UNO, DOS, TRES, CUATRO, CINCO, SEIS, SIETE, OCHO, NUEVE, DIEZ...

UNO, DOS, TRES, CUATRO, CINCO, SEIS, SIETE, OCHO, NUEVE, DIEZ...
"EL CAPITALISMO NO ES NADA MÁS QUE UNA EMPRESA DE LADRONES COMUNES DISFRAZADA DE 'CIVILIZACION' QUE EXTENDIÓ, IMPERIALÍSTICAMENTE, A ESCALA GLOBAL, UN 'SISTEMA' (ECONÓMICO, POLÍTICO, IDEOLÓGICO Y SOCIAL) PARA LEGALIZAR Y LEGITIMAR CON LEYES UN ROBO MASIVO Y PLANETARIO DEL TRABAJO SOCIAL Y DE LOS RECURSOS NATURALES, ENMASCARADO DE 'ECONOMÍA MUNDIAL' ". Manuel Freytas



"UN SISTEMA ECONÓMICO CRUEL


AL QUE PRONTO HABRÁ

QUE CORTARLE EL CUELLO"

¡ QUÉ GRAN VERDAD !
PORQUE FUÉ ESE MISMO
SISTEMA ECONÓMICO CRUEL,
PRECISAMENTE,
¡ EL QUE LE CORTÓ EL CUELLO A ÉL !


Friday, February 5, 2010

ORWELL Y LUKÁCS, "1984" Y EL MARXISMO










   







SOTT Focus
Pathocracy: Brave New World or 1984?

Harrison Koehli
Sott.net
Thu, 28 Jan 2010 17:31 EST


© Sott.netTo those who have grown up in countries considered "free", the vision of George Orwell's 1984 strikes us as a threatening nightmare, a warning of a not-so-distant future where freedom is but a word. Like seed perpetually scorched before it even has a chance to take root, all that it means to be human is actively degraded, denied, and punished at even the smallest display.


"The Antinomy of Bourgeois Thought"
By: manuel cidoncha-hinestrosa


1.-
On the Orwell novel "1984," everything has been said
or almost everything, but certain tactical-ideological questions
have never been asked. So we are going to start by this:
Over time, which social class has benefited from his book, the bourgeois class or the working class, the oppressors or the oppressed?
If Orwell had lived today - hypothesis -, would he had seen the revolutionary process of Cuba Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua… with the same eyes that he saw the socialism in the Soviet Union?

We have to know that controversy flared again over the fact
that the “left-conservatism” of Orwell,
shortly before his death, jotted down a list of people (A) he regarded as political compromised by their sympathy for Stalin and had it conveyed to the Information Research Department (of the British) of the Foreign Office…despite the fact that it was, precisely, the socialist army of the Soviet Union who first entered Berlin to liberate us from the Capitalist Big-Brother of Hitler, despite the fact that it was the socialist army of Russia who, in Spain, fought, side by side with the people, against the Capitalist Big-Brother of Franco, while the Western democracies, that Orwell defended, sided with the Spanish Big-Brother.


2.-
The Orwellian thought gives us the archetypal contradictions
of bourgeois Jacobins that, precisely,  George Lukács describes in his book, "The Antinomy of Bourgeois Thought", because, on the one hand, Orwell tries to prevent us and warn us about the world of zombies that is approaching, which is entirely plausible because (something that Orwell omitted) the sophisticated technological means of mind control of the oppressors made it possible, but, on the other hand, Orwell, in his “left-conservatism”, falls into what Michael Parenti entitled the last chapter of his book, ('The Sword and the Dollar'): "Can We Trust the Russians?", because, Orwell, in his final days, as a good English gentleman, instead of denouncing the whole entire capitalist regime that was holding and protecting in Spain the bloodshed that was taking place under Franco, the Big-Brother in Spain, he devoted himself to give the names of the people (A)
in sympathy with the socialism in Russia.
His anti-communism was very clear.


3.-
In 1946, four years before Orwell's death, the "Big-Brother" in Russia proposed a ban on the manufacture of atomic weapons and the destruction of all existing arsenals, along with conventional reduction in arms. In 1950 and again in 1951 and 1952 --and until the fall of Russian socialism in the late eighties -at the United Nations, the Soviets proposed banning the atomic bomb and asked for the establishment of an international agency to enforce the ban. This is was "a little different” Big-Brother from the Big-Brother of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Now we can answer the question:
Which social class has benefited from his book,
the bourgeois class or the working class,
the oppressors or the oppressed?:
Answer: The bourgeois class of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

4.-
The passage of time has also brought another Antinomy
of the bourgeois thought regarding the "1984" of Orwell:
If the zombies - that's the world where we are going, according to Orwell -, need less coercive means than the no-zombies,
fewer tools to victimize them, less repression, less control and military force to make them do what they should do, WHY THE ECONOMIC BUDGET OF THE BIG-BROTHER, The Pentagon (and other similar agencies), increased steadily TO THE ACTUAL LEVEL OF $700 billion?
Orwell, it seems, in his "1984", he did not understood the dialectical process of history and its inherent dynamics in the intensity of the class struggle that, every hour, increases more and more, and the proof of that is the world in which we are living today where the raising of consciousness, for instance, in Latin America, (and in many other places), the “ALBA” (DAWN) and hopes that they are building up everywhere are in overall contraposition to the ‘orwellian’ world of the the United States and Europe.


5.-
Orwell, among others, indoctrinated us and led us to classify capitalism with erroneous and distorted psycho-analytical terms and psychiatric oxinogroms such as "psychopaths", "pathocracy", etc., but doing so, it would be the same as to save
a serial killer from the death penalty because he had "disturbed his mental faculties”.
Ladies and Gentleman:
we can not fool our self most of what we are already had been deceived: no "psychopath" and no "pathocracy" could have made the astronomical capital accumulation (in a few hands)
that has been done by the capitalist billionaires of the world; this enterprise is very serious, calculated, rational, methodological, and requires expert scientists, planners, smart and wise men and women and an Imperial Legion well prepared, and all of this mathematica tactics and strategies cannot leave in the mind of a "psychopath", as Karl Marx analyzed in “The Capital”; they are products of responsible craniums, which means: a structure in which the exploitation of man by man reaches its extraordinary capacity, efficiency and concordance, qualities that the “psychopath” does not possess.
Here, in this trial, we cannot save the criminals from the guillotine (the guilty ones that produce such barbarism) by diagnosing them, as the doctors of the bourgeois clinic do,
with psychological terms. Because what we have here is a GUILTY CONSCIOUS SYSTEM OF PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION WITH THE ONLY PURPOSE OF OBTAINING THE MAXIMUM GAINS AND PROFITS AT THE COST OF THE SLAVERY OF THE OTHERS.
And this is not a "pathocracy": this is how capitalism work according to the laws and 'fundamentum in re' of the "Das Kapital" of Marx.


6.-
" 'Or Well' 'Or Consciousness' ”?
This is the choice.
We need to use our INTELLIGENCE in the same way that they are doing so, for example, in Venezuela and Bolivia, to replace capitalism’s automatons and zombies by a Rational World, because, if not, we are all going to become passengers of a modern 'Titanic', and Or-Well, in this regard, is no going to help the Third Class passengers locked in the ship's hold while the rich are fleeing, in "an Orwellian way", into the lifeboats ...


Added: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 01:39 EST


.............................................................



Reply to the Above Comment
Pathocracy Now!                                 By: Niall


"Orwell, among others, indoctrinated us and led us to classify capitalism with erroneous and distorted psycho-analytical terms and psychiatric oxinogroms such as "psychopaths", "pathocracy", etc., but doing so, it would be the same as to save a serial killer from the death penalty because he had "disturbed his mental faculties”."
Manuel, I think you should get youself a copy of Political Ponerology so you can understand why Sott.net uses these terms [Link]

Added: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 10:56 EST


.............................................................

Reply to the Above Comment
Wilhelm Reich versus Sigmund Freud
By: manuel cidoncha-hinestrosa


I think that, instead of obtaining a copy of “Political Ponerology" (a term, incidentally, somewhat "Orwellian"), it would be better and more illuminating to recall the ideological conflict that broke out between Sigmund Freud and Wilhelm Reich when the first instituted human behavior under psychoanalytic terms and the second tried to find the objective elements in social and economic roots that give the genesis to such behavior.
It is the socio-political-economic structures of capitalism that are the "raison d'être", the root, of the damage in the psycho-emotional apparatus of man and not vice versa. Therefore, these effects have to be tried, evaluated and labeled, according to their causes and not to their effects.


Added: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 17:48 EST

No comments:

Blog Archive