Casta o non casta, Casta o Anti-casta, Casta, non-casta, pasta… no, questo è l’effetto dell’ora di pranzo. O forse è il tremendo alone lasciato lì, a penzolare giù da Montecitorio, tanto per rinnovare con devozione l’antica tradizione dell’ignoranza non ammessa su cosa sia effettivamente legge in Italia. Per amor proprio opteremo per la seconda ipotesi: nel nostro paese, diciamocelo, la legge è l’ultimo dei problemi. Sì, va beh, c’è. Ma poco importa. Tanto poi c’è sempre il miracolo italiano a provvedere. Quindi non sorprende che al di là degli idolatrati simbolismo della legislazione elettorale, al di là delle meravigliose insegne illuminate al neon dai partiti, in procinto di mettersi in vendita, come una prostituta in avanti con gli anni sotto le luci del neon, al di là di queste misere sciocchezzuole insomma, il mistero di come accidenti si arroccheranno stavolta sul cucuzzolo dell’iceberg rimane. La vacatio legis vera, e col suo ghigno più feroce rimane lì, salutando amabilmente.

Possiamo però, ben immaginare, queste formule arrabattate, maggioritario, proporzionale, uninominale, plurinominale, mentre i partiti, con righello e squadra spacchettano voti (non ancora ottenuti) per rifare tutto come “ai bei vecchi tempi”, quando tutto era semplice e si rubava contenti. Non sono più i vecchi tempi. Tira un’altra aria, e se non vogliamo rimanerne spazzati via, dobbiamo inventare qualcosa, e come comunità, non come meccanismi inanimati di una dualistica elettori/eletti.

Già imparare la fine arte del vergognarsi quando si fa qualcosa di ingiusto sarebbe un buon punto di partenza.

 

Il problema della Legge elettorale, al di là delle batterie da ricomprare per la calcolatrice, fonde la questione dei rapporti tra i partiti e quella dei rapporti tra parlamento ed elettorato. La seconda di queste vede i nostri esemplari rappresentanti perdere un attimo la visione generale delle cose. O forse credono che la sacra ritualità del parlamento possa salvarci tutti dal perdere quel minimo di civiltà che ci resta. O forse non hanno proprio idea di cosa dovrebbero esattamente fare, perché hanno scelto il proprio mestiere non per fare politica, ma per fare i politici. E questo è un costo un po’ troppo stressante, anche per una poltrona calda e un vitalizio consistente. Diciamocelo, non credo che un Gasparri, per dire un nome a caso, possa davvero confrontarsi con il Fondo Monetario Internazionale.

La prima ha molto a che fare con la società “civile”. La legge elettorale incide in maniera sostanziale sulla gestione del paese, e, dato che la stragrande maggioranza del paese preferirebbe spiegare la Critica della Ragion Pura a Calderoli al solo pensiero di andare a votare, questo incide non poco sugli umori del paese.

 

Quest’ultimo aspetto non è né scontato né irrilevante. Non è scontato perché nel momento in cui la “bolla Monti” scoppierà, anche alla scadenza naturale del mandato, le pressioni congelate o comunque tenute a freno dal governo tecnico ritorneranno forti, anche più di prima. Non è irrilevante, in quanto l’umore della popolazione (vero indice della civiltà di un paese) gravita attorno a pensieri poco lusinghieri attorno a categorie identificabili (in ultimo le banche e l’Europa, ma aggiungerei anche immigrati e casta), con il cui cadavere da sempre amiamo dilettarci, l’importante è che poi a pulire dai corpi e dal senso di colpa venga qualcun altro.

 

Ad oggi quello che si evince, non della Legge Elettorale in sé, quanto delle strategie dei partiti per rimanere vivi, sembra essere il tentativo disperato e pesantemente involutivo del recupero della tanto simpatica democrazia consociativa. Di cosa si tratta? Da manuale, di rappresentanti che, nel più puro spirito solidaristico, fanno fronte unico contro un periodo avverso e si stringono in coalizione allargata. Da realtà dei fatti, una sghemba riunione di condominio tra inquilini di lunga data, sorretta da un quartetto d’archi a fare atmosfera, in difesa da un nemico immaginario, mal compreso o semplicemente inviso. Chi è questo nemico l’avrete capito. Si tratta dell’ormai onnipresente Grillo, idolo delle folle, eroe dell’anticasta, difensore del popolo sovrano contro i politici, contro l’unione europea, contro le banche, contro Equitalia, contro Monti, Bilderberg, Goldman Sachs, i nani armati d’ascia, i troll di montagna, le vecchiette con l’alzheimer, i puffi e i cattivi dei Pokémon.

A Grillo, naturalmente, si affiancano Lega Nord e Italia dei Valori, la cui presa di posizione ne fa dei soggetti non coalizzabili.
Da questo deriva la difficile situazione nel caso davvero si opti per il “Monti-bis”, che lo si intenda come una grande coalizione con Monti Presidente del Consiglio o grande coalizione, senza Monti ma in continuum con le politiche dal suo governo adottate. La dualistica Casta/Anti-casta rischia di avvitarsi in un circolo vizioso, stavolta davvero pericoloso, perché istituzionalizzato in un’area refrattaria e compatta (diciamo PD/UDC/PDL), arroccata e insidiata da un’opposizione (M5S, Lega Nord, IDV) resa volatile dalle seguenti condizioni:
-non si tratterebbe (a meno di clamorosi avvenimenti) di una coalizione formale.
-si tratterebbe di partiti divisi da distanza ideologica a volte feroce, ma contemporaneamente legati da una componente di “rottura”, spesso con connotazione anti-sistema, capace di renderne le rispettive basi elettorali reciprocamente permeabili, portando i partiti a spingere sempre di più per salvaguardare il proprio consenso dalla concorrenza.

 

L’errore in cui i partiti incappano è quello di credere che un polo bipartisan attirerà inesorabilmente i cosiddetti e fantomatici “moderati”. Verrebbe da rispondere come fece Borghezio alla parola moderati, ma preferiamo lasciare a tale personaggio le volgarità, dopo tutto è l’unica cosa che sembra avere a sufficienza.

La distinzione moderati/estremisti, oltre ad essere metodologicamente inutilizzabile, resta anche nella logica dualistica che tanti meravigliosi successi ha addotto al nostro paese. Varrebbe a trattare la moderazione, la capacità di dialogare al pari di un bonus di anzianità in parlamento. Se c’è una cosa che la nostra Costituzione insegna è che il giudizio (sia esso legislativo oppure politico) si sviluppa sull’atto, non sull’identità. E’ un principio sacro del pluralismo, e, se vogliamo, il vero nucleo pulsante della democrazia consociativa che tanto sbandierano i parlamentari dietro la blanda retorica della “responsabilità”.

 

Se la guerra fredda sulla legge elettorale si salda quella che sarà una lotta feroce alle prossime elezioni (senza contare la questione delle elezioni presidenziali), le dinamiche di chiusura ai (finti) nuovi partiti rischiano di portare ad una conventio ad excludendum  stavolta sì devastante, perché capace di logorare un ritorno alla prima repubblica tutt’altro che auspicabile. Neanche questo pseudo-rinnovamento sbandierato, che in realtà non è che il moto convettivo per cui gli elementi di un partito meno esposti si sostituiscono a coloro che lo sono, perché sembri più giovane, possono mitigare una tale minaccia. E’ ormai improrogabile una selezione di nuove figure all’interno dei partiti, affinché sostituiscano i leader ormai più ridicoli che autorevoli, come dei vecchi sdentati. Questo, sia chiaro, come primo di un altro inderogabile passo, quello della ridefinizione di nuovi partiti, calciando fuori corrotti, incapaci e condannati. Altrimenti il sistema, sia cristallino, è destinato ad implodere. Fuori si approntano le fiaccole, e il combustibile della crisi è più che abbondante. Chiara l’idea?

Annunci

Innanzitutto, cosa intendiamo per popolarnazionalismo? Intendiamo quell’ebrezza che si prova ogni qualvolta una particolare visione del mondo si cristallizza attorno ad una precisa variabile della realtà quotidiana alla quale si affida il compito di saldare assieme violenza e organizzazione.

 

Violenza e Organizzazione vengono saldati perché tale unione permette agli individui, a quel noi che normalmente è piuttosto evanescente, una sintesi dei suoi mali in uno specifico simbolo di una presunta malvagità che opprime il nostro mondo.
Viene applicato quel principio che
Machiavelli consigliava nel Principe: si individua e annichisce il nemico invisibile, quel particolare gruppo che non può (o non sa) difendersi. Si alimenta la Questione, uno spauracchio dal quale difendersi, si parla, si crea lo scandalo, e intanto si rende assolutamente impossibile non chiedersi se questo determinato gruppo non rappresenti realmente una minaccia, perché, si sa, siamo convinti che il popolo non possa sbagliare (né tanto meno i giornali, suoi fedeli rappresentanti). Una volta alla ribalta della cronaca, la negazione della minaccia opera essa stessa quale affermazione, per un ormai noto principio: la negazione ha minor impatto cognitivo dell’affermazione (quando mai qualcuno che afferma di “non essere un ladro” non è stato sospettato di tale reato?). Inizia con l’interdizione, e cresce fino a diventare un brivido di ribrezzo, spontaneo, immediato. Alla fine, per un altro ben noto principio, la negazione ora affermazione diviene quasi piacevole, come appunto un disgraziato stato d’ebrezza.

 

Stiamo montando la rabbia, ora è contro i crucchi, ora contro i banchieri, ora contro la casta, gruppi il cui contatto con la comunità è quasi nullo, se non tramite l’intermediazione dei media, che ora si scatenano contro i nemici dei propri padroni, con una certa dose di obbedienza. La questione è già nata, è nei bar e sui mezzi pubblici, che sono il vero termometro della civiltà di un paese. Non che la questione sia sola, poverina, si aggiunge ad una lista decisamente lunga di questioni irrisolte, ci sono gli stupratori romeni, i negri puzzolenti, gli zingari che mangiano i bambini, i froci che non devono avere figli. La lista dei “nemici del popolo” è complessa, siamo carnefici sofisticati, noi.

A questi a cui un giorno la si vorrebbe far pagare (l’importante è che la soluzione non sia sgradevole alla vista) oggi si aggiungono con prepotenza i tedeschi che odiano l’Italia, i banchieri che odiano i poveri e la casta che odia il popolo.

In realtà la definizione quantitativa di chi statisticamente abbia più colpe non fa che alimentare la crisi di un sistema, probabilmente una crisi dell’intera civiltà occidentale. Essa non può dirsi arbitrata da una decina di signori in giacca e cravatta, sguardo fosco e pensieri dittatoriali. In realtà ci siamo dimostrati molto più abili nell’uso della violenza che nella sua organizzazione.

 

Appare allora terribilmente indicativo ciò che scrive Walter Siti, proprio in relazione alla recente crisi: “le vittime invidiano i carnefici ed è facile ingannarle con l’elemosina di un simulacro anche miserabile”. In quanto ciò che non ci riesce di capire è che un simulacro non è altro che un simbolo capace di attuare una sintesi dei nostri mali, atto a “identificare ed espellere”. Implica la creazione di una questione perché così si rende possibile la caccia alle streghe che porterà all’eliminazione della vittima sacrificale, perché la società intera possa sentirsi senza peccato.

Detto in altre parole, abbiamo bisogno dei tedeschi perché così possiamo sentire la nostra coscienza a posto senza venire costretti a vedere lo stato feudale in cui versa il nostro paese. Abbiamo bisogno dei banchieri per mettere a tacere la coscienza di fronte al nostro osceno consumismo, che ormai non si limita neanche alla spesa di ciò che abbiamo, ma anche di ciò che non abbiamo, alimentando una vergogna della povertà che, infine, non è altro che la povertà stessa. Abbiamo bisogno della casta per chiudere gli occhi di fronti ad un modello di promozione, di prospettive esistenziali, di un intero immaginario che verte proprio sui valori predicati dalla classe politica. Invidiamo insomma dei veri o presunti carnefici, perché pronti a diventarlo noi stessi, una volta ottenuto un potere di cui sentiamo lo spasmodico bisogno, ogni volta che alimentiamo una visione del mondo che serve soprattutto a giustificare ciò che siamo, invece che a capire ciò che vediamo.

 

Questo modello di comprensione del mondo eteronomica, cioè importata da altrove e non dalla nostra coscienza permette questa capacità di lasciarsi influenzare da chi ci promette di salvarci dai mali del mondo. Affonda le radici su una violenza logica legittimata e riempita di loghi linguistici da partiti, ideologie, gruppi e movimenti. Questi ultimi esercitano la funzione di ripetere litanie perfezionate affinché ci rendano capaci di vincere il discorso, perché risultare inattaccabili nel dialogo significa potersi imporre, senza che in realtà alcuna forma di coscienza permetta una qualche autonomia intellettuale. Quello che ci appare come diritto, come un inequivocabile sillogismo, come chiarezza, è in realtà un guscio vuoto. E quel che è peggio è di che questi “gusci vuoti” siamo bombardati senza soluzione di continuità, e la frammentarietà degli stessi rende questo auto-eliminazionismo estremamente tollerabile, addirittura piacevole. Sentiamo da qualche parte qualcosa e la sua logicità cristallina ci lascia spiazzati, convinti che con un “quelli che vengono qui devono lavorare” ci si apra improvvisamente un mondo, quando in realtà esso si chiude a soffocarci. Abbiamo il dovere di esistere, se non vogliamo finire come un macchinario che, pur ricevendo input da fonti diverse (meraviglioso pluralismo), svolge la stessa medesima funzione per tutta la sua esistenza: compiacersi.

A volte credo che il problema sia nostro. Il problema di ricercare ossessivamente un senso, un significato a quello che accade in questo bizzarro paese. Qualche volta, però, i cambiamenti, le svolte, le incoerenze sono talmente evidenti che diventa difficile non notarle, e alla fine anche il severo sforzo di tenere chiusa la bocca viene meno.

 

Un potente sentimento antipolitico, quasi una vena esplosiva si era alzata dal “popolo degli onesti”, dagli italiani brava gente che, come tifosi di una squadra piuttosto scarsa, alla fine rispuntano solo quando si tratta di vincere. Eppure, ad oggi grida entusiaste annunciano l’avvento del messia, di quel movimento degli uomini probi e disinteressati, guidati da quel re buono, pronto a risvegliare le coscienze, a rovesciare la casta, a pensare per noi, l’importante è che ci salvi. Quasi che il popolo lo chiami (notate qualche assonanza?). Eppure dovreste averlo riconosciuto, quest’uomo si chiama Beppe Grillo, e nella confusione di un paese che ormai non si riesce neanche più a capire sull’orlo di cosa sia, sta facendo man bassa di consensi, grazie ad una struttura di partito ormai da più parti tacciata di cesarismo.

Certo, il focus puntato sulla provocazione da parte dei media (terrorizzati da qualunque partito con il quale non abbiano raggiunto un tacito accordo), non può escludere la realtà di chi, dal basso, vuole partecipare ad un cambiamento del paese. Non credo nemmeno che la politica del Movimento 5 Stelle sia semplice fumo negli occhi, inconsistente e incapace di gestire uno stato complesso e contraddittorio come il nostro. Ciò che lascia rabbrividire, di fronte all’incapacità degli italiani nell’esercitare una qualche autonomia intellettuale, tuttavia, è la volontà di non vedere nel Movimento 5 Stelle un partito a tutti gli effetti. Come se d’un tratto tutta quell’antipolitica si fosse sgonfiata, una volta emerso un nuovo giocattolino che, agitandosi spasmodicamente e senza senso, ci sappia distrarre. E tanto basta per chiamarlo un eroe. Ma a questo, due ventenni ci hanno insegnato che, no, proprio non sappiamo dire di no.

E allora non basta una struttura che sa di settarico, con questo capo che segue tutto dall’alto come un’ombra, quasi ritroso al potere, tanto quanto nella realtà lo vorrebbe; non basta l’utilizzo criminale di qualsiasi paura possa giacere (ovviamente qualora non inflazionata da B.) nell’animo di una popolazione che non vede alcuna prospettiva di cambiamento; non basta il rifiuto del contraddittorio, il malsano spirito da pamphlet, coadiuvato da un avvelenamento da rete che rende tutti più sicuri e coraggiosi di fronte al mutismo di un computer; non basta questo plebiscitarismo che fa di qualsiasi sfogo contro una classe politica inetta un invito al colpo di mano.
Non basta tutto questo, perché in fondo è un “movimento”, in fondo lui è dalla parte della “brava gente”, in fondo una serie di slogan linguistici e blande chiacchiere ci stanno convincendo che “almeno lui fa qualcosa”. Come Mussolini. Come Berlusconi. E a dirla tutta, più come il primo che come il secondo.

Ma noi, storditi come da secoli, ci stiamo accordando attorno al nuovo slogan, ad una nuova, stonata e col tempo terrificante melodia, come le pecore di Orwell. Questa volta è diverso, lui sicuramente ci salverà. Perché, in fondo in fondo, siamo tutti brava gente. Ed è proprio di questa che dovremmo aver paura, di questa brava gente che mostra i denti, che copre le vergogne perché in fondo così, tramite l’attacco all’altro e la capacità di appiccicargli addosso tutti i mali del mondo, ci si sente tutti un po’ migliori di quanto non si sia in realtà, e si torna a sorridere.
E’ su ciò che questo governo sta facendo che la prossima battaglia elettorale si giocherà, e stiamo sicuri che il Movimento 5 Stelle attingerà a piene mani da questa riserva, da questo oro del cesarismo. Ci sta già bombardando, conscio, Grillo, che la piena delegittimazione degli altri partiti (l’unica eccezione sarebbe la Lega, irreversibilmente colpita dagli scandali), non sarà in alcun modo tamponata da occasionali frasette buttate lì tanto per tastare l’efficacia dei messaggi al popolo.

Nulla è stato lasciato al caso: Monti e il suo stato di polizia, la Merkel che odia gli italiani, l’Euro da abbandonare, tutto, insomma, purché un qualche uomo nero rimanga lì, velato, a uso e consumo del paese, come uno zimbello fisso, un nemico, un carnefice. Nessuna demagogia, sia chiaro, solo un’abile mossa di temibile avversario. Un gioco al massacro nel quale uno, e uno solo dev’essere il vincitore, un uomo con il gusto del pretoriano che, in uno spasmo del sistema, ha avuto occasione di assaggiare il potere, cosa significa essere applaudito ogni volta più forte ad ogni parola detta più grossa della precedente. Vediamo se riusciamo nel tris.

Sense, Ethics and Thought

Pubblicato: 11/08/2012 in Filosofia, Politica

Sense, Ethics and Thought

By Francesco Finucci

The rational fundament of Contemporary society brought civilization, through a series of key passages, to the progressive affirmation of dialectics as method of comprehension of reality. Interpretation of phenomena, even if suggested by a society more and more fragmented, remains the choice of a binary thought, where different influences determinate a selection among prestamped options, because of the latent terror of exclusion, meaning a process of individuation and expulsion. Being escaped from the menace of absolutism, as monopolistic power and totalitarianism, as monopolistic thought, the new paradigm of pluralism has been elaborated to assure free choice. Pulverization has been the main concept to assure concurrency. But while information created a continuous connection between man and society, permitting an everlasting exchange of data, the choice taken related to the same fictitious mechanism linking the individual to a group ready to sustain him in front a community felt more and more menacing.

Key words: Ethics, Language, Conscience, Perception of Reality, Eschatological Representation of Time.

Dialectic as the origin of Strings Pulverization and Multidimensional I

As a linguistic matter, in definition of what the sense of a simple string of meaning could be, a natural tendency may emerge, in destructuring the interactional code (the language utilized) in a system of messages, each bringing communicative instances, lying under the selective process where the form of interaction is chosen.
Such a system could be represented by explaining that the Interaction (I) is functional to a complex of messages (m):

I = f (m1,m2,m3,…,mn)

A multidimensional method in interpreting what an interaction is, however, must be considered in its primary dimension, the one of communication. This formula expresses the phenomenological “strings trading” we experience continuously. No market study can resist, in complexity, without the comprehension of inter-relations between microcosm (market) and macrocosm (system). It excellently reveals the kind of good bought by a subject α, the conditions determining access in this peculiar stock exchange, the methods in buying, the strategies utilized, even time between purchase and resale.

Wherever the perspective may be, reasons moving subjects of the little cosmos we retain in our hands stay evanescent phantoms: so ignorant about the bonds interlinking human beings in and out this market, we really don’t know who they exactly are.

In this function of interaction, in short, it can not pass unnoticed the feeling of “message decay” that accompanies a dialogic inter-personal communication. The not-told, the partially-told and the not-listened-told are, sooner or later, doomed to decay, through the process of formation of a dialogic text, fusion of two (or more) monologues never phenomenologically existing.

The immense contact between horizons of sense colliding is, this way, reduced to a conflictual clash between logoi, an eternal chess game producing dialectics.
The formation of identity is so inserted in its existential frame, but playing the dangerous game of schizophrenia, while subdividing our social dimension in a system of basic levels. Each level contain a potential speech, with reference to a a specific value in exchange, equivalent to the number of individuals stakeholding our packet of thought. Every individual can move freely in this level of his own I, interacting with allies and antagonists, losing the sense of anxiety derived from complexity, because of the protecting presence of a certain number of strings logically selected in order to assure victory in the strict and quantifiable interaction by words. Causality is utilized to keep far away every signal of entropic progress of acknowledgment. So, by devitalizing language we meet a process of deconstruction of identity: The individual is brought to skip from a level to the other in order to give response, never to an intellectual necessity (often linked with a revelation of randomness), but to a social one. There’s no aim, this way, in creating those inter-relations giving uniqueness to individual’s mind. Such a novelist became a simple employee, with the task of stamping documents: He’s puzzled in a multidimensional I, in which, for each matter, there is an artificial Me ready to start its refrain of standard responses.

So, the terror of an identity built on the equation: I=US is avoided by breaking up the perception of world in a stream of inputs socially relevant, but however hetero-genetic. Man is interrupted in order to let images stream in mind. This tendency can be recognized in Zygmunt Bauman‘s concept of Liquid Modernity.
The enormous mass of data, combined with dynamic fluidity can be cause of panic in front of the imperative of being in the world. But the self-corroborating emotion in being kidnapped by the variation of images proposed by a smiling group of ideas sellers it’s the fall from an Iron Cage right in the immensely dangerous logic of an invisible one.

It’s the not so bright difference between being crushed under the shame of colonialism and accepting the compromise of exporting raw materials and importing war. And nowadays this war is played at a psychological level. It’s in our minds. An “Everything” had to be found, an everlasting substance imagined to obtain eternity through the work of Man. The World Wide Web.

A sense of menace goes on existing in human relations, something like an unnamed feeling staying there waiting. The idea of an harmonized community, with the angelus novus of a new character, Information, is passed through a descendent concept of freedom, as if this web mind could be really enthroned as a automatized Leviathan and let there, thinking for us.

The Information system has been treated as an upgrading database, in its server function, never reflecting about its human nature. Dealing with it as with a machine giving inputs to be processed, this deus ex machina has partially destroyed every spirit1 of poietic mind.

Brought to his paradigmatic dogmatism, this mankind, can not live if not attached to a machine, really felt as an angelus novus coming to save every drop of humanity from desolation and decay.

In this conflict we are entered, extending space, deploying it as the sails of a boat lost in the sea of time. But with this hetero-genetic code, we have worn a DNA built on a string of binary code, where the choose is only in being a one, or a zero.

The problem in building a human being by a cabalistic choose between two indifferent choices is that this artificial man will lose his capability in committing a free action, linked to the dogmas of a unrevealed religion standing there with a not defined form. That’s the problem Immanuel Kant pointed out: a Dialectic syndrome in interaction.

Kant understood the necessity of a new mind in the inter-relations between man and empiric reality. The union between mechanical causality of the material principle and teleological causality of the natural one2 is the highest peak of Kantian Criticism: by expressing such vision, the philosopher claimed how much fragile could be a metaphysical structure of thought based on epistemological dogmas.
Kant understood how the ferocity either in affirming or denying God was the result of a common existential research expressing that anthropic principle we all share. He put the problem in terms of noumenon and phenomenon, so opening the metaphysical question of reality and perception, but the entire epistemological problem could be pulverized in a chaotic and anarchical quantity of strings of binary codes bringing antagonistic methods, maintaining or even enlarging the question of free thought in Binary Ethics.

Imagine an individual put by existence in front of two possible ways; the first one brings to a group, held together by a simple series of laws, which is their condominium. The same for the other way. But once he has chosen one of the two ways, the individual find out that a corollary exists. No surprise in the existence of cohabitation rules, but a little shock occurs, while investigating the nature of such laws. No possibility of denying his faith: there’s a price of loyalty to pay, even a price of hate. Yes, now he/she has to hate the inhabitants of the other building. Even, simply, for their love for a music genre, but excluding that band he/she’s faithful to. More, even intercepting a vague sense of contrariety to this hidden message he/she holds in heart, can be cause of a real laceration between human beings. However, if they had memory enough.

Sense, Logical Representation and Alteration Drama

Men lying under the representation of world instrumented by the causality of words and fill with content by dialectic, feel doomed to be insecure, so strictly attached to information to know how (how to live, how to behave, how to think). Remains, strong, the feeling to be in a dramatization, like if at night everything’s built all around it was dismantled as an house of cards. In this lack of oxygen this man does what every form of life does when it feels it can’t breath: hyperventilation.

It’s the principle on which is built a phenomenon as Facebook.

The first impression given by a social network as Facebook is a sense of lack. When the profile’s okay, when your best friends have been added, there’s a button you can’t find. That’s the one of Home Page. Sure, an Home Page exists. But there’s something wrong. It returns to you. How! Where are the promises spent when, approaching for the first time Facebook, we met that so reassuring image, representing the bonds linking human beings all around the world. Where is communication, where are discussions about breaking news, where is the Community?

There’s no surprise, at a first reflection. Facebook let your contacts be solid. It doesn’t help you creating some new ones.
But there is a problem in returning on yourself continuously: boredom. So the network goes on widespreading, until the world seems to be in your own profile, looking with interest at your life, saying “I like!” (but not “I don’t like!”). This continuous return to the self reminds to the individual the desperate necessity he/she has of information. The subject goes on upgrading the world by looking a contact, gobbling existence, trying to not fall in obsolescence, because becoming old means venturing in the strange dimension of old things, finding the inferior limit of this machine eating time, so understanding the other late of this bet with the net: everything that assure a so massive quantity of information needs an efficient procedure of destruction.

Lack of time brings, as said, to a continuous request for existence, trembling in front of the disturbing sentiment of transiency.

In a system built on the fluid material of the Indefinite Dynamics (the one of complexity), the fall of capability in shaping world emerges as an image far from freedom: it feeling of a fall of Man as reasoning being, the light in a chaotic mass of creation. The real derangement3 is the loss of Word. The Logical Representation system of phenomenological world can’t resist in front of an immense sea moving and changing eternally. It’s impossible to represent something moving, exactly as it is, by painting. You will need a camera. A machine. It’s the irresistible call of technique when contemplating, in the end, eternity. Something like mankind returning in the cave, after knowing the trembling of determining by an independent decision where to go. Something like agoraphobia4.

This strict fear of experiment is a fundamental element in the concept of human being, built in time since Enlightenment pronounced these laws of reason that are the ones constricting human mind under the dictatorship of logic. While constructing Nomothetic Man, humankind let Alteration Drama as the only possible way to save our mental health, in front of infinite forms of experience, impossible to enter under the semantic expression of word. Once more, the imagine of a painter trying to represent a sea could symbolize this mankind lost in contemplation of an infinite, but constricted under causal logic, incapable to communicate.

This Nomothetic Man, lying with no Sense, killed in his spirit of existence’s creation, could be destined to affirmation of positive reason and, once more, forced under categories, perhaps no more in name of God, but however in name of something even more dangerous, a Party, or a Leader. Because a request of participation needs joiners, stakeholders, never felt as different in their rights, but all of them exactly equal. But, as in the binary code of Dialectics, a one need to emerge. Or, better, has to be called by his lauding people, in order to affirm a new doctrine. Well. In our voyage from an evident (and so weak) Monopole, we have arrived to a Duopoly where, in a perfect democratic process, an indefinite number of men with a passion for leadership is playing cards to totalitarize5 our minds.

From the paralyzing condition of existence, lost in a Everything full of menaces, this research of hetero-referential thought, powerful enough to totalitarize our one, this has never found its point of decay. Hetero-references are still in their higher level of persuasion. The emerging tribalism it’s not something slowly disappearing in front of globalization, not only a reaction to this: It’s exactly the material on which we’re constructing globalization. A Globalization of Us, where a references bombing is destructuring the identity of individual in an indefinite number of Intruder Principles. This way, Logic Representation is no more a possibility. It becomes a necessity. Each one of the data is so involved in the complex of identity, that the individual would feel himself lost, if separated from it. But this world is logical, especially the anthropic dimension of interaction, and how defend this little, precious piece of I from it, if not with a Logical Drama?

Nomothetic Man and Esthetic Demonstration

Nomothetic Man is doomed to a continuous fall into Nomos. In a being of patchwork, Consciousness is the great missing, where laws, behaviors, common knowledge are pursued as functional active schemes. The synthesis of equality between action and reaction emerges, here, as the natural corollary of causality. Society returns, this way, to be a network of reciprocities, an interlinking system of interests. But this must not be confused with a form of civil resistance of consciousness, in front of a not representative authority. At the contrary, abandonment of State let the individual alone in a vague sense of legality, but feeling ignorant and defenseless. A misty idea about his rights, that seems to vanish at a first glance to a legal representative of authority, it doesn’t matter if public or private. State, as a phenomenon of nomothetic filter, is a chess gamer knowing hot to model, how to interpret rules, and the individual is alone in front of authority6. The abandonment is complete: even the idol, that so adored defendant of our right, Logic, trembles, confused and astonished.
Man doesn’t need that a meet with one of these representatives (often officially working for our welfare) to fall, having been educated as a not so intelligent child, in order to obey to an output of Authority received by mail, knowing nothing about the why. Citizen’s used to the fanaticism of an ethics of offices, where experience of law must be treated as an Esthetic Demonstration. As in Hegel’s famous theory, what’s real is rational, what is rational must be real. No disobedience can be forgiven. Each sign of insubordination is censured as a primary lack in our capability in “staying in the world”. This signals of dictatorship of common thought have been detected more than 150 years ago, by David Thoreau. Informatics Society imposes the question of annihilation of consciousness more than in XIX Century, because of an interdependence meaning enlargement of the mass of information needed to not feel ourselves as strangers in the system.

So, Man invented a conflict, an everlasting war giving sense to time. Time, the great eater of Sense, was ordered to become the defendant of what significant was to man. Time was the thin line designed to bring mankind to the end. Man discovered the concept of Culture, a weapon charged with significance to shoot down… To shoot down what? Man needed an enemy. A presence lying just a millimeter under the surface of reality. I’d like to name it the Who. Because under the skin of Evil Spirits, of Devil, of Nature, of Superstition there’s not definition. A lot of thinkers consumed their existences in trying to find out what was the mystery impressing such a powerful fear in our minds. A lot of them tried to find the enemy, to see behind the curtain, to knock on Godot’s door to finally find out where he really was. But such an Unnamed Feeling stayed there, like laughing where the eye couldn’t arrive.

The track’s so evanescent, so fragile, its same existence is in doubt.
So, this line became, not only a direction, but also a work. The work of someone interfering with Time. Something metaphysical, in the end. This system endured for centuries, collecting myths, tales, moral teachings, giving also evidences of the metaphysical dimension of their culture. Man built an interesting scheme in order to interpret an extended experience, the one lost in time, transcendent man as individual.

Man’s postulate inserts in hermeneutic vision of empiric dimension an extraneous element: God. How such a immense presence in a system that’s principally materialistic, how even the birth of a social response to such a peculiar concept. There are obviously more theories about this question, each of them interesting and finding out a precious splinter of sense. But, perhaps, Émile Durkheim realized a point of view expressing what we’re looking for: The God of a Clan, and so the Clan itself. This idea could be important to understand how powerful can be the human mind in creating reality. Because the concept of God, in its existential dimension, cover that question about the hand designing the line of time to make it expression of the track of a teleological revelation. A man experiencing the Zeitgeist, the spirit of time, can now extend his cognitive perception in the deeps of infinite. The same image of paradise, such a land where time and space are widespreading, becoming an “everything” involving man can be saw from this point of view.

Teleology became expression of dialectic itself, in case of fear, in case of nihilism, something like a rope of emergency raining eternity on the aridity of the desert land of phenomena.

As the verb flying on earth before man, Magics, God, Spirit gave life to a system that was an entropic one, and so destined to decay.

There’s no point, here or elsewhere, in discussing about the existence of God. Faith has been perfectly described by Blaise Pascal. That’s a bet. Something found in the reason of heart. Something every man has to deal with by his own.
The real point in this reflection is how the question of the Who has been solved by the nomothetic man, used to make reference to logic reason, and so, disgusted from metaphysics.

Here the linear scheme Ethics-Time is upset by the great, piercing absence of God7. The complex system of dogmas fell, and man found itself looking at a sky with no star. So hit in his deep beliefs, man invented reason, by reducing his creative will to empirical world, and by creating new stars, even constellations, become by time new dogmas, under the term “Paradigm”.

An Esthetic Demonstration is, now, the miracle, the religion of innovative hermeneutic method of technique. It’s an empiric miracle, obviously, but is nothing really based on a stronger consciousness. Esthetic has become the perfect substitute for metaphysics, as well as Paradigms are for dogmas. The chaotic experience in living the system, with no one autonomic complex of references, is broken into pieces, and then reduced to demonstration of principles vaguely listened from a not better known authority. New stars are now guiding our streben, but the fundamental question, the hazard of men living in the platonic cave, the silence between a breath and the one after; The question is still right there, looking in insolence: Is it real?

In the very end, Reality

I’ve always been charmed by a definition I found in a book about Political Geography. Trying to explain a complex concept as the one of Space, the authors gave more than an approach to the problem. One of these proposed the idea that a space is a peculiar dimension where beings are: Each possibility of real was so referred to a thinking mind perceiving the other lying in front of its eyes. Such a point of view typify the phenomenological cut given to what originally was considered only perception of an empiric world existing independently from the observer. Once more, every three-dimensional structure of existence is lost, substituted by pieces of paper not emerging but tanking life because they’re linked to subject.

Like that so desperate Facebook user, this writer that cannot stop working looks frenetically for a new sheet where the novel of existence can be logicized and interpreted. An esthetic world emerges from imagination in order to fulfill the empty spaces let there by the unknown of a not-told world. It’s the same process of decay from insignificance to in-existence that dictates the choice of coercion in defining what a Space is. The reduced dimension of personal reality is somehow similar to a subject of Schrodinger’s paradox holding a blowtorch and merging the box where the cat of the paradox is, with everything the subject can see, in order to create a system of homogeneity (a complex of elements so strictly interlinked that the complex itself can be considered a single entity).

The question emerging from this totalitarizing method is the incoherence between the ideology of Esthetic Demonstration and the phenomenological fundament of nomothetic thought. As a matter of fact, in my idea, the system of references has now been turned in a profane experiment, in a God of gears. The extraordinary tear thought as a stroke, releasing a metaphysical need into a earthly habitat it’s not, in the end, really cared by the subject of this mechanism of self-illusion. The imminent-never-coming, for its dimension of announced arrival gains the role of undefined justice held by divinities, even maintaining its feet on earth.

The real problem is such a daily clash with experience, while even a definition of a system comprehensive this other bombing our perception is hard to be taken. Defining Existence means in the very end handing a real one, in order to find a defined role for our staying here. The idea of living the transition in time as an ordered movement is the feeling of a balance measuring our weight in the happening’s machine of universe. The revelation of the secret of universe brings everything we can’t imagine, in the closed box of a limited comprehension:


Even such an approximation permits to reveal one of the key events in Nomothetic Thought. The mechanism transforming inputs in outputs pass by a not-accepted process of humanization by word: The Secret Lawyer is not something linked from a different dimension, coming to rule the one of men; It is the word, making possible the equality Lawyer=Word=Man. The first effect of this identification is the sensation of freedom both negative and positive:
1) Freedom from the unpleasant presence of the Who, bringing complexity with itself. Because everything has a meaning has the full right to exist.
2) Freedom to be the creators by word of a human space where real and rational collide.

The holy space built on the necessity of comprehension becomes, this way, the dimension of something even deeper, the place for something similar to a soul. So, the question of Role finds in the positioning ruled and observed by the same subject – mankind – the profane affirmation of a mechanical religion, where the tiny machine of individual can be inserted in a wider level of perception and judgment commonly observed by the contact with the continuous production of meaning operated by media. The common thought hovers like a not well defined entity. Now -is this the metamorphosis from a fragmented humanity to Nomothetic Man – the messages bombing can be comprehended by downloading targeted information from the closed box.

The process of exorcism permits now a sensation of safety, by assuring a continuum between man and context, transforming the demonic presence of the Who as unnamed feeling lying behind the shadow of complexity, in a perfectly human Lawyer, the Secret one, now lying behind the higher symbol of modernity and machinery applied in order to aid humankind, not an altar but a computer.

The main question of being, such a metaphysical calculation as the one of existence’s resolution is so passed by the automatism of codes. Now, the revolution of the Age of Nomothetic conditioning is consumed. The equality between the systems of communication concerning the logical protocol of machines and the one deriving from the creative power of life can now be written:

Human = Nonhuman

Colonizing what mankind cannot comprehend, it’s colonizing, by a contradictory paradox, every dimension of existence, every space of freedom and creation, every sign of life itself. Complexity’s now completely defeated, but the price for such a victory is the one of losing humanity itself. Imagining an experience subordinated to a standard office protocol would be imagining the sterility of the loss of entropy as the real matter of discovery. It would be, in the end, imagining a humankind finding Reality, just in time to lose the anthropic spark of life where language is the mean to create new spaces for new prospects, new times for new hopes, and not the ankylosing friction exhausting the body until the arrival of a senescence of thought. Not a cage but a canvas. The real place where there can be wonder. Where we are free.

The experiment of such an afraid humanity, paralyzed by choice, it’s like the game of a bad artist putting a mirror on the canvas in order to forget the disturbing emptiness of such a freedom of expression. Because the use of Language is primarily a method to give life to other beings and let them free in the conservative dimension of physic reality. These little, involuntary corners of time widespread and combine reciprocally, becoming casual causes of revelation for people looking for something absolutely different. This principle of serendipity tends to look like a falling voyage to indefinite. The consolatory linearity of the double pilgrimage Birth/Death, Sin/Perfection, where the

way of existence’s consumption coincides with the one of a titanic ethic to perfection looks like an abysmal spiral. We thought the only response was pushing down humanity itself and let it float on the bottom in order to give a sense to that darkness bringing vertigo. Looking in the well, looking for the moon.

Default Action in binary ethics

What can really let the observer astonished, in defining how the continuous research for a meaning permeates language, is the deep network of roots inter-connecting individual experiences in a immense, common identity of existential landscapes. The need for expression excavating down the origins of humankind spells the eyes interacting, dancing with a creative mind never known. The impregnable strongbox of consciousness represented by an alternative existence let here crumbs for the persistent feeling of a unique condition. Something like humanity surfacing, a kind of knowledge taking breath exactly where knowledge itself is not possible, because of the immediate consciousness of a mute humankind starting to beat its existentialist genesis on an immense number of drums. Where the research of significance stops, between an effort and the following, the conscience of Sense starts to evolve.

The imagined common memory of a spoken existence, fulfilling the obscure silence of empiric world could be the overproduction showing fissures where life itself emerges. Where the word is absent, where the logicizing method crashes, we can imagine beauty, as portrayed by Sam Mendes8, flowing with no need for control. At the moment where a rite of passage marks the Jump Point where experience and experienced cannot collide, where an other reaction is required, because of immensity bringing wonder where once there was a standardized protocol of knowledge, similarly to the giants imagined by Giambattista Vico in his Scienza Nuova, is the roar of a thunder that let humanity have perception, as a touched Ciàula9, of a sky staying there behind the horizon of survival.

When wonder and amazement start to redefine borders and paradigms, every system of statical ethics falls. Man’s alone in front of existence and action, feeling experience passing free by his mind and veins, lost in a liquid uniqueness giving no bearings. The antagonistic bipolarity commonly summarized in the dualistic form optimism/pessimism is an example of statical ethics. It expresses not two different visions of world, but different approaches with diachronic thought, the one interlinking perception of present and future planning. I don’t believe in the existence of a model A with a label “Optimist” and a second one, the model B labeled “Pessimist”. Not even in a relativistic evolution of this idea that however maintains the quantitative approach of enlarging the choice to a wider range of possibilities. We could try to subdivide a line in a number of segments growing higher. How could we obtain the disappearance of segments? We will see, at the contrary, their number increase.
Pessimism and Optimism are not models, but words helping the mind in taking choices, and so they can be deconstructed. More precisely they’re strings of that binary code we introduced before. They are communicable symbols of the linear vision of Ethic and Time (direct consequence of the Double Pilgrimage), symbolizing different prospects on progress (continuous/discontinuous), commonly accepted as inevitable but felt more distant where an obstacle appears on the personal road to victory the individual is used to consider his/her life.
In front of a reality letting no possibility to comprehension, mankind is mute, never having the power to logicize by word. The significance of such categories is the one of a “passport string”, somehow similar to the common information procedure of
“default actions”. They’re thought bypassed by a stakeholding community in order to assure a self-executing safeness in front of the complexity of experience’s decryption. We already spoke about the element of safeness. The element now central is the one of self-execution. Zygmunt Bauman, in one of the most influential essays of the last twenty years, affirms that the fundamental change in liquid modernity could be the progressive acceleration of time. Well, such a perception (it doesn’t matter if real of imaginary), unified with a mechanical repetition of experiences brings from human capability in resolving instances with a creative method to functional automatisms born in order to permit a capable action, or an action bringing consequences in the overall system.

The dialogue between man and human, merging consciousness and conscience and obtaining thought, is so built as a machine of dead continuous movement to nothing. We walk bringing meanings borrowed by imaginary communities, throwing strings of code in response to each warm, each gust of wind, each word said in order to fell ourselves less alone. An automaton shouting his identity pulverized in a mass of loaded dices never saying the truth, because each free thought is a dangerous gaze that rises from the mirror and investigate existence to change a reality that a man can’t stand.

The time of dream

Once more is the capability in feeling wonder that extends perception in something we can recognize as human. Is wonder the element sculpturing new dimensions in experience with the weapon of poietic skills. The use in considering reality as permanence of matter cannot be more than the illusion of stabilization by reason. Man do create reality by being. The result of man colliding with system is not the simple summation of independent elements.

From collision with existence the individual acquires the consciousness of being. Of acting in the strict dimension of empirical world. But there is something not even the reassuring agoraphobia of a cave can deny: it is poetic need as the necessity of looking behind the wall. More. The necessity of raising reality with the power of word. As in aboriginal Alcheringa10man discovered that new realities could be evoked by giving life to what they saw. We found a way to throw a stone in a “where” undiscovered. I find not casual how magics and singing were originally the same thing. That religion, magics and epic poems are often intertwined. By discovering poetry, by landing at the sacred bank of poiesis man discovered Art. By feeling astonished, looking at the sublime image of rain and thunder, platonic slaves now free found their safeness in painting their empty spaces. They became poetic, they let Homer find his Odyssey as they looked in misery at Eliot’s Waste Land. Sooner or later we became fundamentalists of word, we learned to toss the stone where we wanted reality, it became reality, transforming itself in Law. But, in the very end, we were already in cave.

We were used (and we are) to think that the work of a philosopher is in his essays, in words said, in definitions given. The cloister of spoken interaction is our cage, the myth of usefulness our chains. Existence is the only work not for the philosopher, but for man itself.

When we, mute speakers, will find the real independent variable of humankind, we’ll reveal how philosophy of existence and existence by philosophy end in being. In powerful pulse coming from the contact between humanities. In choice as the point where a continuum is created by memory, between thought and action. Where man, as the mariner evoked by Coleridge, looking at the whole dimension of existence, takes on his own responsibility what of human’s out there.

The time of conscience

In a freezed age, where hopes and prospects are inalienable rights of cinder, the glazing spirit of progressive thought, the fierce instinct to creation by existence can falter, shaken when a powerful strain comes from spasms of instability. Waiting for the epic moment of a stillness coming back to gain reality, humankind can be attracted by the idea of hibernation, of blindness as the solution to look in disgrace without be eroded. The opportunities of letting snow blow over our head could be considered numerous, the strategy of shelter convenient. However, nothing can change where life stop streaming, where everything stay there dying of satisfaction. Now, more than in the past, there’s no rain feeding reality our place. No theory, no strategy, no history. No structure.

Hibernation hypothesis could find our awakening in the desert of cultural senescence. There’s, to avoid a return to idiocy, no rainmaker: WE ARE rainmakers.

In the tissue of creation as alteration by word there can be the key of specific identity. The point of discontinuity in agreements, where no automatism rules experience and every noise, every view, every perfume acquire an higher dimension, the one of consciousness, the one of thought as the matter of changing. Imagine how powerful could be that so discredited man of platonic cave when, with rhapsody of need for existence, teared away his cynic idols, get out of his barrier-less prison, projecting shadows of his reformulated words through the world, putting it on his shoulder, trying to find a way by his unique capability of ethics.

Ethics, as energy giving existence in system to the individual, founds phenomenological soul in empiric dimension, being man fragmented in something more than intruder-principles: non-rational randomness of experiential choice.

The abandonment of ethic linearity, indeed, involving a walking α to ω, means also the lack of linearity in choice (as convergence from an individual A, bringing a determinate ethics, with an event B in a point of balance E where choice is).

Choice becomes, this way, a multivector event, being influenced by an high number of elements and related to an high number of other phenomena, giving rise to an high number of consequences.

What can ethics do with desolation, where a blind man writes contemporary history, surrounded by waste land, no compass accepted, if not a broken one, always coming back to the same place.
It can turn the light on. Life, as growing experience, emerges where an obscure fundament of existence is, where experience of evil rooted a spark of ethics, seizing reality, not autistic joy, but anger made will.

Here the energy of ignition. Here the lymph where a continuous effort in experiencing the act becomes the construction of prospects, the not-fragmented existence where life fluently streams. Where:

Not stopping the mind is object and essence. Put it nowhere and it will be everywhere. Even in moving the mind outside the body, if it is sent in one direction, it will be lacking in nine others. If the mind is not restricted to just one direction, it will be in all ten11

The aim in giving mind the control in existence, in changing reality as creatures behind the veil of complexity, cannot be that the one concerning responsibility as the source of permanence in time.

Time’s the greatest gift that man owns, the absolute when, pulverized in moments, is shared among humans, as existence contemplated only by a restricted number of beings. Nothing more intersects that so fragile piece of perception, where choice determines coordinates, fellowship and action. Where the aim of time, wears frailty with permanence.

Permanence involves the need for a responsibility particle, an ever-resisting judgment variable, not in order to acquire place in an over-researched global mind symbolizing human common memory, but in order to gain existence in a system of average inter-connection how reality is.
Kurt Godel, bohemian logician underlined that:

The illusion of the passage of time arises from the confusing of the given with the real. Passage of time arises because we think of occupying different realities. In fact, we occupy only different givens. There is only one reality.12

In an unique reality, interlinking bonds of influence seem to appear even where a condition of reciprocal indifference leads to the construction of (mnemonic or ethic) walls. Because the instance of free choice is based on the opened range of acts and such a request for creativity, as a new chord of existence, implies consequences on individual objects of the action and inspiration for observer ones. Being all connected, even if reconfigured in order to avoid historicist drifts, these words, expressed by Johann Fichte, can help us understand that:

“All these people have labored for my sake. All that were ever great, wise, or noble -those benefactors of the human race whose named I find recorded in world history, as well as the many more whose services have survived their names: I have reaped their harvest. Upon the earth on which they lived I tread in the footsteps of those who bring blessings upon all who follow them. Whenever I wish, I can assume that lofty task which they had set for themselves: the task of making our fellowmen ever wiser and happier. Where they had to stop, I can build further. I can bring nearer to completion that noble temple that they had to leave unfinished.”
“But,” someone may say, “I will have to stop too, just as they did.”
Yes! And this is the loftiest thought of all: Once I assume this lofty task I will never complete it. Therefore, just as surely as it is my vocation to assume this task, I can never cease to act and thus I can never cease to be. That which is called “death” cannot interrupt my work; for my work must be completed, and it can never be completed in any amount of time. Consequently, my existence has no temporal limits: I am eternal.”
13

With this hope, the creature discovers the power in glazing the sky, whatever tempest may obscure prospects, finding in its deeps the strength of a consciousness intertwined with conscience. No matter stays, cathedral into the desert, obstinate stronghold against nihilism. No destiny hangs over imaginary parenthesis occurred as an hiccup of history. No sound of water: no water waits to release the machinery of providence in technique.

Only man stays, source where poietic pulse and poetic need are merged, letting existence fluently stream, giving a meaning where nothing was sovereign. Man is the signification. Man is the Sense, as archetypical research we all share. Only trusting in this vocation, that the work of singularity expresses, in the very end, Sense, light can be turned on, giving life to this unnamed feeling growing, faster and faster, until it becomes thought, until it becomes ethics.

Frequency is on, shining in obscurity. It’s everywhere humanities collide, everywhere a human being puts the world on his shoulders, considering the impossible and thinking the unintelligible.
Everywhere we remember just to turn the light on.

Bibliography

Bauman, Z., 2011, Modernità liquida, Laterza [or. Liquid Modernity, 2000]
Fichte, J.
, 2004, La missione del dotto, RCS Libri [or. Einige vorlesungen über die bestimmung des gelehrten, 1794]
Kant, I.
, 2010, Critica del Giudizio, Laterza [or. Kritik der Urteilskraft, 1790]
Nietzsche, F.
, 2010, Così parlò Zarathustra, Giunti [or. Also sprach Zarathustra, 1885]
Pascal, B., 1996, Pensieri, Newton & Compton [or. Pensées, 1670]

Rucker, R.,1995, La Quarta Dimensione, Adelphi [or. The Fourth Dimension, 1984]

Thoreau, D., 2010, La Disobbedienza Civile, RCS Libri [or. Civil Disobedience, 1849]

1The therm “Spirit” mustn’t be interpreted in Hegelian sense, as something like a teleological bond, linking the humankind through centuries, bringing it to a positive revelation.

2Immanuel Kant – “Critique of Judgment”, paragraph 78, Critique of Teleological Judgment, pagg. 503-515

3The same etymological sense of “derangement” refers to a sort of crash of our perceptive ranges in judgment.

4It’s remarkable that the Greek word “agorà” means “square”, before than “opened space”, the meaning accepted in composing the word “Agoraphobia”.

5The Totalitarianism of reference must be interpreted by analyzing it while acting in two different dimensions. Totalitarianism in political sense is here considered in the tentative of capturing every capability of exercise will in individual by making him/her repeat the slogans of duopolist. Totalitarianism in logical sense is considered the osmotic process of passage of good from the antagonist reality from the allied one. Everything’s good pass from the idea B (for example, apples are red) to the idea A (apples are green). The same happens for evil, but the process is the contrary.

6An important distinction in analyzing the ethical implications of nomothesis is the one between State and Authority. An authority is a social being having a power of wisdom exercised in experiential contact with other human beings. Dialectic intellectuals often denied the multilateral and precarious condition of authority, recognizing it in State, Church, Parliament, Education System. This is the real dictatorship of words, where ethics depends from a definition of good and bad. And, too often, also dignity, health and even life are objects of a coin toss.

7Is this one the question of God Death, raised by Friedrich Nietzsche. The fall of absolute breaks the fragile bond between man and infinite created by Religion. Man’s now alone, a crying being going mad for the atrocity of his crime, the one of illusion destruction.

8“American Beauty” (Usa, 1999)by Sam Mendes

9Ciàula, fictional character from the tale “Ciàula scopre la Luna” in Luigi Pirandello’s “Novelle per un anno”.

10 The so called “Dreamtime” is, in aboriginal tradition, a mythical time where ancestors gave existence to things by singing and speaking.

11 Takuan, Soho. “The unfettered mind”

12 Cited in Rucker, Rudy “The fourth dimension” (1984)

13 Fichte, Johann. “The vocation of the scholar” (1794)

Why Fiscal Compact and ESM won’t save Europe

By Francesco Finucci

The strength in economical policies is founded on the strength of beliefs they are based on. No structure lives when even a feeble impression of will to escape is perceived. But an age of uncertainty as the one following the crisis of 2007/2008 could not be free from a “spirit of plunder”, growing higher and higher with time. The real symptom of disaggregation lies, in the end, in such a phenomenon. No prospect can be imagined if the choice is focused on what to do, and no reflection can be recognized, behind, on what to be.

Some time ago, on the Italian daily newspaper La Repubblica, Barbara Spinelli underlined one of the fundamental elements concerning the European model rose from the recent crisis of sovereign debts. She unveiled a secret that our identity thought desperately tries to cover, the unnamed temptation for a wall1. First shock: the image wandering in European conscience in association with the therm “wall” reminds that so ancient black hole of Berlin during the Cold War. Something’s like a barbaric voice of night hide in places thought as distortions of time come in the civilized world as memory, more than as politics. Something breaking out from the raw mind of an Israeli governor as Sharon, when, in 2002, the decision for a new wall of shame was taken.

We looked with pity, we looked in anger, as a man observing the misery of ants. We cried the disgrace of barbaric thought, inflating Europe with concepts of happy-ending and intellectual rest. Now, how could such a defeatist egg-head bother the rest of the victorious people with such a troubling vision. How could a journalist speak of nonexistent barriers we can’t see. How she dared.

Well, Barbara Spinelli found the question, the same underlined by Richard Sennett, sociologist at London School of Economics: It’s only there, in the capability in doing something with other peoples, with the ones we don’t know, with the ones we don’t like, or at the contrary, sometimes, that we can also consider unpleasant that there can be the way for our future2.

An other shock. What an idea of growth and welfare? Ridiculous! Economics cannot roots on paternalism. We own the right to maintain what we obtained and deserved, in this modern evolutionist conflict. Overlooked the fact that Sennett’s speech is precisely focused on organization in businesses, the real response to such a question, not completely unfounded, can be recognized in the words expressed by -this is not irrelevant- an economist, Barry Eichengreen, professor at the University of California. Eichengreen pointed out how one of the most problematic faces of European crisis (not the only one, as just highlighted by Sennett) could be the one of Trust Deficit3

Eichengreen, during his pitiless analysis, reports three point of deficit in trust.

  • Leaders/Public: The bond liking governments and populations is getting more and more unraveled. The institution of peoples, European Union, is felt, day by day, an empty shell of fear and lack of prospects.

  • Leader(State)/Leader(State): Suspect among representatives is growing higher, moving on the frequencies of finance, of policies beggar-thy-neighbor, of integration as a method of control and control as a method of abandonment.
  • Group/Group: the dominance of suspect as the definition of a system waiting for the order “every man for himself” can be recognized, or even influences a spirit of plunder that’s the real index of the medieval we are playing with.

The elemental function of structuring Europe held by cooperation, as seen, can be considered a common element in those points of view. Nevertheless, the emerging European question regards the same political nature of such an institution. And we’re not speaking about the problem of a lack of a serious political integration, repeated ad nauseam everywhere the word “Europe” is casually whispered.

The system of European Union lies on a tradition linking the western civilization around the phenomenon of political democratization by law. Discovering word as the capability to extend existence, the world survived to WW II gave life to hierarchical schemes elaborated to give response to a founding thought, the one of renaissance, the one of hope: Democracy. Problems, instead, were present, and we saw the consequences. Now is EU under attack, but why? The main reason is the one inter-linking EU and finance. Managing complexity means moving data and resources in enormous quantity. This is the definition of a system that cannot crash. I.e. a net subject to crisis when operators discover how fragile the risk covering strategy is. Where complexity takes over, only trust can hold on reality. The entrance in existence needs a ticket marked with faith.

Trust is the fundament for systems of joint responsibility. Joint responsibility and trust are the two pillards of societies after WW II. Such a building constitues the formula in response to the need for Democracy, a social scheme of entropic free choice, where appartenance is signed with high incidence of casuality and consequently escapes and assaults are determined by details. Fluidity preconized by Zygmunt Bauman some years ago can now be seen more clearly. This is no more fluidity. It’s a game played on the film dividing existence and nonexistence. It’s the complete oxmosys between real and unreal. However, that’s the perception. The one bringing man to law as a churchgoer finding peace in pray. Giving us our daily bread or bringing by its own effort rights, freedom and democracy. One between the two, that’s the same.

But a law, even a constitution, lies on paper. And so, how can it become something real, how can it become really freedom, equity, justice. How can it exist?

Well, we found that palaces, common rules, greetings and declarations could assure existence to principles we needed. As if those mountains of paper could take life, starting to breath and walk. We were the inventors, feeling ourselves similar to these ancestors of Maori tradition, sustaining existence by remembering old songs, by singing. The experiment of supranationality is the highest hazard of our time, because it means that if we fall, we fall together, with or without solidarity. We sang this song of forgetfulness making a deal with disaster, raising the bet.

Unfortunately, the list of errors is so long that only a complete redefinition of targets can save Europe from a slow decline (if we want to consider ourselves lucky).

The first and more significative case of European error is the complete foolery of Schengen Agreement of 1985. Such an agreement clearly shows the dangerous direction taken by European countries (somehow, among other, accepted also by nations out of Schengen Area). The central element justifying the entire system elaborated in Schengen is the one developing the method of exclusive-Europe. It artificially builds a region by closing it under a shield assuring European people from “invasions” by letting culture and identity, contrary to every document signed in forty years, be iced in this long winter we are experiencing. More, everybody knows that different individuals forced to live in the same space, sooner or later, will start to strangle each other. We fear everything’s out, we are starting to hate everything’s in.

The gloomy image of strangers pushing on the barrier went on afflicting European identity, and so European citizens and institutions for decades, stationed within the cracks separating leaders charged with responsibility towards their own countries. Despite a generous production of words we observe an high fragmented system, with high conflict between UE and foreign and latent one among the same European states.4

I would like to underline the aspect of latent conflict, because for a long time we thought, delighted by a celebrated series of philosophers, that the noisy persuasion given by majority would have brought to that not so veiled ethical state we chased with democratization process. Dissents exist, luckily, but conflict exists too, even if a distorted vision of society goes on speaking about armed violence in order to honor this so peaceful clove of world. More. Conflict’s permanence is intertwined with society, sometimes even functional for its survival.

The only way we found was to clean Europe from rubbish. From each drop of evidence that violence remains, even as founding element. We hid it under the rug. We invented sins where administrative offenses were. The case of debt it’s a clear example of this tendency.
The predatory approach to tributary collection in Italy reveals something more than a wrong link between public administration and citizenship. It makes clear a slip from infringement, as temporary condition never damaging the state of individual, to crime, as a precise position, interlinking legal response and ethical consequences in the moral status the individual owns in society.

Because if moral can be judged by exploring successes of the individual, debt is ethical debt, is lack in front of society, even rubbery.
State, at the contrary, divided by corruption, get unraveled in individuals never exactly recognizable as men of State. What have this to do with EU?

Well, the same fragmentation we found in national states, especially the ones characterized by an higher level of corruption, can be recognized in European supranational leadership. The same policy of debt too, evidently.

We arrived to the second big, big error we’re committing.

The notorious fame that Fiscal Compact has get doesn’t need for explanations. The effect on economy of European countries, at the contrary, has to be analyzed.

Fiscal Compact, as known, includes a “budgetary position […] balanced or in surplus” (Art. 3.1). Evidences brought by Eurostat (The European institute for Statistics) point out a medium rate Deficit/GDP in eurozone of 6,2 % (2010). Just take the case of Italy, in table 1. In 2010 Italian quotient between Deficit and GDP was 4.6%. Fiscal Compact

imposes a restrictive limit to fluctuations of Deficit/GDP established as ± 0,5.

Eu countries + UK and Czech Republic Deficit/Pil Eu countries + UK and Czech Republic Deficit/Pil
Austria -4,4 Italy -4,6
Belgium -4,1 Luxemburg -1,1
Cyprus -5,3 Malta -3,6
Estonia 0,2 Netherland -5,1
Finland -2,5 Portugal -9,8
France -7,1 Slovakia -7,7
Germany -4,3 Slovenia -5,8
Greece -10,6 Spain -9,3
Ireland -31,3 Czech Republic -4,8
UK -10,3
Table 1 (Source Eurostat)

That the theory. The provision, photographing reality, was published by the same European Union: Recession (-1,4%) and Deficit/GDP at -2% in 2013, the year chosen to make deficit magically disappear. Obviously the management of spending review is something of terrible difficulty, we already know. But the central question is another one, cried from all around the world to European institutions, the one of time. Time, because the fragile balance between incomes and expenses touches services fundamental to welfare state. It’s the leitmotiv repeated, underlined, reported by famous economists: States expenditure is primary to avoid the fall in poverty of the most weak ranges of population. It means hospitals, schools, pensions and so on. This has not been only claimed from economies where such an instance is rooted in society (for example by the Italian economist Gustavo Piga), but also from nations where the dramatic effect of a pale welfare on society is clear. It’s the case of the appeal to Obama signed by Arrow, Diamond, Maskin, Schultze, Sharpe and Solow, in order to avoid the choice to impose budget balance in constitution. It’s not a mystery the influence of pensions (30,2% in Italy) in state expenditures. Not a news even the idea genially produced to reduce the quotient Debt/GDP to the rate of 60%. The first one emerges as an old demographic issue, especially in Italy. The second belongs to the complex of convergence parameters of Maastricht Treaty. The not marginal problem resides in the fact that reducing expenditure needs time. But, once more, time emerges as the real protagonist of foolery. Foolery always deserves a peculiar attention, if nothing else to assure irony where rage reigns. And rage reigns where governors take foolish decision. As the one of reducing 6% of Deficit/GDP to zero.

We saw how Europe was designed with the principal instance of security. Now security becomes the one of currency by stability of balance. But we forgot the lesson of Eichengreen and Sennett. We forgot how social cohesion may assure real political efficacy more that insignificant institutions clad with good intentions. That trust cannot be built on such procedure:
The Contracting Parties that are subject to an excessive deficit procedure under the

European Union Treaties shall put in place a budgetary and economic partnership

programme including a detailed description of the structural reforms which must be put in place and implemented to ensure an effective and durable correction of their excessive deficits.

It’s not only the arrogance of prestamped solution that horrifies. Responsibility in international relationships has radically changed from Maastricht Treaty. For the first time we tried to assure a new method of supranational policy making, where decisions are taken from authorities interlinked not by a common electoral mandate, but by a precise choice, a pact between peoples. The hypothesis of letting decay the highest, greatest hazard of Europe to assure the miserable return to ownership lead by the strongest one, something like an ordered anarchy, is a nonsense. More. Once disempowered debtor states, we decided to charge a new institution created ad hoc with

the weight of responsibility. We have opted for ESM (European Stability Mechanism), that will replace EFSF since 2013. This the article number 8, 5th comma:

The liability of each ESM Member shall be limited, in all circumstances, to its portion of the authorized capital stock at its issue price. No ESM Member shall be liable, by reason of its membership, for obligations of the ESM. The obligations of ESM Members to contribute to the authorized capital stock in accordance with this Treaty are not affected if any such ESM Member becomes eligible for, or is receiving, financial assistance from the ESM.

No news, it could seem. The problem lies in the historical moment when this treaty has been hypothesized. Tensions among European representatives are spreading rapidly. Declarations on the menace of the new Germanic enemy are quite common. We must not let these voices get place of cooperation. The same line taken by Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy, some time ago links in common memory the thought of fall of Euro and the one of fall of Europe in conflict. The German chancellor said:

If the Euro falls so does Europe. No one take for granted other 50 years of peace in Europe.

Unfortunately institutions won’t prevent this, and the idea of charging its with all the responsibility is almost suicidal. The reason why can be found by analyzing the principal schools of thought about the problem. We can recognize:

-The school of institution building

-The school of bouncing

-The school escape&gain

-The school of diaspora

The school if institution building is the one of economists, politicians and citizens who cannot forgo from creating rigid structures in order to avoid insecurity. Quite right, we can admit. It’s the line that permitted Rigid Constitutions. As known, however, the United Kingdom has never had phenomenon of dictatorship, while maintaining flexibility of Constitutional structure. Feeling can, sometimes, more than structure. We must understand how much empty is a law without individuals acting with the conviction of its importance.

What is more, as well underlined by Gustavo Pica during a meeting at Sapienza University, criticizing the line taken by Mario Draghi during the same meeting, institution are not edifices that arise in a moment. We needed ten years to assure the functioning of Euro. Do we have so much time?

The school of bouncing is a very interesting phenomenon in the so called “civilized world”. It’s the voice of fear, the one of exclusion as method of soul-washing. More than a voice has claimed the criminal historical responsibility for whom who will put Greece out of Euro. They came from important journals as Il Sole 24 Ore, from economists as Paul Krugman, from important websites of citizen journalism as Agoravox. Sometimes, when tension starts to be unsustainable the idea of expelling the sacrificial victim emerges as the black memory of past (or latent reality hidden with care). I have no doubt that this fear hides a complex of reasons, not all of them founded on interest. Sometimes it happens that the thought of everything we care can bring to bad decisions. However, be sure that another country let descend the stairs of welfare in Europe B, the one where imposing democracy is not so important, won’t change the right idea that strength is right, full stop. The liberal choice taken by France to impose an exclusive weapons commerce with Libyan not-so-democratic troops is an evidence among the others5. Will we change this reality?

The school of Escape&Gain has been supported by Krugman in an excellent and moving article in the American journal New York Times. He said:

What is the alternative? Well, in the 1930s — an era that modern Europe is starting to replicate in ever more faithful detail — the essential condition for recovery was exit from the gold standard. The equivalent move now would be exit from the euro, and restoration of national currencies. You may say that this is inconceivable, and it would indeed be a hugely disruptive event both economically and politically. But continuing on the present course, imposing ever-harsher austerity on countries that are already suffering Depression-era unemployment, is what’s truly inconceivable.6

In my personal opinion, supported also be the entire reading of this article, the words expressed by Krugman are words of provocation, a provocation that resides inside every man who entered in contact with the study of Economics, the feeling of urgency for an arrest of human suffering.

Such a feeling deserves a peculiar attention, especially because of the important element it pointed out: An economy founded on exportation can take great advantage from getting out of monetary union. It can take profit from devaluation of currency and placing on the market its goods. This solution has been proposed especially for Italy, commonly considered an exportation lead country. This would directly exclude Greece and other nations not so strong in international market. Moreover, there are other economical unknowns. We’re speaking about the real competitiveness of economies with a low rate of expenditure in instruction, formation and research, but also about the possibility that the damage produced by the probable devaluation of currency could be higher than the advantage, especially considering the strategical relationship existent among countries about energetic market.

Other unknowns are to be treated further.

In the end, the school of diaspora. Europe has failed, Europe is finished. Who would say that such a vision is still unfounded? When chaos is so heavy no time remains to find the enemy, the only acceptable order is the one of “every man for himself”. Believe me that you would not like to see such a solution take life. Because of an high number of politic reasons, bound also to the choice of Escape&Gain.

Just imagine how high could be the price of something that looks like a dismemberment of European Monetary Union. An unreliable neighbor is a very bad neighbor. It’s not clear what kind of scenery could open in front of an Europe in diaspora. But if the momentary unbalance given by a country abandoning the common currency would be problematic, the one where every nation comes back to the precedent monetary system would be a good laboratory for chaos theory. How much desire will have European countries to exchange each other? If now we feel ourselves so European that an enormous mass of gall clouds reason, then there would be something like medieval crusades spirit.

“But” you could say “no solution remains. Good job. You have just erased each possible resolution. Oh, that’s so easy, the road that brings from critique to escape”.
Yes. Each primary effort was to erase each possibility of solution. Of economic solution. Why? Because European tradition on application of economic theory and realization of jurisprudence was, to be clear, a fall into nothing. Powder.

It’s the false myth of rational choice, the idea of man as an empty bottle to be fulfilled with contents and thrown into the sea. We must restart from humanity as the only real link between men and nations. We must because the European system we’re building is an unstable and unpredictable one. Another reason for the refusal of institutionalist shortcut: the strict code that animates pillars as ESM, EFSF and Fiscal Compact reduces the space necessary for nations for fluctuation of their reciprocal trust. We didn’t try to find a political solution, a return to cooperation among European leaders. We simply forced them to adapt their opposite tendencies, magically transforming them in Guarantees. Such an interesting method of non-persuasion, I think, won’t work with efficiency. It means putting in a bag an enormous amount of money trying to make this the motivation to remain in good terms. No point in underlining how utopic this thought is.

At the contrary, the idea of closing different states in a suffocating box will even increase their tendency to escape. This because of two different reasons.

The first one is related to the nature of such intervention. The speed at which the situation degenerated imposed the exploration of methods already known, and the collision with the sternness of Germany, France and Netherlands worked in this direction. So, we opted for the choice of plumping debt with new debt, in order to assure a future rebirth. Something similar to the American aid system of Marshall Plan. This kind of answer, in any case, works in two different circumstances: In long term and severe recessionary cycles, even if widespread, at the unavoidable condition: provision of growth. I fear there will not be for a long period. In short term, the established hypothesis of a forthcoming turning point. The same response: the idea of a short term is not conceivable.

Moreover, the idea that imposing a strict control will save us from corruption has the same effectiveness of the one that militarizing an area this will be sure. This introduce the second reason why the suffocating box won’t work. We’ll utilize, with high attention and care, an instrument let by Albert Tucker, in fifties, the Prisoner’s Dilemma. The Prisoner’s Dilemma is an important example of Game Theory. It has the worth of separating the choice of economic agent from its effective best interest. Because where cooperation cannot be started, staying certain conditions, a tendency to loss of benefit is predictable.

Tucker took the case of two prisoners who had no possibility to convey. Each of them has two feasible choices:

Stay silent, with the hope that the other one will do the same. Such a cooperation would cause the highest benefit, because this would mean the permanence in jail, for each one of the prisoners, for one month. Confess, knowing that this means being free, dumping the whole guilt on the other prisoner. He will be free, but the other will stay prisoner for one year, if he doesn’t do the same.

Prisoner B cooperate

Prisoner B defects

Prisoner A cooperate

1 month; 1 month

12 months; Free

Prisoner A defects

Free; 12 months

3 months; 3 months

Table 2

The mechanism of Prisoner’s Dilemma can be recognized also in ESM, with the preliminary consideration that each lack of communication may provoke a tendency to escape. The admonishment given by Eichengreen and Sennett remains alive. Where the capability of a society to stay united fails, everything’s lost. This is the bet we are trying to raise, because the choice to putting all the resources together means also the double role of guarantor and debtor, of cop and robber, of judge and defendant. More, it means also a game where the company “Europe” is surrounded by shareholders, each one of them trying to find out who is the one that will bring such a massive holding to bankrupt. Each of them, in the end, is looking for the right moment to leave. Because the counterpart for integration is disintegration. We live together, we fall together.
This way, the strategy of austerity seems always to have a plan B, a secondary exit, like a party where the last remaining has to pays the bill. A really expensive bill.

Let’s think about the kind of behaviour that this “ESM prisoner” will take.

The common cash has been deposited, everybody knows his spending limit. But men have a strange idea of relax, they’re used to narcotize their capability in reasoning. If someone seems to pass this limit, to spend more than how much he can, what will let this companionship united? Violence or Trust. And the first one may act on present, but compromise future, often creating more damages than those it avoided. More, violence is an autocorroborative method. It goes on recreating itself, changing people, drying up bonds.
Hypothizing that violence won’t occour, however, we find a not better scenary. Because a lack of leadership becomes, here, a push towards
beggar-thy-neighbor thought. The relationship between the state who doesn’t respect the pact and the others worsens, but the one among the others worsens too. Because the choice to leave, letting the charge of debt to ESM, is a deep temptation, especially in case of high probability that one of guarantors will go out:

State B stays

State B leaves

State A stays

A pays the partial loss of funds;
B pays the partial loss of funds
A pays an higher loss of funds;
B leaves;

State A leaves

A leaves;
B pays an higher loss of funds;
A leaves;

B leaves;Table 3

The table number three points out how the centrifugal tendency in ESM is not improper use of immagination. Its an element directly conditioned by the trust among states. Because a progressive lack of trust means a progressive augmentation of instability in ESM. If we compare the damage in remaining in ESM while other states leave with the fundamental characteristic of European institution, the one of joint responsibility (namely the fact that the choice of an agent to stay influences the choice of others) such a propensity can be provisioned by now.

If we want to avoid another season of tensions among European leaders we need no institutional declaration, but the common background of a shared strategy. A Strategy founding the idea that European peoples need each other. More. The convinction that we ARE the same people. Such a cultural step cannot be processed in European Parlament, it needs to take to the streets, sweeping away nationalistic rusts raising throughout Europe.

Economical solutions exist. We need a common regulamentation of financial flows and speculation risk taking. We’ll need UK. We need more transparency of bank deposits. We’ll need Switzerland. We need a common, strong and effective legislation on corruption, especially for public administration (the British legislation introduced in 2011 with Bribery Act could help). We’ll need Italy, Greece, Spain. We need, overall, a plan of reduction of debt. How? Well, the central point is that those debt flows are crossed. It can be clear at a glance to data published by the American journal New York Times.

Britain France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Portugal Spain Japan US
Britain 321$ 12$ 326$ 28$
France 22$
Germany 54$ 111$ 88$
Greece 1$ 54$ 19$ 0.3$ 3$ 10$ 1$ 1$ 3$
Ireland 17£ 49$ 3$ 4$ 19$ 11$
Italy 26$ 366$ 10$ 39$ 3$
Portucal 19$ 18$ 33$ 1$ 62$ 2$
Spain 118$ 58$ 6$ 26$
Japan 8$
US 345$ 322$ 324$ 1$ 163$ 796$
Debtor (on lines) and creditors (on columns) in billions of dollars. Source: NYT

As you can see, Japanese and American role in European debt can be considered, quantitatively marginal, almost in states where the crisis of sovereign debt has been deeper (Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal and Spain). The hypothesis of cross-debt reduction doesn’t seem, today, a paranormal phenomenon.

Today, because if China will decide to turn its attention on Europe, after having bought part of the American debt, the situation will get harder. The declaration released by Wen Jiabao, Chinese Premier, on February, has been ambiguous, on purpose, in my personal opinion. Something like an attentive waiting for European moves.

At the contrary, we can’t wait, because signs of sociopolitical breakdown are getting graver, lead by some masters of enemy’s creation now finding possibility to emerge. They are nothing. It’s the population that is changing, rapidly and without control. That’s the reason why we need more than economics. We need politics as capability in taking common choices. For example, I stay sure that an higher level of possibilities to move in Europe, to take contact between peoples, a real aid to movement, not the derisive projects for who could also without help, that an higher effort to affirm that we ARE European is the only acceptable solution. This is the reason why I’m also sure that Fiscal Compact, ESM and EFSF won’t save Europe. We will. We’ll do it if we’ll understand that cooperation among nations operates when becomes part of a wider project, the one of human reach for happiness.

We HAVE to stay human. It’s the only way to do almost everything that will endure. We are experiencing dark moments as we had never seen since 1929.

A sense of despair is perceptible, crawls down the streets, infiltrates in everyday life.

In a moment of desolation, however, stays freedom too. Stays the possibility for changing, restructuring reality with new prospects. Stays, indestructible and inalienable, that essence of human nature, the gigantic presence of consciousness, hidden in a corner, stubborn, with the fervent belief that no darkness can extinguish our unique capability to turn the light on, shining in that peculiar shape of hope we call will.

1“La tentazione del muro” by Barbara Spinelli, Repubblica, 22 February 2012.

2“Richard Sennett: Per uscire dalla crisi impariamo a collaborare”, by Paolo Magliocco, Il Sole 24 Ore, 4 April 2012.

3Europe trust’s decific” by Barry Eichengreen,Il Sole 24 Ore, 15 March 2012.

4The center of European civilization reveals, here, shocking similitude with Nuer population, studied by E. E. Evans-pritchard: his model of fragmentation stays valid, revealing how enemies invigorates social cohesion.

5“Parigi presenta il conto a Tripoli. Pressioni sulla Libia dopo il forte calo delle commissioni militari” by Gianandrea Gaiani, Il Sole 24 Ore, 9 October 2011

6“Europe’s economic suicide” by Paul Krugman, New York Times, 15 April 2012

Quando Marco Travaglio, tempo fa, diceva con la sua ironia tagliente che l’Italia è un paese fondato sull’“embè”, forse neanche si accorgeva del fenomeno che aveva scoperto. In quel caso si parlava di una classe politica che preferiva attuare la tattica dell’indifferenza di fronte alle accuse mossele, constatato il livello intollerabile di inadeguatezza raggiunto.
In realtà tale reazione alla realtà in cui l’italiano si inserisce è tutt’altro che un fenomeno circoscritto ad una ristretta cerchia di “collusi”, né può dirsi una recente avvisaglia di “decadenza morale”.

L’“Embè” non si esaurisce nell’autodifesa del furbo di turno, incapace ormai anche di sviscerare l’ennesima e assurda scusante. E’ una lettura dell’esperienza che l’italiano ha del proprio paese che rivela, fondamentalmente, una grassa ironia vigliacca, dove ad ogni essere umano è lecito di agire, dove dal suo agire ce ne derivi un guadagno, che esso sia diretto (da cui l’evoluzione della dottrina nella formula “Embè, allora…”) oppure indiretto, tramite la giustificazione di una miseria che, depositata nel fondo della nostra anima, subodora uno spiraglio per poter vedere soddisfatte le sue esigenze (da cui, invece, l’evoluzione nel motto “Embè, dai!”).

Da ciò il feudalesimo, da ciò il clientelarismo. Da ciò i mediocri interessi di parte, purché l’informazione di un illecito riveli la possibilità di un ampliamento del range di possibilità insite nell’essere all’interno di una ragnatela di reciprocità.

E’ la coscienza sporca di chi con grande vanto si autoproclama un “onesto cittadino”, nella pur piena consapevolezza che ciò che per l’etica è onestà, nel paese che partecipa attivamente a creare, è un reato sociale, come tutto ciò che violi l’estetica. Lo stupratore no, ma il costruttore che fa le case con l’amianto ammazzando decine di persone a volta sì. O meglio, lo stupratore a morte, il costruttore… Embè?

Su questa etica passiva si costruisce un edificio politico che è nulla più di un castello di carte. L’ultimo stato feudale d’Europa, che neanche da due guerre mondiali, una dittatura ed un sultanato ha imparato il senso di una partecipazione in quanto libera comunione di individui, e non come insieme di tessere elettorali che finché se magna, bene, sennò, appeso per i piedi. Fatto sta, continuiamo a chiederci cosa Monti possa fare per noi, cosa noi possiamo fare per salvarci in questa tempesta, e non cosa NOI possiamo fare per il paese. A parte, naturalmente, aprire la caccia al romeno ed altre amenità, discorsi di minacce germaniche come non se ne sentivano neanche dal tempi del fascismo.

Tuttavia, esiste un’alta dinamica fondamentale di questo continuo refrain italiano. Se è vero che la Dottrina dell’Embè è ciò che ci ha reso l’ultimo stato feudale d’Europa, l’altro lato della realtà è che gli italiani sono stati talmente maltrattati, offesi e schiacciati nella loro dignità dai propri governanti, da ogni autorità che nello Stato dovrebbe simboleggiare le garanzie alla base del contratto sociale, da aver versato anche l’ultima lacrima di un popolo che appartenga ad un paese in cui non viga la più completa anarchia: “Tanto…”

Questa è la più devastante delle Dottrine, quella di un popolo che ha perso le speranze, anche dove viga una grande solidità dello Stato, la diffusione di un commento di questo tipo, significa che tale solidità non è che quella di un paese eroso dal di dentro.

Laddove abbiamo giustamente ammazzato un dittatore, abbiamo lasciato posto ad una tale devastazione morale da rendere il diniego di giustizia qualcosa di realmente percettibile, al di sotto della superficie di un’apparente legalità. L’alternanza di governo è quella di una Democrazia troppo simile ad un duopolio di Cournot, dove i due contendenti si spartiscono il mercato solo per poter dominare da monopolisti la loro succulenta fetta della torta. Tanto è così che funziona. Il sistema che dovrebbe garantire i servizi minimi di un paese civile, quali acqua, elettricità ed informazione sono in mano ad associazioni a delinquere, volte alla truffa, allo strozzinaggio, alle minacce e all’estorsione. Tanto è così che funziona, dobbiamo pagare, perché secondo la giustizia LO STATO, QUELLO STATO CHE DOVEVA PROTEGGERMI mi ha truffato facendomi firmare documenti senza alcuna idea del rischio, per beni essenziali e all’attività, e alla vivibilità e alla dignità dell’individuo, roba che neanche la Costituzione può tollerare, quello stato è nella ragione.
E’ allora che all’italiano, qualunque sia la sua tempra morale, non può che apparire, l’illecito, come una forma di vera e propria disobbedienza civile.

Perché dovremmo illuderci che il cittadino italiano, il cui diritto alla dignità è continuamente e sistematicamente leso, sia davvero disposto a mettere la propria ambizione, la propria creatività, il proprio tempo a disposizione di uno Stato incapace di riconnettersi con la sua radice più vitale, la Nazione?

Se ci si vuole appesantire il cuore non si ha che da ricercare le innumerevoli storie di italiani posti di fronte alla faccia nascosta dei capetti, dei burocrati, degli affamati di carne che non fermerebbero la propria volontà di rapina di fronte a nulla1. Ed in nome dello Stato. Violentando la stessa natura della più grande e nobile prerogativa dell’uomo, quella di essere nel mondo e di poter agire contro le storture che in esso riscontra.
Di fronte a tanta sofferenza, a tanti maltrattamenti, i rigurgiti anarchici2 contro Equitalia credo lascino pochi italiani sbalorditi, anche se profondamente preoccupati, perché tali avvisaglie non possono essere passate sottovoce come un fenomeno marginale, ma anzi muovono da un’agitazione profonda del paese, una rabbia e un senso d’impotenza nei confronti di una giustizia che non arriva, mai.

In un’ora grigia, la scelta non può essere tra Stato e Anti-Stato, per tale che sia la frustrazione e lo spirito anarchico che chiede di essere sfogato.

I cittadini, nella morsa del circolo vizioso tra le due Dottrine che la nostra infausta condotta ha generato, non devono avere paura. Lo dobbiamo, se non altro, a noi stessi. Non chiedetevi cosa potete fare, agite per cambiare il paese con il vostro talento, con le vostre idee. In una modernità liquida davvero il battito d’ali di una farfalla può provocare un tornado. O portare nuova linfa vitale. Non è la banale retorica del “anche tu puoi cambiare il mondo”. Nessuno può cambiare il mondo. Può solo fermamente volerlo.

Le Autorità che gestiscono il potere, a qualsiasi livello, devono invece ricordare che nessuna legge può cambiare un paese. Ciò che muove uno Stato sono gli individui che lo compongono. Se essi agiscono come macchine, lo Stato non esiste. Se questi individui sono liberi anche di trasgredire le leggi, applicandole e comprendendone il significato, allora questo paese può cambiare.
I fatti che stanno accadendo, specialmente gli attacchi ad Equitalia, la rivolta dei Forconi, la Sicilia lasciata appesa ad un filo, con i viveri che lentamente si esauriscono, sono altrettanti segnali di allarmi, che, se lasciati senza alcuna risposta, nella peggiore delle ipotesi lo lasceranno discendere nel proprio lento declino. Ma quest’ipotesi di normalità non lascia più ad intendere di essere l’unica possibile. La fame è un materiale decisamente infiammabile. E gli italiani, o almeno questa è la mia impressione, alle ferite da bomba-carta sembrano dare una risposta che dovrebbe incoraggiare a non scherzare con il fuoco:

“Pazienza”.

1 Allego una storia, tra le tante trovate in rete, che veramente non può non far male.
“Da due anni ho rateizzato e pagato sinora il debito che avevo nei confronti di equitalia e inps. le rate sono molto alte ( il debito complessivo è di circa 50000 euro) . Faccio l’agente di commercio e a causa di grossi problemi di salute oltre che di mercato, le mie entrate si sono più che dimezzate al punto che a fine anno dovrò chiudere la partita iva. Dovrò uscire di casa e trasferirmi per non creare problemi ai figli e ho a disposizione solo una pensione di reversibilità di circa 410 euro. come posso mediare la cosa? mi dicono che le rateizzazioni non sono rinegoziabili. grazie per l’aiuto che vorrete darmi.
p.s. l’unico bene che ho è una modus che devo ancora finire di pagare” La risposta, da un sito che offre sostegno a chi si ritrova in questo genere di situazioni, è la seguente:
“Come le hanno detto, non sono possibili mediazioni con Equitalia. Almeno per la cifra in gioco che la riguarda.
A questo punto, è stato davvero un peccato aver pagato negli ultimi due anni. Poteva destinare quei soldi ad altri scopi.
Della Modus bisogna sbarazzarsene formalmente. Lei, se interrompe i pagamenti ad Equitalia, non può più avere veicoli di proprietà. Verrebbero sottoposti a fermo amministrativo.”
da indebitati.it

2 In questo come in altri casi, l’utilizzo del termine “anarchico” non indica alcuna appartenenza politica, quanto un sentimento di disgusto per tutto ciò che possa definirsi Stato o Autorità, riscontrabile nell’Italia di oggi. Potrebbe forse essere assimilabile ad una sorta di vis destruens