Any social media that is an alternative to the mainstream ones is enough to read the same things, both in Italy and elsewhere. All CSOAs are being cleared out, closed down, canceled. The “antagonist” world seems to be alive only in the USA, where it recycles the sloagans of the European 70s as new, while in Europe it seems to have completely run out of office.
If at the beginning of the 2000s it was still possible for them to give life to mobilizations against the G7, and to be many, today their consensus comes with difficulty from the few dozen people who still frequent the few CSOAs. The average age has risen and fatigue dominates.
Even the usual American from BLM and #metoo manages to get some visibility on the media, but then fails to obtain consensus among the population.
The reasons for this lack of consensus are manifold.
- 1. the continuous analysis of the problem is not followed by a proposal that is not ridiculous and obsolete .
Okay, classic capitalism is shit. Modern capitalism is Gucci shit. We got it. We do not need kilometric analyzes (the result of that philosophical pedantry that claims to be science), to know this. We just have to look at our lives.
But if I came tomorrow to propose Charlemagne as model leader, and the Holy Roman Empire as a solution, with a beautiful feudal economic system, people would laugh at me. And they would be right: the solution has now expired like a 1969 yoghourt, it has already shown its limits and, moreover, it is no longer applicable in practice because technology has changed the world.
Likewise, this is what Marx and socialism / communism / anarchism / feminism propose as a solution to the problems of capitalism. And everyone, obviously, laughs at him: the solution has now expired like a 1969 yoghourt, has already shown its limits and is no longer applicable in practice because technology has changed the world.
- 2. the coronavirus, I.
It is obvious that the arrival of the coronavirus has accelerated the phenomenon. And this is a known thing: all crises accelerate the phenomena in progress. But on the antagonists the effect was amplified. And it was amplified for a reason: the coronavirus exists, and it exists in this universe. It's real , a concept they seem to reject, lost in their tavern-like scientific pata-epistemology.
It had been decades since the antagonists had not encountered in person that extravagant physical phenomenon called "reality". Their whole idealist dialectic speaks from a philosophical and / or political point of view. You never find one of their writings that goes into the merits of the real phenomenon, be it scientific or technical. Being basically incompetent in every subject they approach, to hide this incompetence they do nothing but speak from a "political and / or philosophical" point of view.
The problem with the coronavirus is that their 19th century masters were men of their time, and consequently they had nothing to say about an epidemic. In the 19th / early 20th century, scientific positivism said that with vaccines and antibiotics all epidemics would disappear. It was a non-issue. So neither Marx, nor Engels nor Bakunin, nor Lenin or Stalin or Trotsky, have anything to say about it. And so, neither do they.
They tried to say that the virus affects the poor more than the rich, but waves of infections in discos and on holiday-makers' beaches have shown the Briatore and Berlusconi, that is, the ruling classes, being killed more and better.
They tried to say that the virus affects blacks more than whites, but the most affected places are Europe and the USA, with a white majority. They tried to say that women are more affected, to be proved wrong by the doctors. All of their victimhood was useless. Reality dominates ideas, and the virus is real.
But they have little to say about reality, like their teachers.
- 3. Coronavirus, II: that is, we have our balls full of 800.
The coronavirus impacted the population by putting problems that their masters did not know how to interpret in the spotlight. When the phenomenon of smart working emerged, they tried to convince people that in that way "the boss" made you pay for xDSL and heating, completely forgetting the time saved and all the advantages of smartworking. Because if in the 19th century the workers were in the factory, that is their destiny: FOREVER.
Their Marxist "science" has proved inadequate to the times, and it is now clear to all that their simulacrum of science is only a pedantic literary style , which has in common with science the difficulty of reading, but not accuracy , predictivity and goodness of results .
Faced with the technological solutions to the crisis, they have nothing useful to say. Their approach seems to speak to the man of the 1800s. It seems to refer to a society that no longer exists. Even those they call "the poor" are completely different from those Marx spoke of. In a world where young people are unable to form families and have children due to lack of resources, the word "proletarian" is more mocking than apt.
All their "intellectuals still alive" have to say is that they want school back with desks, without computers (or with computers as a specialist subject for the world of work, when IT permeates all aspects of modern life ), with the presence of the professor and sociality. Because young people have no other space to socialize than school, and to feel this is normal . A disaster of stupidity and backwardness: they have 800 in mind, and therefore the school must be that of Cuore .
- 4. The solution appears to be worse than the evil.
If we ask ourselves what is the proposal of capitalism to the poor of the planet, the answer is "if you work hard enough and move to the US you have a 1% chance of becoming a well-off and living like in blogs about America". The proposal obviously sucks, but we must ask ourselves what is the alternative of the antagonists.
First, a regimen of language and behavior control, which permeates almost all aspects of life. Politically correct has become a language police to which Orwell seems a keen optimist. Does anyone in their right mind really dream of a world where they have to use the asterisk to eliminate gender from sentences? Does anyone really dream of a world where it is possible to be ostracized if not excommunicated for a joke? Do we really dream of a world where the Stallmann (and God knows how much I gave against him in the past) is forced to resign for something he never said ? Not to mention the disappearance of privacy, under the name of "the private is political": on the one hand they oppose digital surveillance, but on the other hand you can't say "I do whatever the fuck I want at home", because the private is political. A totalitarian nightmare.
We really want to live in a world where we live in terror of being thrown in jail on charges of harassment, just because it has been decided that if the accuser is a woman, the trial is useless because one must blindly believe in all that it says ? Is the world with justice absque strepitu advocatorum what we dream of?
They say they are against the surveillance society, where the private is public, after shouting for years that the private is political ? If the private is political, then it is also public, and therefore they should be against privacy. And they struggle very much to get out of this contradiction, to the point that it is not clear the difference between a political faction that checks the orderliness of every aspect of your life, and a control system based on mass surveillance. But the sure thing is, we wouldn't want to live in either of us .
And we really want to live our whole life with the only choice between being subsidized and becoming a vegetable with no self-esteem (I have already talked about the effects of Hartz IV, I think) or becoming hyper-performing yuppies who pay the subsidy to others with their taxes. ?
The truth is that the alternative of the antagonists appears to everyone to be worse than the evil . They created boasted CSOAs, hundreds of "anarchist communes", and in all of them we saw only filth, decay, drugs and crime. There was one that ever invited people to think "but do you know that they are better off?".
If even a better world is possible with their methods, they have been extremely skilled in keeping the secret , because when and where we go to observe the microcosm they know how to build, we see nothing so that it makes sense to abandon the little we have . After all, if the microcosms they created had looked attractive, millions would have abandoned the old way of life to join them.
But it didn't happen.
- 5. An absurd idea of "people".
When the antagonists refer to the people, it is never clear who the fuck the recipient of their ideas is. Who are they talking to exactly?
To those who come to indie concerts? To those who come from tango, yoga, caopeira courses, [insert here the IntiIllimanismo of the day ], those who participate in the "flash mob" of the week, selfieselfie / press release? To the billionaire singers who play in the cool hours of May 1st, or the Intillimaniform groups who play in the hot hours, and their fans?
Who exactly would this "people" be today? Who are they talking to, and especially: why don't they talk to us ? Even Jehovah's Witnesses are able to reach homes and talk to people. All these do is stick posters around, where they explain that they have organized an evening of reading by some Russian author of the '800, and come and have fun . I imagine that as an alternative to hemorrhoids it is attractive to most, but trying to stand in front of people and talk to them maybe would have some more chance of a Gogol reading?
Moreover, the knowledge of these authors now belongs to an intellectual, social and economic elite not too different from the one that frequents La Scala in Milan.
And I think being hunted down by their CSOAs is good, because now they will be forced out of their lair and stay in the same places as everyone else, and they will finally be able to see with their own eyes the people they are talking about .
- 6. Brainless intellectuals, and other more or less caricatured stereotypes.
Together with the CSOAs, the antagonist faction took control of the role of intellectuals, trying to achieve cultural hegemony. The problem is they didn't have intellectuals. They had people who tried to imitate an intellectual, they dressed like an intellectual, they combed their hair like an intellectual, they appeared as people believed an intellectual should be, but as soon as they opened their mouth….
… it's as if millions of people, at some point, broke into bookstores shouting “I have to emancipate myself! I have to get a culture! quickly, give me the most boring book you have ”. Their intellectuals are a stereotype of the intellectual, their intelligent women are the caricature of the intelligent woman, we are missing only the blacks who play Jazz and the Chinese who do kung-fu with the gong. (The geishas no, that Japan is right-wing, except manga and cyberpunk).
All they do is caricature. Of a stereotype. Of an American woman.
Although formally they are against American culture, they have filled the cities with useless and out of context graffiti, producing a situation where if you are a poor Negro you have to love rap , becoming a caricature of the American poor Negro. But against racism. And their feminists seem blind to the fact that if there is 'a manifesto of masculinity' toxic can be found right in Rap. If I were to say that the poor American negro should love university, books and opera, I would be contradicting their stereotype. Which for them is not racist, because being antiracists they are condemned to defend the negro of negroes, of those who being negroes are condemned to be antiracists the negro way .
- 7. revolution is impossible. But they don't get it right.
You can take down your Tsar if he's within reach. You can go on strike if you are an employee. You can stop production if you have it handy.
But today your Tsar sits in Washington, your boss is in Palo Alto, your factory is on multiple continents, and what he was supposed to be your leader preferred to be CEO and make billions.
But these antagonists are still looking for the revolution, the tension, they masturbate with the revolts of BLM and they really believe they can subvert the system with a military force they don't have, hoping that a people who must be in office will go to the streets, they have leaders who would not know how to find their home on a map, and all they know how to do is make constant fights with the police, which they call "protests", were it not that not even the most exploited class of workers of the moment (the cops) manages to feel a moment of sympathy for them.
Not only do they fail, but they don't even try to protest. With millions of young people delivering pizzas for 2 euros a day they can't get the message "we need to raise wages", with a thousand deaths a year in Italy they can't convince workers that dying isn't nice, not even the most basic concepts of human dignity emerge from their protests, which are in reality simple brawls with the police. There is little difference between one of these antagonists who seeks a fight with the police and the patafascist who goes to the streets on Saturday evening to look for a fight with some immigrants. In both cases, they are war fools who like to lead their hands.
All this mass of nonsense has transformed antagonism into a boundless expanse of incoherent fakes, more fashionable than the conformists who criticize , as violent as the fascists who criticize, as intolerant and arrogant as the police they say they oppose, as macho as the patriarchy they say to oppose, inquisitors as much as the church they say they detest.
Their extinction was already inevitable, but now the coronavirus has accelerated the times. God willing, my generation will see their successors.
Which can only be better.