Some weeks ago, I saw something on the Italian news. It was about elections, those famous ones where B. won for the second (or third) time, due to which he is PM of Italy again. The item was on the Lega Nord (LN).
The Lega Nord is a right-wing political party, that is trying to move Italy towards a separation of the northern- and the southern part. People who know me, also know my jokes about “sawing Italy in half, directly along the southern borders of Tuscany, Umbria and Marche to sell the rest – including Lazio with its capital Rome – to Northern Africa. The highest bidder, either Morocco or Algeria, gets it. We’ll even throw in the islands of Sicily and Sardinia.”
Well, the truth is, I couldn’t care less about what Italy does. For my part, they can sell Friuli Venezia Giulia back to Austria too, if they feel like it. But this LN guy did say something interesting. He stated that the LN does not want any foreigners – aliens – to integrate into the Italian culture, or come to the country for that, because they think that all those cultures should be preserved by themselves. Including the Italian, of course, in an uncontaminated form. And no, he was not talking about any racial or cultural superiority. Just diversity, worthy to be preserved.
Now that IS interesting. Again, I couldn’t care less for any preservation of culture. I think that it is inherent to the dynamics of civilisation, that ethnic groups, languages and cultures, come and go & rise and fall. An interesting author on this is Jared Diamond, of whom I managed to read two books: “Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies” (1997) and “Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed” (2005). He makes the thought of emerging and vanishing cultures very palatable.
My itch sits with what is called the “leftist” contingent. Often I hear opinions coming from that corner – of all places – that cultures should be preserved, despite or even because of “the progress of the peoples”. And that is weird, because I always interpreted “leftist” thinking as being in favour of progress (and rationality…) and not as advocates of conservation at all. And now I see the Lega Nord on television, a party not particularly reputed for their “leftist” leaning, stating the same thing. Say What!?
The world is confused, so it seems. “Leftist” thinkers make “rightist” remarks. Evidently, progress is hard to swallow, even for intelligent, well-thinking people. Well, I could have known, especially after I slapped some of these notoriously progressive people along Adorno’s F-Scale. The result was horrifying. If I look around amongst the people I know, the “Very Questionable” is never very far away*.
Leave it to me to ask the nasty questions: Why must cultures be preserved? What is the value of an ancient language, ready to die out? As I see it, new cultures will take their place and new languages will emerge. There is no better proof of that than the currently upcoming Internet community. And even that will vanish, eventually, because there will be a reason for it. It will only take time.
We are people. We change. Just accept that.
*I can’t resist. I MUST mention Umberto Eco, a great thinker, and his listing of the UR-fascist parameters. I mentioned this before, because I saw this first in the book “American Fascists”. Here the actual content is needed. For an extended version of the list, together with the full explanation, look here. This is the simplified list:
- The first feature of Ur-Fascism is the cult of tradition.
- Traditionalism implies the rejection of modernism.
- Irrationalism also depends on the cult of action for action’s sake.
- The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism.
- Besides, disagreement is a sign of diversity.
- Ur-Fascism derives from individual or social frustration.
- To people who feel deprived of a clear social identity, Ur-Fascism says that their only privilege is the most common one, to be born in the same country.
- The followers must feel humiliated by the ostentatious wealth and force of their enemies.
- For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle.
- Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology, insofar as it is fundamentally aristocratic, and aristocratic and militaristic elitism cruelly implies contempt for the weak.
- In such a perspective everybody is educated to become a hero.
- Since both permanent war and heroism are difficult games to play, the Ur-Fascist transfers his will to power to sexual matters.
- Ur-Fascism is based upon a selective populism, a qualitative populism, one might say.
- Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak.
