From the social question to the anthropological question
Alberto Buela (*)
As soon as President Kirchner took office in March or April 2004, and accompanied by the lawyer for so many trade unions, Carlos Pizzolorusso, I had the opportunity to talk to him for a while in the Casa Rosada and there I suggested that the plans for the social organisations or piqueteros had to be administered by the trade unions, because they know better than anyone else who are unemployed and who are not. I also added that the army and the Church had to participate in the reconstruction of Argentina. At the time, the current president Alberto Fernández was the private secretary. I also gave him a book of mine, Ensayos de Disenso (Essays of Dissent), who knows where it ended up.
His response was clear and forceful: I want the piqueteros on the streets, no more unions. I replace the army with journalists and the Church with others (he didn't tell me who). I saw the answer years later on the wall surrounding the Policlínico Bancario in Plaza Irlanda, where an irreverent hand wrote: Kirchner fights with everyone, except with the Jews.
Twenty years have passed since this anecdote and today I can confirm that Kirchner's theory is fully valid.
Today the Argentine army is made up of journalists, those illiterate loquacious people who all think the same thing. Ninety-five per cent think, expose and select issues in the same way. The indoctrination received by these people, of whom there are thousands in Argentina and the world, is admirable.
The production of the meaning of the news is born not in them but in the international centres of the production of meaning. Almost no one escapes this international gag. Topics are reiterated over and over again until they become established as indisputable truths. For example, global warming, for which it is claimed that man and industrial gases are responsible. Today, in August 2023, it has just been discovered that 1200 years ago in the middle ages, without the use of machines, global warming similar to the current one took place. And so we can give the example of the Covid vaccines, the war in Ukraine, anti-Christianity, the sweetened vision of the millions of illegal immigrants, the exaltation of consumption, the progressive catechism of Agenda 2030 and so on and so forth.
Semantic warfare is superior to military warfare. The logos prevailed over the polemic.
What happened?
This explanation stems from the observation I made about the meaning of the proximate origins of trade unions. The ancient origins go back to the Middle Ages and that is already part of consolidated history.
When the French Revolution takes place in 1789 the first thing the revolutionaries, so praised and pondered in all the history books, do is to cut off the heads of their opponents (e.g. La Vendée: un génocide légal proto-industriel) that was called Jacobinism. That is when a government only governs for its own and persecutes others. One of the Jacobins, Isaac de Le Chapelier (see picture hereabove), in 1791 abolished all the guilds in France on the grounds that there could be no intermediate organisations between the individual and the state, because that was against democracy.
This was copied, with variations, by all European nations, and we then witnessed the period of the most atrocious exploitation of the worker, which lasted approximately from 1790 to 1860. As a reaction to such heartless exploitation, socialism and its communist and Trotskyite variants arose, as well as Catholic social thinkers. Some find their expression in the writings of Karl Marx, Frederick Engels and many others; others through the writings of Albert de Mun, La Tour du Pin and the encyclicals of the Popes.
In other words, the so-called "social question" is raised in politics, which is the relationship between capital and labour, that of the worker and the boss. And this was the primary question that the various governments tried to resolve for a century and a half.
The primacy of the social question over politics lasted until the 1970s, when the welfare state began to crumble. It was then that "the anthropological question" emerged as a more intense political problem. Its intellectual birth certificate can be traced back to the French May '68, whose slogan was "forbidden to forbid". A purely cultural slogan. And it is from then on that socialism stopped thinking about the proletarian revolution to think about the cultural revolution. In those same days the Church, after the 1965/68 Vatican Council, stopped doing theology=saving souls, and started to do sociology.
It is within this framework of belonging that what we now call progressivism appears, which is an ideology without ideas, or rather, a mixture of socialism, Christian democracy and liberalism.
An ideology that is no longer focused on changing reality but on changing man, or rather, man's conscience.
And in this, journalism, the army of loquacious illiterates, fulfils the function of the philosophers and sophists of ancient Greece or the Enlightened Intellectuals of the 18th century on the French Revolution.
Man is no longer a nature, he has no essence, but only a historical becoming, a choice.
Progressivism is the ideological presupposition of Agenda 2030, which, as it has not yet been implemented, will be extended to 2050. It is, in short, the expression of a single, politically correct way of thinking.
Thus progressivism as liberal, Christian Democrat or social democrat is internationalist - like journalists - and will therefore go against the idea of the nation, which is the contemporary politico-cultural form.
The essential of a nation is its ethos, its proper spirit, its moral form. And the political objective of progressivism is to dismantle the historical nation, either by replacing its symbols, its flags, its anthems, its national songs, its language, its native art with its dances and music, its manners, customs and habits. In a word, its values. The nation is what identifies one state with respect to another, which is why the manuals define the state as the legally organised nation. Progressivism ends up going against nation-states and their sovereign character, in order to go after the establishment of a world state, the ultimate goal of what we call globalisation today.
Thus the replacement of "the social question" by "the anthropological question", as the great Spanish thinker Dalmacio Negro Pavón (in picture) rightly states, is the Copernican political turning point of our time. The government and the nation that resolves it will be left standing, otherwise it will perish.
(*) arkegueta, constant learner
buela.alberto@gmail.com
https://sites.google.com/view/albertobuela/inicio
Commentaires
Enregistrer un commentaire