De la géopolitique à un monde thématique avec des dirigeants post-modernes

De la géopolitique à un monde thématique avec des dirigeants post-modernes

Alberto Hutschenreuter

Source: https://www.geopolitika.ru/es/article/de-la-geopolitica-un-mundo-tematico-y-con-lideres-posmodernos

Napoléon avait coutume de dire que la géographie gouvernait les nations. Il est fort possible que si le terme "géopolitique", né un siècle plus tard, avait existé à l'époque, le Corse l'aurait préféré à celui de géographie.

Parce que c'est la géopolitique, c'est-à-dire les considérations politiques appliquées aux territoires à des fins liées à l'intérêt national et au pouvoir, qui détermine (dans une large mesure) les décisions prises par les gouvernements, ou plus précisément, par les évaluations des hommes d'État, qui ne sont pas seulement des gouvernants, mais des personnes qui pensent à partir de ce que Karl Deutsch appelait "la cuisine du pouvoir".

Au XXIe siècle, les hommes d'État se font rares. Les derniers sont morts ou ne sont plus en fonction, par exemple Jacques Chirac et Angela Merkel. Bien sûr, il y a des hommes de talent, mais ce n'est peut-être pas la stature stratégique qui fait défaut, mais la configuration dé-géopolitisée et multi-thématique que prend le monde qui freine l'émergence de leaders d'envergure.

Nous avons été privés de véritables hommes d'État pendant longtemps. Ceux du XXe siècle, c'est-à-dire les protagonistes des grands événements mondiaux, Churchill, de Gaulle, Mao, Tito, etc., ont progressivement disparu dans les années 1960 et 1970; et comme l'a dit le professeur Carlos Fernández Pardo, le XXe siècle s'est terminé avec eux. Ensuite, il y a eu des leaders et des penseurs importants à la fin de l'ère bipolaire et de l'ère post-communiste, Reagan, Schmidt, Gorbatchev, Kohl, Mitterrand, etc.

Le 20e siècle a été hautement géopolitique, dans la mesure où les événements majeurs ont été précédés d'événements au cours desquels la politique, les intérêts et les territoires ont interagi, c'est-à-dire qu'il y avait à l'oeuvre des "vannes géopolitiques". La guerre froide a impliqué des logiques idéologiques opposées qui se sont mêlées à la géopolitique. Tout cela exigeait un leadership doté de connaissances politico-territoriales. En Amérique latine même, les dirigeants ayant cette préparation ont prédominé, par exemple Perón en Argentine.

Mais au 21e siècle, il semble que la pluralité des questions ait généré le besoin de leaderships croissants ayant des vues (et des pratiques) liées au parrainage et à l'affirmation d'un nouveau modèle pour les questions mondiales à strates multiples; en d'autres termes, pratiquement rien de ce que nous avons connu et qui a eu un impact sur les humains n'a plus de place ou de sens. Même si ce n'est pas le cas pour tous, on peut observer de tels "nouveaux leaders" dans un certain nombre de pays de l'UE.

Dans cette approche "adamiste", ceux qui soutiennent, par exemple, que l'anarchie internationale, c'est-à-dire l'absence de gouvernement ou d'entité exécutive interétatique, reste un fait des relations internationales, faisant des États les arbitres de ces relations, sont qualifiés de "philo-anarchistes", quelque chose comme les porteurs d'une obsession qui non seulement ne correspond pas à la réalité, mais constitue un obstacle à de nouveaux progrès.

De même, ceux qui considèrent que la géopolitique, l'intérêt national et le pouvoir sont des questions qui restent plus valables que jamais sont qualifiés de "dépassés" qui, comme les autres, restent "attachés", pour reprendre les termes de Richard Falk, à "la permanence du système d'États comme forme optimale de gouvernance mondiale réalisable", et ignorent les préoccupations normatives et les avantages de la coopération. De même, les "anciennes approches" ont tendance à latéraliser les nouvelles questions, comme l'écologie.

En d'autres termes, l'idée de ce que l'on appelle le "mondialisme" repose sur une force pratiquement imparable venant d'en bas qui "relâche" les forces qui ont toujours marqué les relations internationales d'en haut. Il y a quelques années, le spécialiste Stephen Gill (photo) a simplifié cela d'une manière plutôt intéressante et curieuse lorsqu'il a parlé du "prince postmoderne" pour désigner les questions qui venaient au centre de ces relations : les mouvements sociaux, la technologie, les droits des personnes, l'environnement, la connectivité, la solidarité, etc.

Tolstoï et Gramsci y faisaient déjà référence bien avant, mais les nouveaux sujets ont renouvelé cette tendance qui nous dit qu'un monde nouveau, uni et plein d'espoir est en train de naître.

Dans une large mesure, le manque de grands leaders internationaux est associé au globalisme (qui n'est pas la même chose que la mondialisation), un phénomène anti-géopolitique qui nous dit que : dans un monde de nouveaux enjeux, désirs et logiques sociales, il n'y aura guère de place pour les enjeux dépassés et délétères, les positions conservatrices et l'individualisme. Quoi qu'il en soit, les "nouveaux dirigeants" devront s'identifier au mondialisme, car les dirigeants qui s'identifient aux "anciennes questions", c'est-à-dire la géopolitique, la patrie, l'intérêt national, les valeurs nationales, les capacités, la famille, etc. sont soit rétrogrades, autocratiques, souverainistes et bellicistes et mettent le monde en danger.

De cette façon, le monde, une fois de plus, est configuré (et divisé) en approches et pratiques opposées et conflictuelles. Face à cette configuration, il est et sera important, une fois de plus, de ne pas croire qu'il existe des processus neutres ou détachés de ce qui, proto-historiquement, a été une réalité catégorique : le pouvoir et ses multiples formes d'exercice.

* Publié à l'origine sur : abordajes.blogspot.com

Leadership & the Vital Order

Leadership & the Vital Order:
Selected Aphorisms by Hans Prinzhorn, Ph.D., M.D.

Hans Prinzhorn

 

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

Translated and edited by Joseph D. Pryce

The enduring fame of German psychotherapist Hans Prinzhorn (1886–1933) is based almost entirely upon one book, Bildnerei der Geisteskranken (Artistry of the mentally ill), that brilliant and quite unprecedented monograph on the artistic productions of the mentally ill, which appeared in 1922. Sadly, it is too often forgotten that Hans Prinzhorn was the most brilliant and independent disciple of Germany’s greatest 20th-Century philosopher, Ludwig Klages (1872–1956).

Although Prinzhorn himself would have protested against the oblivion into which his mentor’s life’s work has fallen, it is a fact that Prinzhorn is still a major presence in the technical literature, whilst his hero, paradoxically, has been “killed by silence.” One should be thankful for even the smallest mercies.

Prinzhorn is even now a not inconsiderable presence in the field that he made his own, and he will remain a major figure, albeit a controversial one, in the field of psychology, as long as his discoveries are cherished and his insights developed as a living heritage by those who recognize, and are willing to repay, at least some small portion of the debt that scholarship still owes to his memory.

Humanitarian Demagogues, Egalitarian Rabble. Whether today’s mechanistic and atomistic experiments with human beings originated in the Orient or in the Occident, the result is always the same: the tyranny of a clique in the name of the equality of all. And it is from this very tendency that the fantastic pipe dream of human individuals being reduced to the status of mere numbers arises. This wishful thinking is a symptom of the nihilistic Will to Power that conceals its true nature behind the cloak of such humanitarian ideals as humility, solicitude for the weak, the awakening of the oppressed masses, the plans for universal happiness, and the fever-swamp vision of perpetual progress. All of these lunatic projects invariably result in a demagogic assault on the part of the inferior rabble against the nobler type of human being. These mad projects, it need hardly be said, are always concocted in the name of “humanity,” in spite of the fact that decades earlier Nietzsche had conclusively demonstrated that it was the ressentiment, or “life-envy,” of those who feel themselves to be oppressed by fate that was at the root of all such tendencies. Indeed, it is even now quite difficult for the select few who have no wish to enroll themselves among the oppressed mob to understand the realities of their situation!

The Goals of Socialism. When we set our goals in the direction of socialism, whether in the sphere of politics, of welfare work, or of the ideal community, the fanaticism that inspires the socialist is customarily tinged with Christianity. Thus the socialist urges the citizen to progress from wicked egoism to a more social attitude. Even when we ignore the social, religious, or political nature of the ideologue’s desiderata, there is one positive aspect to this development, for socialism at least directs our attention away from the tyrannical ego and towards the world that surrounds us, thus calling upon the only one of socialism’s fundamental motives that we can regard as positive and biologically sensible.

Characterological Truth vs. Psychoanalytical Error. The most extensive, pleasant, and (one might even say) amusing effects wrought by the application of the psychoanalytic treatment depended on the fact that the most wretched and feeble blockhead was now able to convince himself that he was equal to Goethe in that the instincts that played so decisive a role in the cretin’s development were identical with those that were operative in the case of Goethe, and it was only a malicious practical joke on the part of Destiny that permitted Goethe to find in poetry a congenial sublimation of his sexuality.

The Psychopath and the Revolution. We can hold out no hope whatever for the successful creation of the sort of community that is constructed by ideologists on the basis of purely rational considerations, for the projects that are hatched out in the mind of the rationalist are most definitely not analogous to the development of living forms in nature, no matter how often the contrary position has been proclaimed by false prophets. Thus, the delusive hopes that are cherished for the successful implementation of the simple-minded schemes of our socialist and humanitarian ideologists must fail in the future as they have always failed in the past. The only tangible result of these schemes has been to intoxicate the isolated psychopath with an egalitarian frenzy, from which his tormented ego awakens, more desperate than ever, in order to plunge once again, with ever-increasing violence, into his political ecstasies, into bellowing his eulogies to those nameless “masses” who are so dear to the ideologue that he has appointed them to be the sole beneficiaries of his activism, now that he has been made sufficiently mad by a nebulous and insatiable longing for “liberation.” But the “sham” anonymity, which functions effectively as the cloak for politicians who pretend to act in the name of “the masses,” can only benefit clever, robust, and willful politicians, such as those who rule the Soviet Union; the real psychopath, on the other hand, who often possesses a taste for novel sensations and who, perhaps, may also be seeking personal publicity, will never be able to conform to the prescriptions of such an icy, strict self-discipline. As a result, he “breaks out,” and is soon overwhelmed by calamities from which he thinks he can only escape by resorting to even more violent attempts to achieve “liberation.” From the standpoint of psychology, the history of revolutions is very helpful to those who wish to increase their understanding of the “everyday” behavior—as well as the political actions—of his fellow human beings, not least to the physician who seeks enlightenment as to the nature of the motivations that drive men to perform violent deeds in situations to which they lend the halo of freedom, equality, and fraternity.

Heredity as Destiny (and Tabula Rasa as Sheer Nonsense). The life-curve of an individual’s development is a single event, which arrays itself along the lines of irrevocable changes. Strictly speaking, therefore, every occurrence, no matter how insignificant, involves an irrevocable change: in life nothing can be reversed, nothing repudiated, nothing ventured without an attendant responsibility, nothing can be annihilated: that formula constitutes the biological basis of destiny. Just as the individual must accept his biological heritage as a whole, whether he likes it or not, in precisely the same fashion must he accept the pre-ordained pattern of obscure rhythms transpiring within him.

Today we have become tragically unconcerned with our biological destiny, to say nothing of the fact that we refuse to feel the slightest reverence to the sphere of life, to which we owe everything. …That very attitude accounts for the success that has greeted the claims advanced by Alfred Adler and his followers, who advance the dogma that the hitherto customary views on heredity are fundamentally false, since man is born as a tabula rasa whereon his environment makes impressions that, by means of education, one can direct at will, and according to the capacity of that will, toward any desired goal. Adler compounds his felony by claiming that there is no such thing as inborn talent or traits of disposition. …

It would be impossible to reject the principles of biological theory more absolutely than Adler and his cohorts have done. Even that which we understand by the old, almost obsolescent name of “temperament”—that which represents the sum-total of the somatically connected, permanent tendencies of an individual—even this link between the purely psychological and the purely somatic view is repudiated by Adler in his grotesquely teleological and hyper-rationalist construction. … Since there is no biological basis whatsoever for his stupendous assertions, one must seek for such a basis in another sphere, viz., the author’s ideology. Sure enough, we learn that Adler is a fanatical believer in the coming Utopia of socialism, and, as we all recognize, no Utopia can prosper until a faceless equality of disposition has been forced upon every individual by the ideological zealots who will run the show. Therefore I denounce the politically tendentious World-View that Adler and his apostles put forward as “science,” for it is a perfect example of nihilism passing itself off as scholarship, and no cloak of pedantic and prudent caution can hide the fact.

Genetic Endowment and Environmental Conditioning. Upon his entry into individual existence, the human being’s development as a psychosomatic creature is determined as regards substance, capacity for expansion, and direction, in the first place by his genetic endowment as a whole; in the second place by his pre-natal environment; and lastly by the circumstances of his birth. That almost all the active factors rise and fall in varying phases, makes a rational interpretation and estimate of the state of things at any given moment impossible in the strictest sense of that word.

But the fact that such an admission of the difficulties that arise due to methodological limitations is exploited by false prophets in order to deceive the world as to the real nature of biological facts—usually in order to breathe some life into the defunct heresy of the infant born as a tabula rasa—is either a sad indication of their childish mentality or additional evidence that they are indulging their ideological proclivities in the wrong place. What Goethe described as “the law under which you entered the world,” what Kant, Schopenhauer, and others called the “intelligible character,” is the first unavoidable actuality that we must accept as the destiny of our being, and as the starting-point of all investigation and thinking that relates to the human being. All experience and all reasonable thinking drives us back to this basic fact.

The Occidental Observer, August 8, 2010, http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Pryce-Prinzhorn.html

Joseph Pryce (email him) is a writer and poet and translator from New York. He is author of the collection of mystical poems Mansions of Irkalla, reviewed here. His translation of the German philosopher Ludwig Klages’ work will be published shortly.