorism merely makes the United States look hypocritical to the rest of the world.”-

Professor William Odom, formerly President Reagan’s NSA Director

We had hoped as time went by that the huffing and puffing of Western arm chair political generals would be seen for what it was by a growing number of their constituents… an attempt to distract attention from domestic problems by using Russia and Putin as a Mexican piñata.

Here in the US our war-loving NeoCons drooled over the opportunity to do some Russia bashing. But to everyone’s surprise, they had support across the aisle, as Democrats felt they needed to make a show of supporting “their” president. Such displays are considered an expected courtesy on Capitol Hill.

We all know they could not care less what the people felt, despite having polled in strong numbers they did not want American involvement. But we know that meant no American troops. So the war strategy has morphed into a primarily financial one, with the US the number one sanctions gunslinger on the planet.

And for fighting troops, after Syria, the US is quite experienced in using proxy troops now, including the terrorist kind. Unfortunately there has been no public political blow back, no accepting of responsibility by politicians or their parties for the continued slaughter in Syria. That has set the stage for encouraging them to use the same scenario on Ukraine.

The unsaid threat is, “Either do what we want or watch your country be destroyed in endless civil war, with the help of all the outside mercenaries and hired killers we can find on the cheap.” The wild-card game of chicken for the West would be their taking the risk of having their loans default, while the Russians would suffer big loses in their business holdings in East Ukraine, not to mention the uncertainties of continued gas flow through the Westward pipelines.

The people will have their first major political input with the European Parliamentary elections just around the corner. I had been willing to place a bet that the business community in Europe would not be too excited about sanctions wars with Russia. They have been struggling during these years of recession and austerity, especially with regard to declining exports.

The main sanctions counterattack came on two fronts, in Germany of all places. Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said, “We must avoid falling into an automatic [sanctions] mode, which leads only to a dead end and leaves no more policy options.”

Ex-chancellors Gerhard Schroeder and Helmut Schmidt denounced the silly game of playing sanctions-roulette, with the 95-year-old Schmidt accusing the EU leaders of megalomania for attempting to annex Ukraine. EU leaders have been blind to the risks of triggering the mess we have now with Ukraine on the edge of complete civil war and the breakup of the country. Merkel was publicly booed at a political event with her party this week, all of this evidence that the pendulum is swinging back.

Next, the German Chamber of Commerce lead the way for the business community in their opposition to any more sanction threats as just plain crazy because Russia is a major export market for many German companies. The number of jobs directly involving Russian exports came in at 300,000. But left out was the important aspect that those export earnings play a key roll in helping keep Germany’s balance of payments in line. These exports to Russia pay for the energy imports.

I had been watching this happen like a slow-motion train wreck. While the Western buffoons were playing Puff the Magic Dragon with their Russo-phobia, Putin and Lavrov, as always, were not over reacting. But they were sending out signals that they were doing what anyone else would have to do when being threatened with escalating sanctions. They began a crash sourcing program to see where they could replace the imports they needed. But that got no traction for the US State Department dummies, or Mr. Hague in Britain. The West was still in denial.

A week went by and more hints came with the announcement that the Russian defense community must plan on domestically producing all the critical things they need to avoid being held up like a stagecoach by the sanctions bandits. The bell went ding, ding, ding. Those Russian export markets for Western companies were now going to be a PERMANENT loss even if the Ukrainian crisis cools off. So the business community felt they were being ill-used by their politicians, which they were.

Now we come to another dangerous area on the Western regime-change follies. When they have miscalculated and created a big mess, what to do they do? They blame the other guy, because taking the blame for screw ups is considered an idiot’s move. Their thinking is, “No one else ever takes the blame, so why should I?” And in that regard, they do have a point.

But that makes them very dangerous, and here is some proof. The insurgents have been losing in Syria, totally rejected by the Syrian people who hate them for the carnage they have brought upon the country. Enter stage-left last week the Friends of Syria making a big show in giving the Syrian National Council more support to keep fighting, when if they had any sense, they should be pressuring them to negotiate the best deal they can. You can’t really call this poor leadership, because it’s no leadership at all.

I am sharing this in detail as I foresee the West could be stupid enough to do a Syria number on Ukraine. You already have the Right Sector head, Dimitry Yarosh, stating during a presidential campaign debate that guerrilla warfare would be coming soon to the East Ukraine break-away regions.

Kiev’s Interior Minister has already acknowledged that foreign mercenaries are in the country and have been deployed. With all the stories we have heard of Kiev having to beg for soap and underwear for their troops, we must assume that some foreign country has militarily intervened by paying for the mercenaries.

The only grownup actions we saw from the West this week came from the IMF. It warned Kiev coup-meisters that if they could not come to some arrangement to prevent the East from breaking away, the debt rollover commitment would have to be “reviewed”, since any hope for economic improvement would go up in smoke. The threat did not seem to bother Dimitry Yarosh very much, as he was also threatening to blow up the gas pipelines. This guy could become the poster boy against future coups.

We see no visible pressure from the US or EU to reign in Kiev’s military operations which is a signal that they have Western approval. We had general artillery shelling of Kramatorsk today, something that would not have been done without authorization from Kiev. The new Donestk interim government says it will not talk to Kiev while its troops are attacking — a quite reasonable position.

This will just harden positions even further and make any settlement later much more difficult. I have been studying the photos closely and the Eastern self-defense people are well armed now with light weapons. You can see that army veterans are their core defense troops, and they have layered ambush positions along all the lines of approach. They have anti-armor weapons, too, although they have used them sparingly.

We got the first reports today of Ukrainian soldiers going over to the East, then being recaptured and executed. If Kiev engages in that, or their nationalist killers do, I can tell you that will put a military coup on the front burner. No professional army is going watch a bunch of cheap politicians and their thugs start executing their soldiers.

Resupply problems would be a major deterrent for that, but we don’t know if Kiev can resupply them anyway. All the army has to do is make a deal with the Russians to watch the border for them and then redeploy to confront the Kiev and Right Sector troop units, and Kiev’s “anti-terrorist” operation will be over.

If the army field grade leaders are smart, they will realize they can stop the killing. And we learned today than their rear area would be protected, as the Kharkov region has bowed out of the Kiev elections and will be holding their own referendum. You can assume they are mobilizing their army for defense at the same time. The three regions are contiguous, with their backs to the Russian border and interior lines of communication between them.

If they reached that point the next trip-wire would be if Kiev would use its attack helicopters and fighter bombers against ground forces in defensive positions. If that happened, then all bets are off, as the Russians might send in air defense units. I can’t see them sitting back and watching Russians being bombed while in defense positions.

Lavrov drew that red line, of protecting Russian citizens if attacked as they were in Georgia, and large numbers of people in East Ukraine are. We hope that it does not get worse, before it gets better.

Jim W. Dean, managing editor for Veteran Today, producer/host of Heritage TV Atlanta, specially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Political Theology of Juan Donoso Cortés

Political Theology of Juan Donoso Cortés

by Jacek Bartyzel

es0026a.jpgThe term “political theology” has never been a more adequate definition of any corpus of thought[1] created by a philosopher, than when applied to the work of Spanish traditionalist Juan Donoso Cortés (1809-1853), who affected the social teachings of the Catholic Church (in statements of Blessed Pope Pius IX) in such a material way, that contemporary Catholic writer Rino Cammilleri is fully justified to call Cortés “the Father of the Syllabus”[2]. In the opinion of the author of Ensayo sobre el catolicismo, el liberalismo y el socialismo, considerados en sus principios fundamentales, theology is always at the foundation of any social issue, because if everything comes from God and if God is in everything, only theology is the skill which presents the final cause of all things; this explains why the knowledge of truth decreases in the world proportionately to the decreasing faith[3]. The sense of dependence of the fate of peoples on God’s providence is common to all eras and civilisations, and an opposite opinion – negating providentialism – should rather be considered as “eccentric.” A notable exception to this rule and an instance of theological “deafness” existing in the times of old was for Donoso the character of Pilate, who in the opinion of the theologian had to yield to Caiaphas precisely because he failed to understand the relationship between theology and politics. If Pilate had a “lay” concept of politics combined with brilliant mind, he would be only able to become instantly aware that he is not dealing with a political rebel who may pose direct threat to the state; however, as he did not consider Jesus guilty from the political point of view, he was also unable even to presuppose that the new religion might change also the world of politics.

Donoso Cortés finds proofs of the dependence of political concepts on religious ones in the whole history of civilised communities, starting from the antinomy between the ancient East and West, represented by ancient Greece. Pantheism common in oriental despotic systems, condemned peoples to eternal slavery in huge but temporarily founded empires, while Greek polytheism created crowded republics of humans and gods, where gods – often delinquent, quarrelling and adulterous – were often human enough, while humans -heroic and talented in philosophy – carried divine characteristics. In contrast to the monotonously static character of Eastern civilisations, the Hellenic world borne various traces of beauty and movement, for which, however, it paid with political chaos and comminution. However, the synthesis of Eastern power and Greek dynamics combined in Rome, two-faced as Janus[4] , which disciplined all gods, forcing them to enter the Capitol, and also – by enclosing nations in its Empire – performed the providential work, preparing the world for evangelisation.

In the apologetic “prodrome” of his political theology, Donoso Cortés emphasises the fact that Christianity has transformed both the lay community (primarily the family in which the father – retaining the respect and love of his children – ceased to be a tyrant for his enslaved wife and children) and also the political community, transforming the pagan domination by force into the concept of power as public service to God: The kings began to rule in the name of God; nations began to obey their princes as guardians of power coming from God[5]. And, which is most important, by depriving the earthly rulers from the attribute of divinity, which they did not deserve, and on the other hand, by providing the divine authority to their rule, Christianity has once and for ever erased any excuse for both political manifestations of the sin of pride– the  t y r a n n y  of rulers and the  r e v o l u t i o n  of the subjects: By adding divine quality to the authority, Christianism made obedience holy, and the act of making authority divine and obedience holy condemned pride in its two most dire manifestations which are the spirit of tyranny and the spirit of rebellion. Tyranny and rebellion are impossible in a truly Christian community[6].

It is obvious for Donoso Cortés that Christianity would not be able to exert such beneficial influence, if the Catholic Church had not been an institution of supernatural origin, established by the God – Man himself, by Jesus Christ. Without the supernatural element, without the action of grace, one can perceive in civilisations only[7] the results and not causes, only elements which make up civilisations and not their sources. However, the Christian community differs absolutely from the ancient community, even with respect to politics and society, for the fact that in the ancient community people generally followed instincts and inclinations of the fallen nature, while (…) people in the Christian community, generally, more or less, died in their own nature and they follow, more or less the supernatural and divine attraction of grace[8]. This not only accounts for the superiority of political institutions of the Christian community over pagan ones, but also supports a thesis which is anthropological and soteriological at the same time and says that a pagan man is a figure belonging to pagan, disinherited humanity, while a Christian man is a figure of redeemed humanity. This thesis is simultaneously compatible with an ecclesiological thesis which says that the Church presents human nature as sinless, in the form in which it left God’s hands, full of primeval justice and sanctifying grace[9].

The apologetics of Donoso Cortés says in conclusion that the Church is not (as Guizot assumed) just not one of the many elements of European civilisation, but it is the very civilisation, as the Church gave this civilisation unity, which became its essence. European civilisation is simply Catholic civilisation. The Christianity (“the catholic dogma”) is a complete system of a civilisation, which embraces everything – the teaching about God, the teaching about the Universe and the teaching about man: Catholicism got the whole man in its possession, with his body, his heart and his soul[10].

Donoso Cortés expressed his conviction that political theology provides a sufficient explanation for everything, in a sentence which echoes with the opinions of Tertullian, the most anti-philosophic apologist of ancient Church: A child, whose mouth is feeding on the nourishing milk of Catholic theology, knows more about the most vital issues of life than Aristotle and Plato, the two stars of Athens[11]. This is not a coincidence if one considers that Donoso used to describe the lay, naturalist and rationalist Enlightenment trends against which he fought, as “philosophism”. However, the most vital consequence of such approach seems to be no need for a separate political theology which would be autonomous against the whole corpus of theology as such. Characteristically enough, it was Catholicism and not conservatism which was evoked in opposition to liberalism and socialism in the whole dissertation by Donoso, and not only in the heading of his opus magnum – and not only due to the fact that conservatism in Spain means the right wing of the liberal camp (moderados, or „the moderate”), and that the author of Ensayo… used to be one of the leaders of this camp before his spiritual transformation and that he radically disassociated himself from this camp after this transformation. If Donoso wished to illustrate the opposition of political doctrines, he could have used the term “traditionalism” which in Spain is commonly identified with the orthodox Catholic counter-revolutionary camp. However, the term „traditionalism” never appears in his work, which proves that it was not necessary for Donoso’s concepts; the fact that the author consistently follows the line of thought confronting Catholicism with liberalism and socialism proves that he aimed at counterpoising religion (and inherent political theology) against ideologies which are understood as “anti-theologies” or “false theologies.” This phenomenon discloses political  a u g u s t i n i s m  of Donoso, for whom the political authority is not vital, and it is justified only “for the reason of sin” (ratione peccati) of man, which is proved also by the theory of “two horse bits” explained elsewhere[12]; such bits are to curb sinful inclinations of humans. The first, spiritual bit is to appeal to conscience, while the other, a political one, is based on compulsion. The other bit is still necessary, in spite of the Redemption on the Golgotha as the Sacrifice of the Cross redeemed only the original sin but it did not erase the option of man’s continuing inclination towards the evil. For this reason, although the Good News has excluded compulsion as the sole option to be used, the political power must continue its existence to prevent depravation; what is more, its role and the choice of the tools of compulsion must grow, as the religion and morality are gradually weakening since the disruption of the medieval Christianitas. When the quicksilver on the “religious thermometer” is falling dramatically, the rise of quicksilver on the “political thermometer” seems to be the only means to prevent total fall and self-erasure of people.

Another Augustinian aspect of the political theology of Donoso Cortés is the fact, that it focuses on discussing the four cardinal issues of Christian theodicy in which the Bishop of Hippo was also considerably involved: 1º the secret of free will and human freedom; 2º the question on the origin of evil (unde malum?); 3º the secret of the heredity of the original sin and joint guilt and punishment; 4º the sense of blood and propitiatory offering.

The Theory of Freedom

369DonosoESD.jpgDonoso Cortés discusses three aspects of freedom, seen as perfection, as means to achieve perfection and in the perspective of historia sacra – its history in Heavens and on earth, together with implications of its abuse by angels and humans.

First, the author rejects common opinion that the essence of free will is the option to choose between good and evil (resp. „freedom of choice”). Such situation would have two implications, which Donoso sees as irrational: firstly, the more perfect is man, the less freedom he has (gradual perfection excludes the attraction of evil), and hence a contradiction between perfection and freedom and secondly, the God would not be free as God cannot have two contradictory tendencies – towards good and towards evil. In the positive sense, freedom does not consist in the option to choose between the good and the evil, but it is simply the property of the rational will[13]. However, one must differentiate between perfect and partial freedom. The first one is identical with the perfection of mind and will and can be found only in God, and hence only God is perfectly free. Man, however, is imperfect, as every other created being and he is only relatively free. Which is more, the level of freedom available for man is directly proportionate to the level of his obedience towards the Maker: man grows in freedom when loves God and shows due respect to the God’s law, and when man departs from God and condemns God’s law, he falls under the rule of Satan and becomes his slave. This is the not only a crystallisation of Donoso’s concept of truth but also of his understanding of authority; freedom consists in the obedience to the authority of the Heavenly Ruler, while slavery is the obedience to the devilish “appropriator”. The link between the natural and supernatural order, identified by political theology, allows to determine by analogy, the earthly submission to a ruler legitimate by his obedience to God and the submission to a godless usurper.

The option to follow the evil, which is the “freedom of choice” is factual, but it is a mistake to consider it to be the essence of freedom; this is just an affection resulting from the imperfection of human will, and therefore it is a week and dangerous freedom which threatens with falling into the slavery of the “appropriator.” Free will, understood as the possibility to turn good into evil, is such a great gift, that, from God’s perspective, it seems to be a kind of abdication and not grace[14], and therefore it is a secret which is terrifying by the fact that man, making use of it, is just continually spoiling the God’s work. Therefore, everybody who cares for achieving true freedom – the freedom from sin – should rather attempt to put this option to sleep or even to lose it wholly if possible, which can be achieved only with the assistance of grace. Without grace, also resulting from acts, one can do nothing – one can only get lost. Grace which gives freedom from sin does not contradict freedom itself because it needs human participation in order to operate. According to fundamental theology, man is granted the grace sufficient to move the will by delicate pull; if man follows this, his will unites with God’s will and in this way the sufficient grace becomes effective. In the light of the above, the freedom of human will understood as the means leading to perfection is, the most wondrous of God’s wonders[15], as the man may resist God and get his dire victory while, in spite of this, God remains the winner and man remains the loser[16], losing his redemption. However, as long as the great theatre of the world[17] still stages the giant struggle between the “Two Cities” – Civitas Dei and the civitas terrena ruled by the Prince of This World, between the Divine and the Human Hercules, every man, consciously or unconsciously serves and fights in one of the armies and everybody will have to participate in the defeat or in the victory[18]of theMilitary Church (Ecclesia militans). The fight will cease in eternity, in the homeland of the righteous – the citizens of Ecclesia triumphans.

In the soteriological aspect, the weakness of human will is the “sheet anchor” for man, which explains the comparison of human and angelic condition. Angels were placed on the top of hierarchy of created beings, and received from the God a greater scope of freedom, which proved to have irrevocably disastrous effect on the angels which rebelled. Angels, more perfect than men, are granted a once-off act of choice only, so the fall of rebel angels was both immediate and the final, and their condemnation allowed no appeal. Man, weaker from angels with respect to his will and his mind, had for this very reason retained the chance for his redemption and the hope to be saved. The decisive damnation can be “earned” by man only when, the human offence, by repetition, reaches the dimension of the angelic offence[19].

Therefore, Donoso Cortés examines the question why God has not decided to “break” human freedom to save man, even against the “freedom of choice” which – as we know – is just an option for self-damnation? His answer allows to withdraw the suspicion of tendencies towards the Lutheran principle of justification sola gratia, as it emphasises the necessity of  m e r i t s  to be saved, as the lack of merits would be not adequate to the divine perfection. Redemption without merit would not be God’s goodness but His weakness, the effect without cause, something which we call on earth (…) a whim of a nervous woman[20].

The possibility of eternal damnation is only balanced by the possibility of redemption. The first one is God’s justice, the other – God’s grace. Donoso Cortés emphasises that the only consistent and logical option is either to accept or reject both options simultaneously as everything outside the common notion of “going to Hell” is not the true punishment, while everything outside “going to Heavens” is not the true reward: Cursing God for allowing the existence of Hell is the same as cursing God for creating Heaven. [21]

Freedom and Truth

Donoso Cortés’ theory of freedom incorporates one more vital motive, which is the discussion on the relationship of freedom and truth. Naturally, in his understanding, the Church is the depository of absolute truth, but such solution implies a very meaningful and painful paradox. The truth and beauty of the Catholic teaching do not by any means contribute to the popularity of the Church; the actual situation is just opposite: the world does not listen to this teaching and it crowds around the pulpits of error and carefully listens to wanton speeches by dirty sophists and miserable harlequins[22]. This gives rise to assumptions that the world is persecuting the Church not only because it forgot Its truth, holiness, the proofs of the divine mission and His miracles, but because the world abhors all these notions.

However if the Church, in spite of its losses and persecution, has survived two thousands years, where is the cause of its triumph, if not in the truth which it represents? The only cause is the supernatural force supporting the Church, the mysterious, supernatural right of grace and love. Donoso Cortés justifies this thesis with a paradoxical argument that Christ did not “win over the world” not with the truth, as Christ impersonates truth and the essence of that truth was already known in the Old Testament, but the people of the Old Covenant rejected the Impersonated Truth and crucified it on the Mount of Calvary: This is a dire lesson for those believing that truth, by its inherent force, may extend its reign and that the error cannot rule over the earth[23]. The Saviour won over the world, but not due to the fact that He is the world, but  i n  s p i t e  o f  t h e  t r u t h !

The truth, by itself, cannot triumph exactly because of the freedom of man, whose mind and will are dimmed by the fall of sin. A man, in the fallen state, becomes the enemy of truth which he treats as the “tyranny” of God and when he crucifies God, he thinks that he has killed his tyrant.

The most extensive explanation for the secret of wrong choices made by human will is found by Donoso Cortés on the Gospel of St. John: I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not; if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive. (J, V, 43) According to Cortés, these words prove the natural triumph of the false over the true, of the evil over the good[24]. The natural tendency of fallen will towards evil is confirmed by the people of Jerusalem choosing Barabbas and by the inclination which contemporary proletariat displays towards false socialist theology. The Nature is unable to choose truth; one needs grace and love in order to choose truth, as no man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him. (J, VI, 44) Simply speaking, the triumph of the Cross is incomprehensible, as the victory of Christianity requires constant, supernatural activity of the Holy Spirit.

The assumption that man in his (fallen) natural state is the enemy of truth and that his “free choices”, stripped from the support granted by grace, must always be wrong, has extremely weighty implications. This means, that freedom cannot be trusted and the “right of choice” is always destructive, both in the state and in the Church. In the former, when people despise of the monarchy by God’s grace and believe in their “natural” right to choose leaders following their will, there is no other hope for maintaining order, than establishing  d i c t a t o r s h i p  perceived in an “occasionalist” sense, as an analogon of a miracle performed by God which suspends the “ordinary” rights of nature, albeit also established by themselves; in such circumstances, the dictatorship also proves the implementation of the divine right of love.[25]. However, on the ecclesiastic plane, the pessimistic assessment of human nature, which perfectly harmonises with the “spirit of the Syllabus”, discloses at the same time a basic discrepancy between Donoso Cortés together with dictates of the Syllabus (and the whole body of the traditional teaching of the Church on the issue), and an optimistic thesis which has been advocated since Vaticanum II, saying that “the truth wins in no other way than by the power of the truth itself”. Adoption of such thesis results in the resignation from the postulate of a Catholic state and proclaims the right of every person to “religious freedom” expressed in the declaration Dignitatis humanae and condemned in the Syllabus[26]. The traditional teachings of the Magisterium include innumerable examples of the same thesis[27] which Donoso presented in Ensayo…, saying that the error has no “right” by itself and that there can be no “freedom for the error” which is as abhorrent as the error itself[28]. This implies that the Church has the right to judge errors which, according to Donoso, protects one against relativism, which is an unavoidable consequence of catalogues of “agreed and arbitrary truths[29]being made by humans, and also implies beneficial character of intolerance which saved the world from chaos, putting above any discussion the truths which are holy and original, which provide the very foundation for any debate; truths, which cannot be doubted even for a moment, for this might instantly shake the mind unsure of truth or error, for his immediately dims the bright mirror of human mind[30]. Only the Church has the holy privilege of useful and fruitful debate, similarly as only the faith incessantly delivers truth and truth incessantly delivers knowledge[31], while doubts may deliver only further doubts.

Where did Evil Come From?

sello_156217.jpgErroneous interpretations of the key issue of theodicy on how to reconcile the imperfection of free human will with divine justice and goodness result, in the opinion of Donoso Cortés, from the very erroneous definition of freedom. A mind permeated with such definition is unable to explain to itself why God keeps yielding to the erroneous human will and He allows rebellion and anarchy on Earth. Terrified by this concept, such mind must resort to Manicheism – either in its traditional ancient form which advocates the existence of two gods (or equivalent principles): of good and evil, or in its modern form identified by Donoso with atheist and anthropolatric socialism of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon. According to Donoso, any Manicheism is able to explain, in its own manner, the nature of fight and duality of the good and the evil but no Manicheism is able to explain the nature of peace and unity or convincingly prove any final victory, as this would require the annihilation of one or the other element, while any destruction of a putative substantial being is beyond comprehension. Only Catholicism provides a solution for this contradiction, as it explains everything by pointing out to an ontological difference between man and God which also serves as an explanation of the origin of evil, without the need to substantiate evil or to negate divine omnipotence or goodness[32].

God, as the absolute Good, is the creator of every good. Therefore it is not possible for the God to create evil, because, although God cannot put in the Creation everything which exists in there, (…) he cannot put there anything which does not exist in Himself, and no god exists in God[33]. On the other hand, God cannot place absolute good in anything, because this would imply the creation of another God. Therefore, God grants to all the creation only relative good, something of what exist in Him, but which is not Himself[34]. If God is the Maker of everything, then the whole creation is relatively good, including Satan and Hell. Satan, choosing to become the being which he is, that is the Evil, did not lose his angelic nature, which is good, as it was created by the God.

Although all the created beings are good, the evil exists in the world and it wreaks dire havoc there. In order to solve this riddle, one must clarify three issues: where does evil come from, what is evil and how finally it is a factor of general harmony.

Evil finds its beginning in the way in which man (and earlier, the fallen angels) used the freedom of will, which was given to him and which is commonly called the “freedom of choice” between the good and the evil, which should be more adequately and precisely called the freedom to unify with the good which exists independently from man, that is with God, or the freedom to depart from God and to negate Him by such departure and to turn towards Evil which is nothingness. Therefore, the occurrence of evil is the result of double negation: negation of the mind, which results in error (negation of truth) and negation of the will which results in evil (negation of good). Both negations are at the same time an absolute negation of God as the truth and the good are substantially the God, that is the same thing which is just discussed from two different points of view.

This negation, naturally enough, does no harm to God, but it introduces disharmony in his Creation. Before the rebellion of angels and the fall of man, everything in the Creation (including matter), gravitated towards God, the truth and the good, while those two metaphysical rebellions resulted in disorder which consists in separating things which the God intended to unite and by uniting things which the God wished to separate. In other words, the gravitation towards God has been changed by rebelling angels and fallen men into the revolutionary movement centred on themselves; both the Satan and the man turned themselves into their absolute and final goal. The price for this “emancipation” was, however dreadful; for Satan, it was final damnation, but the man also paid a lot; with a disintegration of his mental and physical powers. Human mind lost its rule over the will, the will lost its power over actions, the body renounced allegiance to the spirit and the spirit became enslaved by the body.

Therefore, Donoso Cortés affirms, using the mighty power of his fiery rhetoric, the Catholic philosophical thesis derived from St. Augustine which considers that good is identical with the being and that the evils is not metaphysical. The evil “is” the non-existence; it does not exist substantially, it exists only qualitatively, as a manner of being and not as a substance. Therefore, the expression “evil” does not evoke any other notion than the notion of disorder, as the evil is not a thing but just a disorderly manner of existence of things, which did not cease to be good in their substance[35]. Evil is only accidental and as such it cannot be the work of God, but it can be – and is – the work of Satan and man. In the light of the thesis of non-substantiality of evil, which according to Donoso is the only one which is not internally contradictory, both the Manichean theology of “two gods” and the resulting thesis on the constant struggle between God and man become unreasonable. Such struggle is impossible because the man – the maker of accidental and transitory evil – is not equal to God, and consequently, no true struggle may take place where the victory is not possible (for the disproportion of power) and it is not fore-judged (being constant).

Elaborating on the issue of the reconciliation of the possibility of man’s committing evil with the omnipotence of the providential God’s will, Donoso Cortés says that this “terrible freedom” of disrupting the harmony and beauty of the Creation would not have been given to man by God if the God had not been sure that He would be able to turn it into the tool of His plans and to stop the devastation. The point is, that the separation between the Maker and his Creation, which is real in one (moral) respect, becomes feigned in another (existential ties of dependence). Originally – before the rebellion and the fall – rational and free beings were linked with God by the power of His grace. They separated themselves through sin, breaking the node of grace (and hence actually proving their freedom), but when they depart from the God by the power of their will, they approach Him in some other way, because they either encounter His justice or they become the object of His grace. In order to explain this phenomenon, Donoso evokes the medieval metaphor (known, among others, to Dante) which depicts the Creation as a wheel and the God as its circumference on one hand and its centre on the other. Being the centre, God attracts things to Himself, and as the circumference, He encloses. Created beings either gravitate towards the Maker being the circle, or they depart from Him, but then they encounter Him being the circumference, so they always are under God’s hand, wherever they go[36]. If one characterises man as a being which introduces disorder into order, then the divine character of God consists also in the ability to extract order from disorder, changing the temporary separation into unbreakable unity. Whoever is not willing to unite with Him through eternal rewards, shall be united by eternal punishment. The end (goal) which every creature is to reach has been chosen by the God; the creature may chose only the way – either towards damnation or towards salvation.

Elaborate rhetoric antinomies of Donoso Cortés include also a justification for God’s approval for the man’s offence, because the God had “the Saviour of the World, to be used as a kind of reserve[37]; this thesis was one of the reasons for which the author of Ensayo…. has been accused of heresy by father Gaduel, editor of „L`Ami de la Religion”. However, it seems extremely doubtful (also according to the Holy Officium to which Donoso appealed) for this sentence, saying: Man sinned, because God decided to become man[38], to be justifiably interpreted as considering God to be the reason for Adam’s sin, as such causality is negated by subsequent words: Man wavered, because God has the power to support; man fell, because God has the power to uphold[39].

Ideologies which are Negations

The concept of evil as non-existence and the concept of falsity as non-truth is applied by Donoso Cortés to confront Catholicism with ideologies of liberalism and socialism. Their falsity appears there as the lack of ontological and epistemological positivism, resulting from the failure to understand nature and the origin of evil Both the liberal and the socialist concept of evil is too strikingly inadequate to the reality, as they seek evil in places where it does not dwell and overlook its significant manifestations. Liberals see evil in the sphere of political institutions inherited from the ancestors, which primarily embrace Christian monarchy, while socialists say that evil dwells in public institutions – mostly in the family and in private ownership. From the (superficial) point of view of temporary game of power between political parties, this difference seems to be a significant one which affects the public existence; the goals of liberals may seems relatively moderate (replacing traditional monarchy with parliamentary democracy, which actually gives power to the addicts of “debating”), while the intentions of socialists attack the very foundations of the community and evoke also the opposition of liberals. However, in the light of theology and philosophical anthropology, this difference seems diminished to a large extent, even to the point of becoming insignificant, as both these schools – silently or overtly – reject the Catholic dogma on the fall of creation and on the original sin affecting human nature. Both liberals and socialists see man as essentially good – not in the sense of a nature created as good, but always and absolutely, while the evil is always institutional ; the only difference is that both schools name different institutions. However, in any case this means re-ontologisation of the evil and in this sense one can talk about the „Manicheism” of both ideologies.

1093-vidas españolas s-xx_0033.jpg

A significant difference between liberalism and socialism concerns the degree to which they negate the truth concerning the origin of evil, advocated by Catholicism. Liberalism is inconsistent in this respect and, one may say, even timid: it is afraid to negate this truth in a resolute way and it regrets to renounce any principle (including this Catholic principle, which it only subjects to an “amputation” of all non-liberal notions, which actually make up the very essence of Catholicism). Liberalism praises political revolution and calls it liberating while it impugns social revolution, failing to notice that the former causes the latter: the balance between socialism and Catholicism sought by liberalism is absolutely impossible, and for this reason the (…) liberal school will finally have to abdicate, either in aid of socialists, or in aid of Catholics.[40].

The impotence of the “liberal school” is therefore caused by its lack of political theology and by its inability to consistently negate it; such negation is replaced by disputes, which are even assumedly barren and inconclusive. This school may rule only when the community is in decay; the moment of its domination is the transitory and volatile moment in which the world does not yet know whether to choose Barabbas or Jesus and when it wavers between dogmatic statement and total negation. At that moment, the community accepts the government of those, who are afraid to say: “I confirm” and those are equally afraid to say “I negate”so they always say “I differentiate”. The highest interests of this school consist in preventing the arrival of the day of resolute negations or the day of resolute confirmations. In order to prevent it, this school resorts to debating, which is the best way to the confusion of all concepts and to dissemination of scepticism. It understands very well that people, who constantly listen to sophists discussing for and against things, finally fail to know which is which and they ask whether it is true that the truth and the error, the sin and the virtue are opposite concepts or whether they rather are one and the same thing, just seen from different points of view?[41]. Liberalism, however, is condemned to defeat because the man has been created to act and the continuous debate does not agree with action, and therefore it is against human nature. Therefore a day is coming when the people, following their desires and feelings, shall crowd public squares and streets, resolutely choosing either Barabbas or Jesus and levelling the stand of sophists to the ground[42].

The greater “resoluteness” of socialism consists in the fact, that socialists draw two consistent conclusions from the hypothesis on the goodness of man: a conclusion on the perfection of man (which actually is deification of man) and the identification of evil with the God (or with the concept of God, which is the “threat to the conscience”). „The Golden Age” in socialist interpretation will flourish with the disappearance of faith in God, in the rule of mind over sense and the rule of governments over people; that is, when the brutal crowds will consider themselves as Gods, the law and the government[43]. Donoso Cortés sees this socialist system of the future as ideal despotism which combines pantheism of political, social and religious nature. This stands in express contrast with sociological individualism of Christianity which sees community as a group of humans obeying the same institutions and laws and living under their protection, while pantheists see community as an organism existing individually[44]. According to Donoso, this cardinal contradiction allows to perceive the logical consistency of Christian anthropology and the irrationality of socialist (collectivist) anthropology. If a community does not exist independently from people who are its members, then, naturally, a community can have no thing which did not originally exist in the individuals[45], and, logically enough, the evil and the good in a community originates from man and that it would be absurd to consider uprooting evil from a community without touching people in which the evil resides, being its source[46]. The concept of a holistically perceived community gives rise only to contradictions and unclear notions, which by themselves unmask socialism as a “charlatan” theory. It is not known, whether the evil in a community is substantial (in such situation, even an intention to destroy the existing social order would not be radical enough, as the full eradication of evil would be possible only after eradicating the community), or whether it is accidental; if the latter is true, what circumstances and reasons combined to give rise for this fatal coincidence? Unable to solve these contradictions, socialism leads to ascribe to man (a collective man) the name of the redeemer of community, and hence it advocates the same two secrets as Catholicism does (the secret of the origin of evil and the secret of redemption) but it only reverses them in a perverse way; the Catholicism says two simple and natural things: man is man and his doings are human while God is God and his doings are divine, then socialism says two things which are incomprehensible: that man undertakes and performs God’s works and the society performs acts appropriate to man[47]. With the consideration to the above, Donoso amends his earlier opinion on the logical advantage of socialism over liberalism, as socialism is “stronger” only by the way in which it advocates its issues, by its “theological” impetus, while the contents of the socialist doctrine is a monstrous conglomerate (…) of fantastic and false hypotheses[48].

Finally, if liberalism which emphasises its “neutral” lay character, is just an  a n t i – t h e o l o g y, then, according to Donoso Cortés, socialism is a  f a l s e  t h e o l o g y, which is just an awkward plagiarism of the Gospel, an irrational “half-Catholicism” which creates a new “God” of a collective man. however, basically both these ideologies shine with the “moonshine” of Christianity, which consists in undermining Catholicism to various degrees and in various places and in misinterpreting the World of God.: In spite of being schools which directly oppose Catholicism, that is schools which would resolutely negate all the catholic statements and all the principles, they are schools which just differ from Catholicism to a larger or smaller degree; they have borrowed from Catholicism everything which is just not a pure negation and they only live its life[49]. The author of Ensayo… is of the opinion that all heresiarchs, including political ones, share the common fate, as when they imagine that they live outside Catholicism, they actually live within, because Catholicism is just as the atmosphere of minds; socialists follow the same fate: after huge efforts aimed at the separation from Catholicism they have just reached the condition of being bad Catholics[50].

The Heredity of Sin

A theodicy would be incomplete if it failed to complement the answer to the question on the source and nature of evil with an explanation on the dogma of the heredity of original sin by all the generations. Donoso Cortés, who devoted the whole third chapter of his Ensayo… to discussing this issue, does not deny that this dogma in particular, being a dogma without which Catholicism would lose the reason for its existence – causes the highest “outrage” both for the purely natural justice and for the modern mentality, with its most expressive manifestations being the ideologies of liberalism and socialism. How can one be a sinner if he has not sinned, just at the moment of birth? On what grounds one may discuss the inheritance of Adam’s sin, which is the unavoidable consequence of that sin in the form of punishment, but without personal guilt? All this seems to fly in the face of all reason and the sense of the right, and to contradict the truth on the inexhaustible God’s grace advocated by the Christian religion. Instead, one might consider this dogma to be a borrowing from gloomy religions of ancient East, whose gods thrived on the suffering of victims and the sight of blood.

Although this question is usually posed on the ethical plane, the reply provided by Donoso Cortés transcends onto the ontological level, as he explains the putative contradiction between the absence of personal guilt and the heredity of sin and responsibility arising therefrom, with the duality of the existential structure of man. Our forefather Adam was at the same time an individual and mankind, and sin was committed before the separation of individual and mankind (by progeniture). Therefore, Adam sinned in both his natures: the collective and the individual one. Although the individual Adam died, the collective Adam lives on, and he has stored his sin in the course of life: the collective Adam and the human nature are the same thing; hence, human nature continues to be guilty, as it continues to be sinful[51]. Every man who comes to this world is a sinner, because he has human nature and human nature has been polluted: I sinned when I was Adam, both when mature, when I got the name which I carry, and before I came to the world. I was in Adam when he left the hands of God and Adam was in me when I left the womb of my mother; I am unable to separate myself from his person and unable to separate myself from his sin[52].

Every human being simultaneously upholds the individual element, which is its substantial personal unity, and an element which is common for the whole mankind. The first element, received by everyone from his parents, is just an accidental form of being; the other one, received (through Adam) from God , is the essence of every human being and this very fact is decisive for everyone’s participation in the sin. Individual sins are just “extras” added to the original sin which was at the same time one and common, exceptional and embracing nuclei of all sins. No man has been and will be able to sin individually in the same way as Adam: we just cover dirty spots with more dirty spots; only Adam soiled the snow-white purity[53].

Therefore one should note that the theory of existence of Donoso Cortés not only excludes idealistic ontologism, but on the other hand it also rejects nominalism, which denies the reality of the commoners (in this instance: the mankind). The result of the dogma of original sin and the rule of substantial unity of mankind is the dogma of the heaviness of the double responsibility of man (collective one concerning the original sin and the individual one concerning the sinful acts), which is the  s o l i d a r i t y  in sin. Only this solidarity gives to man his dignity, extending his life to cover the long course of times and spaces, and therefore, after a certain fashion, it gives rise to “mankind”: This word, meaningless for the ancients, only with the rise of Christianity began to express the substantial unity of human nature, the close kinship which unites all men in one family[54].

The heritage of guilt and punishment – and hence, without doubt, the suffering, should not be seen as evil, but only as good, available in the condition resulting from the irreversible fact of man’s depravity. If not for the punishment – which is in its essence a healing aid – the pollution would be irreversible and God would not have any means to reach man (to whom He gave freedom) with His grace. By rejecting punishment, we erase also the option of redemption. Punishment is just the very chance for being saved, denied to fallen angels, which ties a new bond between the Maker and the man. This punishment, although it still is relatively bad , being suffering, becomes the great benefit due to its purpose, which is the purification of the sinner: Because sin is common, the purification is also absolutely necessary for everyone; hence the suffering must also be common, if the whole mankind is to be purified in its mysterious waters[55].

Moreover, the dogma of solidarity also has its feedback aspect; solidarity remains in sin and in merit; if all people sinned with Adam, then all people were redeemed by Jesus Christ, whose merit is pointing towards them.

Social Implications of the Solidarity Dogma

According to Donoso Cortés, the concepts of heredity through blood and solidarity in sin explain all significant family, social and political institutions of mankind. If, for instance, a nation is well aware of the idea of hereditary transfer, its institutions will necessarily be based on heredity, and hence on stricte  a r i s t o c r a t i c, basis, moderated, however, by things which are common (in solidarity ) to all people in a society and hence are democratic, but only in this very sense. This also refers to the democracy of Athens, which was nothing else than an aristocracy, impudent and anxious, serviced by a crowd of slaves[56].

However, the concept of solidarity was disastrous for pagan communities due to its incompleteness; particular phenomena of solidarity (in family, community and politics) were not moderated by human solidarity which is comprehensible only in the light of the Christian dogma. This resulted in the tyranny of husbands and fathers in the family, the tyranny of state over communities and the permanent and common state of war between states, as well as a twisted concept of patriotism as declaring war against the whole mankind by a caste which constituted itself as a nation[57]. In modern times, all disorder is caused by the departure from the “Christian dogma” which has already been made known..

donoso.jpgBoth the instances of crippled solidarity in pre-Christian communities and the denial of solidarity in “post-Christian” communities[58] – are proofs of the lack of elementary balance in all doings of man which remain only human. They show the impotence and vanity of man as compared with the might and perfection of God, who is the only one to be able to uphold everything, not degrading anything; on the other hand man, upholding anything, degrades all things which are not upheld by him: in the sphere of religion, he cannot uphold himself without degrading God at the same time; he can neither uphold God without degrading himself; in politics he cannot give homage to freedom without offending authority at the same time; in social issues he either sacrifices community to individuals or individuals to the community[59]. Due to this one-sidedness, Donoso Cortés describes both liberals and socialists as parties of equilibrists.

Liberalism denies solidarity in the religious order, as both its ontological nominalism and its ethical meliorism do not allow it to accept the heredity of punishment and guilt. In turn, liberalism in the social order – as the follower of pagan egoism – denies the solidarity of nations, calling other nations strangers and it has not yet called them enemies only because it lacks enough energy[60].

Socialism goes even further, as it not only denies religious solidarity, heredity of punishment and guilt, but it also rejects the very punishment and guilt. The denial of the rule of heredity results therefore in the egalitarian principle of legal entitlement of everybody to all offices and all dignities[61] while egalitarianism gives ground to the denial of the diversity and solidarity of social groups which leads to the postulate of eradicating family and furthermore to the eradication of private ownership, with particular reference to land. This sequence of denials has a logic of its own, as one cannot understand ownership without some sort of proportion between the owner and his thing; while there is no proportion between land (Earth) and man[62]. The land does not die, and hence a mortal being cannot “own” it if one resigns from the notion of heredity. Purely individual ownership denies reason and the institution of ownership is absurd without the institution of family[63].

Socialism does not end with the denial of sin, guilt and punishment, but continuing the sequence of denials, it negates the unity and personality of man; in the result of rejecting tradition and historic continuity, socialism is unable to unite the present human existence with the past and the future, and all this leads it to unavoidable and total nihilism: Those, who tear themselves away from God go to nothingness and it cannot be the other way, as outside God there can be nothing but nothingness[64].

The Sense of Blood Offering

The “Cortesian” theodicy is crowned by the discussion on the necessity and sense of the propitiatory offering of blood – the most common procedure which is known almost to all religions, but is simultaneously the most mysterious and seemingly repulsive and irrational one.

The first blood offering was made by Abel – and, which is strange, God welcomed it just because it was the offering of blood, in contrast to the offering made by Cain, which was bloodless. It is even more puzzling that Abel, who spills blood for propitiatory offering, abhors the very fact of spilling blood and he dies because he refuses to shed blood of his envious brother, while Cain, who refuses a blood sacrifice to satisfy God, is fond of bloodshed to the point of killing his brother. This series of paradoxes leads Donoso Cortés to conclude that bloodshed functions as purification or erasure procedure, respectively to its purpose. Having discovered this, the fair Abel and Cain the fratricide become pre-figurations of the “Two States” which, according to St. Augustine, will struggle with each other until the end of history: Abel and Cain are the characters representing those two cities governed by opposite laws and by hostile lords; one of which is called the City of God and the other is the city of world and they are warring with each other not because one sheds blood and the other never does it, but because in the former, blood is shed by love while in the latter it is shed by vengeance; in the latter , blood is a gift to man to satisfy his passion, while in the former it is a gift to God for His propitiation[65].

Why everybody then sheds blood, in one way or another? According to Donoso, bloodshed is the inherent result of Adam’s misdeed. But, in the result of the promise of Redemption, by replacing the guilty person with the Redeemer, the death sentence has been suspended until His arrival. On the other hand, Abel, the heir of the death sentence and of the promise suspending it – is a memorial and symbolic offering. His offering is so perfect, that it expresses all the Catholic dogmas: as an offering in general, it constitutes an act of gratitude and respect for God; as a blood offering, it announces the dogma of original sin, heredity of guilt, punishment and solidarity, and also functions as reminder of the promise and the reciprocity of the Redeemer; finally, it symbolises the true offering of the Lamb without blemish.

However, in the course of generations, the original revelation, together with the message carried by Abel’s offering, became blurred, because simultaneously all men inherited the original sin, which corrupted human mind. The most deformed, cruel and fearful consequence of the misperception of the sense and purpose of blood offering was turning it actually into the act of offering human lives.

Where did pre-Christian peoples commit an error? This very fragment of discussion allows the reader experience the fine rhetoric by Donoso Cortés, his subtle reasoning and the sophisticated discourse. The discourse consists of a series of rhetoric questions (starting with anaphors) which are every time answered with a negative reply, except for the last question. Were the ancients wrong, thinking that divine justice needs propitiation? No, they were not. Were they wrong thinking that propitiation can be achieved only by bloodshed? No, they were not. Is it wrong that one person can offer enough propitiation to erase sins of everyone else? No, this is true. Or perhaps they were wrong thinking that the sacrificed one must be innocent? No, this was not false either. Their one and only error – which, however, had monstrous consequences – was the conviction that any man can serve as such (effective) offering. This one and only error, this single departure from the “Catholic dogma”, turned the world into the sea of blood[66]. This leads to the conclusion, which according to Donoso, remains ever true, that whenever people lose any Christian quality, wild and bloody barbarous behaviour is imminent.

donoso-cortes-juventud-politica-y-romanticismo-.jpgThe pagan error concerning offerings of blood was in fact only partial, because human blood is only unable to erase the original sin, while it can erase personal sins. This gives not only the justification but even the (…) necessity of death penalty[67], which was considered efficient by all civilisations, and those advocating its abolishment will soon see how expensive are such experiments, when blood immediately begins to seep through all its [community's – J.B.] pores[68]. Donoso Cortés saw the support of abolitionism as tolerance for crime which can be explained only by weakening religious spirit. It would be hard to say that his discussion on the subject lacks psychological sharpness and prophetic value: The criminal has undergone a gradual transformation in human eyes; those abhorred by our fathers are only pitied by their sons; the criminal has even lost his name – he became just a madman or a fool. Modern rationalists adorn crime with the name of misfortune; if this notion spreads, then some day communities will go under the rule of those misfortunate and then innocence will become crime. Liberal schools will be replaced with socialists with their teaching on holy revolutions and heroic crimes; and this will not be the end yet: the distant horizons are lit with even more bloody aurora. Perhaps some galley slaves are now writing a new gospel for the world. And if the world is forced to accept these new apostles and its gospel, it will truly deserve such fate[69].

Dignitatis humanae?

If human nature is so direly hurt by the fall of sin, and consequently the man may only add more errors to the first and main one, then how will it be possible to achieve at any time in the future the reinstatement of man’s unity with God? Donoso Cortés admits, that without solving this “dogma of dogmas” the whole Catholic structure (…) must fall down in ruin; as it has no vault[70]; in such instance, this structure would be just a philosophical system, less imperfect than the other ones.

This dilemma can be solved in one way only: by acknowledging the infinite  l o v e  of God for his Creation. Love is the only adequate description for God: God is love and love only. (…) We are all redeemed in love and by love[71]. The depth of human fall implies that the reconstruction of the order had to be achieved in no other way than through raising man to divinity which, in turn, had to be effected only by the Incorporation of the World, when God, becoming a Man, never ceased to be the God[72]. The Holiest Blood, spilt at the Calvary, not only erased Adam’s guilt but it also put the redeemed man in the state of merit.

This truly abysmal disproportion between the impotence of the fallen man and the immeasurable, freely granted God’s grace and love makes Donoso Cortés draw conclusions of utmost importance and far-reaching – in the opinion of some, too far-reaching – implications. The Secret of Incorporation is in his eyes, the only title of nobility for mankind, and therefore, whenever the author sees a man fallen by his own guilt and stripped from the sanctifying grace, the he is surprised by the restraint shown by rationalists in their contempt of man and he is unable to understand this moderation in contempt[73]. In this context, Donoso placed his most famous and most controversial statement: if God had not accepted human nature and had not elevated it to His level, leaving it with the shiny trace of His divinity, (…) man’s language would lace words to express human lowliness. As to myself, I can only say that if my God had not became a body in a woman’s womb and if He had not died on the cross for the whole mankind, then the reptile, which I trample with my foot, would have been less deserving of contempt in my eyes, than the whole mankind[74].

In other words, the common character of guilt does not only mean that grace is necessary for salvation and that no man can be considered to be “good by his nature”, which is unquestionable from the point of view of Catholic doctrine, but also refuses natural dignity to man in this state[75]. The author of Ensayo… admits openly: Out of all the statements of faith, my mind has the most difficulty to accept the teaching on the dignity of mankind – the dignity which I desire to understand and which I cannot see[76]. Various deeds of numerous famous people, extolled as heroic, seem to Donoso to be rather heroic misdeeds committed out of blind pride or mad ambition. It would be easy to understand what puzzlement or even horror would Donoso experience learning that Fathers of the Second Vatican Council promulgated the Declaration on Religious Freedom Dignitatis humanae, or perhaps he would think that the anthropological hyper-optimism which permeates this text proved that the heresy of naturalistic Pelagianism, contended by St. Augustine, has been reborn after 1500 years.

On the other hand, the ultra-pessimism of Donoso Cortés has exposed him to the accusations of antithetic heresy. His contemporary critic father Gaduel has discovered in Donoso’s statement on human dignity the condemned error of „baianism”, that is a thesis proposed by Michael Baius[77] saying that “all acts non resulting from faith are sinful” (omnia opera infidelium sunt peccata). However, this seems doubtful, as the author of Ensayo… does not offer any general statements, but discusses only a certain class of acts which are seen as good in the eyes of the “world”.

Father Gaduel is supported by Carl Schmitt, a Catholic, who, although fascinated by the decisionist thought of Donoso Cortés, considered the outbreaks of “monstrous pessimism” (and doubt in the chances to conquer evil, which “often is close to madness”[78]) demonstrated by the Spanish thinker to be a “radical form” of the concept of the original sin which departs from the “explanation adopted by the Council of Trent (…) which says, in contrast to Luther, that human nature has not been wholly polluted but it is only blurred by the original sin, has been hurt to a certain extent, but man still remains naturally able to do good”[79]. Schmitt says also that the way in which Donoso understands the original sin dogma “seems to overlap the Lutheran approach”, although he remarks that Donoso „would never accept Luther’s opinion that one should obey every authority”[80]. He also ventures to offer a peculiar defence of Donoso, emphasising that “he did not aim (…) at developing some new interpretation for the dogma, but to solve a religious and political conflict”, „ and therefore, when he says that man is evil by his nature, he primarily involves himself in polemics with atheist anarchism and its basic axiom – the natural goodness of man; his approach is hence polemic and not doctrinal”[81]. Such defence line would certainly never satisfy Donoso, who, truly enough, was very far away from the intention to develop a new interpretation for the dogma, but at the same time considered the compliance of his own opinions with the interpretation of the Magisterium as the issue of utmost importance.

The problem of whether Donoso Cortés has passed over the boundaries of orthodoxy at that moment, will probably remain controversial. One should remember however, that this would be only a “material” and not “formal” heresy, as Vatican has dismissed charges against him, and the defendant had in advance promised to submit himself to any decision.. In addition to that, even if Donoso was in fact too pessimistic about human nature, the same objection could be directed towards to late anti-Pelagian writings by St. Augustine, which has been disclosed by the controversy on Lutheranism and Jansenism[82].

The issues which, however, seem to remain beyond any essential controversy are the political implications of the anthropological pessimism of Donoso Cortés. This pessimism results in unambiguous rejection of a system based on the trust in human mind and goodness, which is the democratic system: I perceive mankind as an immense crowd crawling at the feet of the heroes whom it considers gods, while such heroes, similarly to gods, can only worship themselves. I could believe in the dignity of those dumb crowds only when God revealed it to me[83]. According to Donoso, any attempt at building a system based on the trust in human goodness and mind, is both heresy and madness. Only Jesus Christ can be the Master and the Focus of everything, both in the whole Creation and in a human state. Only in Him can reign the true peace and brotherhood, while the negation of his Social Kingdom brings only the division into parties, rebellions, wars and revolutions: the poor rise against the rich, the unhappy against the happy, the aristocrats against kings, lower classes against higher ones (…); the crowds of people, propelled by the fury of wild passions unite in their fight, just as streams swollen with rainstorm waters unite when falling into the abyss[84]. One of the best experts on Spanish traditionalist thought Frederick D. Wilhelmsen presents this ideal of the Catholic state in a nutshell, rightly saying that “the political authority in a well arranged society is just a manner of governing, which is always, although in diverse ways, subordinated to God. This means that authority, power and sovereignty can be united only in God”[85].

by Jacek Bartyzel

“Organon”, Instituto de Historia de Ciencia, Academia de Ciencias de Polonia, núm. 34/2006, págs. 195-216.



[1]   Actually, this concerns the ideas of Donoso Cortés expressed after his religious transformation in 1843 when  he changed from a moderate liberal and a “sentimental” Catholic into a determined reactionary  and ultramontanist;  I have discussed this evolution in more detail in my essay: Posępny markiz de Valdegamas. Życie, myśl i dziedzictwo Juana Donoso Cortésa, in „Umierać, ale powoli!”. O monarchistycznej i katolickiej kontrrewolucji w krajach romańskich 1815-2000, Kraków 2002, p. 351-387.  See also Carl Schmitt: „For [Donoso] Cortés, his postulate of radical spiritualism is already equivalent to taking the side of a specific theology of struggle against an opponent. (…) … systemic discussion shows his effort to present in  brief issues belonging to the good, old , dogmatic theology” – id., Teologia polityczna i inne pisma, selected, translated and prefaced by M. A. Cichocki, Kraków – Warszawa 2000, p. 80.

[2] See R. Cammilleri, Juan Donoso Cortés – Il Padre del Sillabo, Milano 1998, 2000².

[3] Jan Donoso Cortés, „Przegląd Katolicki” 1870, No.46, p. 724 [I quote all fragments from the Esej o katolicyzmie, liberalizmie i socjalizmie from  this text (signed in the recent issue as Ks. M. N.) printed therein in the years 1870-1871, which is an actual translation (certainly from French) covering approximately 80 % of the original text and  summarising the rest,  with additional comments and a biographic sketch. However, I introduce corrections to this translation in places which depart from the meaning of the original  or which sound too archaic (I have also modified spelling and punctuation), comparing it with contemporary Spanish edition of the text in Obras Completas, Madrid 1970, t. II, as well as with the French edition of Cortés'  works edited by his friend, Louisa Veuillot – Œuvres de Donoso Cortés, marquis de Valdegamas, Paris 1858, t. III: Essai sur le catholicisme, le libéralisme et le socialisme considérés dans leurs principes fondamentaux].

[4] Ibid., p. 726.

[5] Ibid., „Przegląd Katolicki” 1870, No.49, p. 770.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Similarly to  François Guizot, a writer highly appreciated by Donoso, who however pointed out to his weaknesses and limitations resulting  from his liberal, protestant and naturalist research perspective.

[8] Jan Donoso Cortés , „Przegląd Katolicki” 1870, No.52, p. 818.

[9] Ibid., „Przegląd Katolicki” 1870, No.49, p. 772.

[10]            Ibid., p. 769.

[11]            Ibid.

[12]            See  J. Donoso Cortés, Carta al director de la „Revue de Deux Mondes”, [in:] id., Obras Completas, Madrid 1970, t. II [Polish translation of the fragment in: „Przegląd Poznański” 1849, t. VIII, p. 438-440].

[13]            Jan Donoso Cortés „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No.1, p. 2.

[14]            Ibid., „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No.4, p. 49.

[15]            Ibid., „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No.1, p. 1.

[16]            Ibid.

[17]            It is not a coincidence that Spaniard Donoso Cortés presents this Augustinian opposition of the Two Cities using a Baroque metaphor of el Gran Teatro del Mundo created by his great fellow countryman Pedro Calderón de la Barca.

[18]            Jan Donoso Cortés, „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No.4, p. 51.

[19]            Ibid., „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No.1, p. 6.

[20]            Ibid., p. 7.

[21]            Ibid.

[22]            Ibid., „Przegląd Katolicki” 1870, No.52, p. 818.

[23]            Ibid., „Przegląd Katolicki” 1870, No.50, p. 786.

[24]            Ibid.

[25]            See  J. Donoso Cortés, Discurso sobre la dictadura, [w:] id., Obras Completas, Madrid 1970, t. II, p. 316 i n.

[26]            See the condemned thesis XV: „Every man has the right to accept and believe in a religion which he has considered true, guided by the light of his mind” – Syllabus errorum, in: Bl. Pius IX, Quanta cura. Syllabus errorum. (O błędach modernizmu), Warszawa 2002, p. 23.

[27]            For instance, Pius VII says that the  public law, sanctioning equal freedom for the truth and the error, commits a “tragic and always contemptible heresy” (Post tam diuturnitas), Gregory XVI – „ravings” (Mirari vos), bl. Pius IX – „monstrous error” (Qui pluribus), which is most harmful to the Church and the salvation of souls” (Quanta cura), something which “leads to easier depravation of morals and minds” and to the “popularisation of the principle of indifferentism” (Syllabus), Leon XIII – „the public crime” (Immortale Dei), something which is “equivalent to atheism” (ibid.) and „contrary to reason”; quoted from: F. K. Stehlin, W obronie Prawdy Katolickiej. Dzieło arcybiskupa Lefebvre, Warszawa 2001, p. 188-189.

[28]            Jan Donoso Cortés, „Przegląd Katolicki” 1870, No.49, p. 772.

[29]            Ibid., p. 773.

[30]            Ibid.

[31]            Ibid.

[32]            This explanation naturally repeats anti-Manichean polemics of St. Augustine, while the conclusions concerning modern (socialist) “Manicheisms” are his own.

[33]            Jan Donoso Cortés, „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No.4, p. 52.

[34]            Ibid.

[35]            Ibid., p. 54.

[36]            Ibid., „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No.5, p. 66.

[37]            Ibid., p. 67.

[38]            Ibid.

[39]            Ibid.

[40]            Ibid., „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No.12, p. 179.

[41]            Ibid., p. 177.

[42]            Ibid.

[43]            Ibid., p. 178.

[44]            Ibid., p. 181.

[45]            The defence of this point of view allows to identify Donoso also as an Aristotelian, as he considers individual substances also as real beings.

[46]            Jan Donoso Cortés, „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No.12, p. 181.

[47]            Ibid.

[48]            Ibid., p. 182.

[49]            Ibid.

[50]            Ibid., „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No.16, p. 245.

[51]            Ibid., „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No.13, p. 195.

[52]            Ibid.

[53]            Ibid., p. 196.

[54]            Ibid., „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No.15, p. 226.

[55]            Ibid., „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No.14, p. 210.

[56]            Ibid., „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No.15, p. 227.

[57]            Ibid.

[58]            This term has been, naturally unknown to the author of Ensayo…, but it stands with full compliance with his perception of the current condition of the society.

[59]            Jan Donoso Cortés, „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No.15, p. 226.

[60]            Ibid., p. 228 [Such characteristics of liberalism, which seems to fit rather nationalism, must seem surprising in modern times.  However, the concept of  Donoso can be defended, if one becomes aware that liberal doctrines and movements of his times - during the period of Romanticism - had a very strong national component, which in certain instances (Jacobinism, Italian Risorgimento), seemed just chauvinistic. Liberalism radically separated itself from romantic (proto)nationalism only at the end of the 19th century, a long time after the death of Donoso. It is also worth remembering that the concept of "holy egoism" (sacro egoismo), apparently   Machiavellian in its spirit, and signifying the superior directive of a national state, has been born in the very circle of the liberal destra storica].

[61]            Ibid.

[62]            Ibid., „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No.16, p. 241.

[63]            Ibid.

[64]            Ibid., p. 245.

[65]            Ibid., „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No.17, p. 259.

[66]            Ibid., p. 260.

[67]            Ibid., p. 261.

[68]            Ibid.

[69]            Ibid.

[70]            Ibid., „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No.18, p. 274.

[71]            Ibid., p. 275.

[72]            Donoso’s use of Hegelian concepts  such as “the synthetic union” of man with God (ibid., p. 277),  or the “unification of ideality  with reality”  in the Son of God (ibid., p. 289) is well understandable in the  historic context, although it introduces certain  conceptual chaos to   basically classical (mostly Augustinian and partly Thomistic) philosophical vocabulary of the Spanish theologian.

[73]            Jan Donoso Cortés, „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No.18, p. 275.

[74]            Ibid.

[75]            Terminology of traditional fundamental theology refers to the so-called “original dignity” with which man was supplied in the act of creation, in contrast to the “final dignity” which is inseparable form the strive towards truth, which has been reinstated in man by the act of Redemption.

[76]            Jan Donoso Cortés, „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No.18, p. 275.

[77]              For reference to the condemnation of 79 theses by Baius by  St. Pope Pius V in  1567 see.: Breviarium fidei. Wybór doktrynalnych wypowiedzi Kościoła, edit.. S. Głowa SJ and I. Bieda SJ, Poznań 1989, p. 203-205.

[78]            C. Schmitt, op. cit., p. 77.

[79]            Ibid., p. 76 [In fact, Schmitt does not give an accurate brief of the Trent teachings; certainly, none of the  canons of the Decree on the Original Sin, adopted at Session V in 1546 includes no statement that "man continues to be able to do good  out of his nature.” Fathers of the Tridentinum consciously refrained from solving all problems related to the nature of the original sin and its effects, but they only rejected the teachings of Protestant reformers by declaring that the grace granted at baptism „effaces the guilt of original sin"  and  remits everything which "has the true and proper character of sin" and not only "blurs it or makes it no more considered as guilt” (Can. 5), quot. from: Breviarium fidei..., p. 202].

[80]            Ibid.

[81]            Ibid.

[82]            See also.: L. Kołakowski, God Owes Us Nothing: A Brief Remark on Pascal’s Religion and on the Spirit of Jansenism, The University of Chicago Press 1995.

[83]            Juan Donoso Cortés, „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No. 18, p. 276 [This perception of democracy has been repeated in an equally sarcastic, albeit lay form, by H.L. Mencken saying that “democracy is the cult of jackals professed by asses”.]

[84]            Ibid., „Przegląd Katolicki” 1871, No. 19, p. 292.

[85]            F. D. Wilhelmsen, Donoso Cortés and the Meaning of Political Power, [in:] Christianity and Political Philosophy, Athens 1978, p. 139, quot. from: M. Ayuso, La cabeza de la Gorgona. De la «Hybris» del poder al totalitarismo moderno, Buenos Aires 2001, p. 24.

 

 

 

mercredi, 28 mai 2014

HAARP : les vraies causes des inondations en Serbie

inondations_serbie-560x400.jpg

HAARP : les vraies causes des inondations en Serbie

par Laurent Glauzy

Ex: http://anti-mythes.blogspot.com

« Le 18 mai 2014, après sa victoire aux Masters 1000 de Rome, le n° 2 mondial de tennis d’origine serbe, Novak Djokovic, s’est exprimé au sujet des inondations qui ravagent actuellement l’ex-Yougoslavie, ayant provoqué la mort de plus de trente personnes et contraint des dizaines de milliers de personnes à évacuer leur maison : « C’est une catastrophe avec des proportions bibliques, je ne comprends pas que les médias internationaux en parlent si peu. »
Et pour cause ! Le projet Haarp, arme de destruction massive et climatique entre les mains des Illuminati, serait bien, une fois de plus, à l’origine de ces catastrophes.
 
Dans son livre paru en 1970, Between Two Ages : America’s Role in the Technetronic Era (Entre deux âges : le rôle de l’Amérique dans l’ère technétronique), Zbigniew Brzezinski, un des principaux concepteurs de la politique étrangère américaine, directeur de la sécurité nationale du président Carter, mentionne : « La technologie mettra à la disposition des grandes nations des procédés qui leur permettront de mener des guerres furtives, dont seule une infime partie des forces de sécurité auront connaissance. Nous disposons de méthodes climatiques permettant de créer des sécheresses et des tempêtes, ce qui peut affaiblir les capacités d’un ennemi potentiel et le pousser à accepter nos conditions. Le contrôle de l’espace et du climat a remplacé Suez et Gibraltar comme enjeux stratégiques majeurs. »
Cette arme secrète abordé par Zbigniew Brzezinski correspond au projet Haarp, qui prépare notre monde à un Nouvel ordre mondial que les occultistes appellent l’« âge d’or » et à propos duquel Henry Kissinger, secrétaire d’État américain de 1973 à 1977 (du président Nixon), a déclaré : « Oui, beaucoup de gens mourront lorsque sera établi le nouvel ordre mondial. Mais ce sera un monde bien meilleur pour tous ceux qui survivront. » [Cf. Extraterrestres, les messagers du New Age ou Du mystère des Crop Circles au Mind Control : Quand la CIA et l’ufologie préparent un nouvel armement, 2009, p. 244.] Ces propos sont d’autant plus troublant lorsqu’ils émanent d’un homme d’origine juive allemande. Mais il est vrai que les satanistes ou les Illuminati sont au-dessus de toutes les religions.
Voilà l’avenir que nous prépare la secte supra-maçonnique, les survivants des Pike, Weishaupt : des holocaustes auxquels les populations de l’ancienne Yougoslavie, par des pluies diluviennes, ou de l’Afrique, par des périodes de sécheresses sans précédent, sont à présent confrontées.
Le docteur en science militaire Konstantin Sivkov, qui a travaillé pour l’État-major russe de 1995 à 2007, pense également que l’OTAN a utilisé cette arme climatique dans la massacre rituel contre la Yougoslavie, entre 1991 et 2001. Sirkov atteste qu’il est possible d’engendrer sur une zone limitée des pluies diluviennes comme déjà lors de la guerre du Vietnam, ou d’assurer un temps clair favorable au vol des avions de combat.
Des journalistes de grande renommée, qui ne se plient pas à la vulgate officielle, ont depuis longtemps ouvert les yeux sur les réalités de ce monde entre les mains de satanistes.
Ainsi, à propos du projet Haarp et des inondations de Serbie, John Robles, diplômé en russe de l’Université de Pennsylvanie, expose sur le site de la radio The Voice of Russia que « plusieurs de ses contacts en Serbie parlent d’un déluge sans précédent en lien avec le projet américain Haarp. » Il affirme notamment qu’un journaliste de la Pravda serbe a reçu des appels anonyme lui demandant de ne plus écrire sur ce programme d’arme climatique secret et sur une des stations mettant en œuvre le trait discret ELF System qui serait implantée à Barajevo. Cette base de localité proche de Belgrade, est munie d’antennes surdimensionnées.
On se souvient qu’en 2012, la Serbie menaçait non seulement de ne pas entrer dans l’Union européenne, mais d’accueillir de nouvelles enceintes militaires russes. En outre, sa population refuse les plans mondialistes au Kosovo. Qui plus est, le projet de gazoduc South Stream lancé par le président russe Vladimir Poutine devrait, fin 2015, alimenter l’Europe en gaz par un réseau qui traverse les Balkans, et plus particulièrement la Serbie, qui se trouvera au cœur du dispositif. Peut-être ces faits expliquent-ils les malheurs aussi imprévisibles qu’inégalés qui affligent précisément la Serbie ? »
Laurent Glauzy

Thai Coup Stings Western Meddlers

thcd'E.jpg

Author: Tony Cartalucci

Thai Coup Stings Western Meddlers

 ”America’s Pacific Century,” Foreign Policy magazine declared in an op-ed published by then US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The by-line would continue by saying, “the future of politics will be decided in Asia, not Afghanistan or Iraq, and the United States will be right at the center of the action.”  

And indeed, it has been in the middle of the action. With an army of deeply entrenched US-funded NGOs masquerading as human rights, press freedom, and pro-democracy advocates, the US has been busy subverting and attempting to overthrow indigenous institutions across Southeast Asia either in support of US proxy regimes already in power, or to pave way for disruptive “color revolutions” seeking to install them.  

The idea is to align Southeast Asia, along with India and Pakistan, as well as Korea and Japan, into three united fronts to encircle and contain China. Detailed first in the Vietnam-era “Pentagon Papers” and continuously updated over the following decades, confrontation with China is now the admitted purpose of the US “pivot.”   

For Thailand, the only Southeast Asian country to avoid European colonization, it has suffered over a decade of rule by a US-proxy regime installed for just this purpose – the regime of convicted criminal, fugitive, billionaire Thaksin Shinawatra – supported fully by an army of faux-rights advocates, with the full weight of the Western media behind it, and with the support of the US State Department itself.  

Beginning in the 1990′s Shinawatra was a Carlyle Group adviser. Upon taking office he would privatize Thailand’s petrochemical conglomerate, raise limits on foreign shares, and sell it off to Chevron and Hess. He would send Thai troops to Iraq in support of the US invasion and occupation, as well as allow the CIA to conduct their horrid “rendition” program on Thai soil. He would try, but fail to ramrod through a US-Thai free trade agreement, and has been supported either directly or indirectly by an army of Washington-based lobbying firms for years. 

A recent, peaceful military coup, the second aimed at uprooting Shinawatra’s regime, has been successfully carried out this week. Unlike the previous coup of 2006, this coup is proving to be far more effective and thorough with nearly every aspect of the ousted regime being exposed, detained, warrants arranged, and trials to follow. Assets are being traced and face possible judicial review for their subsequent freezing and/or seizure. In other words, the regime is being utterly uprooted, financially and politically.  

Thai Coup Stings US Meddlers the Most 

In the immediate aftermath of the coup, the US State Department, through a strongly worded condemnation penned by US Secretary of State John Kerry, claimed: 

I am disappointed by the decision of the Thai military to suspend the constitution and take control of the government after a long period of political turmoil, and there is no justification for this military coup. I am concerned by reports that senior political leaders of Thailand’s major parties have been detained and call for their release. I am also concerned that media outlets have been shut down. I urge the restoration of civilian government immediately, a return to democracy, and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, such as press freedoms. The path forward for Thailand must include early elections that reflect the will of the people.

While we value our long friendship with the Thai people, this act will have negative implications for the U.S.–Thai relationship, especially for our relationship with the Thai military. We are reviewing our military and other assistance and engagements, consistent with U.S. law.

The US would move to suspend ongoing military cooperation with the Thai military, canceling future training exercises, and suspend millions of dollars in aid. The Thai military would in turn, allegedly suspend broadcast of Western news channels, including US-based CNN and UK-based BBC.

The US has since made several demands, in a press statement on May 24, which read as follows: 

We are increasingly concerned about actions the military has taken, just a few days after it staged a coup. It has dissolved the Senate, detained a number of people, called in some academics and journalists, and continued to restrict the press. We again call on the military to release those detained for political reasons, end restrictions on the media, and move to restore civilian rule and democracy through elections.

In essences, the US is demanding the release of its proxy regime, the so-called “academics” and “journalists” it has groomed for years to support the regime, and restrictions placed on their propaganda bullhorns to be lifted so as to continue coordinating strife within Thailand.  

Joining the US State Department’s calls, are the various faux-NGOs inside of Thailand funded directly by the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED), including the Human Rights Lawyers Association, Cross Cultural Foundation, Union of Civil Liberties and the Enlawthai Foundation, and Prachatai. The Bangkok Post in an article titled, ”Anti-coup rally on streets, social media,” would report that the faux-NGOs demanded “the return to civilian rule” and for soldiers to “return to their barracks,” a verbatim repeat of both US demands and those of the ousted regime of Thaksin Shinawatra. 

The coup could not have come at a worse time for US global ambitions. With the recent signing of a historical 30 year, $400 billion natural gas contract between Russia and China with direct pipelines circumventing entirely the Pacific region the US has invested much in terms of stifling China’s growth, the loss of America’s client regime in Thailand weakens an already tenuous geopolitical agenda.

West Prepares to Strike Back 

The ousted regime of Thaksin Shinawatra, represented by Washington lobbyist Robert Amsterdam of Amsterdam & Partners, is organizing a “government in exile.” It is currently shopping for a host nation to base itself in – with Thaksin Shinawatra already admittedly running his ruling party mainly from Dubai for the past several years.

In a statement released from Amsterdam’s official website titled, “Statement: Consideration Given to Formation of Thai Government in Exile,” it claims:

“…a number of foreign governments have already expressed their willingness to host such a government in exile under internationally established rules and practice. He emphasised that the Army of Thailand has no legal authority to govern and has acted in violation of both local and international law.” 

Just like US-EU-organized opposition “governments” formed in Europe used to undermine besieged nations like Libya and Syria, the West will most likely coordinate a campaign of systematic destabilization within Thailand while attempting to boost the credibility of the exiled Shinawatra regime beyond its borders.

With the coup having remained so far peaceful, attempts to shed blood to undermine stability and the image of the military-led government appear to be underway. Amsterdam in another statement warned of a “strategy of tension,” in an attempt to shift blame for impending violence of the West’s own design onto the new military-led government.

The statement titled, “Open letter to Red Shirts, UDD Supporters and Those Committed to a Democratic Thailand,” released from his lobbying firm’s official website stated:

In the meanwhile we would ask that all pro-democracy activists, Red Shirts and those committed to returning Thailand to civilian and legally mandated rule remain peaceful. The Army may attempt to unleash a “strategy of tension” in the days to come – something which could include terrorist actions – and Red Shirts must do their utmost to stay disciplined, calm and focused.

In reality, this is setting the stage for rallies to be targeted by the West’s infamous “mystery gunmen” – snipers deployed to conflict zones to kill both security forces and demonstrators to then leverage the violence to expand the conflict and undermine the targeted government. Such tactics have already been used once in Thailand during violence in 2010, as well as throughout the opening phases of the so-called “Arab Spring,” and most recently in Ukraine where “Euromaidan” leaders brought in snipers to kill both Ukrainian security forces and their own supporters. 

Amsterdam’s “premonitions” of impending violence have previously manifested themselves in openly armed terrorism confirmed to be the work of his client, Thaksin Shinawatra and his political machine inside of Thailand. Just weeks before the coup, Shinawatra’s militants were caught with AK47s, M79 grenade launchers, and hand grenades with the same lot numbers of those used in previous attacks 

While waiting for Western-orchestrated bloodshed – Thailand can expect a torrent of slanted media reports condemning the coup and the protests that led up to it, covering up the 6 months of terrorism carried out by the Shinawatra regime against his political opponents that precipitated the coup in the first place, and media reports inflating the numbers and significance of protesters organized by Shinawatra to portray the population as being “anti-coup.” 

It appears that the US “pivot” is turning instead into an ever more precarious “stumble.” 

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook”.

Le coup d'Etat militaire en Thaïlande soutenu par les États-Unis

Thailande-Coup-Etat-620x350.jpg

Le coup d'Etat militaire en Thaïlande soutenu par les États-Unis

Auteur : Peter Symonds 
Ex: http://www.zejournal.mobi

L’armée thaïlandaise a organisé hier ce qui avait toutes les caractéristiques d’un coup d’Etat, sauf le nom. Aux premières heures de la matinée, alors que les soldats se déployaient dans Bangkok, le chef de l’armée, le général Prayuth Chan-ocha a décrété la loi martiale dans tout le pays et pris le contrôle de l’ensemble de l’appareil sécuritaire de l’Etat, y compris la police.

L’armée a stupidement déclaré que ses mesures n’étaient «pas un coup d’Etat» et n’avaient été prises que pour «préserver l’ordre public» au bout de six mois de crise politique aiguë à Bangkok. Les chefs militaires n’ont pas consulté le gouvernement, ils en ont dissout le comité de sécurité, se sont emparés des chaînes de télévision et se sont attribués de vastes pouvoirs pour censurer, arrêter, fouiller et interdire des rassemblements publics.

Interrogé sur le statut du gouvernement, le général Prayuth a plaisanté avec les journalistes: «Et où est-il ce gouvernement ?» Des sections clé des gros bonnets, tels les tribunaux, la bureaucratie d’Etat et la monarchie, se sont montrés sensibles aux protestations anti-gouvernementales organisées par le Comité thaïlandais de la réforme démocratique (PDRC) et le Parti démocrate de l’opposition, tout comme à leur demande de faire tomber le gouvernement élu de Pheu Thai.

Suite à une décision judiciaire qui a annulé les résultats de l’élection qui s’était tenue en février et que Pheu Thai avait remportée haut la main, le gouvernement pour sa part expédie les affaires courantes avec des pouvoirs limités. Le 7 mai, la Cour constitutionnelle a organisé ce qui correspondait à un coup d’Etat judiciaire, en destituant la première ministre Yingluck Shinawatra et neuf de ses ministres au motif de fausses accusations d’abus de pouvoir. Le gouvernement est confronté à d’autres défis émanant du Sénat et des tribunaux qui pourraient le faire chuter si l’armée ne prend pas d’abord directement le pouvoir.

Le gouvernement Obama soutient le coup d’Etat, tout comme il avait tacitement soutenu l’éviction de Yingluck. La porte-parole du Département d’Etat américain, Jen Psaki, a insisté pour dire que les actions de l’armée n’étaient pas un coup d’Etat et que la loi martiale «est prévue dans la constitution thaïe». En fait, le général Prayuth a justifié ses actions non pas sur la base de la constitution de 2007 élaborée par l’armée, mais en faisant référence à une loi opaque centenaire datant de l’époque de la monarchie absolue en Thaïlande.

L’armée a de toute évidence défini ses projets en concertation avec Washington. L’assistant au secrétaire d’Etat américain pour l’Asie, Daniel Russel, avait séjourné le mois dernier à Bangkok pour rencontrer un «certain nombre de dirigeants et d’acteurs concernés» à propos de la crise politique dans le pays. Le gouvernement Obama considère la Thaïlande, et particulièrement son armée, comme un élément important de son «pivot vers l’Asie» qui vise à subordonner et à encercler militairement la Chine. Le Pentagone est en train de renforcer sa collaboration avec l’armée thaïe et cherche à accéder aux bases aériennes thaïes qui furent utilisées dans les années 1960 durant la guerre du Vietnam pour effectuer des bombardements de saturation.

Le coup d’Etat d’hier fait suite à huit années d’instabilité politique qui avait commencé avec le coup d’Etat militaire qui avait renversé le frère de Yingluck, Thaksin Shinawatra, premier ministre depuis 2006. Ces violentes querelles intestines au sein des élites dirigeantes ont leurs racines dans la crise financière asiatique de 1997-98 qui avait durement touché l’économie thaïe. Après avoir initialement soutenu le milliardaire des télécommunications Thaksin afin de contrer les exigences de mesures brutales de restructuration du Fonds monétaire international, les élites traditionnelles du pays, qui sont axées sur la monarchie, se sont retournées contre lui lorsque ses mesures économiques se sont mis à contrecarrer leurs intérêts commerciaux et leurs réseaux clientélistes. Elles furent tout particulièrement hostiles à son aumône populiste accordée aux pauvres du monde urbain et rural.

La principale cible du décret imposant la loi martiale n’est pas tant le gouvernement intérimaire pro Thaksin que la classe ouvrière et les masses rurales. Dans le contexte d’un ralentissement économique accru partout en Asie et d’une croissance négative en Thaïlande, le gouvernement, tout comme l’opposition, sont déterminés à imposer des mesures d’austérité, dont la réduction des concessions sociales limitées faites par Thaksin. Dans le même temps, toutes les sections de l’élite dirigeante craignent que les luttes politiques intestines au sommet de la hiérarchie ne mènent à un soulèvement social d’en bas.

Les deux factions de la bourgeoisie pro et anti-Thaksin avaient reculé sous le choc au moment où en 2010 les protestations combatives des «Chemises rouges» contre le gouvernement démocrate soutenu par l’armée avaient failli échapper à tout contrôle. Bien que théoriquement sous la direction du Front uni de la démocratie contre la dictature (UDD), les pauvres urbains et ruraux, qui constituaient l’épine dorsale des protestations, avaient commencé à avancer leurs propres revendications de classe. L’armée avait réagi par une répression brutale qui avait tué au moins 90 manifestants non armés en en blessant 1.500 autres.

L’ensemble de la classe dirigeante cherche désespérément à éviter une explosion sociale. Au cours de ces six derniers mois, le gouvernement et les dirigeants de l’UDD ont délibérément démobilisé leurs partisans des Chemises rouges. Ils étaient vivement préoccupés que la classe ouvrière industrielle, qui est rassemblée dans de vastes usines du centre et de la périphérie de Bangkok, ne se jette dans la mêlée.

Loin de condamner le décret de la loi martiale d’hier, le ministre de la Justice par intérim, Chaikasem Nitisiri, a dit aux médias: «Il est bon que l’armée s’occupe de la sécurité du pays». Le dirigeant de l’UDD, Jatuporn Prompan, a déclaré que la loi martiale était « une bonne chose » et exhorté ses partisans à coopérer avec les soldats.

Cette capitulation veule ne fera qu’encourager les forces anti-gouvernementales à achever le processus de l’établissement d’une dictature soutenue par l’armée, en lançant un assaut de grande envergure contre le niveau de vie des masses et une répression impitoyable de toute résistance venant de la classe ouvrière.

Le soutien de Washington au démantèlement de la démocratie parlementaire par l’armée thaïe est un avertissement sévère pour les travailleurs et les jeunes dans la région entière. Dans leur renforcement militaire et leur préparation à la guerre contre la Chine, les Etats-Unis n’hésiteront pas à appuyer ou à mettre en place des gouvernements droitiers et autocratiques alignés sur Washington et prêts à recourir à des mesures d’Etat policier pour imposer un programme de militarisme et d’austérité.

Comme le spécifie la théorie de la Révolution permanente de Léon Trotsky, la bourgeoisie des pays connaissant un développement capitaliste arriéré est totalement incapable de satisfaire les besoins sociaux et les aspirations démocratiques des travailleurs. Dans toute la région, la démocratie de façade, usée jusqu’à la corde, de pays comme la Thaïlande, la Corée du Sud et l’Indonésie est en train de rapidement montrer son vrai visage.

 - Source : Peter Symonds

20 MAI 2014: Le jour où les USA ont perdu la maîtrise du monde...

ruschinegaz.jpg

20 MAI 2014: Le jour où les USA ont perdu la maîtrise du monde...

Michel Lhomme
Ex: http://metamag.fr

La Chine et la Russie ont conclu à Shanghai un méga-contrat d'approvisionnement gazier, fruit d'une décennie de négociations. La Russie fournira en gaz la deuxième économie mondiale à partir de 2018, et le volume livré à la Chine gonflera progressivement « pour atteindre à terme 38 milliards de mètres cube par an », a indiqué le groupe pétrolier public chinois CNPC dans son communiqué. Le prix total du contrat conclu pour 30 ans se chiffre à 400 milliards de dollars. Le gaz russe sera acheminé vers la Chine par une ramification orientale du gazoduc Iakoutie-Khabarovsk-Vladivostok baptisé Power of Siberia. Les livraisons doivent débuter en 2018. Prévus au départ à 38 milliards de mètres cubes par an, les volumes de gaz fournis à la Chine pourraient atteindre 60 milliards de mètres cubes. Le contenu en détail de l'accord reste secret. La signature de ce méga-contrat intervient, alors que les relations entre la Russie et les pays occidentaux connaissent une période de vives tensions sur fond de crise ukrainienne et syrienne.


Le président russe Vladimir Poutine et son homologue chinois Xi Jinping avaient tous deux assisté à la signature. Ils pouvaient ne pas le faire. Cette signature est donc un signe international adressé aux USA, à l'Otan et à l’Europe. Vladimir Poutine a ensuite participé à Shanghai à la quatrième édition de la Conférence pour l'interaction et les mesures de confiance en Asie ( Cica ), un nouveau forum de sécurité régionale. 


Après cette conférence, des exercices militaires conjoints russo-chinois ont été décidés et programmés pour 2015. Pourquoi ? Pour obliger l’Amérique à « jouer selon les règles des pays civilisés », a estimé mardi Igor Korottchenko, directeur du Centre d’analyse du commerce mondial des armes ( TSAMTO ). « Compte tenu de l’actuelle situation géopolitique dans le monde, la Russie et la Chine deviennent des partenaires stratégiques, et leur coopération ne sera plus uniquement économique, mais aussi militaire. Aussi, la tenue d’exercices militaires conjoints constitue un facteur extrêmement important attestant la similitude de nos approches des problèmes militaires et politiques », a déclaré l’expert militaire à RIA Novosti.


Ainsi, la participation de la Chine à ces exercices montre une fois de plus que Moscou et Pékin ont des objectifs communs et partagent les mêmes positions sur les événements en cours dans le monde. Il est, en effet, devenu nécessaire d’empêcher les Etats-Unis de décider seuls des destinées du monde, ont estimé ensemble la Russie et la Chine. Selon les deux puissances asiatiques, les Etats-Unis sont devenus une puissance dangereuse et en organisant des exercices conjoints, Moscou et Pékin montrent aux Etats-Unis qu’ils sont des pays capables de dresser une barrière sur la voie de l’expansion américaine. D’après le général Evgueni Boujinski, ex-responsable de la direction des accords internationaux auprès du ministère russe de la Défense, les exercices russo-chinois seront très vraisemblablement des exercices terrestres. Ces dernières années, la coopération militaire entre la Russie et la Chine est en plein essor. En 20 ans, Moscou a livré à Pékin un large éventail d’armements et de matériels de combat, dont des chasseurs Su-27, et des armes de défense antiaérienne, dont des missiles sol-air S-300, Bouk et Tor. La partie chinoise compte élargir la nomenclature des armements achetés à la Russie, notamment commander des systèmes S-400 et des avions Il-76 et Il-78.


Par ailleurs, l'accord énergétique russo-chinois qui vient d'être finalisé à Shangaï entérine la fin de la dollarisation. Pour la première fois depuis 40 ans, c'est-à-dire depuis Kissinger, un pays ne devra pas d’abord aller acheter du dollar sur les marchés pour acheter son énergie. Le dollar en effet se meurt doucement. Pour l'instant, il arrose l'Amérique mais ce n'est plus qu'une monnaie de papier de singe, fabriquée de toutes pièces par la FED. Tous les grands de la planète le savent. Certes, l'Amérique dispose de la haute technologie militaire. Elle croit être définitivement sauvée par ses drones ou ses avions furtifs, son B2 mais il faut aussi payer les heures de vol. L'Amérique est en réalité à genoux. Ses anciens combattants d'Irak ou d'Afghanistan croupissent dans les hôpitaux psychiatriques ou se suicident. Ses soldats souvent drogués, sauf peut-être ses mercenaires privés, n'ont même plus l'éthique du combat, la moralité virile de l'honneur pour se battre. L'Amérique est psychologiquement épuisée : ses vieillards travaillent maintenant dans les MacDo ! Détroit est en ruine, les villas de l'American Way of Life sont à vendre ou en saisie. Les prisons sont pleines, les homeless végètent dans les rues, même plus secourus par l'Armée du Salut. Neuf millions de ménages américains ont perdu leur foyer après la crise des subprimes. La population carcérale américaine a augmenté de 600 %, j'écris bien 600 %, ces quarante dernières années. L'Europe a choisi le destin américain. Elle a choisi le camp des perdants.


Y aura-t-il une réaction américaine à Shanghai : pour la première fois depuis des années, un avion Us provenant du Nigeria s'est posé le 18 mai sur l'aéroport de Téhéran. Que transportait-il  ? De l'uranium ? Que préparent donc les Américains en riposte du coté de l'Iran ? Avec quelles complicités ?...