Mechanical Orange and the myth of “re-education”

Mechanical Orange and the myth of

Receiving comments on the orthodoxy of my reading of "Mechanical orange" (in the last post) left me perplexed, and I could not understand under what political profile to frame the thing, when I read a news:

Mechanical Orange and the myth of
Congratulations to the Titanium scarf.

And here I understand the problem: Arancia Meccanica is an embarrassing film, and therefore it must be "encysted" by the usual "criticism" (ie it must be served) in order to make them say things that they did not want to say, and especially NOT to let them say what he meant. And it's embarrassing because it touches on a typical dogma of the left, the myth of "re-education".

"Educate" and "re-educate" is the myth of the left, both historical and modern. They were so peppered with ideology that they attributed to the ideology of magical powers itself, such as that of transforming a normal human being into a "socialist man", a new variety of man who would see the light in countries with real socialism. In short, ideology was the new faith, which had the miraculous saving power, as when the unnamed one converts and becomes a different person because of repentance.

But once the ideology is adored, and once attributed to the same ideology the same mythological power attributed to faith, that is to transform a mafioso into a pious man, then why not think of applying the method to prisoners, and transforming them?

That is, if it is enough to be educated to socialist ideas to pass from a decadent and dedicated man to bourgeois vices to a "socialist man", why not think that there is some ideology, some theory, idea, education capable of taking a criminal and transforming it in a decent person?

The fruit of this absurd magical belief is the myth of the re-education of criminals. According to this myth the criminal, once exposed to saving experiences with miraculous power, automatically becomes a worthy person.

And the problem comes when you point out that this thing fails spectacularly in every place on the planet where it is applied, since the recidivism rates are very high. You will be told that the constitution says that the penalty must be used for reintegration: if the Constitution says so, it will be true, and thank goodness that the Constitution does not say that cows fly, otherwise we would be avoiding shits of five kilos each that rain from the sky.

This dogma, the dogma of re-education, blatantly clashes with reality, that is the fact that there are non-re-educable individuals. And the case above is just one of many examples of characters coming to jail, they say to him "if you want to go out you have to say this and that and pretend to be sorry by saying so 'and what'" and then a surveillance judge (priest of the thaumaturgical power to "re-educate" he is convinced that he has completed yet another miracle, and they are left to leave.

The cattocununist left is so imbued with the dogma of re-education that Arancia Meccanica has always been indigestible: yet, the film is sadly prophetic.

So let's explain: the film essentially has three phases. And it speaks of an extremely violent system that strives to recover the criminals; it is implicit that the system is violent BECAUSE it strives to recover the delinquents, but this is understood in the end. But let's go step by step: the three phases, I said.

  1. The first phase, in which the subjects of the re-education experiment are shown BEFORE re-education. It is a gang of fools who spend their lives taking drugs and committing free violence, for the pure sadistic pleasure of doing so. Generally the man of the left arrives only at this point: at the rape scene he makes his saw, and at that point the porn video is useless and stops him.
  2. The second phase, that of re-education itself: using an unlikely Pavlovian system, Alex is re-educated. At that point he is released, and his victims who recognize him, take their revenge by showing that they are the same as Alex, and behave in the same way. The difference between them and Alex is whether to play on the winning team or not. In fact, when they can behave like Alex, that's what they do. The first message of this film is: in a society that believes in repression and re-education, VICTIMS AND FLOORING PLANES BECOME EQUAL.
  3. The last phase is the one in which everything is reversed. After an "excess of revenge" Alex loses the conditioning, his companions have all become policemen. As a matter of political convenience, the politician who sponsored the Pavlovian rehabilitation of Alex must give him what he wants, and Alex asks to be able to become Chief of Police, in order to do what he did as a criminal (violence and rape) but with the coverage of the law. The second message of the film is: in a society that believes in repression and re-education, the re-education and re-education staff become the same, and indeed they are the same people.

These two messages seem extreme, but try to look here:

Ludovico Van in action.

The idea that the film propagates is simple: the violent criminal, especially if psychopathic, will always be attracted by the system that "re-educates", for the simple reason that:

  1. The "re-educating" system needs a very strong armed wing. If our violent and sadistic criminal likes brutal violence, all he has to do is join the police, and he will be able to exercise violence without going unpunished.
  2. The "re-educating" system needs torturers, confessors, inquisitors, and persons in charge of expiation. If our psychopathic criminal wants a more intellectual kind of power, a less physical but more invasive type of violence, if he wants an exercise of the most spiritual arrogance, he has to do nothing but enter the "re-educating" system.

We can name Federico Aldrovandi, Cucchi, and many others, up to the most recent ones:

Mechanical Orange and the myth of
I said, in fact, "torturers"

All this happens for a simple reason: the "re-educating" system, besides not re-educating at all, does nothing but attract people who are made of the same substance as the delinquent. There will be two criminal careers for this type of people:

  1. If the person does not notice his tendencies or does not plan them, he will become a criminal. Maybe then he will end up in jail, where he will make friends with the jailers, because he will ultimately recognize them as his equals. But now it's late to become like them.
  2. If the person knows what he wants, he knows what kind of sadistic instinct he wants to exercise, he can plan his career as a violent criminal taking refuge in an area where he knows he remains unpunished.
  3. Once inside, he knows he will go unpunished only if his colleagues and superiors are like him. By cooptation and aggregation, tacit hierarchies of uniformed criminals will be formed, supported by executives-inquisitors who after all approve the thing, but do not cultivate the same lust for methods, and the whole system will be managed by the same people.

Once the entire police / prison system is made up of people who are ethically indistinguishable from the criminal, social transformation comes, and the victims become equal to the perpetrators. And then it happens that someone ends up in prison for having shot a thief escaping from the balcony while the thief was in the street (moreover, at the risk of hitting some passerby).

Mechanical Orange and the myth of

And this is the film's sadly prophetic message: a police system that proposes to "re-educate" first becomes a criminal underworld because it attracts among its ranks those it would like to re-educate, and then transforms society into a system where among victims and perpetrators there is no ethical difference.

This makes Arancia Meccanica one of the most INDIGENIBLE films to the cattocomunista, which must stick well before being able to see it (since Kubrik's films were destined for them), in order to remove the message that strikes the dogma.

Because if you think about it, if it is not possible to re-educate the person through a message or a teaching, then messages and teachings have no power, and if they have no power, if it is not possible or convenient to "re-educate", then perhaps it is not it is not even possible to educate, and if it is not possible to educate,


And this, for the male-communist man, is enough to scream heresy.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.