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.

samedi, 11 février 2017

L’Europe unie, la nouvelle Athènes

acropole-athenes.jpg

L’Europe unie, la nouvelle Athènes

par Thomas FERRIER

Ex: http://www.europemaxima.com

Nouveau patron du « Libre-Journal des Européens » sur Radio-Courtoisie, un mardi sur quatre, en semaine C, de 21 h 30 à 23 h 00, Thomas Ferrier est aussi le président du Parti des Européens.

Le projet du Parti des Européens est d’unir les Européens sur leur commune parenté et leur commune civilisation afin de défendre l’Europe contre les périls qui s’annoncent, et contre les chevaux de Troie qui la menacent de l’intérieur, après que des politiciens sans cervelle les y aient fait rentrer, et de susciter le renouveau de notre continent.

Notre démarche est bien différente de celle des prétendus « eurocrates » qui encensent l’Autre de peur d’avoir à défendre les nôtres, qui sanctionnent une Russie qui ne fait que se défendre et qui a toujours voulu se réconcilier avec le reste de l’Europe, qui sont incapables de nous faire respecter à nos frontières, accueillant celui qui veut forcer notre porte au lieu de lui indiquer la sortie, acceptant le chantage permanent du Turc Erdogan. Ce ne sont pas des élections présidentielles en France ou des élections parlementaires en Allemagne, toutes deux en 2017, qui changeront les choses, bien au contraire.

L’Athènes classique de Périclès est notre modèle, celui sur lequel nous voulons rebâtir l’Europe politique, en restaurant la démocratie authentique en lieu et place d’une oligarchie médiatico-financière qui voudrait régenter nos vies.

Athènes, c’est un citoyen qui sait qui il est, de qui il vient, avec qui il partage un destin commun. À Athènes, on est citoyen parce que son père est citoyen et parce que sa mère est citoyenne, même si l’influence orientale (depuis l’époque mycénienne) aura empêchée cette dernière d’en exercer réellement les attributions. Tous deux auront été mariés en conformité avec les lois de la cité. Les enfants hors mariage ne seront pas citoyens à moins que la situation légale de leurs parents ne soit établie. C’est la loi mise en place par Périclès en 451 avant J-C et dont les propres enfants, nés de la courtisane Aspasie, qui n’était pas athénienne, seront victimes avant que le peuple athénien, par égard pour le grand homme, contrevienne exceptionnellement à sa propre règle. On ne devient pas Européen, on naît Européen.

Athènes, c’est un citoyen qui décide de son destin et qui est même rétribué par la cité pour sa participation publique aux décisions prises, touchant le misthos. Bien sûr sa présence est obligatoire et ceux qui feraient défaut se verront peints la toge en rouge par les mercenaires scythes employés par la cité. Ils seront alors sanctionnés financièrement et condamnés moralement. Si le citoyen athénien élit des responsables politiques, ces derniers n’ont pas de blanc-seing. Le peuple reste souverain, non seulement en théorie mais en pratique.

Dans la nouvelle Athènes que sera l’Europe unie, grâce aux technologies de l’information, un citoyen européen pourra à tout moment de la journée voter les lois, dans la rue, chez lui et même au travail. Il n’aura pas besoin de passer par des représentants élus pour décider de son avenir dans les domaines essentiels. Il recevra un salaire citoyen, qui correspondra au salaire minimum, qu’il perdra s’il ne remplit pas ses obligations.

Athènes, c’est une cité qui exige de ses plus riches qu’ils contribuent à l’embellissement et à l’expansion de la cité. Demain, les grands capitaines d’industrie devront mettre la main à la poche pour les liturgies européennes, la nouvelle forme prise par le mécénat. Leur nom sera honoré à hauteur de leurs contributions. Le Parthénon d’Athènes, qui fait la fierté de tout Européen, a été financé par des capitaux privés. Les 88 temples de Rome qu’Auguste fit réparer durant son règne l’ont été aussi.

hopath.jpgAthènes, c’est une cité où chaque citoyen est un soldat, où il dispose comme dans la Suisse contemporaine d’un équipement hoplitique complet et où il est tenu à faire des périodes d’entraînement. Contrairement aux États totalitaires qui interdisent la possession d’armes par les citoyens, dans l’Europe de demain chacun pourra disposer d’un matériel standard de combat. Il aura aussi le droit de s’équiper afin de protéger sa famille et ses biens. Les USA nous donnent une leçon de démocratie lorsqu’ils autorisent les citoyens à s’armer, même si la société américaine est dans l’excès en ce domaine.

L’Europe vit en plein Âge de Fer. Elle doute de son destin. Elle n’est plus seule maîtresse de son propre sol. Même la Russie de Poutine ne peut que ralentir son pourrissement intérieur. Nous devons retrouver l’Âge d’Or. Nous devons nous ressourcer sur ce qui fit de nous une civilisation si brillante. Athènes est notre phare, avec en complément la Rome républicaine qui sur un plan moral nous dépasse de si loin. Redevenons ce que nous sommes. C’est en retournant aux lumières de l’Antiquité, qui éblouissent les forces du mal, que l’Europe renaîtra et avec elle que nous renaîtrons tous. Parce que « nous sommes ce que vous fûtes, nous serons ce que vous êtes (Lycurgue) ». En ramenant la démocratie à ses racines grecques, nous balaierons les faux représentants et les usurpateurs qui osent se dire nos chefs alors qu’ils nous trahissent, corrompus par l’or « perse » qui a désormais pour nom « capitalisme spéculatif international ». Xerxès-Soros ne décidera pas de l’avenir des Européens.

C’est aussi l’Athénien Isocrate qui prôna l’unité de la Grèce et c’est nous qui au nom de l’unité de l’Europe reprenons son flambeau. L’Europe comme Nouvelle Athènes, c’est une Europe à nouveau européenne, avec de vrais citoyens prêts à la défendre, avec une élite au service de son peuple, une Europe vraiment démocratique où le peuple décidera de manière souveraine de son avenir.

Le Parti des Européens, c’est le parti qui redonnera aux Européens la maîtrise de leur destin sur la ruine de cette caste corrompue qui nous emmène au précipice. Nous ne pourrons éviter une révolution politique. Elle devra être salvatrice. Les Tarquins qui siègent à Paris ou à Berlin pourront aller dans cette Amérique qu’ils encensent et devant laquelle ils rampent. Car il nous faudra non seulement être Périclès mais aussi être Brutus. L’Europe vaut bien tous les sacrifices et tous les combats.

Thomas Ferrier

• D’abord mis en ligne sur le blogue de Thomas Ferrier, le 14 décembre 2016.

jeudi, 13 octobre 2011

Pericles & the Athenian Ideal

Pericles & the Athenian Ideal

By Troy Southgate

Ex: http://www.toqonline.com/

Bust of Pericles bearing the inscription “Pericles, son of Xanthippus, Athenian”. Marble, Roman copy after a Greek original by Cresilas, ca. 430 BC (Museo Pio-Clementino)

Bust of Pericles bearing the inscription “Pericles, son of Xanthippus, Athenian”. Marble, Roman copy after a Greek original by Cresilas, ca. 430 BC (Museo Pio-Clementino)

There is already much discussion in our circles about the example of Sparta, not least as a result of the recent Hollywood blockbuster 300 [1] which was rather loosely based on the exploits of King Leonidas, but in this article I intend to examine Sparta’s chief rival Athens.

The Athenian statesman, Pericles (495 – 429 BCE) once claimed that his city was an educational role model for the whole of Greece, but how far was this really true?

Pericles’ boast is part of his funeral oration recorded by Thucydides (460 – 395 BCE) in his The Peloponnesian War [2]. The aim of Pericles’ oration is to establish that Athens was a society worth dying for. Thus the speech is designed to exploit in his listeners deep-seated feelings of local pride and identity, inviting them to recall the glory of Athenian growth and prosperity. His verbal tapestry begins by lauding Athenian ancestry, emphasizing the fact that the people’s “courage and virtues have handed on to us, a free country.”

He mentions “the constitution and the way of life that has made us great” and points to certain social improvements such as power being democratically channeled into the hands “of the whole people,” the fairness and “equality before the law” and the fact that, in terms of social classification, status is not determined by “membership of a particular class, but the actual ability which the man possesses.” Pericles was also careful to mention the prevailing moral ethos which underpinned fifth-century Athenian society, that of sovereign, “unwritten laws which it is an acknowledged shame to break.”

Then Pericles lists what he considered to be the noblest attributes of his native city, with particular reference to the cultural activities that provided “recreation for our spirits.” This tactic was designed to pave the way for a contrasting description of the traditional enemy, Sparta.

Pericles then polemically denounced Spartan militarism and the rigorous training to which it “submitted” its youth, lauding the Athenian educational system by contrast. He also praised Athens for apparently maintaining a confident superiority above and beyond all other Greek states, emphasizing the importance of thought before action.

When Pericles finally describes Athens as “an education to Greece,” he explains precisely why he considers this to be the case. Athens stands for the freedom of the citizen, who is “rightful lord and owner of his own person.” Because of its constitution, Athens has waxed powerful: “Athens, alone of the states we know, comes to her testing time in a greatness that surpasses what was imagined of her . . . future ages will wonder at us, as the present age wonders at us now.” But with greatness comes peril: “it is clear that for us there is more at stake than there is for others who lack our advantages.”

Pericles then offers an inspiring account of the necessity of personal sacrifice. The slain warriors, in whose honor the funeral had been held, were depicted as heroes who had lain down their very lives for the continuation of Athenian culture, heritage and tradition, itself “a risk most glorious.” Pericles then challenges the living to emulate the honored dead, making “up your minds that happiness depends on being free, and freedom depends on being courageous .  .  . for men to end their lives with honor, as these have done, and for you honorably to lament them: their life was set to a measure where death and happiness went hand in hand.”

But can Athens really can be considered to have been a role model for the whole of Greece, or was Pericles merely deluding  himself and his contemporaries? Let us examine the historical record.

Pericles is renowned for the prominent role he played in the democratization of the Athenian political system, which itself had “been fixed by Cleisthenes (570 – 507 BCE) and further reformed after the battle of Marathon” (J. B. Bury, A History of Greece to the Death of Alexander the Great [3] [Macmillan, 1951], 346).

After overthrowing Thucydides and assuming the leadership of the people, Pericles and Ethialtes (d. 461 BCE) set about reducing the power of the judiciary in the Areopagus. At this time, the archons or chief magistrates were appointed by lot, but only from a select number of pre-elected candidates. Pericles abolished this system with the result that the archons themselves became “appointed by lot from all the eligible citizens [who now] had an equal chance of holding political office, and taking part in the conduct of political affairs” (Bury, 349). This system was also extended to the Boule, or Council of the Five Hundred.

In addition, Pericles effectively dismantled the hereditary powers of the traditionally oligarchic Areopagus completely, restricting its activities in order to redefine its role as little more than a “supreme court for charges of murder” (A. R. Burn, Pericles and Athens [4] [English Universities Press, 1964], 46). In 462 BCE, Pericles also initiated a scheme whereby jurors and those holding offices of state received payment for their services to the city, “a feature which naturally won him popularity with the masses” (Bury, 349).

This very popularity, in fact, had been deliberately engineered by Pericles himself in order to counteract the large support that Cimon (510 – 450 BCE), an accomplished naval hero, was able to command from the Athenian nobility. Although Pericles was himself an aristocrat, he “decided to attach himself to the people’s party and to take up the cause of the poor and the many instead of that of the rich and the few, in spite of the fact that this was quite contrary to his own temperament”(Plutarch, The Rise and Fall of Athens: Nine Greek Lives [5] [Penguin, 1960], 171).

Indeed, Thucydides attacked Periclean reforms and labeled them “democracy in name, but in practice government by the first citizen” (Plutarch, 173). So what began as Greek democracy under Cleisthenes around 500 BCE had become a dictatorship under Pericles by 430 BCE.

Despite all the speculation surrounding Pericles motives for initiating democratic reforms, in terms of her constitution and statecraft Athens undoubtedly stood far ahead of her rivals.

One measure of the seriousness of Athenian democratization was the introduction of new political technologies, such as allotment-machines, water-clocks, juror’s ballots, and juror’s tickets.

Another sign of Athenian political acumen is the transfer of the headquarters and treasure of the Delian league from Delos to Athens in 454 BCE. The Delian League was a crucial alliance of 150 Greek city-states established prior to the Peloponnesian wars to defend Hellas from the Persians. The transfer of its headquarters to Athens gave the Athenians enormous political and economic influence over the member states.

Sparta had an entirely different political structure. In Bury’s words, Sparta was imbued with a “conservative spirit.” The Spartan constitution, unlike its continually revised and reformed counterpart in Athens, had remained virtually the same since its inception.

Sparta had a mixed constitution with monarchical, aristocratic, and democratic elements. Sparta was ruled nominally by kings, an order going back to the times of Homer. The aristocratic element was the Council of Elders, or Gerusia, which consisted of thirty men who were elected for life and chosen by acclamation in the general assembly of citizens. Membership was described as a prize for virtue. However, the Spartan Assembly of the People, or Apella, contained only males over thirty years of age who decided matters of state purely on the basis of a particular speaker receiving the loudest cheers from those in attendance. Theoretically, the Spartan constitution was democratic, but if the elders and magistrates did not approve of the decision of the majority, they could annul the proceedings by refusing to proclaim the decision.

The Athenians were always very keen to stress the political differences between themselves and their Peloponnesian rivals. Many island states — often artificially created by colonial means — usually followed the example of Athens rather than Sparta. Athenian democracy, unlike the American variety, was not spread around the world at gunpoint. Instead, the states that adopted the Athenian system seemed genuinely inspired by her example.

Sparta, on the other hand, had few imitators, and the states that did resemble Sparta did not appear to imitate her. So as far as Athenian politics was concerned, at least, Pericles was right to claim that Athens was the educator of Greece.

Athens was an example to Greece in politics. But what about the economic and cultural realms?

According to Plutarch, Athens became fantastically wealthy after Themistocles (524 – 459 BCE) had directed the revenue of the city’s lucrative silver mines at Laurium towards the construction of a strong navy, including a new fleet of triremes, which made possible the reconquest of Athens after its inhabitants had been forced to flee from the invading Persians.

When Athens became host to the treasury of the Delian League in 454 BCE, Pericles used its funds for the rebuilding of Athenian temples, claiming they had been destroyed by the Persians in the common cause of Greece, thus it was appropriate that they be rebuilt from the common funds.

In 449 BCE, a pan-Hellenic Congress was proposed to raise funds for further projects. This plan met with fierce opposition from Thucydides among others. According to Plutarch, Pericles answered his critics by declaring that “the Athenians were not obliged to give the allies an account of how their money was spent, provided that they carried on the war for them and kept the Persians away.” Pericles had effectively plundered the common treasure of Greece and turned it into the adornment of Athens.

Athenian trade also began to flourish during the rule of Pericles, and Themistocles’ fortification of the Piraeus made Athens one of the greatest ports in Greece. The decline of merchant cities in Ionia also contributed greatly to the Athenian economy.

But the most striking developments in fifth-century Athens took place in the cultural sphere.

Although Greek philosophy began in Ionia, it flourished in Athens. Because of her wealth, political power, and cultural refinement, she attracted the best minds from all over Greece. The Sophists, in particular, contributed much to the development of political theory, rhetoric, and logic and stimulated the thought of Athens’ native geniuses Socrates and Plato.

Athens is also renowned for her great architecture, a matter in which Pericles himself played a prominent role. Pericles enlisted Pheidias (480 – 430 BCE) to be the director of his building program, assisted by such skilled architects as Callicrates, Ictinus, Coroebus, and Metagenes. Among their projects were the Parthenon, the Temple of Athena, the adornment of the Acropolis, the Odeon, the Concert Hall, and the temples of Eleusis and Hephaistos.

When Pericles was attacked for his lavish use of public funds, he offered to pay for the construction work himself, if he could take all the glory. This did the trick. Even Pericles’ most zealous critics wished to share in his renown, so they insisted that he complete the buildings at public expense.

Pericles’ construction projects were remarkable not merely for their expense, but also for their artistry, craftsmanship, and good taste, which no other Greek states were able to match, least of all Sparta. In fact, C. M. Bowra wrote that the “remains of Sparta are so humble that it is hard to believe that this was the power which for many years challenged and finally conquered Athens” (Periclean Athens [Wiedenfeld and Nicolson, 1971], p. 180). But although Pericles’ construction program clearly was an “education” to the rest of Greece, it was no safeguard against eventual Spartan conquest.

What we call ancient Greek drama is better deemed ancient Athenian drama. The great tragedians Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripedes were Athenians, as were the comic playwrights Aristophanes and Menander. Sparta had its share of talented poets — among them Tyrtaeus during the mid-seventh century BCE — but they could not compete with the new trends being set in Athens. As Bury put it, when a stranger visited Sparta he must have experienced “a feeling of being transported into an age long past, when men were braver, better, and simpler, unspoiled by wealth, undeveloped by ideas” (p. 134).

The social status of women in Athens was far lower than it was in Sparta. Athenian women took no part in public life and were instructed solely in domestic arts. In his Funeral Oration, Pericles said that women should merely aim “to be least talked about by men, whether they are praising you or criticising you.” In Sparta, however, women were permitted to engage in gymnastic training and “enjoyed a freedom which was in marked contrast with the seclusion of women in other Greek states” (Bury, p. 133). So as far as respect for women was concerned, Athens could not really claim to have exported an policy worthy of emulation, although Ionia also shared the fundamental Athenian weakness of excluding women from education.

Religious and sporting festivals were much the same throughout Greece and, although it is always the Athenians who are remembered for their gods and sporting heroes, most other Greek states were equally advanced.

Thus when Pericles declared that Athens was “an education to Greece.” he was, on the whole, making an accurate observation. This is not to say that Athens was superior to Sparta in every respect, of course, and her democratic system left much to be desired.

Although other Greek states shared some Athenian political, social and economic principles, it remains the case that Athens gave birth to some of the finest Greek accomplishments. These accomplishments, moreover, provided key elements for the development of European art, architecture, drama, philosophy, rhetoric, and politics for 2500 years. Thus Athens continues to serve not only as an “education” for Greece, but for the world.


Troy Southgate is from Crystal Palace in South London and has been a Revolutionary Nationalist activist and writer for almost 25 years. He has also been involved with more than twenty music projects. He is a founder of National Anarchism and author of Tradition and Revolution (Aarhus, Denmark: Integral Tradition).

jeudi, 02 décembre 2010

Atene dorica. Comunità gerarchica di popolo

Atene dorica. Comunità gerarchica di popolo

athenes-agora-grecque-11.jpgA sentire il poeta aristocratico Teognide (VI-V secolo a.C.), già ai suoi tempi si doveva parlare di crisi della Tradizione: a quel tipo di Junker greco, tutti i valori superiori sembravano esser crollati dinanzi all’affermazione del dèmos. Ci sono intellettuali della Grecia antica che fanno pensare a certi loro omologhi moderni. Difensori dei valori tradizionali, essi  interpretano la società a democrazia totalitaria del loro tempo come una caduta plebea e demagogica. Teognide o Pindaro, ad esempio, per diversi aspetti si assomigliano come gocce d’acqua a Jünger o a Evola: per loro un’aristocrazia democratica, estesa a tutto il popolo, è uno sproposito. Nessuno dei quattro ammise che la valenza politica dell’eguaglianza di stirpe affermatasi in modi diversi a Sparta e ad Atene, così come nel Reich del 1933, non era un principio di eguaglianza assoluta, ma l’allargamento della coscienza signorile all’intera comunità di popolo, per via del comune lignaggio di sangue. Per il reazionario, spesso difendere la casta vuol dire essere ostile al popolo.

 

 

La democrazia greca nulla ha da spartire con gli universalismi della moderna “democrazia” liberale, che di fatto è una tirannia del denaro in mano a oligarchi estranei al popolo, ridotto a massa livellata. La differenza sta tutta nel concetto cardinale che ad Atene la democrazia non è un diritto, ma un privilegio.

 

Per capire come in Grecia non solo Sparta, ma anche Atene fosse il centro di una concezione di democrazia anti-egualitaria ed etnicista, del tutto opposta all’idea moderna di “democrazia” parlamentare basata sui diritti individuali, basta dare uno sguardo agli ordinamenti di Pericle. È vero che l’epoca classica non vide più all’opera i venerandi ceppi nobiliari dell’epoca arcaica, già decaduti, ma è altrettanto vero che presentava ugualmente la volontà di preservare i retaggi bio-storici della Tradizione dorica, allargandoli all’intera comunità popolare, in una vera e propria specie di socialismo nazionale ante-litteram. Grandi politici come Clìstene, Cimone e Pericle, demagoghi a occhi reazionari, in realtà furono protagonisti di una lotta rivoluzionaria, intesa a proteggere con istituzioni sociali ferree l’identità atavica del popolo, di tutto il popolo, messa in pericolo dal procedere dei commerci e dai contatti con le altre popolazioni. Secondo Plutarco, Pericle, di carattere autoritario e carismatico, era un «capoparte popolare», tipico rappresentante della politica ateniese, gestita da Capi forniti di un Seguito personale, alla maniera della democrazia tribale germanica. Quello di Pericle, in particolare, fu un sistema di potere fondato sul sostegno diretto del popolo, senza intermediari istituzionali, e tutto basato sul prestigio del capo.

 

La cittadinanza, nell’Atene del V secolo, non era un pezzo di carta da mettere in mano al primo venuto, come accade oggi nella “democrazia” liberale. Pericle restrinse la legge precedente, che considerava cittadino chi fosse figlio di un genitore ateniese, e riservò il diritto di cittadinanza unicamente al figlio di entrambi i genitori ateniesi. Questa disposizione – risalente al 451 – si accompagnava al tassativo divieto di contrarre matrimoni misti, secondo una legislazione che prevedeva la condanna e la confisca dei beni per un Ateniese che avesse sposato una straniera e la riduzione in schiavitù per qualunque straniero si fosse ammogliato con una Ateniese. I divieti di immigrazione erano chiari: si tollerava soltanto la presenza dei meteci, stranieri-residenti privati dei diritti civili, cui si inibiva la facoltà di possedere terra, di ricoprire cariche pubbliche, di adire ai tribunali.

Per un’idea di quanto fosse egualitaria Atene, basta un piccolo esempio: l’omicidio di un Ateniese per mano di uno straniero comportava la messa a morte del colpevole, mentre l’omicidio di uno straniero per mano di un Ateniese era punito con una multa…insomma, nulla a che vedere con l’ideologia dei diritti individuali…Si ricordi che siamo nell’aureo V secolo, l’epoca di Platone, di Fidia, di Eschilo, di Sofocle: tutte persone così poco “democratiche” in senso moderno, da considerare del tutto ovvia la superiorità della loro civiltà rispetto a quelle “barbare”, e da vantare l’eccellenza non solo di ordinamenti comunitari apertamente discriminatori verso gli stranieri, ma pure dell’aggressivo imperialismo colonizzatore ateniese – attivo dalla Sicilia al Mar Nero – e persino del sistema schiavile, su cui Atene basava la propria economia e di cui, tra gli altri, Aristotele fece un celebre elogio.

 

E proprio da Aristotele sappiamo di un caso tipico, in cui certi stranieri giunti verso il 510 ad Atene per partecipare alla vita politica ne furono senz’altro allontanati perché non in grado di «dimostrare la loro discendenza dai più remoti antenati della società attica»: era questo il metodo del diapséphismos, la revisione delle liste elettorali in base alla «purezza della nascita». Qualcosa che, ad un confronto, fa apparire le leggi di Norimberga del 1935 – che, diversamente da quelle ateniesi, contemplavano numerose eccezioni, a cominciare dalla figura del Mischlinge, il sanguemisto, del tutto sconosciuta ad Atene – delle blande misure di magnanima tolleranza.

 

Platone definì bene il senso della democrazia ateniese: «un’aristocrazia con l’approvazione del popolo». Una democrazia, quindi, gerarchica, diretta e acclamatoria, in cui la isonomìa, cioè l’uguaglianza davanti alla legge, riguardava unicamente i nativi d’Attica, di cui si sollecitava la partecipazione politica e la mobilitazione, chiamandoli a condividere in assemblea pubblica le decisioni prese dal comando politico. Questo è il senso di ciò che è stato definito il “totalitarismo” delle istituzioni ateniesi, tutte incentrate sulla netta distinzione tra membri della polis ed estranei, sulla rude chiusura ad ogni assorbimento di stranieri, sulla centralità della fratrìa quale organismo parentale e insieme sorta di corporazione ereditaria. Un ricordo dell’arcaico ordinamento ateniese, in cui gli eupàtrides (i patrizi di “buona nascita”), gli agrìkoi (i contadini) e i demiùrgoi (gli artigiani) davano vita allo Stato organico etnico e corporativo.

 

Nell’Atene classica vigevano, ripotenziati da Pericle, gli arcaici presupposti dell’Atene dorica, in cui il legame di sangue veniva protetto lungo la linea ereditaria sia familiare che “nazionale”. Alla base di tutta la grecità troviamo il concetto di synghéneia, la fratellanza di sangue, che ad Atene – città e territorio uniti in un’unica koiné – veniva tutelata dalla legge e riproposta attraverso un fitto reticolo di legami sociali: le varie tribù in cui era suddiviso il dèmos si diramavano su base razziale vera e propria, con la fratrìa, e su base territoriale, con i dèmoi, racchiudendo il senso dell’antica filé dorica, la tribù clanica che legava l’individuo come membro di schiatta radicato al suolo. In questo quadro, così lontano dall’idea moderna di “democrazia”, c’era spazio anche per la difesa del klèros, il possedimento familiare inalienabile, nucleo della solidarietà di stirpe e di terra, secondo il ben noto “mito dell’autoctonia” attica. Come dire, un Blut und Boden in piena regola.

 

In realtà, la preponderanza della comunità sull’individuo era tale che, ad Atene, tutto veniva risolto comunitariamente, e la società inglobava il singolo in ogni aspetto della vita associata. Era lo “Stato” ad occuparsi, ad esempio, della gestione dei funerali, del mantenimento degli orfani, della regolamentazione della prostituzione o della vendetta familiare. Solo che lo “Stato” come lo intendiamo noi, ad Atene semplicemente non esisteva. Come ha scritto lo storico Brook Manville, ad Atene lo “Stato” erano tutti i cittadini: «La comunità non temeva l’intervento dello Stato: la comunità era, infatti, lo Stato». In altre parole, ad Atene ciò che contava non era lo Stato burocratico e anonimo, ma, detto con parola che rende bene l’idea, era il Volk.

 

Antonio Castronuovo, studioso della democrazia ateniese, ha riportato le enunciazioni del mito: «Noi siamo Greci puri e mai ci siamo mescolati coi barbari…non abbiamo contaminato il nostro sangue…», definendole una «vera attestazione di purezza etnica», cosicché «l’uomo attico vuole far credere che il ghénos, la stirpe, sia il primo livello di aggregazione comunitaria». E si ricorderanno le famose parole del Menesseno platonico: «Il primo fondamento della loro buona nascita sta nell’origine dei loro antenati, non straniera…».

Nell’Atene di Pericle vediamo insomma una società completamente “anti-democratica” in senso moderno e democratica in senso tradizionale: autarchia economica; gerarchia del rango sociale; privilegio esclusivo dell’appartenenza; solenne culto dei padri e degli eroi; mistica dell’ethnos ereditario; sacralizzazione del suolo patrio; libertà di popolo e non libertà dell’individuo; religione della guerra, dell’onore e del coraggio; culto della bellezza e della sanità psico-fisica; partecipazione totalitaria dei cittadini alla vita pubblica nelle liturgie assembleari; abbattimento del diaframma tra sfera pubblica e privata…e così via. Tutti valori rivendicati da Pericle in persona, in una celebre orazione dell’anno 431.

Quando, ancora oggi, sentiamo ripetere la secolare sciocchezza che Atene sarebbe statala culla della democrazia occidentale”, a stento si può reprimere una risata omerica. Ricordiamo solo le brevi parole di Ambrogio Donini, il famoso studioso di religioni: «La cosiddetta “democrazia greca” è un’invenzione della storiografia idealistico-borghese». Ad Atene, come a Sparta, non si aveva idea di cosa fossero il cosmopolitismo, i diritti individuali, l’eguaglianza universale, il pacifismo, il libertarismo, l’etnopluralismo e tutte le altre devastanti utopie della liberaldemocrazia. Ad Atene, come a Sparta, civiltà significava lotta eterna per difendere la propria identità contro tutte le aggressioni, quelle di fuori come quelle di dentro.

Luca Leonello Rimbotti