Corriere della Sera, November 14, 1974
What is this coup? I know
of Pier Paolo Pasolini
I know.
I know the names of those responsible for what is called a "coup" (which is actually a series of "coup" in istituitasi protection system of power).
I know the names of those responsible for the massacre in Milan on December 12, 1969.
I know the names of those responsible for massacres of Brescia and Bologna in the first months of 1974.
I know the names of the "summit" that has operated, therefore, designers of both the old fascist "coup", is the neo-fascist perpetrators of the first massacres, and finally, the "unknown" perpetrators of the massacres more recent.
I know the names that have managed the two different, indeed opposite phases of the tension: a first anti-phase (Milan 1969) and a second phase of the antifascist (Brescia and Bologna 1974).
I know the names of the group of powerful figures who, with the help of the CIA (and the second order of the Greek colonels of the mafia), have created the first (besides failing miserably) an anti-Communist crusade, it must reverse the '68 And later, again with the help and inspiration of the CIA, have recovered a virginity-fascist, it must reverse the disaster of the "referendum".
I know the names of those who, from a Mass and the other, have given the provisions and ensured the security policy in general older (to keep standing in reserve, the organization of a potential coup d'etat) , a young neo-fascists, neo-Nazis, even (to create tension in the concrete anti), and common criminals, until now, and perhaps forever, without a name (to create the next power-fascist). I know the names of people who are serious and important behind the comic characters like the general of the Forest he worked, rather operetta, in the ducal city (as the Italian forests burned), or the gray and purely organizational character as General Miceli.
I know the names of people who are serious and important behind the tragic children who have chosen suicide fascist atrocities and common criminals, or not in Sicily, which are made available, as killers and assassins.
I know all these names and know all the facts (killings and attacks on institutions) that you are guilty.
I know. But I have no evidence. I did not even clues.
I know because I am an intellectual, a writer who tries to follow everything that happens, to know everything that he writes, to imagine all that you do not know or is silent; coordinating events even far away, which brings together the disorganized and fragmented pieces of an entire coherent policy framework that restores the logic where it seemed the arbitrary rule, madness and mystery.
This is all part of my job and instinct of my job. I think it's unlikely that my "draft novel," is wrong, that does not have that bearing on reality, and that its references to real people and facts are inaccurate. I also believe that many other intellectuals and writers know what I know as an intellectual and novelist. Because the reconstruction the truth about what happened in Italy after the '68 is not that difficult.
This truth - it is heard with absolute precision - is behind a large amount of journalistic and political action, also: that is, not as fancy or fiction is inherently mine. Last example: it is clear that the truth was urgent, with all their names behind the editorial of the "Corriere della Sera, November 1, 1974.
Probably journalists and politicians have also evidence, or at least clues.
Now the problem is this: journalists and politicians, although perhaps of evidence and certainly clues are not the names.
To whom then will compete to make these names? Evidently those who not only has the necessary courage, but, together, is not affected by the power in practice, and, moreover, has not, by definition, nothing to lose, that is an intellectual. An intellectual
therefore could well do those names publicly, but he has no evidence or clues.
The power and the world, though not the power, take practical relations with power, ruled the intellectual free - just for the way it did - the ability to have evidence and clues.
I could argue that I, for example, as an intellectual, and inventor of stories, I could go into that world explicitly political (power or around the power), to compromise with it, and then have the right to participate, with some high probability, evidence and clues.
But this objection I reply that this is not possible, because it is the reluctance to enter such a world politician who identifies with my potential intellectual courage to tell the truth: that is to name names.
the intellectual courage of truth and the political practice are two irreconcilable things in Italy.
intellectualism - profoundly and viscerally despised by all the Italian bourgeoisie - they refer sent a falsely high and noble, in reality servile to discuss the moral and ideological problems.
If he is put to this mandate is considered a traitor to his role: it just screams (as if he expected more than this) at the "treason of the clerics" is an alibi and a reward for politicians and for the servants of power.
But there is only power: there is also opposition to power. In Italy this opposition is so large and strong enough to be a power in itself: I am referring of course to the Italian Communist Party.
is certain that at this time the presence of a large opposition party as the Italian Communist Party is the salvation of Italy and its poor democratic institutions.
The Italian Communist Party is a clean country in a country dirty, a country fair in a dishonest country, a country in a smart idiot country, a country caught in an ignorant country, a country humanistic consumerism in a country. In recent years between the Italian Communist Party, understood in a truly united - in a compact ensemble of leaders, and voting base - and the rest of Italy, has opened up a barter for which the Italian Communist Party has become indeed a separate country, "an island. It is precisely for this reason that it may now have close relationships like never before with real power, corrupt, inept, degraded, but it's diplomatic relations almost from country to country. In reality the two are incommensurable moral, designed in their concreteness, in their entirety. It is possible, precisely on this basis, the prospect that "compromise", realistic, perhaps it would save Italy from complete collapse, "compromise" but in reality it would be an "alliance" between two neighboring states, or between two states trapped in a 'else.
But all the positive things I said about the Italian Communist Party it is also the time when relatively negative.
The division of the country in two countries, one sank up to their necks in the degradation and degeneration, the other intact and not compromised, can not be a reason for peace and constructive.
also designed so as I have outlined here, I think objectively, that is, as a country in the country, the opposition is identified with another power: but it is always power.
a result of that opposition politicians can not fail to behave themselves as men of power.
In this case, at this time so dramatically that we are concerned, they also have referred to the intellectual terms of reference established by them. And if the intellectual is less to this term - only moral and ideological - that is here, with great satisfaction all, a traitor.
Now, because even the opposition politicians, if they have - as you probably have - at least evidence or clues, are not the real names of those responsible, ie, politicians, comedians and frightening coup massacres in recent years? It's simple: they do not make them stand out to the extent that - contrary to what would be an intellectual - political truth from political practice. And then, of course, here again to bring evidence and indications that the current intellectual official: if you do not even dream, the rest as normal, given the objective facts.
The intellectual must continue to adhere to what is imposed as his duty, to iterate its encrypted form of intervention.
I know well that is not the case - at this particular moment in Italian history - to make public a motion of no confidence against the entire political class. It is not diplomatic, it is not appropriate. But these categories of politics, not of political truth: what - when he can and how can it - the impotent intellectual is required to serve.
Well, just because I can not give the names of those responsible for the attempted coup and massacres (and not instead of it) I can not pronounce my weak and ideal accusation against the entire Italian political class. And I do
in what I believe in a policy, I believe in the principles of "formal" democracy, in Parliament and I believe in parties. And of course through my particular viewpoint is that of a communist.
I am ready to retract my vote of no confidence (or rather do not expect more than that) when a politician - not by chance, that is not because the time has come, but rather to create the possibility of that moment - to decide do the names of those responsible for coups and massacres, evidently he knows, like me, can not have evidence, or at least clues.
Probably - if the power America will allow it - perhaps deciding "diplomatically" to give another democracy that American democracy has been given about Nixon - these names will be known sooner or later. But to say it is men who have shared with them the power: how to charge lower against most responsible (and it is not, as in the American case, which is better). This would ultimately be the real coup.
I know the names of those responsible for what is called a "coup" (which is actually a series of "coup" in istituitasi protection system of power).
I know the names of those responsible for the massacre in Milan on December 12, 1969.
I know the names of those responsible for massacres of Brescia and Bologna in the first months of 1974.
I know the names of the "summit" that has operated, therefore, designers of both the old fascist "coup", is the neo-fascist perpetrators of the first massacres, and finally, the "unknown" perpetrators of the massacres more recent.
I know the names that have managed the two different, indeed opposite phases of the tension: a first anti-phase (Milan 1969) and a second phase of the antifascist (Brescia and Bologna 1974).
I know the names of the group of powerful figures who, with the help of the CIA (and the second order of the Greek colonels of the mafia), have created the first (besides failing miserably) an anti-Communist crusade, it must reverse the '68 And later, again with the help and inspiration of the CIA, have recovered a virginity-fascist, it must reverse the disaster of the "referendum".
I know the names of those who, from a Mass and the other, have given the provisions and ensured the security policy in general older (to keep standing in reserve, the organization of a potential coup d'etat) , a young neo-fascists, neo-Nazis, even (to create tension in the concrete anti), and common criminals, until now, and perhaps forever, without a name (to create the next power-fascist). I know the names of people who are serious and important behind the comic characters like the general of the Forest he worked, rather operetta, in the ducal city (as the Italian forests burned), or the gray and purely organizational character as General Miceli.
I know the names of people who are serious and important behind the tragic children who have chosen suicide fascist atrocities and common criminals, or not in Sicily, which are made available, as killers and assassins.
I know all these names and know all the facts (killings and attacks on institutions) that you are guilty.
I know. But I have no evidence. I did not even clues.
I know because I am an intellectual, a writer who tries to follow everything that happens, to know everything that he writes, to imagine all that you do not know or is silent; coordinating events even far away, which brings together the disorganized and fragmented pieces of an entire coherent policy framework that restores the logic where it seemed the arbitrary rule, madness and mystery.
This is all part of my job and instinct of my job. I think it's unlikely that my "draft novel," is wrong, that does not have that bearing on reality, and that its references to real people and facts are inaccurate. I also believe that many other intellectuals and writers know what I know as an intellectual and novelist. Because the reconstruction the truth about what happened in Italy after the '68 is not that difficult.
This truth - it is heard with absolute precision - is behind a large amount of journalistic and political action, also: that is, not as fancy or fiction is inherently mine. Last example: it is clear that the truth was urgent, with all their names behind the editorial of the "Corriere della Sera, November 1, 1974.
Probably journalists and politicians have also evidence, or at least clues.
Now the problem is this: journalists and politicians, although perhaps of evidence and certainly clues are not the names.
To whom then will compete to make these names? Evidently those who not only has the necessary courage, but, together, is not affected by the power in practice, and, moreover, has not, by definition, nothing to lose, that is an intellectual. An intellectual
therefore could well do those names publicly, but he has no evidence or clues.
The power and the world, though not the power, take practical relations with power, ruled the intellectual free - just for the way it did - the ability to have evidence and clues.
I could argue that I, for example, as an intellectual, and inventor of stories, I could go into that world explicitly political (power or around the power), to compromise with it, and then have the right to participate, with some high probability, evidence and clues.
But this objection I reply that this is not possible, because it is the reluctance to enter such a world politician who identifies with my potential intellectual courage to tell the truth: that is to name names.
the intellectual courage of truth and the political practice are two irreconcilable things in Italy.
intellectualism - profoundly and viscerally despised by all the Italian bourgeoisie - they refer sent a falsely high and noble, in reality servile to discuss the moral and ideological problems.
If he is put to this mandate is considered a traitor to his role: it just screams (as if he expected more than this) at the "treason of the clerics" is an alibi and a reward for politicians and for the servants of power.
But there is only power: there is also opposition to power. In Italy this opposition is so large and strong enough to be a power in itself: I am referring of course to the Italian Communist Party.
is certain that at this time the presence of a large opposition party as the Italian Communist Party is the salvation of Italy and its poor democratic institutions.
The Italian Communist Party is a clean country in a country dirty, a country fair in a dishonest country, a country in a smart idiot country, a country caught in an ignorant country, a country humanistic consumerism in a country. In recent years between the Italian Communist Party, understood in a truly united - in a compact ensemble of leaders, and voting base - and the rest of Italy, has opened up a barter for which the Italian Communist Party has become indeed a separate country, "an island. It is precisely for this reason that it may now have close relationships like never before with real power, corrupt, inept, degraded, but it's diplomatic relations almost from country to country. In reality the two are incommensurable moral, designed in their concreteness, in their entirety. It is possible, precisely on this basis, the prospect that "compromise", realistic, perhaps it would save Italy from complete collapse, "compromise" but in reality it would be an "alliance" between two neighboring states, or between two states trapped in a 'else.
But all the positive things I said about the Italian Communist Party it is also the time when relatively negative.
The division of the country in two countries, one sank up to their necks in the degradation and degeneration, the other intact and not compromised, can not be a reason for peace and constructive.
also designed so as I have outlined here, I think objectively, that is, as a country in the country, the opposition is identified with another power: but it is always power.
a result of that opposition politicians can not fail to behave themselves as men of power.
In this case, at this time so dramatically that we are concerned, they also have referred to the intellectual terms of reference established by them. And if the intellectual is less to this term - only moral and ideological - that is here, with great satisfaction all, a traitor.
Now, because even the opposition politicians, if they have - as you probably have - at least evidence or clues, are not the real names of those responsible, ie, politicians, comedians and frightening coup massacres in recent years? It's simple: they do not make them stand out to the extent that - contrary to what would be an intellectual - political truth from political practice. And then, of course, here again to bring evidence and indications that the current intellectual official: if you do not even dream, the rest as normal, given the objective facts.
The intellectual must continue to adhere to what is imposed as his duty, to iterate its encrypted form of intervention.
I know well that is not the case - at this particular moment in Italian history - to make public a motion of no confidence against the entire political class. It is not diplomatic, it is not appropriate. But these categories of politics, not of political truth: what - when he can and how can it - the impotent intellectual is required to serve.
Well, just because I can not give the names of those responsible for the attempted coup and massacres (and not instead of it) I can not pronounce my weak and ideal accusation against the entire Italian political class. And I do
in what I believe in a policy, I believe in the principles of "formal" democracy, in Parliament and I believe in parties. And of course through my particular viewpoint is that of a communist.
I am ready to retract my vote of no confidence (or rather do not expect more than that) when a politician - not by chance, that is not because the time has come, but rather to create the possibility of that moment - to decide do the names of those responsible for coups and massacres, evidently he knows, like me, can not have evidence, or at least clues.
Probably - if the power America will allow it - perhaps deciding "diplomatically" to give another democracy that American democracy has been given about Nixon - these names will be known sooner or later. But to say it is men who have shared with them the power: how to charge lower against most responsible (and it is not, as in the American case, which is better). This would ultimately be the real coup.
Pier Paolo Pasolini
0 comments:
Post a Comment