Marò!

Glasgow, UK 

‘Twas a very low-profile end of the year, but here we are again. After some vacation and without much time to waste, here’s a little story of the facts involving two Italian soldiers arrested last year in India for having shot 2 fishermen dead. For my Italian friends, there is a non-translated, non-abridged version of the story by Giap here (author: Matteo Miavaldi)

Listening to the Italian media is excruciating. This sentence can be – and is – used by anyone living in Italy and turning on the TV.

Reading the Italian papers is a waste of time. This sentence can be – and is – used by anyone who speaks Italian and has access to newspapers, either in print or online.

Verba volant, scripta manent. Latins knew how to depict feelings in one sentence: the TV brainwashes you and you don’t even realize it, while you can note down all mistakes a newspaper prints on the page. But what’s so special about the Italian media? More than its audience, it is racist and bigot to a disproportionate extent. The case of the two Italian soldiers who allegedly shot dead 2 Indian fishermen while “protecting” an Italian tanker nearby the Indian coast is a case in point. After the whole Christmas merry-go-round of fascist utterings by several Italian politicians, the time was ripe for a rebuttal from honest people who actually know the facts and live where they have occurred. It just takes a little reading and a pinch of surfing the web to get the perfect recipe of information on this case. Serving their political agenda, Italian newspapers and newsreels have built a farce in order to purport a different reality to their customers.

“It’s not fair that our soldiers are kept in prison by those barbarians”. BOOM! Racism, supremacism, imperialism, and fascism all in one go. This was never said by the news, but is what the news have generated within the numb brains of many Italians. Here’s what happened, according to the article – and reality.

On February 15, 2012 the Italian tanker “Enrica Lexie” (EL) is sailing not far from the coast of Kerala, in South-Western India, in its journey to Egypt. 34 people are on board. Among them, 6 “Marò” (Italian marines) from the Venetian “Reggimento San Marco” whose duty was to protect the boat from pirate attacks, which proved to be a concrete risk along the route that brought them close to the waters of East Africa. Not far from there, an Indian fishing boat “St. Antony” [sic] has 11 people on board. At around 4.30 p.m., the incident. EL thinks it’s under a pirate attack and the Marò shoot towards the “St. Antony”, killing Ajesh Pinky (25) and Selestian Valentine (45). The “St. Antony” reports to the coastal guard of the Kollam district, who immediately contacts the EL, asking if it were involved in a pirate attack. EL’s confirmation leads the coastal guard to ask the Italian boat to approach the port of Kochi. The Italian Navy commands to the EL’s captain Umberto Vitelli not to sail to the port and not to let the Italian soldiers on Indian soil. The captain, who’s not in the army but a private citizen, has to respond to the shipowner first and so he concedes to the requests of the Indian authorities. The same night, the victims’ bodies are examined with an autopsy. Two days after, they are buried. On the 19th, Massimiliano Latorre and Salvatore Girone, two among the Marò, are arrested upon charges of murder. The Tribunal of Kollam sentences that the two Italian soldiers be kept in custody at the guesthouse of the CISF (Central Industrial Security Force), Indian police corps. This detail is important, because they are not kept in a regular prison.

The Italian news and the Italian people have been vomiting racist crap on the issue for almost a year now, but the amount of bullshit intensified last Christmas, when the two Marò had been granted a special permit to visit their families in Italy, while they wait for a trial. An exceptional case for people who are accused of murder. Especially given that, without the consent of the Indian court, the families of the victims were “presented with” a donation of 10 million rupees (around $200.000) on a cheque signed by the Italian government. On top of this slimy conduct, a grotesque scene took place when Rome lobbied their neighbors in the Vatican to get a local Catholic priest to “open a spiritual channel” in connection with the families, both Catholic. The Indian authorities were unhappy of this attitude, to say the least.

There are three questions that leave a bitter taste to those who care:

1) How is it possible, in the XXI Century, to think you can resolve international questions with bribes and slimy practices just because Italy is dealing with India (ppfft. they don’t even have laws down there!)

2) How can Italians negate their inherent racism when they approach a foreign country in such manner, and how can we stand the presence of so many fascists (many among them are actually in Parliament or in Government)?

3) Why, why on Earth, do Italian soldiers “protect” private tankers abroad? The law that allowed this practice was signed under the usual Parliamentary silence. Apparently, corporations in Italy are more important than people. Suck it, Colbert!

Capitalist Anti-Semitism

Oakland, CA

Jean-Paul Sartre tickles my mind. So, when I come across one of his books that I haven’t already read, I grab it and I  take it home. There it sits for a while, until the time is ripe (and my mind is free). This time I didn’t go for either a novel or a theatrical piece. I approached a libellum titled “Anti-Semite and Jew” written in France in 1944 (date and place are important in this respect). Knowing that Sartre is not Jewish and that he is politically a Marxist, I couldn’t answer the riddle that the title created until I read the first pages. In line with much existentialist literature of the time, JPS chose an issue of current socio-political relevance in order to abstract the fundamental question further up to a more general level. Just like Sartre in his narrative, here I would like to express my pleasure for reading the book and my take-home lesson with a very simple language.

Jean-Paul Sartre’s Anti-Semite and Jew (here I include free versions: html and pdf) was written in 1944, after the Nazi occupation was over in France, but well before the war ended and the crimes against the Jews were fully disclosed and accounted. The title in French is more elusive: Réflexions sur la question juive is less provocative and more to the point. In this book, JPS deconstructs anti-Semitism and portrays the customs of (French) society for what these really are. Jewness is harder to spot in a person than skin color. For this reason, the reading that I filtered through from the book is more far-reaching than what one can imagine at the beginning. At one point, especially if you’re just starting to understand race in a more systemic way like I am, you can read beyond the characters on the pages and play more with the crude words of the French philosopher.

Sartre, apparently using Instagram

Sartre starts by making everybody in France who carried the book – or read part of it in Les Temps Modernes – feel anti-Semite. There aren’t anti-Semite opinions. There are just anti-Semites. People who buy into stereotypes of street culture (and fascist propaganda),  people who turn a blind eye on the issue, people that cannot shake off from their mindset the prejudices against a race-less, nation-less (at the time) community. JPS also marks the distinction between the authentic and the inauthentic Jew. The latter being someone who denies himself, his roots, his personality, in order to appear less of a Jew to his fellow compatriots, who in addition advocate for the universal man, the Frenchman, devoid of any characterization besides his nationalism. [note: here I use the same gender courtesy that the translator used in the version that I read. Both the anti-Semite and the Jew are male types – French is a romance language and the masculine is commonly used as a neuter gender.] Crooked noses and curly hair are simply not enough to define a Jew, but are chatacteristics that can be singled out in a Jewish person. The path of the deconstruction of anti-Semitism is very long for JPS, who winds to all sides of human behavior and psychology.

He argues that anti-Semitism is driven by passion. One not justified by a direct provocation, causing anger not through logic. But, as he notes, one must “consent to anger before it can manifest itself.” So the anti-Semite has chosen to hate. In opposition to a concept, not something real. The anti-Semite’s Jewish friends are never a direct target of his anger. But when the crowd shouts: “I hate the Jews”, he joins. Sartre also discusses the reason for Jews’ attachment to money and possession, as the only legal, tangible means to emancipation that an outcast of society can seek for. Here’s the twist: JPS portrays the anti-Semite as member of the middle-class, angry at the Jew, member of the nonproducer, burgeois class. But “The Jew is free to do evil, not good” and therefore he is also a ruthless Bolshevik ready to destroy France in the name of Socialism. The anti-Semite’s arguments are very hard to sort out: he believes in Good and Evil and is certain of his position and of the position of the Jew in this configuration. JPS’s Marxist soul appears here to throw light on the essence of the class struggle is between two world orders, alternative in their administration of humanity and nature, both far from the perfection typically associated with the archetypal symbols of Good and Evil. Sartre pulls also the existentialist card by noting that the anti-Semite is afraid of himself, his consciousness, and his liberty, not of the Jew. The anti-Semite is a coward who would rather be a stone than a man.

One-third of the book is already gone and JPS has just acknowledged what the XXI century reader has already figured out: the anti-Semite only needs the Jew as a pretext; his counterpart elsewhere “will make use of the Negro or of the man of yellow skin”. The second chapter is dedicated to spiting the democrat, the universalist, the enlightened, etc. who only recognizes man, “man always the same in all times and places”. The democrat’s acceptance of the Jew as a man leads to the denial of the latter as a Jew. What follows is the creation of the inauthentic Jew as a way of mini-salvation for the Jew. Sartre aptly describes this condition in Part III as a conscious choice and dwells philosophically and pragmatically on it (the term is of course devoid of any moral blame, as the philosopher clearly states). There, he also rejects the definition of race as “that indefinable complex into which are tossed pell-mell both somatic characteristics, and intellectual and moral traits.” At the same time, JPS slashes those who “can’t see race,” but only individuals. Then he goes on against the defenders of the true France and the purity of the Frenchman. As usual, Sartre takes everybody to court. Interestingly, the theme of the judgement comes in the book with the assimilation of the condition of the Jew to that of the hero of Franz Kafka’s The Trial.

For JPS, however, there is a clear culprit: “It is our eyes that reflect to him [the Jew] the unacceptable image that he wishes to dissimulate. It is our words and our gestures – all of our words and all of our gestures – our anti-Semitism, but equally our condescending liberalism that have poisoned him. […] It is we who force him into the dilemma of Jewish authenticity or inauthenticity”. The choice of inauthenticity stands before the Jew who is “haunted by the spectre of violence”, and chooses to deny himself in order to be left alone.

One of the chief problems with Sartre’s argument is the treatment of Zionism just as a byproduct of all this hatred. It becomes harmful for the authentic Jew and an additional weapon in the anti-Semite arsenal. JPS only lightly touches upon the issue of the colonization of Palestine under Zionist principles. But our dear philosopher could not imagine that the course of the events would have taken such inflexible path.

The fourth, and last part sums up the argument and deals with solutions. The “regressive social force” of anti-Semitism is to be countered by propaganda and education, which alas will not prove effective enough. Let’s not forget that the anti-Semite is the champion of legality in France. Anti-Semitism is the product of the burgeois division of society in classes, communities, and sections. The Jew cannot accept assimilation in such a world – he must fight for a society without anti-Semitism. “What is there to say except that the socialist revolution is necessary to and sufficient for the suppression of anti-Semitism? It is for the Jew also that we shall make the revolution.”

The revolution indeed. What struck me the most about this book is the possibility to cross out and substitute the words anti-Semite and Jew with analogous oppressor-oppressed dynamics (white-all other colors/types; even rich-poor, although most of his reasonings remain relevant through racial arguments). Only a change in the type of society we live in may bring about the obliteration of such dynamic. White oppression is synonymous with capitalist oppression. It’s about time that we realize it.

In the words of Richard Wright: “There is no Negro problem in the United States, there is only a White problem”. There’s no poverty, racism, inequality, exploitation, pollution… there’s just their root-cause: capitalism – the Evil we should fight against.

La Rivoluzione Siciliana

Oakland, California. È necessario parlarne. Dei Forconi nessuno ha parlato per una settimana. Adesso “ci si sposta a Roma”. Credo che sia pericoloso per la democrazia e che manchi totalmente la presenza delle forze di sinistra. Ho scritto questo articolo il 19 gennaio e l’ho proposto a un paio di pubblicazioni, ma evidentemente il disinteresse è tale che non rispondono neanche alle e-mail (dopo 5 giorni qualcuno ha poi risposto, in realtà).

Una settimana prima dell’inizio dello sciopero, il leader del movimento, Mariano Ferro, aveva avvertito: “Ricorderete questo giorno come l’inizio di una rivoluzione pacifica. La rivoluzione dei siciliani”. Il 16 gennaio, come annunciato, è cominciato lo sciopero: ai mezzi commerciali non è stato permesso di percorrere indisturbati le proprie rotte e i porti principali sono stati obiettivo di occupazione. L’isola è “bloccata” come dicono le principali testate nei trafiletti di quarta pagina che dedicano all’evento. I capi del “Movimento dei Forconi” o di “Forza d’Urto” – qualunque sia il nome che decidano di dare all’organizzazione della protesta – usano termini grandiosi e parlano di cambiamento epocale, mentre i mass media additano il prezzo della benzina come unica causa del malcontento.

È logico che la posizione dei promotori dell’evento sia così distante da quella della stampa. E cercare di capire i meccanismi editoriali che ne dettano le priorità non è lo scopo di questo scritto. Capire invece perché questo movimento è nato, come sia riuscito a ottenere successo e quali siano le forze che lo sostengono e lo dirigono è fondamentale per prendere una posizione in merito. Già, perché chiudere gli occhi davanti alla vicenda non fa altro che dare ragione alla protesta dei siciliani, che si sentono abbandonati dai palazzi di Palermo, ma soprattutto tagliati fuori dalle dinamiche nazionali ed europee.

Quando la parola “rivoluzione” echeggia nell’aria, chi conosce la storia drizza le orecchie. Il povero vocabolario corrente pone di fronte agli occhi dei lettori espressioni vuote che, messe in fila, recitano: “gli indignados dei forconi” “contro la crisi” e “apartitici” “bloccano l’isola”. Tuttavia, sappiamo che ciò non basta per generare la protesta di più di centomila siciliani. Molti di questi, infatti, sono stati costretti a scioperare dai picchetti formati dall’unica sigla sindacale degli autotrasportatori che ha diretto il blocco: l’Aias di Giuseppe Richichi. Non sono mancati scontri, anche fisici, con chi ha provato a forzare il blocco. Le tre principali richieste del movimento sono: la defiscalizzazione del tributo regionale sui carburanti, l’azzeramento del governo palermitano e l’attivazione di canali di negoziazione con l’Unione Europea al fine di emendare la legislazione esistente in termini più favorevoli all’agricoltura siciliana.

Vedere le lacrime correre dagli occhi di anziani agricoltori la cui terra ha iperbolicamente perso di valore negli ultimi anni e pertanto è rimasta incolta è un’esperienza che capita a chiunque abbia voglia di girare per le campagne siciliane. Non è quindi mai accaduto alla classe dirigente siciliana, che preferisce i salotti dell’Assemblea Regionale Siciliana (Ars) ai fondi dell’ennese o alle chiuse ragusane. Non è mai accaduto neanche alla classe dirigente nazionale, pur essendo essa composta in parte più che proporzionale da isolani. Ma essi ricordano dei loro fratelli e sorelle solo quando è tempo di raccogliere i loro consensi, trasformando le tornate elettorali in vendemmie stagionali, delle quali i siciliani subiscono solamente la fase della pigiatura.

È così che Anna Finocchiaro, senatrice PD eletta tra le liste emiliano-romagnole ma originaria dei “salotti buoni” di Catania, licenzia con poche e brevi parole lo sciopero, un “diritto democratico” che sta “mettendo in ginocchio l’Isola” – non siamo sicuri che la lettera maisucola l’abbia scelta lei – ed è necessario che si ritorni a “una situazione di normalità”. Ivan Lo Bello, presidente di Confindustria Sicilia, si occupa degli affari e si preoccupa del blocco, aggredendo il movimento e bollando le sue azioni come inefficaci. Non ci deve stupire che la protesta, benché acefala, non piaccia alle forze della conservazione.

Il cosiddetto “Movimento dei Forconi” è nato come segno di protesta durante la visita del Ministro dell’Agricoltura Saverio Romano, palermitano, la cui permanenza al dicastero di via XX Settembre fu breve e inconsistente nel 2011. Da lì, il caro benzina e la manovra rapace del governo “tecnico” che non risponde alle dinamiche parlamentari, ma le detta, hanno fomentato il movimento e lo hanno trasformato in “Forza d’Urto”, che racchiude i Forconi e altri gruppi e sigle simpatizzanti. Ciò che fa specie a chi conosce l’ambiente politico dell’isola, è che coloro che pochi mesi fa sgomitavano per essere immortalati sorridenti insieme ai governanti locali, coloro che li fecero eleggere, coloro che spesso illecitamente dettano le regole del gioco economico dell’isola o le applicano, sono lì, forconi alla mano a bloccare i caselli autostradali.

I siti web che si sono occupati della vicenda hanno sottolineato quasi immediatamente che l’apartiticità del movimento è poco trasparente, visto che le bandiere di partito non sono ammesse, ma sono benvenuti personaggi la cui biografia reazionaria – e spesso anche fascista – è ben conosciuta. Essi sono coloro che il movimento lo hanno acceso fin dall’inizio, con la retorica ben oliata contro il Presidente della Regione Raffaele Lombardo e i suoi cinque fallimentari governi in una sola amministrazione. Ma prima che definire i centomila siciliani che hanno contribuito al blocco dell’isola “fascisti” o “rivoluzionari”, credo che serva un passo indietro.

Quello che si è visto e si è letto, nei simboli, nei comportamenti, nelle cantilene che i promotori e gli astanti sciorinano ai microfoni è segno pericoloso della direzione che le energie siciliane hanno preso. Il fiume che ha levigato gli oppressori, i borboni, i fascisti e i mafiosi quando c’era la piena, oggi si rivolge contro il potere costituito procurando più rumore che altro. Sembrano prove tecniche di una marcia su Palermo. Riecheggiano le baionette di Bixio e quelle di Portella della Ginestra, non le grida di libertà di Caltavaturo o di Calatafimi. Sembra che stavolta i siciliani abbiano scelto di scommettere sul cavallo sbagliato, quello del qualunquismo e dell’azione di rottura, ma senza una visione di progresso.

Abbiamo già sbagliato in passato proprio perché abbiamo agito d’istinto, senza ragionare. Come uomini d’onore d’antan, ci sorprendiamo, ci angustiamo e ci lasciamo ribollire il sangue, quando ci troviamo di fronte a un torto subito. Tuttavia, oggi non dobbiamo lasciare il campo alla cieca ignoranza e tuffarci tra le braccia del primo che si autoproclamipater patriae. Questo dei Forconi è un movimento che deve destare le forze politiche che hanno dimenticato la forza della Sicilia e che deve stuzzicare la passione dei siciliani verso l’alternativa. Un’alternativa egalitaria, civile, legalitaria e di liberta. E antifascista.