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, 22 octobre 2017

Decline of the Western Male

maledeclin.jpg

Decline of the Western Male


Martin Heidegger, Oswald Spengler – “Martin Spengler” – these two 20th-century thinkers provide the main source of inspiration behind this project. Both sought to understand the times we live in, and to bring into view the deeper historical and philosophical significance underlying many of the political, economic, social, and cultural issues before us today. Both offer profound insight, and our goal here will be to lean on them in order to tease out what is at stake in many of the day to day problems, challenges, and controversies that grip our attention across the Western world.

Spengler’s masterpiece is his Decline of the West, which first appeared in Germany in the years immediately following World War One. His contribution is to set contemporary events within a civilizational context, as milestones in the development of a culture whose evolution has been dictated by its own internal laws and dynamics, apparent at its very birth 1,000 years ago. Spengler allows us to see how the impulse that drove Medieval European craftsmen to construct magnificent Gothic cathedrals that soared towards the heavens, while betraying ever more intricate detail in their stonework, is the same motivating force behind the transgenderism agenda today, Hollywood’s obsession with the Superhero genre, and in the attractive power of the dream to travel in space.

For Heidegger the key event has been the rise of Modern science and technology, and it is the implications of this development he seeks to reveal. It is Heidegger who helps us to understand how the Modern project is in its essence nihilistic; if followed through to its logical conclusion it means no less than the annihilation of both the world and humanity. This is a cataclysmic perspective, but Heidegger’s reasons for sounding the alarm apply with a monumentally increased force since he first raised this prospect during the 1930s. It was Heidegger who understood that the “subjectivism” which reduces the world to a “standing reserve,” a resource to be used at our convenience, is at its core empty, that the desire for comfort and ease is in fact a death wish. Nietzsche understood this too. The danger does not lie so much in an ecological disaster, the consequence of reckless actions such as the use of GMO crops, but from the success of technology rather than its failure. We can see this with “climate change,” first global warming will be successfully held at bay, then extreme weather events prevented, and then . . . the outside world will be made to look and feel no different from the carefully controlled environment we have inside every shopping mall. After all, if you could push a button from your beachside mansion to stop an oncoming hurricane in its tracks, and instead select for a pleasant view offshore, why wouldn’t you?

No one openly articulates such an agenda, and it does not matter whether it is realistic or complete fantasy, the logic is there nonetheless. It has been present for a thousand years, and it is immensely powerful. Our entire civilization is testimony to its power. This is the value both Heidegger and Spengler bring to a discussion of such issues, they allow us to approach topical subjects such as climate change or transgenderism from a very different angle, to understand why these are the battlegrounds today, and what is at stake.

A third dimension, however, is also needed. It is one neither “Martin” nor “Spengler” were aware of in their lifetime, nor is it a question that has ever concerned Western philosophy to any significant extent in its 2,500-year history. It is a product of our time, and as such is the key to understanding everything. In this respect, “the West” is unique, and at its heart lies a contradiction.

Civilisation by its nature is a masculine project, but Western civilization is in its essence – feminine.

The driving purpose behind the science and technology of the West is to make life easy, comfortable, safe, and amusing. These are feminine desires not masculine ones. Western men have striven for centuries to deliver such a lifestyle to their women, and over the last 70 years or so this effort has borne fruit in the unsurpassed standard of living enjoyed by large sections of the population in Western countries. But the more it has done so, the more the essentially feminine character of the West has come into play. Masculine values, masculinity, men, these were all necessary to bring us to this point, the achievements of science and technology are products of the masculine impulse to make an impact on the world, to understand it, shape it, to create with it, to build with it, for their enjoyment in part but most of all for their women and children, and for the sake of the larger civilizational project to whose success they are committed. But to the extent this project is realized, and life does become easy, comfortable, safe, and amusing, masculinity becomes increasingly redundant, and fades into the background. In its place the feminine becomes primary, a process that has accelerated to an enormous extent over the past half-century with the arrival of the “sexual revolution” in the 1960s.

In the world that is emerging, there are no limits, nothing that women cannot do, nor anything that requires the masculine impetus to turn outwards towards the wider world, to discover its secrets, confront its dangers, for there is no longer is an outside world. Once we reach the point where everything that exists is either an oversized shopping mall, an air-conditioned office building, a campus safe space, a theme park, or a McMansion, masculinity has served its purpose and has no further place, other than to supply routine maintenance services in the background. In this world everything is self-referential, reality is what we make it, truth is what we decide it to be, on the basis of what makes us feel comfortable, safe, and amused. This is why the internet and social media are so central to our culture, why reality TV is our iconic genre, celebrities our key figures, entertainment our main industry, marketing our critical skill set, and brand value our ultimate asset. It is also why #fakenews is a thing.

This self-referentiality is Heidegger’s “subjectivism.” It is extending its influence everywhere, even such former bastions of masculinity as the military. Western militaries are completely feminized, with the partial exception of Special Forces, the only units who actually experience real combat. This is not to say that US or NATO forces do not kill and destroy, they do on a massive scale, their mostly male members also die, but they do not fight, they do not even engage their “enemy.” Instead they conduct operations against fictitious opponents who are figments of their own imagination, and take casualties at the hands of real adversaries about who they know nothing. The disastrous British campaign in Helmand, Afghanistan, from 2006-10 is the classic example of this, launched against an insurgent force that did not exist at that time, but which soon did come into being with a vengeance as a result of the “counter-insurgency” operation.

Helmand is the rule rather than the exception. It is no accident that the weakest branch of the US military machine has always been Intelligence, because this is the one element that cannot be self-referential if it is to be effective.

post-truth.jpg

The Eclipse of Truth

We see the contradiction that runs through the West above all in the current state of science as an institution. In spite of its critical role in the Western civilizational project, science today is in an appalling state of disrepair. This is so even though vast amounts of data and new information are becoming available to many scientific disciplines due to earlier developments in technology, and also to the enormous resources being thrown into research and academia. Astronomy is a good example of this. However, the ability to intellectually process these sources into theoretical advances, to improve our understanding, has been all but lost, at least in the mainstream. Instead, astronomically related areas such as cosmology and astrophysics have disappeared into a fantastical set of rabbit holes that bear no relation to any reality outside of their own mathematical set of fictions. As a result they are completely sterile, there has been no progress in these branches of science for decades, in sharp contrast to the revolutionary breakthroughs that marked the first half of the 20th century. These gave us the technological advances that make the present possible, although the irony lies in that they also have contributed in large part to the dead end we now find ourselves in. This includes its poster boy Albert Einstein, who in spite of his personal integrity has been the single greatest catastrophe ever inflicted on the scientific enterprise. It is no accident that this individual was the first ever science “celebrity,” in no other period could a set of intellectually incoherent nonsense be mistaken for genius, but then again, it did so because it suited certain purposes . . . long before #fakenews came #fakescience.

The reason for this is the eclipse of truth, which is a masculine value, as the determining factor in decisions over what ideas to accept, papers to publish, research to fund, who to appoint, and who is selected to go viral, at least on the media circuit. Science as a practice has to balance its inquiry into the world as it really is with a whole series of competing interests. These might be commercial, political, ideological, institutional, or personal. The more important a branch of science is to Western society as a whole, the more corrosive these other influences, so that when we get to a central political issue such as “climate change,” we soon find that the quality of the science being produced on this question is utterly corrupted, and from a scientific standpoint completely worthless. This is because its purpose is not to find the truth, but to support an agenda, which it does by creating “models” of how the world should be and then using these to justify policy decisions whose motivation always lay elsewhere – self-referentiality once again. The reality is that climate “science” is not science at all, which goes to explain why its proponents refuse to honor any of the principles that guide genuine scientific inquiry – honest debate, transparency of data, willingness to admit uncomfortable facts, or explore alternative hypotheses.

An indication of the West’s true character and current state of decay can be seen in some of the intractable problems that plague modern society. Many of these revolve around health, arguably the area that provides the greatest source of pride to those who believe in the achievements of Western civilization. But while it is true that life expectancy is at record levels, infant mortality at its lowest, and that a cut finger is unlikely to result in death from a ravaging infection, it can hardly be argued that the population of a nation such as the United States is “healthy” in any meaningful sense. If we look at the obesity epidemic, for example, what is most significant about this problem is less that people are getting fat, but that Western medicine has proved totally incapable of making even a small dent in the constantly rising numbers of the obese. A different approach is clearly needed, but one will only be found on the basis of civilizational values that understand medical treatment in terms that do not involve drugs or surgery. Counter currents of this nature do exist, such as the ancestral health movement, or the advocates of LCHF, but these are defined precisely by their rejection of the Western project and its conception of what a healthy way of life is. The same applies to mental health issues, or the unbelievably high rates of addiction across the West, to everything from pain killers, shopping, gambling, gaming, porn, anything that offers an escape from an otherwise entirely meaningless, but materially quite comfortable, existence.

Escape-from-Wuhlheide---Daan-Botlek_900.jpg

The Desire to Escape

It is Spengler who shows us that this desire to “escape,” in his words towards “the infinite,” was present at the very birth of the West, and is in fact its driving force. This too needs to be understood in terms of masculinity and femininity. The masculine impulse is not to escape the world but to go out and engage with it, to learn how to navigate through it, to understand it, and with this knowledge to create and to build with it. A man may seek an escape from the wind and the rain for his family, but the shelters he constructs are made from real materials, and if they are not built according to the natural laws that govern civil engineering they will fall down. This is why truth is the paramount masculine value, and this truth is never self-referential, it is truth about the external world, so that humanity can live within this world.

The feminine impulse is the opposite, it is an attractive force and its ultimate point of reference is the woman herself and her children. If the masculine seeks to expand outwards towards the infinitely large, to ever extend knowledge and understanding, then the feminine measures this in terms of what it means to her, how it affects her, whether she likes what emerges around her as a result of this, or not. Men build houses, but women decide whether they want to live in these structures, and turn them into homes. The feminine is in its essence aesthetic, its measure is beauty, and the beautiful is appreciated through emotion, how it makes her feel.

During the rise of the West, this masculine impulse is harnessed and the Modern world takes shape over time. The feminine character of the Western project, however, is expressed in the ultimate end state Western civilization sets as its objective. This is Spengler’s “infinity,” but in everyday terms it goes under the slogan of “freedom.” The dominant motive behind the entire development of the West has been the desire to be free, and this means freedom from any and all constraints. Science and technology emerge as the means by which to escape the constraints of nature, but alongside this there is also the desire to escape social constraints. During the first centuries of the West, this mostly involved the struggle to overcome the Catholic Church, which dominated the social and cultural landscape of medieval Europe, and this lead to the Protestant Reformation. Later it becomes the desire to be free of any religious imposition on life whatsoever, whether through moral codes or the law of the land. Western society becomes secular.

Freedom is a feminine value, not a masculine one.  Femininity resents any external constraints on it, whether natural or social, because its reference point is the woman herself, in her singularity. There is no such thing as a feminine morality, because even two women form a set of entirely different compass points for any moral code. These might coincide, the two might agree and cooperate well together, but they also might not, there is no force behind the agreement, as soon as it feels like a constraint to either of them it will be abandoned. Women approach all relationships in this way, except with their children, there the rules change.

Masculinity does not strive for freedom, it seeks to serve. A man is measured by his contribution to something larger and outside of himself, his family, his tribe, his nation, his civilisation, its Gods, the truth. This service must be voluntary, and it must be valued. The Roman slave in revolt may kill his master but he will also willingly give up his life in the army of Spartacus, and ask only that in battle his general not throw this away cheaply.

For the same reason, equality is not a masculine value either. Men contribute to the best of their ability, because that is the source of their worth, but the end results are measured externally. The input is irrelevant, only the output. Masculinity naturally gravitates towards hierarchy, because some are more talented, experienced, or able than others, and what matters is the common venture, success or failure, victory or defeat. Men will accept the leadership, and even the domination of others, if this leads to a good outcome, because that is all that counts. Better to follow the victorious general, than lead an army to its destruction.

The feminine, on the other hand, does aspire to equality, because like freedom it is an abstract concept, it means the removal of any expectations placed upon her by anyone, which she might perceive as a constraint. Equality is the stepping stone towards freedom, which is the ability of a woman to act as her own point of reference in any aspect of her life. Today this goes under the term, “empowerment,” or “You go girl!” This is one form of the “tendency towards abstraction” we will try to elaborate on further.

Masculinity, however, acts as a counter-balance to this female “solipsism.” The masculine overrides this impulse and it is the woman who benefits, because it allows her to serve something greater – children, to become something larger than herself, to contribute, to leave her mark on the earth, to attain a slice of immortality. Men do this by imposing an order that serves the civilizational project they are committed to, in other words they impose social constraints on women. This is the “patriarchy,” it ensures that a society will continue because there will be future generations, that women will bear children. It is a civilizational project that makes women have babies, and this is its greatest gift to femininity, to those same women, it overcomes their own drive to “self-referentiality” and allows them to be something more, to participate in something larger.

The project of Western civilization, on the other hand, has been to escape this very civilizational constraint. By the 1960s it had achieved an important milestone along this path through the application of science and technology, with the invention of the contraceptive pill. As a result, birth rates have plummeted, well below the numbers required to reproduce the population. This is one reason why it is safe to predict the coming demise of the West, a social order can not survive if its women do not have children.

trhum.jpg

Transhumanism — The Final Showdown

The West, in its essence, is neither a human nor a natural society. The current debate – is gender real ? – is not directed at finding truth but is instead a program of action – “we will make it so that there is no such thing as gender.” Masculinity and femininity, their polarity, will be abolished. This process is already well advanced, especially in the urban centers, and can be objectively measured by tracing the plummeting levels of testosterone in Western men. It is also the meaning behind the pronoun controversy that catapulted Jordan Peterson into the spotlight during 2015, and why his stance is so important.

Transgenderism is only the prelude, the real showdown is still to come. This will go under the title, “transhumanism,” and if its proponents are successful it will mean the end. Humanity will cease to exist. The technology is not yet fully developed, but the work is being undertaken, and rapid progress is being made. Starting with heart implants, prosthetic limbs, and wearable tech, the ultimate goal will be to overcome the limitations of the human body and achieve immortality. This will be done through packages whose benefits are undeniable – the replacement of legs lost by soldiers to IEDs, the extension of life expectancy, early detection of disease onset, and for this reason will be hard to resist.

An idea of what this means for humankind can be seen in the stresses and strains already affecting peak human activity, the Olympic Games. On the one side, the dissolution of gender difference will destroy women’s sport, a foretaste of which can be seen in the controversy surrounding South African runner Caster Semenya. On the other, advances in prosthetics mean Paralympians will increasingly overtake “able-bodied” athletes in their achievements, this already being the case for the 1500m event. In the background lies the ever more murky divide between legitimate diet and nutrition supplementation, and performance enhancing drugs, an indeterminancy that is also being exploited for political ends, as in the blatantly unjust treatment of Maria Shaparova over her use of meldonium. The point here is that the ruling to outlaw this drug in 2015, after years of its legally sanctioned use, was entirely arbitrary. The same applies to the earlier ban on blood doping.

All these trends lead in the same direction, a loss of meaning to the entire enterprise of elite sport as a human activity. This is nihilism playing itself out; it is Nietzsche’s “devaluation of all values.” The Paralympics for example, whose entire purpose is a celebration of the human spirit in the face of adversity, loses any sense of this once artificial limbs become a source of advantage rather than disadvantage, and replacing body parts becomes a desirable option. We approach the point in the first Robocop film where the decision is taken, “lose the arm,” even though it is undamaged. This has already happened on a small scale, with Australian Football League player Daniel Chick choosing to amputate an injured finger because it was harming his performance on field.

At the time, the idea of removing a body part for the sake of a sport was shocking. But the reasoning is clear, after all, what is there in our society that is not a game of some kind of other ? What better use could he have for his finger other than play a game in which he had attained a high level of mastery and was being well rewarded for doing so. Here it is important to understand what games are, and how they are essentially feminine in nature. This is because they are self-referential, defined by rules of their own making, and pursued for their own purpose – for fun. The value of a game is measured by whether it is enjoyable to play, or in our time, to watch. This applies with equal force to games that make a concession to masculinity – Call of Duty – and are therefore fun for boys to play. Such games are not masculine at all, in spite of feminist protests to the contrary, precisely because they are games – nothing is at stake. They are the safe forms of play a protective mother is happy to let her boys engage in, but they are forms that will also never allow these boys to grow into men, because for men failure has to matter, it has to hurt, physically not emotionally, it has to leave scars, it has to shape future behavior, it has to teach, the hard way. This still happens at the elite level, but only so the rest of us can spectate from the comfort of our sofas.

This helps us understand why, once a society becomes feminine primary, as the West is, it also takes on a more and more childish character. If everything is a game, with well-defined rules to prevent anyone from being harmed, and whose sole purpose is to be fun, then it is entirely legitimate to cry “not fair” whenever someone or something interrupts the proceedings. This was Donald Trump’s greatest sin, he spoiled Hillary’s party, he didn’t play by the rules, he didn’t accept that the 2016 election was never supposed to be a contest, but a game with only one outcome. This is how girls like to play, it was a crowning ceremony not a fight, and then that nasty boy ruined it. The massive display of infantilism that followed her defeat, the historically unprecedented tantrum that ensued, reflects just how far this process has gone.

This is again why Spengler and Heidegger are so useful. By standing back and adopting a perspective that spans 500 or a 1,000 years, it is possible to see how all these various strands interweave and form part of the same picture. There is a logic to this madness.

tangoarg.jpg

The Masculine-Feminine Polarity: The Key Battleground

It also helps us to understand what it is that needs to be defended, if all is not to be lost. First and foremost, it is this – masculine-feminine polarity.

Masculinity and femininity are opposite impulses, but not only do they complement one another, they are mutually dependent on each other if either is to fulfill its true nature. Masculine without feminine can no more be itself than feminine can be so without the masculine. This is why our current feminine primary world is so at risk of annihilation; it has lost the counter-balance it requires to avoid oblivion. Femininity alone is a black hole, it is an attractive force that has no limit, and as such will consume everything, including itself. Masculinity left to its own devices would be no different, exploding outwards into nothingness, just as the Mongol horde was able to roam the known world and conquer vast expanses of territory, but whose heartland was left a depopulated desert as a result, much as was Alexander’s Macedonia at the height of his empire.

Both Alexander and the Mongols were conquerors, but they were not builders. In their modes of warfare lay truth, they were victorious in battle, but they left nothing of beauty. They did not create a space for the feminine, no architecture to admire, no style to imitate, no structures to dwell in. As a result, they came and went, in a very short span of time, and they did so because they lacked internal cohesion, their territories were broken up from within, not without.

These were masculine primary civilizations, in which one polarity is taken to such an extreme that the absence of its opposite became its downfall. A feminine primary society works in a different way, in that what it does is undermine polarity itself. This is because the feminine impulse is singular, solipsistic, so that anything external that has shape or definition is experienced as a constraint, and as such must be neutralized or eliminated. Gender roles are by definition oppressive, not because they disadvantage women, but because they are defined, and as such are limiting, only non-gendered, abstract beings can be truly free.

This is the “tendency towards abstraction.” It is being applied to human bodily constraints, to social, ethical, and moral codes of conduct, and also to time and space. This goes under the name of “globalization.”

timespaceill.jpg

Globalization: The Loss of Any Meaning for Time and Place

Once again Heidegger assists us to understand what globalism is, in its essence. He does so in his classic work, “On the Question of Technology.” Here he takes the river Rhine as an example, whose role and function in modern Germany is primarily to serve as a source of hydroelectric power. This statement is usually interpreted as a kind of pro-environment stance, that the earth should not simply be seen as a set of resources for human beings to exploit. Heidegger certainly did believe that, but it is not the main point he wants to make. We see this when he introduces Holderlin’s 1808 poem, “Der Rhein,” into the discussion. For Heidegger, this poem represents the possibility of history, in which a people can emerge, a specific point in time that is their moment, and in a place that is their’s too. “Der Rhein” is not only a poetic work, it is the river, except that in the hands of Holderlin it becomes more than a moving body of water, but a historical location, the site of “Germanien,” the people whose language the poem is written in, the people for who this river is “Der Rhein.”

It is this kind of possibility the river as hydroelectricity denies. The current it produces is distributed through a grid. It is made available to anyone, anywhere, at any time. Who they are, and what they do with it, is irrelevant, in fact through the network the precise power source for any single wall socket might be any river, or any one of the various types of generating plant. This means that whatever people manage to create or achieve thanks to the availability of this electricity, it cannot bear the same relationship to the river Rhine we find in Holderlin’s poem. The connection has been severed, even if what comes into being is an online community of “Rhine lovers,” arrangements for a tourist cruise along its course, or a Heidegger fan page on Facebook. All of these can be enjoyable activities for those who participate, they can take on great significance in their personal life stories, but they do not have the capacity to be moments in historical time, where a “Germanien” is founded. There is no longer any possibility of history being made, of a “Der Rhein” coming into being.

This is globalization. It is the rupture of any meaningful link between place, time, and people. This is the postmodernist “end of the grand narrative,” which creates a lived experience of complete disorientation and disconnection, it is why our reality always feels so “artificial.” The problem is not so much that everywhere becomes the same, although this tendency is also present, but in the fact that any differences that do exist between locations are entirely random and meaningless. Even if a particular site has historical merit, or architectural splendor, this is now preserved purely for the benefit of tourists, who are visitors from nowhere in particular, who have come solely in order to be entertained, and whose value is entirely abstract – the money they spend. The great pyramids of Egypt may be the country’s main source of foreign currency earnings, but they bear no more relationship to the present nation’s culture, religion, language, or way of life, than they do to those who flock to see them. This is one reason why genuine study of these monuments has been effectively shut down for decades, in case any new understanding emerges that might have a negative impact on the tourism industry.

It is also why we can travel to Victoria in Australia and stumble across a large scale copy of the Sphinx, at what turns out to be a suburban gambling venue. Why a Sphinx? Who knows? Who cares? We can imagine future generations of archaeologists attempting in vain to decipher its meaning, because there is none, no greater relevance to the former manufacturing center and woolen industry export hub of Geelong than the original does to present day Cairo. Instead, the inspiration for this choice of design is more likely to have come from Las Vegas, where such total disregard for history and geography is taken to its logical extreme.

Las Vegas provides a good example of the “tendency towards abstraction” at work. The city’s location was chosen precisely because it was in the middle of nowhere, inside a state without any legal restrictions on gambling. Its founding was enabled by the availability of technology that overcame the natural constraints presented by the desert. Its central economic activity consists solely in the manipulation of symbolic values, games, whose appeal lies in their entertainment value. These games require as little skill acquisition as possible, and are governed purely by luck. Physical input is kept to an absolute minimum, no more demanding than pushing a button, the environment is carefully controlled for comfort, safety, and security, and no concession to time is made – venues are open 24/7 and no indication of whether it is day or night permitted. The entire enterprise is either entirely abstract or seeking to become so. Casinos, however, are not the final word in this process, their main competition now coming from the online gambling industry.

We see a similar tendency across the economy, which takes on an ever more “immaterial” character. This has two major forms. The first consists purely of symbols, above all banking and finance, which generate capital flows in various directions, but also the world of information technology that provides the platform for this kind of activity. These bear some relation to the “real” economy of tangible goods and services, but as the global financial crisis showed, this link is tenuous at best, and at times is broken entirely. The second is made up of “cultural” production – entertainment, fashion, style, brand identity, academic research, social media content, also dependent on IT to a large extent. As with finance capital, this constantly strives for autonomy from outside “reality,” it seeks to become self-referential, and in this it is becoming increasingly successful.

beautyjjj.jpg

The Impossibility of Beauty without Truth and Truth without Beauty

This is why a defense of male-female polarity is so important. Without this, both truth, the masculine value, and beauty, the feminine value, collapse. We see this in the Geelong Sphinx, which has neither truth nor beauty – it is tacky and looks ridiculous. We also see it in trends such as the “fat acceptance movement,” whose express purpose is to separate truth from beauty by denying that there is any such thing as a naturally beautiful female human form. On this question Gad Sa’ad has provided an overwhelming mass of evidence, but his argument only stands if we hold truth to be a value, and in a feminine primary world this is simply not the case. This is because the entire objective is to escape the truth, it is to create a world free of such constraints, so that any female, no matter how morbidly obese, can be considered beautiful. It is not a matter for debate, it is an agenda to be realized, and once again it is making rapid progress, as can be seen in the overwhelming number of Western women who are seriously overweight.

Beauty requires truth, it needs to be real in order to be truly beautiful. At the same time, truth needs beauty, because reality can be ugly too. There is a truth to female genital mutilation – by making sexual intercourse a painful act it serves as a powerful reinforcer in a patriarchal order whose goal is to subordinate women’s sexuality to family and property interests. As such, female genital mutilation works. Male genital mutilation, which is much more widespread in the West than female, also achieves its original purpose, almost identical to FGM, by reducing men’s enjoyment of sex. These truths do not make either practice any the less cruel or barbaric.

The masculine-feminine polarity is the central battleground today. It is why feminist ideology is the main opponent, because this is where the insurgent forces of annihilation are currently deriving their inspiration. What is at stake here is not simply an assertion of masculinity, or men’s rights, although our society is increasingly hostile to men; it is also a defense of femininity, because there is no single force on the planet more misogynistic than feminism, especially its radical wing, which detests everything feminine with the utmost venom.

In order to combat this misogyny and androgyny, it is necessary to set it in its proper historical perspective, to understand its source, and to appreciate the critical roles played by the concepts of “freedom” and “equality.” This is not to promote “unfreedom” or “inequality,” especially in relations between the sexes, but to grasp that the masculine and the feminine are forces that run in opposite directions, have different values at their core, but who ultimate complement and are necessary for one another to flourish. It is to protect a world in which truth and beauty both have a place, and it is to preserve the possibility of a new civilizational project, or projects, arising to replace a West now well into its terminal phase of decline.

vendredi, 16 septembre 2016

Féminines, pas féministes!

femtraboule.jpg

17:38 Publié dans Evénement | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : gabrielle cluzel, féminisme, féminité, lyon, événement | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

jeudi, 16 octobre 2014

Julius Evola e la donna crudele

3038385535_1_3_30xylUmX.jpg

Julius Evola e la donna crudele

Ex: http://romeocastiglione.wordpress.com

Si annida il mistero tra le impalcature dell’imponente opera evoliana Metafisica del sesso. Nei capitoli ammalianti è celato un particolare erotismo evocativo; le tematiche affrontate nel volume brillano di un’immortale e remota luce. L’archetipo femminile è denso di sacralità e spiritualità arcana. La donna è inquadrata in un’ottica tradizionale, ancestrale: è sospesa nella perenne immutabilità ed è legata in modo preponderante alla terra, alla luna, ai ritmi ciclici del mondo. È un libro spiazzante, intrigante, coinvolgente. Le righe si sovrappongono nell’immaginario. Julius Evola esalta l’aspetto segreto della femmina, il lato nero, demoniaco. Secondo l’autore la donna riesce a far coesistere dentro di sé la disposizione alla pietà e quella alla crudeltà. In virtù di ciò egli rielabora alcune convinzioni di Lombroso e Ferreno. Particolarmente pone all’attenzione un prototipo di femmina violenta e spietata; tale modello si esalta nelle rivoluzioni e nei linciaggi. L’autore argomenta le supposizioni e riporta i passaggi più improntati del volume lombrosiano La donna delinquente. Credo che sia di ausilio il lungometraggio Malena: le donne del paese si accaniscono con perfida violenza sulla bellissima protagonista del film. La sfigurano pubblicamente. È un atto di giustizia sommaria. Malena abbatte i tabù. Di conseguenza provoca un’invidia assurda. È l’altra faccia della medaglia; rappresenta l’evasione. E deve essere distrutta.

Le donne crudeli di Tornatore sono simili alla perfida Emma Smael del lungometraggio Johnny Guitar di Nicholas Ray. Come il fuoco Emma Smael avvampa la nuda pelle. Ella sprigiona nell’atmosfera un aroma tragico intriso di dolore; ha un carisma esasperato, uno charme lugubre e impersonale. Porta i segni della rabbia oscura e antisolare. È vestita di nero, non cura il suo corpo. All’apparenza è un essere insignificante e indesiderabile. Ma sotto la scorza alberga un’anima inquieta, crudele, mesta. Luccica di cattiva luce quest’antieroina lunare. Emma fomenta il popolo, aizza le masse. Combatte la crociato contro i diversi, i forestieri, i fuorilegge. È puritana: disprezza le tentazioni dei sensi. Nello stesso tempo desidera ardentemente il bandito Ballerino Kid. Nel suo corpo si affrontano gli istinti contrastanti. Questa donna vorrebbe addirittura uccidere la sua segreta passione per far allontanare i bollenti spiriti. «Desideri Kid, ti vergogni e vorresti vederlo impiccato». Ribecca così Vienna, la nemica acerrima, la rivale assoluta.

Evola tenta di mettere insieme come un puzzle i richiami evocativi. In modo particolare è dedicato alla crudeltà della donna un intero capitolo. Così denocciola una carrellata di aneddoti storici: si sovrappongono le saghe della Tradizione. I persiani intravidero nell’universo femminile una particolare dualità. Fuoco e neve, durezze e dolcezza formano la donna. Ebbene sorge un collegamento tra crudeltà e sessualità: il tipo della baccante e della mènade è un esempio lampante. Nelle pieghe affiora un prototipo femminile afroditico ambiguo. La Dolores di Swinburne, la cosiddetta Nostra signora dello Spasimo è il vessillo del peccato, del piacere, della perdizione, della crudeltà latente. E il filosofo coglie alcune sottili sfumature. Ridisegna l’eroina Mimi della Boheme di Murger in un modo diverso; in sostanza inquadra la ragazza in una dimensione perfino “brutale e selvaggia”.

Ebbene il fascino muliebre è associato alla magia e alla stregoneria. Circe, Calipso e Brunhilde rappresentano l’esasperazione, l’estremizzazione, l’attrazione malefica. Tale tipologia di donna attrae l’uomo come una calamita famelica; la fascinazione è gravida di richiami alla negromanzia, all’occultismo. È la lagnanza della terra, lo spirito del peccato, la rottura. Perfino Ulisse è incantato dalle sirene: ascolta l’eco d’estasi legato a un palo. È una lotta tra il bene e il male. Anche il valoroso Gerardo Satriano nel romanzo L’eredità della priora è sedotto dalle fattucchiere lucane. Smarrisce la concezione del tempo e annulla la sua individualità. Così come perde la cognizione del tempo il giudice salentino protagonista del film Galantuomini di Winspeare. L’uomo prova una strana attrazione nei confronti di una donna legata al mondo della malavita. Per tale ragione perde tutte le certezze e confonde il bene e il male.

La letteratura, la poesia e il cinema hanno esaltato diverse volte le donne crudeli, in altre parole quelle dotate di un fascino antisolare, demoniaco. Per alcune strane similitudini elogio Giulia Venere, la domestica del libro Cristo si è fermato a Eboli di Carlo Levi. Leggo, annoto i passi del racconto. Ed elaboro il pensiero. Penso che sia un accostamento intrigante; tramite poche righe il lettore è catapultato in un anfratto antimoderno. «Giulia era una donna alta e formosa – scrive Levi – doveva aver avuto, nella gioventù una specie di barbara e solenne bellezza. Il viso era ormai rugoso per gli anni e giallo per la malaria, ma restavano i segni dell’antica venusità nella sua struttura severa, come nei muri di un tempio classico, che ha perso i marmi che l’adornavano, ma conserva intatta la forma e le proporzioni. […] Questo viso aveva un fortissimo carattere arcaico, non nel senso del classico greco, né nel romano, ma di una antichità misteriosa e crudele, cresciuta sempre sulla stessa terra senza rapporti e mistioni con gli uomini, ma legata alla zolla e alle eterne divinità animali. Vi si vedevano una fredda sensualità, una oscura ironia, una crudeltà naturale, una protervia impenetrabile e una passività piena di potenza che si legavano in un’espressione insieme severa, intelligente, malvagia». Con molta probabilità anche Levi ha subìto il fascino distruttivo della maga lucana. Emerge un ritratto sensuale, erotico, spietato.

Tale donna è un archetipo, un modello evoliano. Il filosofo della tradizione nella sua Metafisica del sesso rimarca gli oscuri aspetti. E appare con prepotenza la “dimensione fredda” evocata perfino da uno scrittore progressista come Carlo Levi. «È questa la dimensione fredda della donna – scrive Evola – quale incarnazione terrestre della Vergine, di Durgâ e in quanto essere yin. […] Che la donna sia connessa più dell’uomo alla terra, all’elemento cosmico – naturale è cosa dimostrata. […] Ma nell’antichità questa connessione si riferiva piuttosto all’aspetto yin della natura, dal dominio sovrasensibile notturno e inconscio, irrazionale e abissale, delle forze vitali. Di qui, nella donna certe disposizioni veggenti e magiche in senso stretto».

Nella rappresentazione cinematografica del libro Irene Papas veste i panni di Giulia. Avvertiamo nelle pieghe delle scene un velato erotismo colmo di allusioni estatiche. La donna nasconde il suo copro con le vesti. Soltanto i piedi sono scoperti: pertanto codesta forma di pudore primordiale si differenzia da quello delle donne orientali. Le cinesi considerano i piedi l’elemento primitivo da nascondere; le arabe, invece, coprono la bocca. E Giulia cammina scalza fra le macerie derelitte. In uno spezzone lascia intravedere una gamba nuda; la copre subito con un’aria sensuale. Magnetizza così l’uomo. Quest’ultimo è attratto dal gesto insolito della megera, dai movimenti furtivi, dal sensualismo impersonale. Proprio Evola dedica al pudore taluni passaggi coinvolgenti. «Si sa fin troppo bene quanto spesso la donna usa le vesti per produrre un maggior effetto eccitante allusivo alle promesse della sua nudità. Montaigne ebbe a scrivere che ci sono cose che si nascondono per meglio mostrarle».  Giulia Venere si è cristallizzata nelle sembianze di Irene Papas ed è difficile scindere le due figure. Il gesto insolito dell’attrice greca è un frammento penetrante e ipnotico. Con pochissime e calde movenze è riuscita a descrivere i sentieri tracciati nel libro evoliano.

dimanche, 13 juillet 2014

Entretien avec Piero San Giorgio

 

piero-san-giorgio.jpg

Entretien avec Piero San Giorgio

Ex: http://zentropaville.tumblr.com

Piero San Giorgio est, depuis vingt ans, responsable des marchés émergents d’Europe de l’Est, du Moyen Orient et d’Afrique dans l’industrie high-tech. Depuis 2005, il se prépare à l’effondrement de l’économie et étudie les moyens d’y survivre.

Le thème de votre dernier livre peut surprendre. Dans « Femmes au bord de la crise » vous évoquez des figures féminines très fortes dans un monde au bord de l’effondrement. Comment êtes vous venu à écrire ce livre ?

Lorsque l’on parle de crises – personnelles ou de grande envergure – on a trop souvent l’image du héros hollywoodien, déterminé et invincible, qui mène la charge. Or les statistiques montrent que dans la plupart des crises, et ce malgré un siècle de féminisme tendant vers l’égalité homme-femme, ce sont les femmes qui sont en première ligne et qui souffrent le plus : précarité dans le travail, difficultés financières avec enfants à charge, violences, prédation sexuelle… Dans le monde moderne, les femmes ont, selon moi, beaucoup plus exposées aux risques et ont plus à perdre qu’avant.

Il y a trois raisons qui m’ont poussé à écrire ce livre. Tout d’abord, le fait que parmi les lecteurs de mes deux précédents livres “Survivre à l’effondrement économique” et “Rues Barbares – survivre en ville”, il n’y avait que 15 à 20 pour cent de femmes. Ensuite, en lisant l’édifiant essai de Laurent Obertone “France Orange Mécanique”, j’ai pris conscience de la réalité (j’ai revérifié toutes les statistiques choquantes cités dans cet ouvrage, et elles sont bien exactes) de la violence faite aux femmes aujourd’hui en France, en Europe et partout ailleurs. J’ai été bouleversé par certains des récits et je me suis dit que je ne pouvais pas rester inactif et donc essayer à contribuer à la prise de conscience et à la recherche de solutions spécifiquement pour les femmes.

Enfin, beaucoup de mes lecteurs m’écrivent pour me dire qu’ils travaillent à la mise en place d’une stratégie d’autonomie, de recherche de liberté et de sécurité, par la mise en place de Bases Autonomes Durables, mais qu’ils ont de la difficulté à expliquer leur démarche auprès de leurs épouses ou compagnes. Un nouveau livre était nécessaire pour qu’ils puissent le leur offrir, le leur faire lire… Du moins c’est ce que j’ai essayé de faire dans la première partie de “Femmes au bord de la crise”, que j’ai complété dans la deuxième partie par des interviews d’une vingtaine de femmes de toutes extractions sociales qui, seules ou en famille, se préparent et qui partagent leurs expériences, leur démarche et leur vécu au quotidien. Ces femmes sont formidables!

Quelle est votre définition de la féminité ?

A priori, c’est un mystère absolu ! Il faudrait que vous posiez la question a Conchita Saucisse ! Toutefois, c’est comme beaucoup de choses que l’on ne peut définir avec exactitude pourtant, lorsqu’on y est confronté, on reconnait la féminité instantanément ! Pour ne pas tourner autour du pot, pour moi, la féminité c’est à la fois le charme, la douceur, la séduction, la grâce, l’élégance naturelle, la maternité, l’érotisme… coexistant dans la même personne : un vrai mystère !

Paradoxalement, le caractère féminin n’est-il pas le mieux adapté à la survie ?

Anthropologiquement oui. Tant dans les peuples pré-littéraires, dans les récits de la Torah (Deutéronome) que chez les chimpanzés, lorsqu’une tribu ou un peuple avait conquis le territoire d’un autre, après avoir exterminé tous les mâles, y compris les vieillards et les enfants, les femme les plus belles et les plus fertiles sont absorbées par la tribu victorieuse. Dans ce sens, la femme a plus de chances de survivre et de continuer à transmettre son patrimoine génétique, à défaut du culturel. Aujourd’hui encore et malgré un siècle de féminisme, beaucoup de femmes ont comme stratégie de rencontrer l’homme le plus riche ou le plus puissant possible. Ce n’est pas une stratégie idiote, lorsque l’on voit le nombre de jolies femmes qui gravitent autour des hommes de pouvoir ou d’argent, et malgré leur physique ingrat, voire parfois objectivement repoussant (je pense a quelques hommes politiques ou autres capitaines d’industrie là). Toutefois, cette stratégie à deux points faibles : le premier est qu’il y aura toujours une femme plus belle, plus jeune surtout, ou plus intrigante pour venir la remplacer, notamment dans un monde où, grâce au féminisme entre autres, l’homme n’a plus d’obligation morale ni de pression sociale pour ne pas simplement jeter une femme pour une autre, si bien sûr, il en a les moyens matériels. Ainsi, la précarité des femmes s’en retrouve accrue. Et on ne parle même pas des cas où ces femmes feraient une erreur de jugement dans la puissance ou la fortune de leur cible ! Le deuxième point faible de cette stratégie est qu’en choisissant un tel homme, elles se mettent en position, si je puis dire, de dépendance.

Je crois profondément que les hommes et les femmes sont les deux parts complémentaires et indispensables à l’“unité de production”, vous me permettrez d’utiliser ce terme marxisant, qu’est la famille. Unité de production d’enfants, mais aussi de joies et de bonheurs simples. Or, dans mes livres, je parle d’acquérir de l’indépendance, de l’autonomie et de la liberté. Quoi de mieux que de travailler à cet idéal en famille?

Des Antigones aux Caryatides, de nombreuses jeunes femmes s’engagent dans l’action militante nationaliste/identitaire. Que pensez-vous de ce phénomène ?

Ah, je ne connais pas les Caryatides, enfin à part celles sur l’Erechthéion. Mais je vois très bien qui sont les Antigones, et je trouve leurs actions et positions politiques admirables et, surtout, très intelligentes. C’est un phénomène qui mérite de s’accentuer car sans elles, sans les femmes, nous autres hommes avons l’impression de combattre seuls. Bien souvent, après un combat politique ou simplement d’opinion, nous rentrons dans nos foyers vers nos femmes, nos mères, nos filles qui ne comprennent pas toujours, voire parfois réprouvent ce que nous faisons, à cause de la pression du politiquement correct notamment. Il est donc bienvenu de voir s’accroître des femmes qui combattent aussi, côte à côte des hommes, pour un combat qui, il me semble, mérite d’être mené – même s’il semble impossible à remporte, tant la tâche est immense et tant les probabilités de perdre sont grandes. Enfin, et c’est très important, ces mouvements me semblent agir avec féminité, grâce, politesse, intelligence… on est loin de la vulgarité crasse et gueulante des “femen” et autres groupes de grognasses immondes, financés par la banque !

Dans une optique de survie, la famille semble être pour vous la plus sûre des bases?

La famille est la cellule du corps social depuis que l’homme existe. Et bien qu’il y ait eu au cours de l’histoire et des géographies des rares et légères variantes, la famille humaine est tout d’abord l’union d’un homme et une femme avec pour objectif de perpétuer leur gênes et leur culture par l’intermédiaire de leurs enfants, qu’il faudra protéger, éduquer et rendre capables d’intégrer le corps social, que celui-ci soit le clan, la tribu ou la Nation, en tant qu’adultes autonomes et responsables, c’est à dire des citoyens. Au delà de la notion de survie stricto-senso, c’est donc la famille, et non l’Etat, qui a la responsabilité ( parce qu’elle fait l’essentiel du travail, bien qu’on puisse mutualiser un certain nombre de tâches au sein de la famille élargie ou d’une groupe de familles) de mener à bien cette “éducation” du petit d’homme pour le transformer en adulte “moral” et coresponsable de la “cité”. Pour cela, bien évidemment, il faut travailler sur l’autonomie, sur la capacité de production, sur les connaissances et compétences à acquérir, sur les valeurs communes garantes d’une identité forte et clairement identifiable, sur la capacité de se défendre contre la prédation et la violence – seul s’il le faut, mais préférablement en groupe. Sans la famille, il me semble bien impossible de faire tout cela. L’alternative, c’est à dire ce que nous vivons aujourd’hui, où nous sommes tous encouragés à l’individualisme et où toutes les tâches sont déléguées à l’Etat. Notre modèle sociétal à rempli la Cité – ou ce qu’il en reste – d’abrutis narcissiques, inaptes à travailler a quoi que ce soit d’utile, et incapables à ne serait-ce que comprendre où se trouve leur vrai intérêt. Cette population tombera de haut et souffrira terriblement lors des crises à venir. Préparons nous!

Transhumanisme, théorie du Genre: que vous inspire ces délires scientifiques? Pensez-vous qu’ils peuvent nous conduire à une catastrophe?

Paradoxalement, car amateur de science-fiction, je pense que non. Ces apprentis sorciers délirent complètement sur la capacité de changer l’homme par la technologie ou par de la doctrine, plus proche de la croyance religieuse que de la science. Autant le socialisme sous sa forme Nazie ou Communiste a pu causer des centaines de millions de morts car les Etats étaient puissants dans le réel, et qu’ils voulaient façonner l’”homme nouveau” à coups de baïonnette, de famines ou de camps de rééducation, autant ces sorciers modernes le font avec quoi? La gay-pride? Des manuels scolaires que les élèves, de plus en plus analphabètes, ne sauront de toute façon plus lire? Avec un Etat qui n’aura bientôt plus d’argent pour acheter les matraques des CRS? Et ces “théories”, ces croyances, sont tellement éloignées de la nature humaine profonde, de notre anthropologie de base que personne dans le monde réel ne les suivra. Vous imaginez la classe de banlieue française typique avec 70% de gamins d’origine sub-saharienne ou Nord-africaine à qui l’on dit qu’ils peuvent choisir d’être soit homme, soit femme? Le lendemain, le prof, il se fait lapider sa race par leur famille et leurs grands frères, wa Allah al Adhim! Si cela conduira à une catastrophe, ce sera pour ces grands prêtres du progrès qui ne comprendront pas pourquoi la populace va venir sous leurs balcons et les pendre aux réverbères des beaux quartiers de Paris. Personnellement, et bien que je comprenne les combats tels que ceux de la “Manif pour Tous” – et qui sont utiles pour le symbole, le panache, je pense que c’est trop tard, l’effondrement sociétal et économique sera sur nous avant que leurs vaines tentatives de reprogrammer nos enfants n’aboutissent. Mais je peux me tromper, bien sûr, donc restons vigilants.

Votre premier livre, « Survivre à l’effondrement » est paru en 2011 aux éditions Le Retour aux Sources. Comment jugez vous l’évolution de la « mouvance survivaliste » en France?

Le succès de ce livre m’a surpris! Nous en sommes à près de 40’000 exemplaires vendus, la version en anglais marche bien et celle en italien sort en septembre. Je vois souvent des lecteurs et des lectrices se passer le livre, l’annoter, le surligner… parfois certains en achètent par commandes de dix ou de vingt pour l’offrir a tous leurs amis… et tout cela sans aucun relai des grands médias, sans la télévision, sans aucune revue littéraire. Preuve qu’un autre monde, que d’autres réseaux se créent, alors que l’ancien se meurt…

Je crois que ce livre a dépassé la mouvance “survivaliste”, pour peu qu’il y en ait une, pour toucher un public bien plus large, constitué de jeunes et de moins jeunes, de couples, de familles, de retraités… qui, simplement, on pris le contenu de ce livre comme point de départ d’un travail, d’une quête, vers plus d’autonomie. Et ça donne des résultats! L’autonomie permet de consommer moins et mieux (eau et nourriture locale, meilleure consommation ou production énergétique), d’apprendre et acquérir de nouvelles compétences utiles, d’accroitre sa capacité à se défendre, et surtout à tisser un lien social plus réel et plus fort entre les membres d’une même famille, d’un quartier, d’un hameau, entre amis… finalement un peu comme dans les témoignages des femmes dans mon dernier livre. Au bout du chemin vers l’autonomie, se trouve la liberté réelle.                

Vous préfacez « Too much magic : L’Amérique désenchantée » de J.H Kunstler. Ce livre est une critique féroce de la société US. Croyez-vous à son effondrement à court terme?

Ce livre est exceptionnel et c’est un grand honneur pour moi que de l’avoir préfacé. Encore Inconnu en France, Kunstler est pourtant l’un des auteurs majeurs aux USA aujourd’hui. Non seulement il écrit de manière superbe, mais sa critique de la société Etat-Unienne est mordante, drôle, documentée, factuelle et… désespérée. Pour lui, les USA se meurent. Ils meurent de leurs infrastructures délabrées, de leur classe politique corrompue, de leur population vivant dans une orgie de consommation futile et incapable de voir la réalité de la crise économique et énergétique à laquelle ils font déjà face. Les USA sont dans une fuite en avant dans le techno-narcissime (oh, qu’il est beau mon iphone 12S!), dans des aventures guerrières hasardeuses et coûteuses (Afghanistan, Irak, Syrie, Ukraine…), et le dans une gouffre d’endettement invraisemblable. L’Empire est nu. L’Empire va mourir. Et Kunstler décortique avec minutie et humour les raisons et les résultants de cette mort. Et ca va faire mal. Si vous voulez comprendre les USA d’aujourd’hui et donc où va le monde, il faut lire ce livre!

Que pensez-vous du phénomène des « milices » américaines et du courant libertarien?

Les Etats-Unis se sont fondés sur l’esprit pionner et sur l’idée de liberté subconstantielle à celui-ci. Ce pionnier devaient pouvoir défendre leur terre par eux mêmes, et se sont constitués en milices. Pendant longtemps, l’armée américaine n’existait pas. Il n’y avait que des milices incorporées selon les besoins dans la Garde Nationale. Et cet esprit de liberté-armée se retrouve dans mon pays, la Suisse, où le citoyen-soldat est le garant de la liberté et du bien commun, il est même le vrai contrepouvoir au gouvernement et aux partis politiques. Le renouveau de l’esprit de milice aux Etats-Unis est bien réel et se fonde dans le désir d’un nombre croissant d’américains – civils et soldats – de retrouver les sources de leur nation dans leur textes fondateurs, et non dans un gouvernement de plus en plus centralisateur et à tendance totalitaire. Ces citoyens pensent que par le fait d’être armés ils peuvent être le seul frein à la machine d’Etat qui s’est emballée sous l’effet corrupteur de l’establishment, que le président Eisenhower déjà, appelait “complexe militaro-industriel”, auquel il faudrait ajouter “bancaire”.

Le courant Libertarien est proche de ces idées et prône une état redimensionné aux tâches que lui confère la Constitution et non à un Léviathan bureaucratique. Pour les adeptes de cette philosophie politique, l’accent doit être mis sur les libertés individuelles que sont la liberté d’entreprendre, de vivre affranchi du contrôle et de la surveillance de l’état, voire à ne pas avoir à payer d’impôts ni de subventionner une sécurité sociale qu’ils considèrent comme inefficace et contre-productive. Mais il faut dire que c’est un mouvement très disparate et on y trouve des conservateurs, des religieux, des anarchistes de droite, des antisystème… leur “leader” historique, qui est un homme très respectable à mon avis, est Ron Paul qui lutte depuis des décennies contre la corruption rampante de Washington et contre les aventures militaires de son pays.

Bien que ces courants me soient sympathiques, je crains là aussi qu’il ne soit trop tard pour les USA : leur infrastructure est trop vétuste, leur population bigarrée est trop individualiste, leur chaînes d’approvisionnement en énergie, en nourriture et en équipements vitaux (médicaments, pièces de rechange, etc.) est trop fragile, leur économie trop endettée et incapable de créer de la croissance réelle. Ils sont finis. Et ces mouvements ne pourront, a mon avis, au mieux que créer des bases, des réseaux pour reconstruire sur les décombres. Ce serait déjà pas mal.

Crise économique, révoltes sociales, tensions ethniques, engrenages militaires à l’Est; croyez-vous que l’Europe va basculer dans un chaos majeur?

Vous oubliez dans votre liste nos classes dirigeantes corrompues et des peuples amorphes et apathiques! Oui, malheureusement, je crois que l’Europe – Suisse comprise – mais particulièrement les pays de l’Union Européenne, France et Royaume Uni en tête, vont basculer dans un chaos majeur. Quels en seront les déclencheurs? Ils peuvent être nombreux et s’amplifier les uns les autres : crise énergétique, dette irremboursable, effondrement de l’économie, tensions sociales, conflits ethnico-religieux, expéditions militaires hasardeuses… L’avion à tous ses moteurs en feu et le pilote est un sociopathe !. J’espère me tromper, mais je vois que ce que j’avais vu dès 2005 et mis par écrit en 2011 dans “Survivre à l’effondrement économique” arrive. Et de plus en plus vite. Je ne suis pas le seul à le voir, bien sûr, d’autres le voient aussi de Alain de Benoist à Guillaume Faye à Serge Latouche et bien d’autres encore! La question demeure : que pouvons nous faire? En politique? Collectivement? Identitairement? En tant que familles? En tant qu’individus – hommes ou femmes? Les réponses à ces questions ne s’excluent pas nécessairement, mais elles nécessitent de l’action. Or le temps est plus que jamais venu d’agir, de travailler dur pour acquérir nos moyens d’autonomie, d’autodéfense, de liberté réelle, je dirai même de reconquête ou, à défaut, de sécession – sans doute mentale pour commencer… et, dans toutes ces démarches, j’espère voir nos femmes être non seulement à nos côtés, mais à l’avant garde.

Propos recueillis par Monika Berchvok pour Rivarol

Piero San Giorgio, Femmes au bord de la crise, 242 pages, 16 euros.

James Howard Kunstler, Too much magic - L’Amérique désenchantée, 372 pages, 21 euros.

Livres disponible sur http://www.leretourauxsources.com

La revue Rébellion consacre un important dossier dans son numéro 61 à la question de l’engagement féminin dans les mouvements militants radicaux. Il faut reconnaître que le sujet n’avait jamais vraiment évoquer jusque là, surtout par des militantes de notre famille de pensée.

Une enquête de terrain mener par Alaïs Vidal donne l’opinion de plusieurs femmes engagés dans l’activisme patriotique. « Si nous voulons avoir notre place dans ces milieux exclusivement masculins, déclare Louise, il faut savoir à certains moments taper du poing, sortir de notre « carcan de douceur et de grâce ». La solution ? C’est Iseult , une des animatrices du groupes de jeunes filles militantes les Antigones, qui l’avance : « Être une fille ce n’est pas une faiblesse mais une force. Prenez votre place sur la dentelle du rempart ». Le numéro 61 de la revue Rébellion est disponible contre 5 euros ( frais de port compris) à l’adresse suivante : RSE BP 62124 – 31020 Toulouse cedex 02.

00:05 Publié dans Actualité, Entretiens | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : piero san giorgio, entretien, féminité, crise, livre | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

mercredi, 28 septembre 2011

Absolute Woman: A Clarification of Evola’s Thoughts on Women

Absolute Woman:
A Clarification of Evola’s Thoughts on Women

By Amanda BRADLEY

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

evola08.jpgOne of the central concepts of Julius Evola’s philosophy of gender is the distinction between absolute man and absolute woman. But he seldom gives explicit definitions of these terms. Absolute man and woman can be likened to Platonic Forms, thus defining them can be as difficult as defining Justice, Truth, or Love.

The term “absolute woman” inspires more controversy than “absolute man.” Since the male principle is associated with light, goodness, and activity, whereas the female principle is associated with darkness, evil, and passivity, feminists can easily claim that Evola’s views are inherently misogynist. Another point of controversy is Otto Weininger’s influence on Evola. Evola himself admits that Weininger must be read critically due to “his unconscious misogynous complex” (Julius Evola, Eros and the Mysteries of Love: The Metaphysics of Sex [Rochester, Vermont.: Inner Traditions, 1991], 157–58).

It is important to address Evola’s writings on women so that his views are correctly understood. Since he was opposed to the emerging feminism of his day, it would be easy for those unfamiliar with his ideas to infer that Evola also was anti-woman. By explaining his views and not glossing over any points that do in fact sound misogynistic (as is the case with some Evola devotees) the New Right can set the terms of discourse and accurately elucidate his position.

Evola on the Composition of Human Beings

The simplest definition of “absolute woman” is the female principle, the feminine force of the universe. Individual men and woman have varying degrees of the absolute man and woman, although the feminine principle usually is the underlying force in women.

In the modern world (the Kali Yuga) these forces appear in more degenerate forms and also do not always manifest properly. In fact, Evola said that “cases of full sexual development are seldom found. Almost every man bears some traces of femininity and every woman residues of masculinity . . . the traits that we deemed typical for the female psyche can be found in man as well as women, particularly in regressive phases of a civilization” (Eros, 169). In addition, these “manifest differently depending on the race and type of civilization” (Eros, 168).

To understand the influence of the “absolute woman,” it is first necessary to understand Evola’s conception of the human being. He held that humans are comprised of three parts:

  1. the outer individual (the personality, or ego).
  2. the level of profound being, the site of the principium individuationis. This is the true “face” of a person as opposed to the mask of the ego.
  3. the level of elementary forces that are “superior and prior to the individuation but acting as the ultimate seat of the individual.” (Eros, 36)

It is at the third level, that of elementary forces, where sexual attraction is aroused (Eros, 36). Thus it is here that the elementary forces that comprise the absolute man or woman are located. This matches Evola’s description of some modern women, who are able to develop “masculine” skills such as logic or intellectualism. He says they have done so “by way of a layer placed on top of [their] deepest nature” (Eros, 151–52). However, they have not succeeded in altering their fundamental nature, only their superficial personalities.

A Metaphysical Starting-Point for Male and Female

According to Traditional doctrines, the sexes were metaphysical forces before they manifested in the world. Absolute man and woman exist from the beginning of time, when the Universal One splits into a Dyad, which then causes the rest of creation. In most forms of Hinduism, Shiva, the male principle, is identified with pure Being. Shakti, the female principle, is identified with Becoming and Change. In a similar vein, Aristotle associated the male principle with form and the female with matter. According to Evola, form means “the power that determines and arouses the principle of motion, development, becoming” while matter means “the substance or power that, being devoid of form in itself, can take up any form, and which in itself is nothing but can become everything when it has been awakened and fecundated” (Eros, 118). In the Far Eastern tradition, yang (the male principle) is associates with heaven, while yin (the female principle) is associated with the earth (Julius Evola, Revolt Against the Modern World, trans. Guido Stucco [Rochester, Vermont: Inner Traditions: 1995], 157.).Thus, form and matter combined to create the manifested universe. And from the coitus of Shiva and Shakti “springs the world” (Eros, 122). (This is in contrast to Oswald Spengler, who believed that becoming was the essential element, rather than steadfast being.)

The male principle is associated with truth, light, the Sun, virility, activeness, and stability. Sometimes it is associated with the Universal One that existed before the Dyad. The female quality is associated with deception, changeability, the moon, the earth, darkness, wetness, passivity, and dependence on another. In Evola’s words:

What the Greeks called “heterity,” that is, being connected to another or being centered on someone other than oneself, is a characteristic proper to the cosmic female, whereas to have one’s own principle in oneself is proper to the pure male. . . . female life is almost always devoid of an individual value but is linked to someone else in her need, born of vanity, to be acknowledged, noticed, flattered, admired, and desired (this extroverted tendency is connected to that “looking outside” which on a metaphysical level has been attributed to Shakti). (Eros, 157)

These forces then manifest in actual men and women. But Evola is clear to maintain that absolute man and woman are not simply aspects of character. Instead, they are “objective elements working in individuals almost as impersonally as the chemical properties inherent in a particular substance” (Eros, 152). As Evola says:

before and besides existing in the body, sex exists in the soul and, to a certain extent, in the spirit itself. We are man or woman inwardly before being so externally; the primordial male or female quality penetrates and saturates the whole of our being visibly and invisibly . . . just as a color permeates a liquid. (Eros, 32)

As such, the absolute woman is not simply an idealized concept of woman. She is defined from the divine down to the human, and is not a human conception of something divine.

Evola’s Description of Absolute Woman

The absolute woman is the rod by which all women are to be measured. Evola writes, “the only thing we can do is establish the superiority or inferiority of a given woman on the basis of her being more of less close to the female type, to the pure and absolute woman, and the same thing applies to man as well” (Eros, 34). In addition, superiority is defined by how closely one realizes the absolute woman or man. “A woman who is perfectly woman is superior to a man who is imperfectly man, just as a farmer who is faithful to his land and performs his work perfectly is superior to a king who cannot do his own work,” says Evola (Eros, 34).

Many more characteristics are associated with the female principle than those described below; however, these are the primary ones highlighted by Evola in his writings on the subject.

The Waters and Changeability

The fundamental feminine characteristic is changeability. Thus, the female is associated with water, which is fluid, and adapts to whatever form it is put into, just as matter/Shakti is shaped by form/Shiva. Evola writes that woman “reflects the cosmic female according to its aspect as material receiving a form that is external to her and that she does not produce from within” (Eros, 153). This fits in with Carl Jung’s description of woman’s animus, which is not self-created, but instead is a subconscious collection of the thoughts of men.

This changeability is related to woman’s tendency to live for someone outside of herself, due to the fluidity and changeability of her nature. For Evola, this means following the path of a mother or lover, fixing herself to a virile force in order to obtain transcendence. In contrast, “modern woman in wanting to be for herself has destroyed herself” (Revolt, 165.). By believing that she is merely her personality, she loses her transcendent aspect.

This changeability is seen in the association of the female with water. According to Evola, water represents “undifferentiated life prior to and not yet fixed in form,” that “which runs or flows and is therefore unstable and changeable,” and “the principle of all fertility and growth according to the analogy of water’s fertilizing action on earth and soil” (Eros, 119).

Evola also describes the correct relationship between the principle of water and that of fire, associated with the male: “when the feminine principle, whose force is centrifugal, does no turn to fleeting objects but rather to a ‘virile’ stability in which she finds a limit to her ‘restlessness’” (Revolt, 158).

Evola assents that certain modern women may appear very unchangeable, but stresses that this is at an outer level of her being:

a possible rigidity may follow the reception of ideas due precisely to the passive way she has adopted them, which may appear under the guise of conformity and conservatism. In this way, we can explain the apparent contrast inherent in the fact that female nature is changeable, yet women mainly show conservative tendencies sociologically and a dislike for the new. This can be linked to their role in mythology as female figures of a Demeter or chthonic type who guard and avenge customs and the law—the law of blood and of the earth, but not the uranic law. (Eros, 153)

Thus, a woman may be quite unchanging in her beliefs about society, etiquette, and morality, but will lack an attachment to a transcendent truth. Many of women’s ideas regarding social truths such as honor and virtue are “not true ethics but mere habits,” Evola says (Eros, 155).

This changeability of women explains the notion that women are at the same time more compassionate and more cruel than men; as woman is associated with the earth, she expresses both the tenderness of the mother and the cruelty of nature. The best example of this duality is the Greek goddess Artemis, who was both the protector of wild animals and the huntress.

Woman’s Lack of Being or Soul

Perhaps the most controversial characteristic of Evola’s absolute woman, which he gets from Weininger, is a common conception throughout history: that woman has no soul, or being. Weininger states that woman has no ego, referring to the Transcendental Ego of Immanuel Kant, which Evola describes as “above the whole world of phenomena (in metaphysical terms one would say ‘above all manifestation,’ like the Hindu atman)” (Eros, 151). In some schools of Hinduism, the atman (or “higher self”) is identical with the Brahman, the infinite soul of the Universe. In other Hindu conceptions, the atman is the life-principle. As manifested existence would be impossible without the atman, this description of woman as lacking a Transcendental Ego should not be taken to mean that women are incapable of developing and solidifying this aspect, though they may be at a disadvantage to men. Also, in the Kali Yuga, all people are the furthest removed from the divine, so modern men and women are likely in the same starting position in terms of development of Being.

Evola expands on the notion, stating that if soul means “psyche” or “principle of life,” then “it should signify in fact that woman not only has a soul but is eminently ‘soul,’” whereas man is not a soul but a “spirit.” He continues: “the point we believe settled is that woman is a part of ‘nature’ (in a metaphysical sense she is a manifestation of the same principle as nature) and that she affirms nature, whereas man by virtue of birth in the masculine human form goes tendentially beyond nature” (Eros, 151).

Deception and a Connection to Truth

Another attribute of absolute woman is deceitfulness. In fact, Evola states that it is so essential that telling lies has been acknowledged as an essential characteristic in female nature “at all times and in all places by popular wisdom” (Eros, 155). According to Weininger, this tendency is due to her lack of being. With no fixed essence, most women (and modern men) are attached to no transcendent truth, and therefore there is nothing to lie against—Truth only exists when one has substance and values. In Evola’s words:

Weininger observed that nothing is more baffling for a man than a woman’s response when caught in a lie. When asked why she is lying, she is unable to understand the question, acts astonished, bursts out crying, or seeks to pacify him by smiling. She cannot understand the ethical and transcendent side of lying or the fact that a lie represents damage to being and, as was acknowledged in ancient Iran, constitutes a crime even worse than killing. . . . The truth, pure and simple, is that woman is prone to lie and to disguise her true self even when she has no need to do so; this is not a social trait acquired in the struggle for existence, but something linked to her deepest and most genuine nature. (Eros, 155)

This quality of deceitfulness, while springing from the fundamental makeup of women, should not imply that it must be accepted as a given trait of all women, as some of Weininger’s writings imply. For, just like man, the ultimate goal of a woman’s existence is to connect with and live by the transcendent, which requires a fixation that cannot accept deception.

Woman’s Intuition, Man’s Ethics and Logic

Another idea Evola gets from Weininger is the notion that absolute woman, since she lacks being, also lacks memory, logic, and ethics (Eros, 154). In order to explain this, Evola distinguishes between two kinds of logic: everyday logic, which women can use quite successfully (though sometimes like a “sophist”) and “logic as a love of pure truth and inward coherence” (Eros, 154). This distinction can most commonly be seen when women use logic in arguments as a means to personal ends, rather than to arrive at a truth beyond their desires. Evola writes that

woman, insofar as she is woman, will never know ethics in the categorical sense of pure inner law detached from every empirical, eudemonistic, sensitive, sentimental, and personal connection. Nothing in woman that may have an ethical character can be separated from instinct, sentiment, sexuality, of “life”; it can have no relationship with pure “being.”

Women’s primary tool of cognition is not logic but intuition and sensitivity (Eros, 154).

In explaining memory, Evola turns to Henri Bergson, who described two types of memory. One is more common in women: the memory connected to the subconscious, which may remember dreams, have premonitions, and unexpectedly recall forgotten experiences. The second type of memory, which women lack due to their fluid nature, is “determined, organized, and dominated by the intellect” (Eros, 154).

The Female Principle as Powerful, Sovereign, and Active

Generally the female principle is described as passive, and the male as active. According to Evola, this only is true on the outermost plane. On the subtle plane, he says, “it is the woman who is active and the man who is passive (the woman is ‘actively passive’ and the man ‘passively active’)” (Eros, 167–68). In Hindu terms the impassible spirit (purusa) is masculine, while the active matrix of every conditioned form (prakriti) is feminine (Revolt, 157). Thus, to use the creation of a child as an example, man gives his seed, but it is woman who actively creates and gives birth to the child.

Mythology supports the sovereign aspect of woman. Evola gives the examples of the Earth goddess Cybele drawn in a chariot led by two tame tigers, and the Hindu goddess Durga seated on a lion with reins in her hands (Eros, 167). Evola states that man knows of this sovereign quality in women, and “often owing to a neurotic unconscious overcompensation for his inferiority complex, he flaunts before woman an ostentatious manliness, indifference, or even brutality and disdain. But this secures him the advantage, on the contrary. The fact that woman often becomes a victim on an external, material, sentimental, or social level, giving rise to her instinctive ‘fear of loving,’ does not alter the fundamental structure of the situation” (Eros, 167).

 

Association with the Demonic and Aspiration

Another “negative” quality of the absolute woman is that of aspiration, in the sense of a sucking quality, which also is associated with the demonic. On a profane level, in a degenerate form, this could be the woman who is constantly demanding more from her husband and others—more time spent together, a better car, a bigger house, or more attention. Since she has no “soul” (as defined above), she must fill the void within herself by sucking the vital force from others in emotional, monetary, or temporal vampirism.

On a metaphysical level, this quality merely refers to the divine female, Shakti, pulling Shiva into the world of manifestation. Thus, it is not good or bad, except for Gnostics or other sects who believe the created world to be evil. As Evola states, woman “is oriented toward keeping that order which Gnosticism, in a dualistic background, called the ‘world of the Demiurge,’ the world of nature as opposed to that of the spirit” (Eros, 141). This demonic element is expressed in actual life when women draw men to the realm of earth, nature, and children. It is expressed in sex when man’s seed being draw into the woman, creating a child bound by nature. “Although ‘woman’ can give life,” Evola writes, “yet she shuts off or tends to shut off access to that which is beyond life” (Eros, 142).

In some Eastern thought, the man’s seed is thought to be the spiritual manhood—hence the formation of sects that teach men to retain this force to attain liberation rather than wasting it through ejaculation. Women properly trained are said to be able to capture this essence during sex, thus seducing the man into giving up his manhood.

The positive aspect of this trait lies in woman’s ability to overcome it, most often by following the path of the mother or lover. In the actions required by these paths (if following them in an attitude of self-sacrifice and not self-aggrandizement), she no longer drains others, but instead learns to build up a vital force within herself through renunciation of desires. By relinquishing the control of the ego/personality by instead being devoted to others, woman is able to fix herself to the transcendent.

Like the other qualities of absolute woman, that of aspiration also can be found in man, especially in the Kali Yuga. Evola refers to sexual practices found in Chinese Taoism, India, and Tibet, where the man sucks the vital female energy from a woman during sex, a technique he describes as bordering on “male ‘psychic’ vampirism” (Eros, 249).

 

The Value of Absolute Woman in the Modern World

In the Golden Age, we can imagine that the metaphysical elements comprising a person manifested in the proper way. In such a time, the highest classes gave birth to the highest people; race was indicative of a corresponding inner quality; beauty on the outside attested to an inner beauty; and physical gender aligned with the qualities of absolute man or woman.

But in the Kali Yuga, there are pariahs in the highest classes, men who act like women, and men of Aryan stock who do not embody any of the virtues attributed to their race. As Evola says, it is possible for a person to be a different sex in the body than they are in the soul. These cases are similar to those where individuals of one race “have the psychic and spiritual characteristics of another race”(Eros, 34).

Therefore, men today may not innately possess any virile seed, just as modern women do not necessarily express the absolute female principle. In reading Evola’s work, then, we must not mistakenly interpret what he says about absolute man or woman as corresponding with individual men and women of today. Modern men and women are almost completely removed from the deepest aspects of themselves, functioning only as personalities. Thus, a person’s sex or caste has little importance in determining vocations or social relations. What relevance, then, do Evola’s descriptions of absolute man and woman have in the modern world?

An answer is found in the existential Angst that defined the twentieth century. Martin Heidegger wrote of the inauthentic life, and Jean-Paul Sartre of bad faith; most people today still fit the description of mere personalities, lacking divine connections or the means to find them. In a world that has lost its values and connection to Tradition, discovering these principles in our innermost natures becomes even more important. By examining Evola’s work, and that of other Traditionalists, we can find our way back to our true selves, the true relation between the sexes, and a connection to the transcendent.


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

jeudi, 25 novembre 2010

Il fascino eterno della femme fatale

Il fascino eterno della femme fatale

Mario Bernardi Guardi

Ex: http://www.mirorenzaglia.org/

femmefaltae.jpg“Non lo fo per piacer mio, ma per dare un figlio a Dio”, garantivano in rima baciata i camicioni da notte delle nostre trisavole. E diamo pure per buoni pudori e rossori di quelle spose e madri esemplari: ma non ci si venga a dire che tutte le signore dello stupido XIX secolo, con novecentesche appendici, erano così devote e vereconde. Non lo era sicuramente la celeberrima contessa di Castiglione, cugina di Cavour, e scelta dal conte per convincere Napoleone III a scendere a fianco dei piemontesi nella guerra contro l’Austria. Lei, «bocca sdegnosa, occhi grigi dal fascino inesplicabile» non se lo fece ripetere due volte e «in una camera tappezzata di Damasco di seta azzurra del castello di Compiegne» lo sedusse, convertendolo alla buona causa del patriottismo italico. Ma così come non era mai stata fedele al marito, «un ingenuo galantuomo ingannato ‘prima, durante e dopo’, non si consacrò certo a un esclusivo amore imperiale e concesse lo stropicciato fiore della sua (poca) virtù a una numerosa schiera di amanti, non disdegnando l’amore mercenario. Visto che per una notte di fuoco chiese a Lord Hertford un milione di franchi. Va detto anche che la vocazione libertina della nostra contessa era ben nota. Tanto è vero che un gentiluomo della corte di Napoleone, vedendola succhiare un sorbetto di fiori d’arancio, le chiese in tono pesantemente allusivo: “Le piace succhiare, contessa?”, e lei rispose ridendo: “Dipende da cosa…”».

Donne, donne eterni dèi! E davvero fascinose, voluttuose, vampiresche divinità sciupamaschi sono quelle (ventidue, tra grandi dame, grandi cortigiane, attrici, muse ispiratrici, intellettuali salottiere e militanti ecc.)  ritratte da Giuseppe Scaraffia in un libro uscito l’anno scorso, ma che, in questo delirio di escort piuttosto sgraziate, volgarotte e urlanti da cui siamo afflitti, può essere recuperato, a insegna di altri tempi e altre, più eleganti e galanti, atmosfere (Femme fatale, Vallecchi, pp.175, euro 15).

Andiamo di fiore in fiore. Cristina di Belgioioso, avvezza a ricevere gli spasimanti «in un salotto tappezzato di velluto scuro ricamato di stelle d’argento» dove si mostrava mollemente «allungata su un sofà vicino a un narghilè, la testa incoronata di fucsie, il suo fiore preferito», era tanto sicura di sé da dividere gli uomini in tre categorie: «Mi ama, mi ha amato, mi amerà». E la amarono, tra alterne vicende, Balzac, Bellini, Heine, Liszt e de Musset. Non fece in tempo ad amarla, invece, il garibaldino Goffredo Mameli che, ferito mentre combatteva contro i francesi sul Gianicolo, spirò tra le braccia di Cristina, mentre lei gli sussurrava “Fratelli d’Italia”.

Sciupamaschi d’eccezione fu anche l’attrice Sarah Bernhardt di cui si diceva che dormisse «in una bara di raso bianco, tra una funebre abbondanza di fiori». Ma anche che dietro i suoi pallori anoressici occultasse bulumici appetiti: in pubblico rifiutava sdegnosamente il cibo, ma solo dopo essersi «rimpinzata coscienziosamente» in privato. La amarono, a lei si ispirarono, per lei si entusiasmarono Hugo, Proust, James, Rostand, Lawrence, Shaw: chissà se sapevano che la Divina «nei periodi di penuria non esitava a prostituirsi per congrue cifre, come testimoniano le note della polizia parigina».

Anche Jeanne Duval, la creola «bruna come la notte», la «strega dai fianchi d’ebano», che ammaliò il bello, dannato e fragilissimo Baudelaire, era adusa a procurarsi i soldi nei modi più spregiudicati. E amava troppo «bere e fare l’amore» per recitar la parte della Musa devota e dell’amante fedele. Lui, ovviamente, pativa, implorava, malediceva. Ma, cotto com’era, continuava a venerare quella mulatta ignorante che se ne fregava dei suoi versi.  «Anche quando cammina si direbbe che danzi», scriveva trasognato. E dopo aver beccato la sifilide.

Fior di danzatrice e “femme fatale” per eccellenza fu Mata Hari che diceva di essere nata nel sud dell’India, figlia di un bramino e di una baiadera. Quel nome esotico, aggiungeva, significa “pupilla dell’aurora”. Fosse vero o meno, quando appariva in palcoscenico, «ondeggiando sinuosamente sotto i veli che la nascondevano e la rivelavano», il pubblico andava in estasi e immergeva lo sguardo goloso in quel corpo che, tentatore, si arrotolava e si srotolava, fino a lasciarsi scivolare a terra, spossato, coperto soltanto da un minuscolo “cache-seins” e, sul pube, da un invitante triangolino tempestato di pietre preziose. Anche lei fu amata e venerata. Nell’aureo “carnet”, tra gli altri, Céline e Filippo Tommaso Marinetti. E un appuntamento con la morte, la mattina del 15 ottobre 1917. Fucilata dai francesi con l’accusa di spionaggio a favore degli Imperi Centrali. Ma gli elementi a suo carico erano ridicoli e inconsistenti. Forse, più che la spia, chi la condannò volle ammazzare la “femme fatale”. Che bella morte, però. Che stile. Che movimenti eleganti e ondulati da magnifica pantera non profanata dalla prigionia. E che concede un’ultima rappresentazione: «Si lasciò docilmente legare al palo. I due gendarmi le fecero una legatura finta, da teatro, da cui si sarebbe potuta liberare facilmente, ma non lo fece. Non doveva uscire dalla parte che la storia le aveva assegnato. Guardò negli occhi il comandante del plotone: “Monsieur, vi ringrazio”. Non volle che le bendassero gli occhi. Mata Hari non significava ‘luce del mattino’?».


MARIO BERNARDI GUARDI

jeudi, 18 novembre 2010

Les femmes devant le déclin démographique

Les femmes devant le déclin démographique

 

par Jean-Yves Le Gallou

Ex: http://www.polemia.com/

femme_hdef.jpgFondateur de l’Institut de géopolitique des populations, Yves-Marie Laulan a une préoccupation majeure : il craint que les déséquilibres démographiques entre Français de souche européenne et immigrés ne déstabilisent la société. Un sujet tabou. Mais un vrai sujet qu’il aborde avec constance sous ses deux faces : l’immigration étrangère d’un côté, la fécondité euro-française de l’autre. Lors d’un colloque, organisé à l’Assemblée nationale le 28 mai 2010 (1), Yves-Marie Laulan à donné la parole à des femmes, partant du principe que ce sont les femmes qui au premier chef donnent la vie.

Disons le tout de suite ce colloque dont Polémia met en ligne les actes (2) est une formidable réussite. Incontestablement Yves-Marie Laulan a réuni un panel de femmes exceptionnelles : de belles intelligences, des cœurs généreux, des corps féconds. Et une approche polyphonique de la question posée.

Catherine Rouvier : le caractère divin de la fonction maternelle

D’emblée Catherine Rouvier pose le problème du sens de la maternité : « l’incommensurable noblesse, le caractère essentiel et quasi divin de la fonction maternelle, encore perceptibles dans les sociétés moins développées, moins matérialistes, moins mécanisées, ne sont plus perçus dans nos pays présumés civilisés. »

« Pire, elle est cachée comme une survivance des temps anciens, une faute de goût, que ne commettent plus des femmes libérées, une occupation subalterne pour femmes désœuvrées, une preuve d’esclavage, la conséquence désastreuse d’une éducation encore fondée sur le schéma périmé de la différence homme/femme. »

« C’est cette mutation de l’idée de maternité qui, autant et peut-être plus encore que les causes matérielles, scientifiques et techniques, est à l’origine de cette baisse drastique de la natalité. »

Catherine Rouvier énumère ensuite ce qui lui paraît nécessaire à la restauration de l’image de la maternité : « dire la sensualité de la maternité ; refuser la dictature du préservatif ; refuser le risque de la (trop) longue attente du « quand je veux » ; refuser d’être complice de la disparition de notre civilisation bimillénaire ; refuser la disparition programmée du dimanche ; refuser la solitude individualiste des sociétés urbanisées. »

Jeanne Smits : l’image matérialiste de la maternité dans les médias

C’est évidemment une image différente de l’amour, de la famille, de la maternité, de la vie qui est donnée dans les médias. Et d’abord par le premier d’entre eux : le livre scolaire qui dissocie radicalement sexualité (pour le plaisir individuel et quelque soit le ou la partenaire) et procréation ; et c’est ce message tronqué et faux qui est constamment répété depuis l’âge de 12/13ans.

Jeanne Smits poursuit sa critique en analysant les magazines féminins. Elle y trouve que « L’image de l’enfant et de la maternité (y) est plutôt positive, mais (qu’) elle privilégie l’image d’un enfant objet. C’est l’enfant pour soi.(…) Si on regarde l’image de l’enfant dans les médias, il ne s’agit pas d’un autre qui est accueilli, mais de celui que l’on peut se permettre d’avoir, que l’on va habiller et élever selon des normes qui en font ce que les Anglais appellent un status object (un objet de statut). »

Enfin « Il y a une image de la maternité qui est complètement ignorée, médiatiquement parlant, que ce soit dans la presse glamour, dans les émissions télévisées, dans les téléfilms ou au cinéma : l’image positive de la mère au foyer, de la mère de famille nombreuse. »

Janine Chanteur : un individualisme insensé

Pour Janine Chanteur, du « Deuxième sexe » de Simone de Beauvoir à « l’absurde révolte de 1968 », « un profond bouleversement des idées et des mœurs » est survenu : « Il en est sorti une justification insensée de l’individualisme. Or l’individualisme est un ennemi majeur de la natalité. Les femmes, en grand nombre – et les hommes avec elles –, ont confondu la liberté avec l’individualisme, d’où une subtile rupture entre l’homme et la femme, devenus deux individus qui n’avaient plus, a priori, d’intérêt commun. Il est vrai que chacun de nous est un individu. Mais, sans liens avec les autres, est-il possible de survivre en être que l’on peut dire humain ? Que l’égalité des devoirs et des droits soit commune à l’homme et à la femme n’implique pas la guerre des sexes, ni leur assimilation. Aujourd’hui, la justification déplorable de l’individualisme et de l’indistinction des sexes d’une part, de la primauté du plaisir sexuel devenu d’autre part le but de la vie, a barré la perspective d’un avenir construit dans l’espérance pour les générations suivantes. Aussi pouvons-nous avancer l’idée que le déclin démographique est peut-être moins imputable aux crises financières que nous avons traversées et que nous traversons encore, qu’à l’atmosphère de négativité qui asphyxie, en Occident, les femmes – sans oublier les hommes – et qui fait redouter les naissances. »

Janine Chanteur continue ainsi son propos : « Avec un moral livré au Désenchantement du monde, pour reprendre le beau titre d’un livre de Marcel Gauchet, beaucoup d’hommes et de femmes pensent qu’ils n’ont pas le droit de procréer une nouvelle victime. »

« Il faut donc poser la question: qu’est-ce que mettre au monde un enfant ? La réponse est simple : un enfant, c’est une espérance, un pari confiant sur l’avenir. » Et cela ne peut se faire que dans la confiance de l’homme et de la femme dans la durée du couple.

Joëlle-Anne Robert : la femme au foyer, modèle incontournable

C’est l’image de la femme au foyer que défend sans complexe Joëlle-Anne Robert en dénonçant d’abord quelques pieux mensonges du « familialement correct » : « Faire croire qu’il est facile de concilier travail et famille ; faire croire que la femme s’épanouit nécessairement au travail, faire croire que la femme est un homme comme un autre. »

Joëlle-Anne Robert avance ensuite les arguments positifs en faveur de sa thèse : « Donner la vie, un désir profond auquel on ne renonce pas si facilement ; le rôle de la famille dans l’éducation (La famille, et plus encore la famille nombreuse, est une micro-société fournissant un apprentissage irremplaçable) ; l’intérêt de l’enfant ; l’avenir de nos retraites ».

Rappelons au passage à ceux qui seraient tentés d’écarter cet argument matérialiste que l’équilibre démographique repose largement sur les familles de trois enfants (sinon plus) et que dans ces familles plus de 50% des femmes sont au foyer. Encore un mot de statistique : « 600 000 parents ont bénéficié du congé parental. 3 millions de femmes au foyer en 2010, c’est 2 fois moins qu’il y a vingt ans. Mais, en 1999, elles n’étaient que 2,2 millions. Ce choix a été assumé par 57 % des femmes qui souhaitent voir grandir leur enfant. »

Hélène Richard : N’oubliez pas l’homme !

C’est une vision autre et hors des sentiers battus que défend Hélène Richard : celui de la mère de famille nombreuse assumant sa vie de femme libre « loin du modèle d’Henri Bordeaux ». D’où paradoxalement l’importance du père. Laissons la parole à Hélène Richard. « Une femme fera un enfant avec un homme digne, c’est-à-dire capable de doter de qualités génétiques élevées cet enfant qui viendra au monde. La femme choisit le père de ses enfants. Et ce père n’est pas forcément ni l’amant idéal ni le plus grand amour de sa vie. C’est juste l’homme qui sera capable d’être le meilleur père possible pour sa descendance. Biologiquement, paternellement, affectivement, moralement, etc. C’est une question de lignée, une question d’immortalité. (…) De là, l’ineptie du divorce, qui brise cette lignée, qui remet en cause cette immortalité et rend esclave la femme. Accepter de façon simple et évidente qu’on fait des enfants à deux, qu’on les élève donc à deux, quoi qu’il arrive, qu’on est là pour transmettre et pas pour se comporter de façon versatile, remettre donc à l’endroit la notion d’engagement serait, à mon sens, une bonne chose :«  on ne s’engage pas vis-à-vis de sa femme, de son mari mais vis-à-vis de sa lignée, de sa descendance. »

« Le seul moyen de donner aux femmes et aux hommes l’envie d’avoir des enfants est de montrer aux femmes que la maternité ne les empêchera pas de vivre et de rester avant tout des femmes et de montrer aux hommes que la paternité leur permettra de devenir un homme. »(…)

« Oui, il est possible d’être une maman de cinq, six, sept enfants et d’être aussi, voire même avant tout, une femme. Il est possible d’harmoniser gravité et insouciance, sagesse et grains de folie, attention et légèreté, etc. C’est possible à une condition : que nos enfants aient un père, un papa, pas un mari-de-maman-jaloux qui refuserait qu’elle sorte ; pas un père-qui-gagne-beaucoup-de-sous mais qui n’est jamais là ; un père par correspondance en quelque sorte, qui signerait les relevés de notes, distribuerait les félicitations et les punitions, arbitrerait les bagarres ; mais ne serait jamais là pour jouer, pour câliner ; pour préparer des pizzas quand maman n’est pas là ; raconter des histoires le soir quand maman est sortie avec ses copains et ses copines et qu’elle ne rentrera peut-être pas cette nuit ; préparer un gâteau pour quand maman rentrera ; partir en balade le week-end quand maman travaille… »

Par delà les choix personnels d’Hélène Richard, son texte souligne un point majeur : les hommes partagent avec les femmes la responsabilité de donner la vie et de construire l’enfant. Et ils sont parfois aussi, sinon plus, égoïstes et malthusiens que les femmes : pour une raison simple, ils vivent dans le même bain de valeurs dominantes.

Gabrielle Cluzel : culpabilisation et dévalorisation

« Dans les sondages, une femme sur deux avoue qu’elle aurait aimé avoir un enfant de plus » remarque Gabrielle Cluzel. Si ces enfants ne naissent pas c’est que « culpabilité et dévalorisation sont (…) un frein à la maternité ».

Gabrielle Cluzel observe que « les femmes au foyer sont des « sentinelles invisibles ». Elles sont transparentes aux yeux de l’administration, elles n’ont pas de statut, ce sont des sortes de sous-femmes, elles sont comme réduites à une sorte de dhimmitude de fait, une dhimmitude à l’occidentale ».

Et Gabrielle Cluzel de noter ce paradoxe étonnant, celui de deux voisines qui décideraient d’échanger leurs enfants : « Tu gardes les miens, je me charge des tiens » –, elles auraient dans ce cas un statut, une couverture sociale propre, une retraite d’assistante maternelle. Parce que les enfants dont elles s’occupent sont les leurs, elles sont comme punies. Elles n’ont droit à rien, aucune reconnaissance matérielle ou sociale, et les enfants qu’elles ont mis au monde paieront les retraites des autres. »

Paradoxe extraordinaire de la société marchande : la mère mercenaire (qui, il est vrai, augmente le PIB) est reconnue alors que la mère affective ne l’est pas !

Marie-Thérèse Hermange : l’aide à la garde des jeunes enfants

Le colloque a aussi traité les questions économiques et pratiques. Le sénateur Hermange a souligné les contradictions des politiques officielles et affirmé que « notre système de prise en charge de l’enfant, lorsque la femme travaille, est un système pervers ». En effet, les Caisses d’allocation familiale et les mairies privilégient pour l’aide à la garde des enfants le système des crèches : système qui présente le double inconvénient d’être le plus coûteux et moins adapté aux besoins de l’enfant qu’une garde familiale. D’où l’intérêt de la prestation d’allocation différentielle pour garde d’enfant, PAJE, créée par la ville de Paris à la fin du mandat de Jean Tibéri : davantage de bénéficiaires d’un mode de garde plus adapté.

Un point de vue de bon sens hélas largement ignoré des décideurs politiques !

Dominique Marcilhacy : la retraite des mères

« En consacrant de leur corps et de leur temps à la mise au monde et à l’éducation des enfants, les mères préparent les retraites de leur génération » affirme Dominique Marcilhacy. Et pourtant à chaque réforme des retraites, les avantages particuliers dont elles bénéficient sont remis en cause !

Dominique Marcilhacy estime que la prise en charge financière de l’enfant est faite à 40% par la collectivité et à 60% par la famille. Mais au final les familles qui ont contribué au renouvellement démographique bénéficient de retraités moins élevées que les couples inféconds ou à fécondité réduite.

Une aberration doublée d’une injustice que Dominique Marcilhacy propose de corriger en réformant l’allocation des points de retraite de façon à prendre en compte la contribution des familles au renouvellement démographique. Un statut parental viendrait compléter le dispositif.

Christian Vanneste : le poids des idéologies, relativiste, culturaliste, marxiste

Dans ce colloque par les femmes et pour les femmes, deux hommes sont, malgré tout, intervenus Yves-Marie Laulan et Christian Vanneste. Député mais aussi philosophe. Christian Vanneste a mis en exergue du colloque trois causes idéologiques à la situation actuelle:

  • - Le relativisme «c’est à dire la volonté, quasiment entropique, de nier toutes les différences»;
  • - La mécanique marxiste qui, appliqué au féminisme, «a remplacé la lutte des classes par la lutte des sexes»;
  • - Le culturalisme «qui tend à nier complètement la dimension biologique, génétique; naturelle de l’humanité pour prétendre que tous nos comportements sont dictés par l’éducation, par l’environnement culturel».

Et le député philosophe de conclure son propos par deux recommandations, « deux mariages » : celui de la génétique et de l’éducation celui de l’égalité et de la différence.

Christian Vanneste a aussi, comme beaucoup des intervenantes traité du sujet de l’avortement et noté que « chacun aura remarqué qu’entre la loi Veil et aujourd’hui, l’avortement, qui était un droit de la détresse, est devenu un tabou. On n’a plus le droit de contester le droit à l’avortement comme étant l’expression la plus forte de la liberté féminine ». Et Christian Vanneste de rappeler qu’il y a quelques années, il avait été diabolisé simplement pour avoir défendu « l’idée de l’IIG (interruption involontaire de grossesse) qui prend en compte la situation d’une femme qui perd un enfant du fait d’un autre ». Or comme disait Pierre Chaunu « le monde est condamné si la femme répudie son désir d’enfant ».

Yves-Marie Laulan : transcendance et dépassement de l’instant présent

Il revenait à Yves-Marie Laulan – père du colloque ! - de le conclure et de revenir sur les causes de la chute de la fécondité « Il faut y voir, sans doute et avant tout, la disparition du sens de la transcendance, à savoir le souci de vivre au-delà du moment présent et des individus que nous sommes. Or l’enfant, au sein de la famille, est précisément la seule passerelle que l’homme peut jeter entre le passé et un futur par définition inconnu, le seul véhicule inventé à ce jour pour dépasser l’instant présent et se survivre à soi-même (en dehors de l’espoir de la vie éternelle pour le croyant, bien entendu). Ajoutons au passage que s’expliquent ainsi les attaques forcenées contre l’Église catholique qui dérange, qui interpelle, qui remet fâcheusement en question les certitudes confortables et sécurisantes apportées par les médias complaisants.

Un changement de paradigmes

Par delà les différences d’approches – philosophiques, sociologiques,religieuses, idéologiques, économiques, morales, personnelles – des différents intervenants, il apparaît très clairement que le redressement démographique français et européen passe par un changement radical des paradigmes dominants. Une révolution conservatrice est nécessaire.

Jean-Yves Le Gallou
Polémia
02/11/2010

Notes :

1) – INSTITUT DE GEOPOLITIQUE DES POPULATIONS
Colloque du 28 mai 2010 à l’Assemblée nationale
Les femmes devant le déclin démographie

2) – Actes du colloque :
http://www.polemia.com/pdf_v2/colloquefemme.pdf
Les intertitres pour chaque intervention sont de la rédaction

mercredi, 15 septembre 2010

Mütterrevolution in Frankreich: Frauen wollen wieder ins Haus zurück!

Mütterrevolution in Frankreich: Frauen wollen wieder ins Haus zurück!

Eva Herman

Ex: http://info.kopp-verlag.de/

 

Es tut sich was im Staate Deutschland. In Frankreich. In ganz Europa. Die Menschen sind aufgewacht. Sie protestieren, demonstrieren, widersprechen und fordern! Sie gehen auf die Straße und melden sich, sprechen endlich aus, was sie sich gestern noch nicht getrauten: Im Ausland sind es Einschnitte ins sozial abgesicherte Leben, hier ebenso. Und mehr: das Sarrazin-Buch, die Schulreform Hamburg, Projekt Stuttgart 21, der Atomdeal der Bundesregierung, die Diskussion um die Atommüll-Endlager, die Castortransporte usw. Die Bundes- und Landesregierungen haben derweil immer schlechtere Karten. Zu lange und zu offensichtlich wurde amtlich vertuscht, gelogen und betrogen. Ja, es tut sich gewaltig etwas. Doch noch sind längst nicht alle Themen auf dem Tisch. Frankreich führt uns gerade vor, was auch hierzulande über kurz oder lang explodieren wird: die Familienpolitik!

 

 

Wenn man die hierzulande überhaupt noch so nennen darf. Richtiger hieße es wohl eher: die Anti-Familienpolitik. Frau von der Leyen, die ehemalige Krippenministerin, wird sich bei einem Blick auf den französischen Nachbarn verwundert die Augen reiben, ebenso ihre eher linksgerichtete Vorgängerin Renate Schmidt. Ach ja, und nicht zu vergessen die amtierende, kinderlose Familienministerin Schröder, die sich, ebenso wie ihre resoluten Vorgängerinnen, heute für die Krippen stark macht wie einst schon Margot Honecker.

Die fatalen Anti-Mama-Thesen, die den Frauen hierzulande seit Jahrzehnten übergestülpt werden, haben bereits immensen Schaden angerichtet. Sie zerstören die natürlichen, intuitiven Anlagen der Mütter und ersetzen sie durch die straff getaktete Botschaft: Ein erfülltes, globalisiertes Leben besteht aus einem strammen Berufsdasein! Kinder? Sind kleine Störfaktoren, die man schon früh in die Krippe bringen kann, bringen soll. Je mehr Krippen vorhanden, desto gelungener wird dies als familienfreundliches Modell gelobt. Deswegen: Ausbau des deutschen Krippennetzes auf 750 000 Plätze. Dabei werden sämtliche Forschungen über das natürliche Bindungsverhalten, wie es uns jede Straßenkatze mit ihren Jungen vor Augen führt, arrogant und sträflich vernachlässigend ignoriert. Mehr noch: Es wird tatsächlich, rein amtlich, sogar behauptet, Krippenhaltung bei Kindern fördere die Geburtenquote. Das ist ebenso dreist erlogen, was sogar der Familienforscher Hans Bertram aus von der Leyens Expertenteam einräumen musste, als er letztes Jahr vor den bundesdeutschen Medien einknickte: Ob sich Elterngeld und Kita-Ausbau auf die Geburtenzahlen auswirkten, werde sich erst in »zehn bis fünfzehn Jahren« zeigen.

Es ist schon jetzt klar, dass das System gescheitert ist. Es wagt nur noch keiner, das laut zu sagen. Seit Jahren ist Deutschland auf der inzwischen langen Liste der europäischen Länder Schlusslicht, was die Geburtenquote angeht.

Nicht nur von der Leyen beschwor das Nachbarland Frankreich als rühmliches Vorbild. Alle deutschen Feministinnen, deren erklärtes Ziel die Zerstörung mütterlicher Gefühle ist, schielten ebenso zu den »frankofrohen« Nachbarn mit dem Hinweis: So müssen wir es auch machen! Alle Kleinkinder kämen dort schon früh in die Krippe, alle Mütter arbeiteten und alle seien ja sooo glücklich!

Und jetzt? Auf einmal Pustekuchen. Eine mittelschwere Mütterrevolution ist in Frankreich plötzlich im Gange: Die Frauen wollen nicht mehr! Sie wollen nicht mehr den anstrengenden Spagat zwischen Karriere, Kind, Haushalt und Ehemann leisten müssen. Immer mehr gut ausgebildete französische Mütter kündigen ihren Job und bleiben zuhause. Wohlwissend, dass sie von der Gesellschaft für diese Entscheidung nicht geliebt werden, in Kauf nehmend, dass sie mit weniger Geld auskommen und sich ständig ihrer Familie und dem Bekanntenkreis gegenüber erklären müssen. Doch das ist ihnen egal. Die neue Sehnsucht der Frauen in Frankreich heißt: Rückkehr zu den traditionellen Grundwerten.

Bereits Ende der siebziger Jahre zog die französische Journalistin und vierfache Mutter Christiane Callonge (l’Express, Elle) in einem aufsehenerregenden Buch Bilanz. Unter dem Titel Ich will ins Haus zurück schrieb Callonge: »Ich will ins Haus zurück, nicht immer nur erzwungenermaßen, sondern öfter, länger, freiwilliger. Ich will nicht meine Kinder nur zwei Stunden täglich sehen. Ich weigere mich zu wählen zwischen Beruf und Familie. Ich will beides. Ich will leben!« Dieses Buch hatte in Frankreich der Diskussion um die Befreiung der Frau bereits vor dreißig Jahren entscheidende neue Impulse gegeben.

Nun ist die Debatte wieder öffentlich geworden, doch längst nicht mehr so zaghaft und vorsichtig. Selbstbewusste Mütter, jahrelang erfolgreiche, durchsetzungsfreudige Macher- und Karrierefrauen, hängen ausdrücklich ihren Job an den Nagel und bleiben selbstbewusst zuhause. Sie wissen, auf was sie sich einlassen: auf das Natürlichste der Welt, auf die Liebe. Und genau das wollen sie auch. Der bisherige gesellschaftliche Status, nach dem die Arbeit das Wichtigste sei, verliert für besonders gut ausgebildete Frauen zunehmend den Reiz. Immer mehr Französinnen brechen mit den alten, familienunfreundlichen Traditionen.

Der französischen Feministin und Beauvoir-Anhängerin Elisabeth Badinter gefällt das neue Mutterideal überhaupt nicht. Sie sorgt sich um die Freiheiten, die sich Frauen einmal erkämpft haben, schreibt sie in ihrem neuen Buch Der Konflikt. Diese seien seit 30 Jahren zunehmend bedroht – in Deutschland noch mehr als in Frankreich. Badinter, auch Philosophin und Bestsellerautorin, macht dafür genau jene neuen Ideale von der perfekten Mutter verantwortlich. Sie flößten allen Müttern ein schlechtes Gewissen ein, die ihrem Kind nicht ständig den Vorrang vor sich selbst, ihrem Partner und ihrem Beruf einräumen, ist die Meinung der Publizistin.

Das, was den Menschen erst zum Menschen macht, nämlich seine Verbindung zur Schöpfung, kritisiert die engagierte Kämpferin. Das neue Mutterbild, vor dem sie sich augenscheinlich fürchtet, würde dominiert vom Diktat der Natur. Die ständige Nähe zwischen Mutter und Kind sei angeblich natürlich, mault sie; sie soll für die gesamte Entwicklung des Kindes unverzichtbar sein? Eng mit diesem Naturbild verknüpft sei das Stillen. Dass es daher weit über das erste Jahr hinaus moralisch geboten sei, gefällt Badinter ebenso wenig. Was sei denn eigentlich wirklich natürlich? Und sollten Frauen im Namen der Natur wieder verzichten lernen? Badinter fürchtet sich, wie viele fehlgeleitete Feministinnen, vor Nähe, Zärtlichkeit und vor Abhängigkeit durch Liebe. Das betrifft Kinder gleichermaßen wie auch Männer. Umso engagierter kämpfen sie dagegen.

Das ist der neue Konflikt Frankreichs. Er wird sicher auch in allernächster Zeit zu handfesten Debatten in Deutschland führen. Das Bewusstsein für diese drängenden, lebensbestimmenden Fragen wächst täglich. Auch wenn deutsche Mainstream-Medien wie DER SPIEGEL, DIE WELT oder die Süddeutsche Zeitung die Feministin Badinter derzeit ebenso emphatisch hochjubeln wie ihre deutschen Mitstreiterinnen Dorn oder Schwarzer – angesichts der alarmierenden Zahlen, dass jede zweite berufstätige Mutter über Burn-out-Syndrome klagt, und angesichts der Tatsachen, dass seit den siebziger Jahren die Zahl alkoholanfälliger bzw. alkoholgefährdeter Frauen drastisch zugenommen hat , verweigern sich auch hierzulande die Frauen zunehmend dem Diktat der globalisiert-notwendigen Erwerbstätigkeit, die zulasten ihrer eigenen Gesundheit und zulasten des Seelenfriedens der ganzen Familie geht.

Wenn die Menschen dann erkennen werden, dass sie auch im Bereich der Familienpolitik zu Opfern von staatlicher Propaganda und Manipulation geworden sind, wenn sie den Zerfall der Gesellschaft aufgrund der Atomisierung der kleinsten gesellschaftlichen Zelle, der Familie, erkennen müssen, dann wird der Schmerz darüber sie traurig und wütend machen. Diese Wut der Bürger ist eine mindestens ebenso große Gefahr wie die derzeitig wachsende Erkenntnis, dass scheinbar überall amtlich getäuscht, gelogen und betrogen wird: Sie wird die Menschen zunehmend auf die Straße führen, sie wird sie suchen lassen nach neuen Möglichkeiten, zu ihrem Recht zu kommen. Vielleicht in einer neuen Partei, die weitab von den derzeitigen Volksparteien einstehen will für Werte, Tradition und ein Empfinden für die eigene Kultur? Warum auch nicht?

 

lundi, 29 décembre 2008

"Visage féminin" par Victor Rousseau

Visage féminin.jpg

00:17 Publié dans art | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : belgique, belgicana, sculpture, femme, féminité, art plastique | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook