These are the Nights of the Wild Hunt which herald the great festival of Walpurgisnacht with the full moon, also called Beltane and/or interwoven with its fire festival in chiaroscuro from ancient times as Saxons met Gaels as brother warriors to find the truths of themselves in sacred rites of battle and hunting, and modern Britain arose with wicca as boundaries became interfaces.
Monsters who hunt other monsters we are under such spells, possessed by the madness of avenging wrongs which restores balance to the world.
During my years teach Forensics in high school I opened each year’s class with a demonstration; putting an object on the desk with the words; “This is a fulcrum”. Then placing a ruler across it; ”It balances a lever. When your parents ask what you are learning in Forensics class, tell them you are learning to become a fulcrum, and change the balance of power in the world.”
Is it mad to tilt at windmills, which in the mind of Don Quixote were revealed as giants and symbols of systems of oppression which are ancient, vast, and seem unanswerable like forces of nature?
Or is this what makes us human, this refusal to submit, this will to solidarity with the powerless and the dispossessed, the silenced and the erased, all whom Frantz Fanon called The Wretched of the Earth, this exaltation beyond the limits of our form which unites us as a band of brothers, sisters, and others, and gives us the faith in each other and hope for a better future among the limitless possibilities of becoming human from which we must choose, and claw our way out of the ruins of civilization and a fallen America to make yet another Last Stand, beyond hope of victory of survival?
In the words of Cervantes regarding windmills; “they might be giants”.
To realize and seize for ourselves unauthorized possibilities of how to be human together is a disruptive event which unmoors us from our bonds to our past selves and to the dark legacies of our history, a liberation which is also a crisis of identity which can manifest as madness. We wish to “see in a new way: as Picasso phrased it, but this is both seizure of power and a time of great peril, for in rapture, what Rudolf Otto called “fascinans et tremendum”, we are without control of ourselves, and without referents or trustworthy warning systems which might disambiguate good from evil or tell us when we are in danger of becoming the monsters we fight.
We who hunt fascists must remember always Nietzsche’s warning in Beyond Good and Evil; “He who fights monsters should be careful lest he thereby become a monster. And if thou gaze long into an abyss, the abyss gazes back into thee.”
What has happened?
As written by in The Guardian, in an article entitled Shots rang out, pandemonium erupted: how the White House press dinner shooting unfolded.
Smiles turned to shock and fear, Trump dived to the ground and guests ducked under tables after loud bangs were heard; “Donald and Melania Trump appeared in good spirits as they settled in on the high table at the White House correspondents’ dinner in Washington DC on Saturday night, despite the event already being steeped in controversy over the US president being invited when he frequently makes aggressive verbal and legal attacks on the media that covers him.
There was tense anticipation about what kind of speech he would make – but just about half an hour after arriving, Trump was diving for the floor as something far more dramatic erupted.
Video captures the moment when shots can be heard ringing out at the Washington Hilton, where the glittering annual White House press journalists’ dinner is held in the hotel’s vast basement-level ballroom.
Trump was seated next to Weijia Jiang, the CBS News TV journalist and president of the White House Correspondents’ Association, the organizer of the event, while on his right, Melania Trump was chatting and laughing with the White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt. Leavitt is about to take maternity leave, having joked to journalists just last Thursday that her second baby was due “any minute”.
Around 8.35pm local time, a series of loud bangs were heard, coming from just outside the ballroom.
The smiles instantly turned to shock and fear. Melania Trump turned from Leavitt to look out across the ballroom and, as seen on video clips, appears to say “oh my God” as Leavitt appears to say “what’s happened?”.
Pandemonium erupted. The place was packed with journalists and their guests in evening wear who had just begun eating from the appetizer plates of spring peas with blobs of soft burrata Italian cheese, as waitstaff scuttled around tables and in and out with food and wine. Now, dishes could be heard clattering in the background and guests ducked under their tables.
Trump later said he thought the shots was the noise of trays being dropped. But it was clear in split seconds that it was not, as several US Secret Service agents rushed to the stage. Some security officers appeared to shout “get down!” and “stay down!” as Trump got on the ground and agents in tactical gear rushed to the stage, rifles drawn.
Trump could then be seen being picked up and hurried from the stage, shielded by a phalanx of Secret Service agents trying to block sight lines on the president in case the shooter breached the ballroom.
The uniformed officers pointed their rifles out into the ballroom.
JD Vance was rushed off the stage in the opposite direction from the president and the thousands of attenders that had been seated moments before at the tables below the dais could be seen crouching under the tables, awaiting further instruction from police. Spilled wine was sloshed across tablecloths. Witnesses later reported an eerie silence briefly descending, punctuated by the occasional whimper or sob from frightened attenders.
The chaos and danger had burst forth in the form of a 31-year-old suspect who had checked in to the hotel a few days earlier as an ordinary guest, the acting attorney general, Todd Blanche, said on Sunday.
As the correspondents’ dinner was getting under way he rushed across the expanse of one of the approach lounges to the ballroom where, minutes earlier, journalists had posed for pictures and waited for their tickets to be checked and to pass through metal detectors to take their place at the dinner.
The man can be seen on footage, sprinting right past one person who appears to be a plainclothes federal agent, who then quickly draws his gun. The man is running towards the ballroom and, witnesses say, fired shots as security personnel snapped into action, many aiming their service weapons and moving towards the suspect. He had with him a shotgun, a handgun and several knives.
One officer, believed to be a Secret Service agent, was shot in the chest but the bullet was halted by his ballistics vest. The alleged gunman was wrestled to the floor and held, in the process of which some of his clothes were ripped off.
Pictures later showed him face to the carpeted floor, shirtless and apparently with his hands cuffed behind him. The exact sequence of events in that vestibule had not become public by Sunday afternoon. Writings that the suspect sent to family members online shortly before the incident implied that he had not expected to survive his attack. And yet he was not shot and will appear in federal court in the capital on Monday to face criminal charges.
Less than an hour after the chaos, Trump took to his social media website Truth Social and provided updates, even though many details of what had occurred were very unclear. It was also announced that there would be a hasty press conference at the White House.
“Quite an evening in D.C. Secret Service and Law Enforcement did a fantastic job. They acted quickly and bravely,” he said. “The shooter has been apprehended.”
Trump claimed he recommended that they “LET THE SHOW GO ON” and carry on with the dinner but that he deferred to law enforcement officials who ordered everyone to be evacuated and abruptly cancelled the event.
Trump insisted that “regardless of that decision, the evening will be much different than planned, and we’ll just, plain, have to do it again. President DONALD J. TRUMP.”
Trump later posted that law enforcement officials requested that he leave the hotel, in keeping with safety protocol. He also said “the First Lady, plus the Vice President, and all Cabinet members, are in perfect condition” and announced a press conference in half an hour. Trump also said he spoke with event organizers and that it would be rescheduled in a month.
Then as Washington and those who had watched the chaos unfold on television and the internet were still trying to take stock of what had happened, journalists streamed from the event to the White House to cram into the press briefing room in the West Wing to witness the president’s hastily called press conference.
In the front row was Jiang in her spangled dress, surrounded by media colleagues in their tuxedos, gowns and fancy shoes, as Trump came out to the familiar podium, also in his evening suit. He made a half-serious, half-jocular address, peppered with his usual self-promotions and a reference to his determination to build a ballroom at the White House. He also talked about being president as “a dangerous profession”. This was, of course, the third time that someone has been caught trying to shoot Trump. In the first attempt, during the 2024 election campaign in Pennsylvania, the bullet grazed Trump’s ear and shots killed one spectator and injured others.
Then in uncharacteristic style, Trump issued warm words to the press. He said he was impressed with the coverage of the night’s events so far, then he complemented Jiang on her handling of the evening, and gave her the first question.”
As written by Biblical scholar and pastor Jenny Carter in her Face Book page; “A teacher cracked open Saturday night, sent his family a letter ten minutes before he opened fire.
🚫 I do not condone what he did. I do not support violence.
Past it, the rest of this is more complicated than the country will let itself admit, and I am not flattening it for the comfort of people who spit in our faces daily.
Jesus said it plainly in Matthew 7:
“Do not judge, or you will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.”
The people demanding the entire left perform unbroken grief this week have not extended that measure to anyone in 463 straight days. They will not get it from me on schedule.
His name is Cole Allen. 31 years old. Caltech graduate. Son of a Reformed church elder. Part-time tutor in Torrance, California. Donald Trump told 60 Minutes Allen “was a Christian, a believer, and then he became an anti-Christian.”
The manifesto says otherwise. He is a Christian.
Manifesto is available if you search it.
Facebook wouldn’t let me post it.
💔 WHAT HE ACTUALLY WROTE —
The letter is saturated in Christian moral reasoning from the first paragraph to the last. Reading it as a scholar, I see a young man wrestling with the same texts the rest of us wrestle with, anchoring every step in scripture, arriving at a conclusion the Holy Spirit, I’m sure, is as grieved by as we are.
The fact is, a beautiful teacher who had his entire life ahead of him has been living through the ENORMOUS GRIEF & RAGE WE ALL FEEL every single day.
Day in and day out watching the innocent suffer. Watching death in all its crushing forms swallow up life and everything actually worth saving in this broken mess of a shithole country.
😔 💔 And that does something to any person of conscience. This essay is about that process. It’s complicated, nuanced, and not for the weak.
SO PISS OFF & MOVE ALONG MAGA 😡 – cause this shit is way over your head anyways!
This belongs to those who still have access to complex moral reasoning. 😡 Until you repent you have neither morals nor reason.
He opens by naming the people he believes the administration has harmed:
“I’m not the person raped in a detention camp. I’m not the fisherman executed without trial. I’m not a schoolkid blown up or a child starved or a teenage girl abused by the many criminals in this administration.”
He then engages two of the scriptures most often weaponized to silence Christian dissent. On “turn the other cheek,” he writes that the principle applies when you yourself are oppressed, and that:
“Turning the other cheek when someone else is oppressed is not Christian behavior; it is complicity in the oppressor’s crimes.”
On “render unto Caesar,” he writes that the United States is:
“Ruled by the law, not by any one or several people.”
And that an unlawful order does not bind a citizen’s conscience.
Both readings sit inside the moral vision the Spirit of God produces in a person, the same vision that moved Bonhoeffer in Nazi Germany, the same vision that moved every Black church pastor who marched in 1965, the same vision that moves every nun sheltering refugees on the southern border right now.
The verdict Allen put in his letter is the verdict MAGA pastors have spent a decade refusing to preach, because preaching it would cost them their building, their salary, and the comfortable lie they have been feeding their congregations every Sunday.
They have catastrophically failed the people in their pews on the things that matter most. We are watching the evidence in real time, and we have been watching it for 463 straight days. The vulnerable. The oppressed.
The objective and systemic racism this country has inflicted on Indigenous people and Black Americans for four hundred years and is inflicting still. The foreigner Christ said to welcome. The prisoner Christ said to visit. The poor Christ said are blessed.
The 463 days are not the beginning of the problem. They are the harvest of it. The fruit of the American right-wing church is not new. It propped up segregation. It fought civil rights from the pulpit. It blessed every war and every tax cut and every cruelty toward the poor that came down the pike.
It built Jerry Falwell’s empire and Pat Robertson’s empire and the Religious Right that turned Christianity in this country into a partisan brand. The fact that Donald Trump was elected the first time, the fact that 81% of white evangelicals voted for him in 2016 after the Access Hollywood tape, that was already the evidence.
The current moment is what happens when the rot finishes its work. This iteration is louder, more brazen, more insidiously evil, but the tree producing this fruit was planted a long time ago and these pastors have been watering it the whole time.
Jesus had a phrase for this kind of religious leader. Matthew 23. He said they strain out a gnat and swallow a camel. They obsess over tiny ritual questions while ignoring the weightier matters of the law: justice, mercy, faithfulness.
The American right-wing church does this in every measurable way. They will fight for an hour over a worship song while a child dies in a detention camp.
James 4:17 says:
“To the one who knows the right thing to do and does not do it, to that person it is sin.”
They have known. They have refused. That refusal is sin.
Bonhoeffer, watching the German church capitulate to the Nazi regime, said the church does not just bandage the victims under the wheel. The church drives a spike into the wheel itself. He paid for that conviction with his life.
The American right-wing church has done the opposite. It has spent decades tightening the wheel, blessing the wheel, taking communion at the wheel, and calling the people crushed under it lazy and ungrateful.
A 31-year-old in Torrance read the text more honestly than the men with the seminary degrees and the megachurch parking lots, and that is the indictment of American Christian leadership in one sentence.
Allen’s read on this administration was correct. His read on the Christian obligation to fight for the oppressed was correct. The action he took Saturday night was not. The cross he was supposed to carry was his own, not a weapon turned on someone else. I share his fury. I share his grief. I do not share his answer.
God’s anger burns against this administration. Amos 5 has God speaking through the prophet to the religious people doing the worship and the offerings and the songs:
“I hate, I despise your festivals. I take no delight in your solemn assemblies. Take away from me the noise of your songs. Let justice roll down like waters.”
The plain-English translation is that God does not give a single f•ck about the worship of people whose hands are covered in the blood of the vulnerable. The blood is on their hands. The songs are not covering it.
The PS at the end of Allen’s letter is a man already grieving himself:
“I want to throw up; I want to cry for all the things I wanted to do and never will, for all the people whose trust this betrays; I experience rage thinking about everything this administration has done.”
Then:
“Can’t really recommend it. Stay in school, kids.”
He knew. He knew what he was doing was wrong. He knew he was throwing his own life away. He knew the people who loved him would be devastated. He knew the Spirit of God does not hand a person a shotgun. He told the kids reading his letter not to follow him.
He chose anyway. That was the moment. 😔💔
Please, I’m begging you, don’t ever throw away your life for this pedophile.
HE IS NOT WORTH 1 RESISTER’S LIFE. YOU ARE FAR TOO VALUABLE.
❓A FALL FROM GRACE VS. A LIFE AGAINST GOD
Scripture also names a real distinction between a fall, a single catastrophic break in a life otherwise pointed toward love and the good of others, and a pattern, a daily diet of feeding the worst parts of yourself and calling it strength. The Bible treats them differently and so should we.
That distinction is the answer to the question my readers are about to ask me.
How can I call Cole Allen a Christian and not call the people running this administration Christians, given what Allen did Saturday night?
The answer is the trajectory. Allen’s letter is consumed with the suffering of other people. He named them by category, in detail, with grief. The thirty-one years of his life that we have any record of, before Saturday, was a life pointed at others. He taught. He tutored. He sat under his father’s eldership at a Reformed church.
The fall he took on Saturday was a fall from a life otherwise pointed in the direction Galatians calls fruit. The witness of his church and the long line of Christians who have refused violence even under the worst regimes in history will hold what he did against him.
He still did the wrestling. The break is the catastrophic break of a Christian who collapsed under a weight he should not have been carrying alone.
I am not saying any of this to excuse what he did, to rationalize it, or to justify it.
I have already said I do not condone violence and I have meant it every time I said it. What I am asking the reader to do is hold two things at once. Allen made a catastrophic, indefensible choice.
Allen was also a person under a weight that broke him. Both are true. Holding that tension is extraordinarily hard when the country around you is gaslighting you in real time and demanding you simplify everything into hero or villain. I am refusing to simplify it. So should you.
Who among you reading this has never carried a weight of grief or rage so heavy you made the worst decision of your life under it? Who among you has never said something you cannot take back, ended something you cannot rebuild, or done something you would never have done on a day when your nervous system was not drowning?
Dr. Mary-Frances O’Connor, who studies grief at the University of Arizona, has documented what most of us already know in our bodies. Grief impairs executive function. It impairs impulse control. It impairs the brain’s capacity to weigh long-term consequences against immediate pain. People in acute grief make catastrophic decisions every single day in this country, and most of them never make the news.
Allen’s grief was over the people he believed were being destroyed by an administration most of the country is pretending is normal. The break is real. The choice is still his. Both are true. He will wrestle with what he did, and with what he is putting his family through, every single day for the rest of his life. He is saved, and he is responsible. Those two things are not in conflict. They are how grace actually works.
The other side has spent decades building a life pointed at the opposite list. Domination. Self-promotion. Cruelty toward the foreigner, the prisoner, the sick, the hungry, the children. Mocking the disabled and the dead. Turning every other human being into stage material for a crowd. By the test scripture itself gives, that pattern is the opposite of fruit.
For the reader who does not share this faith, the framework still holds. People are known by what their lives produce over time. By that measure Allen was the more honest one in the room. He failed. He failed badly. He was failing in the direction of people he believed were being harmed. The other side is not failing. They are succeeding at exactly what they have been building.
PART TWO
✌️ DONALD TRUMP IS CONSUMED BY & CONTROLLED BY EVIL & HE REMAINS POSSIBLY THE BIGGEST THREAT TO HUMAN LIFE ON THE PLANET
✌️HE IS EXCEPTIONALLY DANGEROUS & HIM IN POWER IS THE SINGLE BIGGEST THREAT TO EVERY HUMAN ON THE PLANET
It’s not TDS.
Donald Trump told a reporter this week he had studied assassinations, that the people who get targeted are the most impactful people, that Abraham Lincoln was on the list, and:
“I hate to say I’m honored by that, but I’ve done a lot.”
He is not Lincoln. He is not Jesus. He is not a martyr.
The scripture for what he is going through is 1 Peter 4. Peter wrote to early Christians being persecuted by an empire and drew a clean line:
“If you suffer, it should not be as a murderer or thief or any other kind of criminal, or even as a meddler.”
There is suffering that has spiritual weight because you are taking it on for the sake of righteousness, and there is suffering that is just the bill coming due on the life you have built. Donald Trump is in the second category.
He is suffering because he feeds his broken nature every single day and the consequences of that life are catching up with his body, his sleep, his face, his relationships, the children who will not speak at his funeral the way McCain’s family did not let him speak at theirs. Proverbs 28 says:
“The wicked flee though no one pursues.”
He is the man fleeing. The judgment does not require any of us to deliver it.
🌎 THE MORAL EXCELLENCE OF DONALD TRUMP —
James 5 has a passage pastors do not preach in this country anymore because it scares the donor base:
“The wages you failed to pay the workers who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord Almighty.”
The same man now demanding the country grieve his close call has spent his entire political career laughing about other people’s:
• Paul Pelosi. After a man fractured Nancy Pelosi’s 82-year-old husband’s skull with a hammer, Trump turned it into stage material at a California GOP convention. “How’s her husband doing, anybody know?” The crowd laughed on cue.
• John McCain. Five-year prisoner of war, dead from brain cancer. Trump kept attacking him for months and told reporters, “I gave him the kind of funeral he wanted, which as president I had to approve. I didn’t get a thank you.”
• Dead American soldiers. The Atlantic reported he called them “losers” and “suckers.” The AP confirmed it independently.
• Serge Kovaleski. Disabled reporter mocked on camera in front of a cheering South Carolina crowd in 2015.
• Myeshia Johnson. Gold Star widow. Trump told her on the phone that her husband “knew what he signed up for.”
The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of Hosts. We are not required to add tears on top. Not a f•cking chance.
🌎 ON THE COMPARISON TO OBAMA AND BIDEN – WHAT A JOKE GTFOH MAGA
Trump supporters are flooding social media this week with a line meant to shame the left into performing grief on cue. We didn’t like Obama. We didn’t like Biden. But we never wished them dead. Why can’t the left do the same?
That comparison is f•cking insane.
It is not a clever rhetorical move. It is a confession that the people making it cannot tell the difference between political disagreement and watching mass preventable death in real time. Nobody on the left wished Obama or Bush or Biden dead because none of them were doing what Donald Trump is doing.
Let me give you one example out of dozens. As of January 20th, 2026, according to Health Policy Watch, 757,314 people have died from the Trump administration’s funding cuts to USAID. The majority of them are children. That is one policy. That is the body count from one policy. That number does not include the 51,000 Americans a year projected to die from the Medicaid dismantling. It does not include the people in detention camps. It does not include the people deported into countries that will k-ll them. It does not include what the climate collapse is going to do.
Three quarters of a million human beings, mostly children, are already dead from one signature line on one piece of paper. And the people defending the man who signed that line are on Facebook this week telling us we are the unhinged ones for not crying about him.
Jesus said in Luke 12:
“From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded.”
The man who holds the most powerful office on earth and uses it to dismantle the floor under the most vulnerable people on earth is not in the same moral category as a president we disagreed with on tax policy. The people making this comparison are not operating in reality. That break from reality is exactly what Allen was trying to wake the country up from. He chose the wrong way to do it. The break is still real.
🌎 WHERE THE PSALMIST WENT, AND WHERE I HAVE GONE
Psalm 73 is the scripture for everyone who has ever watched evil prosper and almost lost their faith over it:
“I almost slipped. My feet had nearly stumbled. For I was envious of the arrogant when I saw the prosperity of the wicked. They have no struggle. Their bodies are healthy and strong.”
The psalmist is honest about how close he came to walking away from God over the injustice of watching the wicked thrive. I have been there. Many of you have been there. I scream at God most days about what is happening to this country and to every country touched by its policies.
To be a person with a working conscience in this world is to live in pain. Not just here, not just now, not just under this administration, although this administration has dialed the volume up past anything most of us have lived through. Anywhere a person refuses to look away, anywhere a person refuses to numb out, anywhere a person stays awake to the cruelty and the injustice and the suffering that is everywhere and largely preventable, the cost is grief. A working conscience hurts.
The people who do not hurt are the ones who have stopped paying attention or have killed the part of themselves that could feel it. Allen had a working conscience. So do you. So do I. The pain is the price of staying human in a world that keeps trying to make us not.
I have my own version of the psalmist’s question.
I was s•xually assaulted by my teacher in high school.. I testified in three different trials for over a decade and I didn’t win every trial. According to RAINN, out of every thousand reported s-xual assaults in the United States, only twenty-five end in a perpetrator going to prison. Most r-pists walk. The system is not broken. It is working as designed. I know the felt sense of standing inside that injustice and asking God where he is.
So I get it. I get what moral injury on this level does to a person.
I know the feeling Allen was inside of when he wrote his letter. The feeling is not the failure of a Christian conscience. The feeling is the cry of one. Habakkuk stood at the edge of an empire eating his country and asked God “how long?” four times in a single chapter. Asking is not the sin. The sin would be lying about what we see.
🌎 WHERE I REFUSE TO GO, AND WHY YOU MUST TOO
I have thought every angry thought a person can think about this president.
I have thought thoughts I will not write down. So have most of you.
The thoughts are not the sin. The action is. There is a long distance between the rage of a working conscience and the choice to walk into a hotel and start shooting.
Allen collapsed that distance.
I will not.
We feel everything we feel, we name everything we see, we yell at God when the injustice is too much, and we keep our hands clean of violence ANYWAY.
This is not just a spiritual point. It is a strategic one.
The minute the resistance picks up the weapons of the people we are resisting, we hand them the only justification their lies have ever needed for the false story they have been telling about being persecuted.
Violence from our side does not hurt them. It hurts us.
It loses us the country, it loses us the people we are trying to protect, and it loses us the moral ground that has been our only real weapon all along.
Whatever you feel, however justified the feeling is, the answer is never the gun.
THE ANSWER IS STAYING ALIVE, TELLING THE TRUTH, AND REFUSING TO BECOME THEM. THE ULTIMATE VICTORY OF EVIL IS NOT WHAT IT DOES TO US. IT IS WHAT IT TURNS US INTO. DO NOT GIVE IT THAT WIN.
That refusal IS the cross.
It is heavier than picking up a weapon.
It is supposed to be.
🌎THE GASLIGHTING IS THE SECOND INJURY
Isaiah 5:20:
“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness.”
That is the daily diet of every American paying attention right now. Dismantling the floor under fifty-one thousand American lives a year and calling it freedom. Pulling lifesaving aid from millions abroad and calling it strength. Cooking the planet and calling it energy independence. Putting people in camps and calling it safety.
Jeremiah called the false prophets out for healing the wound of his people lightly, crying peace, peace, when there is no peace. There is no peace. Our nervous systems know it before our minds catch up.
Then we turn on the television and a man at a podium tells us the wound is healing. That is the second injury. The part that makes people feel like they are losing their minds. You are not losing your mind. You are responding correctly to evil that is being denied in real time by the people committing it.
🌎MORAL INJURY —
There is a clinical name for what this does to a soul. Moral injury. It is what happens to a person who is forced to witness atrocities they cannot stop, and forced to function inside a system that pretends those atrocities are fine. Soldiers come home with it. Hospice nurses brought it home from COVID.
Teachers carry it deepest, because a teacher’s whole vocation is to build a small democracy in one room where every child feels seen, and they spend their careers learning exactly how much damage one bad actor in a system can do.
Now they are watching one bad actor at the top burn the country down, told by his press secretary that the fire is a sunrise. Allen reached his breaking point Saturday night. The wound underneath his break is the wound the rest of us are still carrying. He is what can happen when this kind of moral injury is left untended.”
References
Bonhoeffer: Pastor. Spy. Assassin. | Official Trailer
News of the White House correspondents’ dinner shooting
Shots rang out, pandemonium erupted: how the White House press dinner shooting unfolded: Smiles turned to shock and fear, Trump dived to the ground and guests ducked under tables after loud bangs were heard
Of the civilization we humans have created together since the inventions of language and writing, what’s worth keeping?
So I wondered in 2018 as I founded Lilac City Antifa in hope of preserving our our civilization as it came under threat of capture globally by the Fourth Reich as America had recently been in the Stolen Election of 2016, with Putin’s star agent Trump squatting in the White House and set upon a mission of subversion of our democracy and dismantling of the state as an embodiment of the values of the Enlightenment, and of clawing something of our humanity back from the darkness.
My solution was this literary calendar in which I celebrate the birthdays of one hundred sixty seven authors whom I love by reading something of theirs and writing about it annually, a practice I encourage for everyone. My calendar will be different from yours because we are different and unique; this is also one of the points of this experiment.
For myself, this replaces national holidays I care nothing about or which represent theocratic tyranny and terror like Christmas or spurious myths of racist national identity like Thanksgiving with holidays I care about very much and regard as important, celebrations of authors on their birthdays.
If you wish to follow my method, read a primary work and a major guide or work of criticism about it, take notes on your reactions, memories, associations, insights, and from these write a review or appreciation of the work and its meaning and value to you. You may also be inspired to write your own fiction or poetry in reply, as have many authors.
Herein are the birthdays of the world’s great authors of world classics of literature; those who are important to me personally or whom I regard as essential to the construction of our human civilization I have celebrated in critical essays encompassing the whole of their works, to which links are appended.
This is more an atlas and history of myself as an assemblage across time and the project of reading world literature as an instrument with which to change boundaries into interfaces through which to become human, than it is a set of authorized identities as all versions of the Canon of literature must inescapably also be.
How then did I come to my choices of these particular authors as lives and imaginal universes which merit celebration and an ongoing reading into the stories of our own lives?
Some came into my life as the books they had set free in random moments of discovery and recognition, because at that moment I needed them and they filled my empty spaces with their thoughts as sustaining, informing, motivating, and shaping forces. This I call the Narrative Theory of Identity; memories, histories, identities which unfold each other in recursion. Among these I count Thus Spake Zarathustra which I adopted as a counter text to the Bible during eighth grade, and Finnegan’s Wake whose quest for a universal human language and being beyond authorized identities I claimed for my own during high school and which shaped my quest to learn other ways of being human during my many years of wandering the world.
Some seized and shook me as in the jaws of a lion, destroyed and recreated me, exalted me beyond the limits of my flesh into the imaginal spaces of others, opened my consciousness to truths and ways of being human beyond my own horizons, transformed boundaries into interfaces and became gateways to unknown selves among the limitless possibilities of becoming human.
Some speak to me with the voices of long lost friends and mentors whom I knew personally and who helped me find my life’s path; Edward Albee, William S. Burroughs, Susan Sontag, Jean Genet.
What makes an author or their works great, a universal classic of literature and a treasure of the civilizational memory of humankind, cannot be reduced to objective and quantifiable criterion; it is about our unique stories which are part of who we are. As a list of authorized identities, a canon of literature cannot be produced, though all such lists make this claim. The truth is quite the opposite; to read is to think the thoughts of others, and each of us will construe ourselves and the books we read not according to their words but to our own histories and uniqueness. I cannot tell you what will enrich and bring meaning to your own life; I can only tell you what has done so for mine.
Enter here the world of stories of which I am made, with this caveat; reading is a Rashomon Gate event of relative truths, which like all truths must be performed to become ours, and to become real as lived truths.
The most important question to ask of a story is, whose story is this?
And among the most wonderful and marvelous things about our lives, our identities, and our stories is this; you don’t have to settle for just one.
On Poetic Vision as Reimagination and Transformation of Our Possibilities of Becoming Human
On this day we remember the anniversary of the destruction of Guernica in 1937 by the Nazis, vividly commemorated by Picasso as a witness of history, and situated within the special context of the Spanish Resistance, and of the Humanist values of the Enlightenment and the Rights of Man which the atrocity violated, but also a universal testament, lament, and cry of defiance against the horror of war.
The horrors of the Nazi annihilation of the civilization of Europe is being recapitulated today in the destruction of Ukraine by Russia and of Palestine by Israel, with Mariupol and Gaza echoes and reflections of Guernica, as it will whenever we forget the lessons of our history and are doomed to repeat it.
When I founded the Abraham Lincoln Brigades of Ukraine and Palestine with my fellow American volunteers in liberation struggle, it was not only to recall the glorious International Brigades of the Spanish Civil War as our true forebears, but also in recognition that both Putin’s Russia and Netanyahu’s Israel have modeled their obscene and criminal wars of imperial conquest and dominion on Guernica and the idea of Total War as developed in the Spanish Civil War by the fascist regimes of Hitler and Franco; and that we must reply to them as Resistance and by any means necessary.
All Resistance is war to the knife.
Evil never sleeps, nor must our vigilance in guardianship of each other.
War is an evil born of many things, including fear and the dehumanization of others, and of the pathology of disconnectedness and failure of empathy. It is also an instrument of government and authority which exists because it is enormously profitable for those in power.
The family fortune of the Bush dynasty was made by the first President Bush’s grandfather, who personally handed Adolf Hitler the cash to finance the Beer Hall Putsch. Why? He was the exclusive New York banker for Thyssen-Krupp, the arms manufacturer of Germany, and there was profit to be made as a Nazi agent. The American invasion of Iraq as an instrumentalization of the 911 terror attack in imperial conquest and dominion and the centralization of power to a carceral state with the counterinsurgency model of policing becomes horrifically clear in its design when considered as a seizure of power by multigenerational Nazi ideologists of the Fourth Reich.
When President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned us to beware of the military-industrial complex in his 1961 farewell address, he diagnosed the cause of our enslavement by wealth and power, and a primary subversive threat to democracy.
To the horror of war, as to fascism, there can be but one reply; Never Again.
In the words of Cal Winslow writing in Jacobin; “Guernica represented the first instance of a new kind of war. The Blitz followed it, then Dresden and the firebombing of Tokyo. Then Hiroshima. The “saturation” bombing of Vietnam — a nation virtually defenseless from the air — left millions dead. Now we have watched Fallujah and Aleppo and Mosul, while today the United States bombs seven countries simultaneously: Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, and Libya.
And so Guernica remains, alas, timely, timeless, universal. A decade ago, T. J. Clark concluded his magisterial Picasso and Truth with this tribute to Picasso’s “astounding feat”:
Life, says the painting [Guernica], is an ordinary, carnal, entirely unnegotiable value. It is what humans and animals share. There is a time of life, which we inhabit unthinkingly, but also a time of death: the two may be incommensurable, but humans especially — from the evidence of Paleolithic burials it seems a human defining trait — structure their lives, imaginatively, in relation to death. They try to live with death — to keep death present, like the ancestors whose bones they exhume and re-enter.
But certain kinds of death break that human contract. And this is one of them, says Guernica. Life should not end the way it does here. Some kinds of death, to put it another way, have nothing to do with the human as Picasso conceives it — they possess no form as they take place, they come from nowhere, time never touches them, they do not even have the look of doom. They are a special obscenity, and that obscenity, it turns out, has been a central experience for seventy years.”
26 de abril de 2026 Guernica: el horror de la guerra
En este día recordamos el aniversario de la destrucción de Guernica en 1937 por los nazis, vívidamente conmemorado por Picasso como testigo de la historia, y situado en el contexto especial de la Resistencia española, y de los valores humanistas de la Ilustración y los Derechos. del Hombre que la atrocidad violó, pero también un testamento universal, un lamento y un grito de desafío contra el horror de la guerra.
Los horrores de la aniquilación nazi de la civilización de Europa se recapitulan hoy en la destrucción de Ucrania por Rusia y de Palestina por Israel, con Mariupol y Gaza ecos y reflejos de Guernica, como sucederá siempre que olvidemos las lecciones de nuestra historia y están condenados a repetirlo.
Cuando fundé las Brigadas Abraham Lincoln de Ucrania y Palestina con mis compañeros voluntarios estadounidenses en la lucha por la liberación, no fue sólo para recordar a las gloriosas Brigadas Internacionales de la Guerra Civil Española como nuestros verdaderos antepasados, sino también para reconocer que tanto la Rusia de Putin como la de Netanyahu Israel ha modelado sus guerras obscenas y criminales de conquista y dominio imperial sobre Guernica y la idea de Guerra Total desarrollada en la Guerra Civil Española por los regímenes fascistas de Hitler y Franco; y que debemos responderles como Resistencia y por todos los medios necesarios.
Toda Resistencia es guerra al cuchillo.
El mal nunca duerme, ni tampoco debe hacerlo nuestra vigilancia para protegernos unos a otros.
La guerra es un mal que nace de muchas cosas, incluido el miedo y la deshumanización de los demás, y de la patología de la desconexión y la falta de empatía. También es un instrumento de gobierno y autoridad que existe porque es enormemente rentable para quienes están en el poder.
La fortuna familiar de la dinastía Bush fue hecha por el abuelo del primer presidente Bush, quien personalmente entregó a Adolf Hitler el dinero en efectivo para financiar el golpe de estado de la cervecería. ¿Por qué? Era el banquero exclusivo en Nueva York de Thyssen-Krupp, el fabricante de armas de Alemania, y como agente nazi se podían obtener beneficios. La invasión estadounidense de Irak como una instrumentalización del ataque terrorista del 11 de septiembre en la conquista y el dominio imperial y la centralización del poder en un estado carcelario con el modelo policial contrainsurgente se vuelve terriblemente clara en su diseño cuando se la considera una toma del poder por parte de los ideólogos nazis multigeneracionales. del Cuarto Reich.
Cuando el presidente Dwight D. Eisenhower nos advirtió que tuviéramos cuidado con el complejo militar-industrial en su discurso de despedida de 1961, diagnosticó la causa de nuestra esclavitud por la riqueza y el poder, y una principal amenaza subversiva a la democracia.
Al horror de la guerra, como al fascismo, sólo puede haber una respuesta; Nunca más.
We mourn a hero in the death of Virginia Giuffre, and it is important that she be remembered not as a victim defined by her abuser, but as a hero whose witness of history was a seizure of power which liberated others, at great cost as is often true for those who choose to bear burdens for us all.
It is important, if we are to remain human, not to look away from evil; most especially when people have died to reveal the rot beneath the illusions which hold us all captive.
My flesh is a map of private holocausts written in horrors and atrocities which define the limits of the human and which I hope you cannot imagine, but there is nothing unique, special, or remarkable in this; in fact our suffering is the common condition of humankind, one which should bind us together in solidarity, interdependence, and universal principles of human being, meaning, and value rather than drive us apart as is so often the case, especially when fear is weaponized in service to power by authority.
Let us celebrate the defiance of authority and refusal to submit in the face of impossible odds and overwhelming force of Virginia Giuffre, whose glorious triumph over a monster and tyrant of patriarchal systems of oppression, commodification, and dehumanization will hold open a door of liberation struggle for so long as we remember.
Remember, and bring a Reckoning.
As written by Sammy Gecsoyler in The Guardian, in an article entitled Virginia Giuffre hailed as ‘fierce warrior’ for women, who ‘gave voice to the silenced’; “Virginia Giuffre has been hailed as an unflinching campaigner for survivors of sexual abuse, who took on the wealthy and the powerful during the course of her life.
“Virginia was a fierce warrior in the fight against sexual abuse and sex trafficking. She was the light that lifted so many survivors,” her family said in a statement confirming her death.
Her relentless pursuit of justice for what she claimed were the crimes committed against her by the billionaire financier and convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein made her a public figure in her own right.
The allegations she made against Prince Andrew set in train a legal battle that culminated in an out-of-court settlement in which the royal admitted no wrongdoing.
Andrew maintains his innocence, but the reputational damage brought on by the case – and the disastrous PR campaign he waged to cast doubt over Giuffre’s story – saw him step back from frontline duties with his image in tatters.
In 2000, when she was 17-years-old, Giuffre met the British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell while working as a locker-room assistant at Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida. Maxwell then offered her a job as massage therapist to Epstein.
Giuffre alleged that after taking the role she was trafficked to the financier’s friends and clients and “passed around like a platter of fruit”. Among them, she claimed, was Prince Andrew.
It was in March 2011 that Giuffre went on the record about the alleged horrors she faced, and claimed that she had met Andrew on three occasions in 2001.
In the Mail on Sunday, she recounted her first alleged meeting with Andrew during a six-week trip to Europe and North Africa when she was still 17. Giuffre said she flew to London with Epstein, who then took her to Maxwell’s house.
She said that she, Epstein and Maxwell all stayed in the house overnight, and when Maxwell woke her up in the morning, she told Giuffre: “We’ve got to go shopping. You need a dress as you’re going to dance with a prince tonight.”
She alleged Andrew arrived at Maxwell’s home before they went out for dinner and visited Tramp nightclub where, Giuffre claimed, she danced with Andrew.
Later that evening, Giuffre said they all returned to Maxwell’s home where a now infamous photograph of Giuffre, Andrew and Maxwell was taken.
She recounted two further meetings with Andrew: one in New York, and one on Epstein’s private island in the US Virgin Islands, by which time she was 18. At this point, claims of sexual contact with Andrew were not made public.
In 2014, Giuffre made a court filing in Florida claiming that she was made to have sex with Andrew. A year later, a judge decided that her allegations about the prince were “immaterial and impertinent” to a defamation claim against Maxwell and ordered them struck out.
In 2019, after Epstein’s arrest and death in jail, Giuffre gave her first television interview to NBC News, where she claimed she was “trafficked to that prince”.
Later that year, after mounting public outcry, Andrew granted the BBC’s Newsnight programme an extraordinary interview that was widely seen as an embarrassment for the duke.
Speaking to Emily Maitlis, Andrew said it was not possible for him to have been at Maxwell’s property in London on the night in question in 2001. Instead, he said he was at home after attending a children’s party at Pizza Express in Woking.
He denied claims during the interview that he slept with Giuffre three times, saying: “I can absolutely, categorically tell you it never happened. I have no recollection of ever meeting this lady, none whatsoever.”
The disastrous reception to the interview prompted Andrew to “step back from public duties for the foreseeable future”.
In 2021, Giuffre sued Andrew in a New York court, accusing him of sexually abusing her at Epstein’s mansion in Manhattan and at other locations in 2001 when she was under the age of 18. The duke settled the case for an undisclosed sum in 2022.
A month before he settled the case, Andrew was stripped of his military roles and use of the title His Royal Highness. The eventual settlement did not include an admission of wrongdoing from the duke, and he has continued to deny the allegations against him.
Time has done little to repair Andrew’s public image. Last week, a rare public appearance at the royal family’s Easter Sunday service with King Charles sparked a fresh round of negative headlines.
Giuffre’s death has not only drawn tributes, but also expressions of sorrow over the circumstances. Last month, she announced on social media that she had days to live after being involved in a bus crash. The story was later clarified by Giuffre and those around her.
On Saturday, her family said she taken her own life at her farm in Western Australia.
Charlotte Proudman, a barrister and women’s rights campaigner, said on X: “Virginia Giuffre survived sex trafficking, fought for justice for over a decade, and gave voice to the silenced.
“She donated part of her $12m settlement to other victims. She has now taken her own life. The fight cost her everything. Never forget what this system does to women.”
As written by Tony Pentimalli on his FB and Bluesky pages in an essay entitled The Death of Virginia Giuffre: A Brutal Indictment of Power, Silence, and Cowardice; “Virginia Giuffre is dead. At 41, she ended her own life on a quiet farm in Neergabby, Western Australia, far from the glittering palaces and marble courtrooms where her abusers moved with impunity. Her death is not an isolated tragedy; it is the damning, predictable result of a world that punishes the wounded and worships the powerful.
She was trafficked as a teenager by Jeffrey Epstein, a man whose crimes were not secret — they were systemic, enabled, and indulged by presidents, princes, and billionaires. Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, Prince Andrew — men who orbited Epstein’s grotesque empire, whether through personal association, flights on his private jet, or appearances at his infamous gatherings. She was groomed by Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s chief recruiter, who was finally convicted decades too late. And she was forced into the company of Prince Andrew, a man so insulated by birth and wealth that even the stench of scandal could not penetrate his title.
Virginia named her abusers. She stood alone against a machine designed to protect them. And for that, she was dragged through the mud of public skepticism, media character assassination, and institutional cowardice. Tabloids like The Daily Mail and The Sun gleefully published character assassinations. American outlets — desperate for access to palace insiders — questioned her motives, her credibility, her worth.
Prince Andrew’s settlement with her in 2022 — for an undisclosed but undoubtedly massive sum — was not an admission of guilt, the lawyers insisted. But anyone with a shred of humanity understood what it was: an expensive non-apology, a desperate attempt to make the problem go away without ever facing the rot at the heart of the monarchy.
Epstein died under suspicious circumstances in a jail cell. Ghislaine Maxwell was arrested years later, her trial sanitized to avoid naming too many powerful names. Prince Andrew, stripped of some royal titles, still walks free, his reputation only slightly tarnished, his privileges largely intact. Justice has never been blind. For men like these, it has been their servant.
And Epstein’s “network”? It was vast — a sprawling ledger of politicians, academics, media moguls, financiers, and celebrities. His “little black book” was not a social curiosity; it was a map of systemic rot. Virginia Giuffre was not fighting a man. She was fighting an empire that spanned continents, governments, and industries.
Meanwhile, Virginia carried on. She founded SOAR (Speak Out, Act, Reclaim), dedicating herself to helping other survivors find their voices. She lived with the weight of trauma no settlement could erase. She tried to rebuild her life, even as the world that failed her every step of the way continued to heap burdens on her shoulders.
In her final months, she faced health struggles, a separation from her husband, and legal battles that sapped her spirit. Even then, few stopped to ask how many wounds a person can endure before they collapse under the strain.
Her death is not simply a suicide. It is an indictment.
It indicts the American justice system that let Epstein cut a plea deal in 2008 — a deal secretly negotiated behind closed doors by then-prosecutor Alexander Acosta, who would later be rewarded with a cabinet position. It indicts the British monarchy, which circled its wagons around Prince Andrew rather than acknowledging the suffering of a trafficked child. It indicts every media outlet that gleefully published sneering profiles of Virginia while tiptoeing around the crimes of the rich and powerful.
It indicts us.
Because we live in a world where victims must fight to be heard, where survival is seen as suspect, and where the burden of proof rests not on the predator, but on the prey.
And even after Epstein’s death, even after the fleeting outrage, what changed? How many more powerful men faced real consequences? How many institutions were dismantled? How quickly we moved on — congratulating ourselves for “raising awareness” while the machinery of exploitation quietly resumed its operation.
Virginia Giuffre’s death demands more than grief. It demands rage. It demands action.
We must name and shame the enablers. We must tear down the institutions that protected predators. We must refuse to consume media that smears survivors and shields abusers. We must strip titles, revoke honors, dismantle the myths of “great men” who built their power on the backs of the vulnerable.
If we mourn Virginia but change nothing, then her death was not just a tragedy — it was a sacrifice made on the altar of our own cowardice.
Virginia Giuffre is not a footnote. She is a mirror. Look into it. See the world that broke her. And if you have any conscience left, honor her by fighting like hell to build a world where no one else is broken like she was.”
As I wrote in my post of January 5 2024, Exposing Authority: Case of the Epstein Blackmail Files; Secret power is among the most terrible of all forms of unequal power, for it silences the witness of history by the powerless because they will not be believed. This is the true test of democracy and equality in any society; who has authority to bear witness?
And now a Pandora’s Box of evils and the hungry ghosts of the silenced and erased return to give us warning; a monster who defines the limits of the human has been exposed and his head mounted on our wall, but the systems of unequal power as Patriarchy and sexual terror of which he was a figure and apex predator remain to be deconstructed and transformed, and until that day of liberation we must unite in seizures of power and revolutionary struggle.
The first benefit of an open society is the right to be heard. Without this and other rights of freedom of information, there is no freedom for anyone, for we are all captives of power and authority.
This is the true crime of Epstein and of all such monsters; theft of the soul.
If we consider the principle that Silence Is Complicity together with its interdependent forces of falsification as kinds of unequal power, which include denial by forces of repression of the sacred calling to pursue the truth, of the right of witness as autonomy, of the Four Primary Duties of a Citizen to Question, Expose, Mock, and Challenge Authority, and of the dangers of division and the modern pathology of disconnectedness in isolating dissent, we see that regardless of the enormity and atrocities of gender unequality itself, it is part of a larger system of dehumanization by elite hegemonies of wealth, power, and privilege.
Herein we wander lost in a Wilderness of Mirrors; a phrase from T.S. Eliot’s Gerontin, which I use to describe the pathology of falsification of ourselves through propaganda, lies and illusions, rewritten histories, state secrets, alternate realities, authoritarian faith which devours truths. This I contrast with its opposite, journalism and the witness of history as the sacred quest to pursue the truth. We are made counterfeits of ourselves by systems of elite hegemonic power such as patriarchy, and by those who would enslave us, through capture of our stories as theft of the soul.
James Angleton, evil genius of the C.I.A.’s Counterintelligence Service on whom John Le Carre based his character of George Smiley, infamously used the phrase in this sense as well, and it has become universalized throughout the intelligence community he shaped and influenced during the Second World War and its aftermath the Cold War. Writing in reference to David Martin’s biography of himself entitled Wilderness of Mirrors, Angleton described it as a “myriad of stratagems, deceptions, artifices, and all the other devices of disinformation which the Soviet bloc and its coordinated intelligence services use to confuse and split the West … an ever fluid landscape where fact and illusion merge.” And of course, everything he ascribed to the Soviets was also true of himself, his own agency, and America as well, and of all states, for all are houses of illusion.
How does this help us understand the horrors, violence, and sexual terror of the Epstein Blackmail Files as examples of systemic oppression?
Secret power; secrets which can destroy a target or win leverage over him as a strategy of power, and which can be manufactured from trivial or spurious sources; Epstein used simple association with and compromise of the wealthy and powerful to create enormous wealth and power for himself. In this he was not simply the crime lord of a human trafficking syndicate, like his buddy Traitor Trump’s modeling agency-beauty pageant organized crime network, which both exploited teenage girls, but also had the services of Ghislaine Maxwell who succeeded her father in masterminding honeytrap operations for the KGB and Mossad among other customers. Epstein was a blackmailer who modeled his business on intelligence services, and this made him a very special kind of monster, a pedophile and sadist who had refined sexual terror to a science.
And all of that wealth and power, stolen from the lives of impoverished and vulnerable young girls, reveals to us the inherent unequal power of the system he typified; falsification in service to power and the patriarchal subjugation of women.
As I wrote in my post of September 6 2019, #metoo: the Crimes of Secret Power Require Broad and Systemic Collusion; Three interesting events which provide motivating and informing sources for the #metoo cultural and social transformation which is reshaping our civilization and ourselves are happening at about the same time; the start of a series of podcasts investigating the Jeffrey Epstein case, the release of Margaret Atwood’s new novel The Testaments, sequel to her visionary classic The Handmaid’s Tale, and the publication of a memoir by Chanel Miller, whose victim impact statement, read out in Congress and in a 60 minutes interview which will be broadcast on the 22nd of this month, was among the initial testimonies that broke the silence of sexual terror and opened the door for others to seek justice.
Power asymmetry alone cannot account for the regime of sexual terror which has enabled the patriarchy to hold a hegemony of power and privilege for most of human history; for this we must look to the inversion of moral values perpetrated by traditional religion as a tool of control. Shame, shunning, and the force of authorized public will, of the social ownership of identities of sex and gender; we have never really left the world of Hawthorne’s Scarlet Letter.
Secrecy is the key precondition of abuse of power, and the crimes of secret power require broad and systemic collusion. This is especially true of sexual violence against women, which is only a crime under the rules of Patriarchy when it trespasses another man’s power of control, ownership, and territory, and is otherwise regarded as a means of control which maintains existing hierarchies of power. It is among a class of crimes which exist only when the values context of our social system is abrogated and at risk; and its meaning can change with shifting contexts from diversionary illusion to lynch mob rallying cry with serpentine swiftness. As with so many inequalities, the truth will set us free.
Set us free; I imagine we can spend a lot of time parsing that phrase. By the term us I do include both men and women, for the equality of relationships liberates both masters and slaves- and we must be clear that this is precisely the social order which the Patriarchy authorizes and maintains- from their former categories of being. Democracy requires equality of its citizens; how else can we function as co-owners of our government than as a free society of equals? How can we be free in our personal lives to forge authentic relationships if we do not possess the autonomy to choose our own identity and be whatever we discover to be our own best selves?
Men have been changed into swine not by the spell of Circe, whose magic revealed truths, but by the same disfigurement of the soul which has caught and dehumanized women; it is the system as social force and structural inequality which has robbed us of our humanity, and must be resisted. We are beasts, we humans, but we need not remain wholly so.
And herein lies the special magic and liberation of #metoo as a seizure of power; it confers the casting aside of masks others have made for us, and the claiming of those we choose for ourselves.
#metoo is a global coming out party for humankind.
As I wrote of the feminine reverse face of this issue, the dynamics of unequal power as Patriarchy, in my post of January 3 2022, Patriarchy and Sexual Terror: Case of the Ghislaine Maxwell Trial; Patriarchy and sexual terror are about power as expressed in the most atavistic way as subjugation and dehumanization of others; the power to turn people into things you can use. Patriarchy is about the theft of the soul.
Like the freaks in a carnival show, monsters define the limits of the human and help us establish normality and the tyranny of other people’s ideas of virtue. But this othering also grants immunity and permission as well as vilification and dehumanization of that which is different, for it allows us to ignore systemic evils and inequalities through constructions of personal responsibility derived from the doctrine of original sin and its basis in law as the innate depravity of man; here be monsters, not ourselves.
In the case of Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, serial predators whose crimes against humanity defy comprehension in the way that the Holocaust does as intrusive forces and atrocities beyond our frames of reference, the astounding scale and baroque abominations and perversions of their crimes offered concealment even as they were performed before a global audience of the wealthy and famous due to their manipulation of elite privilege and making their peers complicit as a strategy of blackmail.
This is how fascism operates, and its components patriarchy and racism; by making those who could bring them to justice complicit in their crimes. As Peter Carey said in regard to his novel A Long Way From Home; “You can’t be a white Australian writer and spend your whole life ignoring the greatest, most important aspect of our history, and that is that we – I – have been the beneficiaries of a genocide.”
If we are to challenge and bring a reckoning to patriarchy as systemic unequal power and as sexual terror, we must avoid othering its agents and perpetrators, for this enables the restoration not of balance but of our comfort with our own privilege.
There is a line spoken by the villain in the series The Magicians, a survivor of childhood abuse and tyrant known as The Beast for his horrific crimes, once the powerless and terrified boy Martin Chatwin and now a monstrous god; “You know, when I was a boy, a man who was meant to care for me bent me over his desk and had me over and over every time I was alone with him. It helps me understand a truth. You’re powerful or you’re weak. “
Here is the original lie of the tyrant and the fascist in the apologetics and self-justification of power; the lie that only power has meaning, that there is no good or evil. How we use power is of equal importance as who holds it. Fear and force are a primary means of human exchange, but not the only means; love, membership, and belonging are as important.
It’s a line which captures perfectly the inherent contradictions of the Wagnerian Ring of fear, power, and force as an origin of evil; for the use of social force is subversive of its own values. Yet the imposed conditions of revolutionary struggle often require violence, and until the gods of law and order have been cast down from their thrones I must agree with the famous dictum of Sartre in his 1948 play Dirty Hands, quoted by Frantz Fanon in his 1960 speech Why We Use Violence, and made immortal by Malcolm X; “by any means necessary.”
As written by Walter Rodney in The Groundings with my Brothers; “We were told that violence in itself is evil, and that, whatever the cause, it is unjustified morally. By what standard of morality can the violence used by a slave to break his chains be considered the same as the violence of a slave master? By what standards can we equate the violence of blacks who have been oppressed, suppressed, depressed and repressed for four centuries with the violence of white fascists. Violence aimed at the recovery of human dignity and at equality cannot be judged by the same yardstick as violence aimed at maintenance of discrimination and oppression.”
And here is the passage he references from Leon Trotsky in Their Morals and Ours: The Class Foundations of Moral Practice; “A slave-owner who through cunning and violence shackles a slave in chains, and a slave who through cunning or violence breaks the chains – let not the contemptible eunuchs tell us that they are equals before a court of morality!”
Yet in reflection I think of those great figures who have been both heroes of liberation and villains of tyranny; Napoleon, Washington, Stalin, Mao, the list is a near endless litany of woes and failures of vision wherein Brave New Worlds became hells and carceral states. In evidence I offer the Soviet Union, the Chinese Communist Party, the American and Napoleonic Empires, and above all the state of Israel, a dream of refuge forged in the terror of the Holocaust whose victims learned the wrong lessons from the Nazis and assumed their role in the Occupation of Palestine. The dangers of Idealism are very real, as Thomas Mann taught us in Death in Venice and Vladimir Nabokov in his reimagination of it as Lolita; but so are the dangers of submission to authority and the complicity of silence in the face of evil.
I am a hunter of fascists, and mine is a hunter’s morality. For me there is a simple test for the use of force; who holds power?
All those who hunt monsters must remember always Nietzsche’s warning in Beyond Good and Evil; “He who fights monsters should be careful lest he thereby become a monster. And if thou gaze long into an abyss, the abyss gazes back into thee.”
The other two hundred fifty or so criminals of the Epstein trafficking syndicate have thus far escaped a Reckoning, including Epstein’s buddy Trump and his blackmail target Prince Andrew, one which may never come at least through legal channels as the machine of unequal power, systems of oppression, and elite hegemonies of wealth, power, and privilege protects itself, and for this too we must bring a Reckoning and seizures of power which levels all classes and universalizes our human rights. Patriarchy is most profoundly un-American.
The trials of Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, like those of their fellow sexual terrorists Harvey Weinstein and Larry Nassar, are seizures of power as revolutionary struggle in which the victims refusal to be silenced has triumphed over the immunity of hegemonic elite wealth, power, and privilege; the Scarlet Letter has no power to shame women into submission through victim blaming in our society any longer, for in refusing to be silenced these courageous women have seized it as an instrument with which to dismantle the Patriarchy.
Force is brutal, terrible, but also fragile, for it fails at the point of defiance and disobedience. Enacting the role of the Jester of King Lear and the girl who cried “The king has no clothes”, parrhesia or what Foucault called truth telling, the witnesses of these iconic trials and of the historic turning of the tides of the #metoo movement have shown us all how to wage liberation and revolutionary struggle.
As Max Stirner wrote; “Freedom cannot be granted; it must be seized.”
As I wrote in my post of July 21 2020, How Patriarchy Works: Unequal Power, Identities of Sex and Gender, Autonomy Versus Authorization, Complicity and Responsibility, and the Social Use of Force; Here I began thinking about the murder of Vanessa Guillen, toxic masculinity and violence, and the military as an atavism of rape culture in tidy categories of Hegelian-Marxist history and the dialectics of revolutionary struggle, when I quickly realized that patriarchy is a spectrum disease which corrupts and subverts its victims and its perpetrators alike, and this is its true terror.
At the intersection of power asymmetries and identities of sex and gender lie issues of authorization versus autonomy, with crucial consequences for complicity and responsibility in our legal system which arbitrates the social use of force.
In her now classic work Ring of Power, Jean Shinoda Bolen interprets Wagner’s great opera in terms of patriarchal forces which dehumanize us because they cripple and steal our capacity to love. Of particular interest here is the figure of Brunhild as Daddy’s Avenger and victim of internalized oppression.
So I looked again, but this time not at the primary struggle for power and ownership between male perpetrator and female victim, but at two female monsters who are parallel figures as enablers and accomplices of sexual terror, Melania Trump and Ghislaine Maxwell.
Moreover they are characters embedded in fairytale narratives with which we are all familiar; the etiology of their disfigurement and monstrosity lies in the malign effects of inequality as a moral debasement and leprosy of the soul. For the study of such things I return to Margaret Atwood’s masterpiece Cat’s Eye, her novels Interlunar and Life Before Man, to the thematic companion volumes The Handmaid’s Tale and The Edible Woman, and to the foundational critical work by Sharon Rose Wilson, The Fairytale Sexual Politics of Margaret Atwood.
A study of Margaret Atwood is illuminating and instrumental to understanding the elements of patriarchy and the operations of its systems, especially in the context of female on female violence in secondary order power relations. Allow me to elaborate.
Cat’s Eye presents a narrator, Elaine Risley, who is a trapped Rapunzel in a world of ghosts, witches, cruel stepsisters, vanishing princes, and a merciful fairy godmother. The story draws ideas mainly from Anderson’s Snow Queen and Grimm’s Rapunzel, secondarily from Anderson’s Ice Maiden and Grimm’s Girl Without Hands.
Fearful door images echo Grimm’s Fitcher’s Bird; Risley’s dreams and visions are filled with images from medieval art, paintings of the Annunciation, Ascension, and the Virgin. The Hobgoblin’s fragmented mirror in The Snow Queen provides a metaphor of Atwood’s vision; mirrors, cameras, things that reflect but also capture and distort.
Of her characters, Cordelia from Shakespeare’s King Lear is among her finest; Mrs. Sneath is a cannibal goddess who resembles Baba Yaga and is linked to the figure of cat-headed Maat in this story.
Thematically Cat’s Eye is an investigation of the Rapunzel Syndrome; the wicked witch who imprisons her, the tower she is trapped in, a rescuer. Margaret Atwood’s driving conflicts are female-female, though her plots foreground sexual power and its political reflections.
Life Before Man offers The Wizard of Oz, The Nutcracker ballet, Anderson’s Snow Queen, a host of tales from Grimm including The Girl Without Hands, Rapunzel, Cinderella, Little Red Cap, Fitcher’s Bird, and The Robber Bridegroom. Secondary intertexts include Wilde’s Salome, Dante’s Inferno, Ovid’s Metamorphosis, Coleridge’s Kublai Khan, Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland, Irving’s Sleepy Hollow, and Mother Goose rhymes, mainly Little Miss Muffet. It’s a sort of Grand Tour of our civilization and the history of our private inner space and the disastrous and grotesque ways we collide with each other. Also, wonderful and illuminating reading.
Interlunar reimagines Cocteau’s Orphee, the ballet Giselle, both the Grimm and Anne Sexton version of The White Snake, and the paintings of Hieronymus Bosch. Motifs include death, pestilence, filth, eating, power, the journey, healing, hands, blindness and vision. Themes of guilt and shame, love, destruction, sacredness, creation, fertility, and metamorphosis are to be found in this richly imagined novel.
The Edible Woman is a linked text with The Handmaid’s Tale; do read both together. Herein the main embedded stories are Hansel & Gretel, The Gingerbread Boy, Goldilocks, Alice in Wonderland, Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, and Rapunzel, and her protagonist Marion plays all of these roles as well as those of Little Red Cap, the Robber Bride, and Fitcher’s bride.
The Handmaid’s Tale gives a voice to Bilhah, the Biblical Handmaid, revisions Little Red Riding Hood as an extension of Angela Carter’s The Company of Wolves, and tells the story of the Christian disempowerment of the Goddess as presented in the great film The Red Shoes.
Margaret Atwood’s parodies of Grimm operate on three levels; thematic, images and motifs, and narrative structure. In The Handmaid’s Tale, we have themes of family and especially female-female conflict, gender and sexual power asymmetries, and the initiation and heroic journey. Motifs and images include dismemberment, cannibalism, fertility, labyrinths and paths, and all manner of disturbing sexual violence. Plot devices include a variety of character foils, doppelgangers, disguises and trickery of stolen and falsified identity.
Among Margaret Atwood’s Great Books, The Handmaid’s Tale is a universally known reference both because it has been taught for over a generation in every high school in America as a standard text and because of the extraordinary television series, arguably the most important series ever filmed. We teach it for the same reasons the show is popular; a visceral and gripping drama with unforgettable characters, a mesmerizing plot, and an immediate and accessible story which empowers and illuminates.
It depicts the brooding evil and vicious misogyny of Christianity and Fascism as two sides of the dynamic malaise of patriarchy and authority, as drawn directly from Arthur Miller’s The Crucible and Hawthorne’s Scarlet Letter, but also from contemporary culture as it contains satires of identifiable public figures, organizations, and events. Serena is based on Phyllis Schlafly, and Gideon is the nation of Pat Robertson and the fundamentalists who seized control of the Republican Party around the time of the novel’s writing; Margaret Atwood’s motive in part was to sound an alarm at the dawn of the Fourth Reich and its threat to global democracy.
It remains to be seen whether the forces of tyranny or of liberty will prevail in the end. Each of our lives is a contest between these forces, our private struggles reflected in the society and human civilization we share.
And this is the great lesson and insight of Margaret Atwood; each of us is both a Handmaid and a Serena, trapped within the skin of the other. She locates the primary conflict within ourselves, and transposes the Jungian conflict between Anima and Animus with that of the Shadow in terms of sex, gender, and power.
So we return to our Brunhilds and twin monsters Melania Trump and Ghislaine Maxwell, who Janus-faced represent corruption and perversion, the dual spheres of action of feminine power turned against itself by the forces of patriarchy and shaped to the uses of predation and misogyny.
Melania’s message on the coat she wore to tour a migrant concentration camp, “I really don’t care. Do U?’ and Ghislaine’s self-description in Vanity Fair, “‘I do it the way Nazis did it with the Jews,” reflect the disease of power in its political and sexual contexts, and as a First Cause of both racist hate crimes and crimes of sexual terror. Unequal power is a precondition of them both.
And these are direct quotes from enablers and accomplices of crimes against humanity which define the limits of the human, and who are not marginal figures whose malign violations of our values and dehumanization of others occurred in a trailer park brothel or secret sweatshop of slave labor but at the pinnacle of our society’s ruling class. Their existence is an indictment of the flaws of our nation and of our civilization, and a measure of the distance we have yet to travel in the realization of a true free society of equals.
As Margaret Atwood said in her 2015 lecture to West Point cadets; “Nothing makes me more nervous than people who say, ‘It can’t happen here.’ Anything can happen anywhere, given the right circumstances.”
As written by Jonathan Freedland in his article in The Guardian entitled, The Ghislaine Maxwell case raises a question some may think naive: why?; “The Ghislaine Maxwell case raises so many questions, and yet scarcely discussed is the one that perhaps matters most. Naturally, there’s huge interest in whether Maxwell, convicted this week of recruiting and grooming teenage girls for sex with her one-time boyfriend Jeffrey Epstein, will seek to reduce her sentence by naming names – opening up the pair’s notorious little black book and telling prosecutors who else among the rich and powerful abused the vulnerable minors Maxwell trafficked for sex.
In Britain, much of that interest focuses on Epstein’s longtime pal, Prince Andrew, who was so close to the couple he invited them on visits to Balmoral, Sandringham and Windsor: it’s lucky the prince doesn’t sweat, because if he did, he might be drenched now. So far he has refused to answer US investigators’ questions – not for his own sake, you understand, but according to multiple reports, to save the Queen from embarrassment. Because a 61-year-old man hiding behind his 95-year-old mother would not be in the least bit mortifying.
There are other questions, such as: how many others enabled the travelling child abuse ring that Epstein and Maxwell operated, turning a blind eye to what was surely obvious? Or: when else would the BBC respond to the conviction of a child sex offender by interviewing a brother of the offender who refused to accept the verdict of the court? And how come that Today programme interview with Ian Maxwell came so soon after the BBC had given a platform to one of Epstein’s lawyers, presenting him as if he were merely a neutral expert?
All those questions matter, and yet the one that preys on my mind is more timeless. It’s the question that arises in all such cases of human cruelty yet which one hesitates to ask, lest the inquiry seem naive: why?
The coverage of Maxwell has probed that a bit, suggesting for example that Ghislaine Maxwell was conditioned, as the daughter of the publishing magnate Robert Maxwell, to cater to the whims of a monstrous man, and simply transferred her allegiance, and her service, from one monster to another. Growing up surrounded by wealth and power, where the deference of officialdom was taken for granted, would have had its effect too. Ghislaine Maxwell may well have assumed that people like her and Epstein were granted a special kind of impunity, that they could break the laws that restrained the appetites of lesser mortals, because for most of her life that had indeed been the case.
And yet, both those answers are unsatisfying as explanations. There are plenty of abusers who did not grow up with either a Maxwell-style father or Maxwell-level wealth and, conversely, there are people whose upbringings were comparable to Ghislaine Maxwell’s but who did not go on to commit terrible crimes.
So the why question lingers, just as it did in sharper and more horrific form at least twice in the last month alone. December 2021 began with convictions for the father and stepmother of Arthur Labinjo-Hughes in a case so appalling, I confess at the time I could barely read accounts of it. The six-year-old was subjected to a regime of sustained torture which was, incredibly, filmed by those who inflicted it. The little boy was made to stand in isolation for up to 14 hours at a time, without anything to eat or drink. He was beaten. To punish him, his father took the football shirts he loved and cut them to shreds in front of him. Perhaps most unbearable of all, the jury was shown footage of a weak and frail Arthur shortly before his death saying: “No one loves me. No one is going to feed me.”
When the man and woman guilty of destroying Arthur’s brief life were found guilty, there was revulsion, of course – and on Friday their sentences were referred to the court of appeal for being too lenient – but the public conversation moved without pause for breath to the policy implications. There was intense debate about the state of children’s services, about the damage done by austerity, about target-driven culture, about the recruitment and retention of social workers and so on. But what was missing was a much less sophisticated question. Why would two people do such terrible things to a defenceless child? How could a father cause such pain to his own flesh and blood?
There was a similar reflex 11 days later, following the verdicts in the equally soul-draining case of Star Hobson, a child, a baby really, who died at just 16 months, having been punched to death by her mother’s partner as her mother did nothing to save her. Once again, the pair filmed their months of cruelty against the little girl, apparently finding the videos amusing enough to send to friends. And yet the immediate talk was not of how two people could do such a thing, but of a local “child safeguarding practice review” and whether control of children’s services should belong with the local council or the Department for Education.
I understand the impulse to concentrate on these institutional, bureaucratic issues. The assumption is that there will always be people capable of horrendous brutality, that that fact will never change, and so the sensible focus of our attention should be on prevention. I get that. And yet the sheer speed with which we move to technocratic answers, barely even asking the harder human questions, begins to look like displacement activity. It’s as if we can’t bring ourselves to contemplate the puzzle of what humans are capable of, because we have no idea what we’d say.
Earlier, God-fearing generations did not find this so difficult. Nor do those who still have traditional faith. They have recourse to a vocabulary that includes the notion of evil and wickedness and that allows them to talk about it. But those words don’t trip so easily off the secular tongue.
Instead, we look for explanations in psychology or economics, assuming, to adapt Stephen Sondheim’s lyric, that if people are depraved it’s because they’re deprived, whether of love or money. That view persists. There was an echo of it in the closing argument from Maxwell’s defence lawyer, when she asked “why an Oxford-educated, proper English woman would suddenly agree to facilitate sex abuse of minors”. Only the poor or poorly educated behave badly.
We can see the flaw in such reasoning, even before you get to the insult it delivers to all those who endured great privation, emotional or material, without becoming abusers. And yet, the absence of easy answers does not give us a licence to stop asking hard questions. We need to be able to stare wicked acts and evil deeds in the face, rather than to comfort ourselves that they exist solely as functions of failed systems, errors that could be eliminated given the right policy tweak.
This need not be a bleak endeavour. I think of Julie K Brown, the Miami Herald reporter without whose fearless pursuit of Epstein’s crimes this week’s reckoning might never have come. I think of the courage of the victims, who kept up the fight for justice at great cost. Unfathomable evil is part of the human story, but so too is unimaginable good.”
Here is a short list of named Epstein associates, co-conspirators, and criminals complicit in sexual terror and pedophile trafficking among some 250 now unsealed from court records, with people involved in the case as trafficked persons, witnesses, investigators, doctors, lawyers, and reporters:
Source One
Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s former girlfriend, convicted in 2021 of sex trafficking in connection to Epstein’s activities
Prince Andrew, Duke of York, second son of Queen Elizabeth II of Great Britain. Brother of King Charles III
Bill Clinton, former US president
Donald Trump, businessman and former US president
Hillary Clinton, former first lady to Bill Clinton, US secretary of state under Barack Obama, and US presidential candidate
David Copperfield, American stage magician
John Connelly, New York police detective turned investigative journalist who investigated Epstein
Alan Dershowitz, prolific lawyer and media pundit who represented Epstein in 2006
Leonardo DiCaprio, actor and film producer famous for his roles in Titanic and Inception
Al Gore, former US vice president under Bill Clinton
Richard Branson, British billionaire and business magnate, founder of the Virgin Group
Stephen Hawking, British physicist and science author
Ehud Barak, former Israeli prime minister
Michael Jackson, famed musician known as the “King of Pop”
Marvin Minksy, artificial intelligence pioneer
Kevin Spacey, actor known for his roles in Se7en and House of Cards, found not guilty of sexual assault in 2023
George Lucas, American film director and creator of the Star Wars saga
Jean Luc Brunel, French model agency boss and alleged Epstein co-conspirator who died in an apparent suicide while awaiting trial
Cate Blanchett, Australian actor who starred in The Lord of the Rings and Tár
Naomi Campbell, British model
Heidi Klum, German-US model
Sharon Churcher, British journalist
Bruce Willis, actor famous for his roles in Die Hard and The Sixth Sense
Bianca Jagger, activist and wife of The Rolling Stones frontman, Sir Mick Jagger
Bill Richardson, former governor of New Mexico
Cameron Diaz, actor who starred in Shrek and There’s Something About Mary
Glenn Dubin, an American hedge fund manager who was allegedly friends with Epstein
Eva Andersson-Dubin, former Miss Sweden and wife of Glenn Dubin, who once dated Epstein
Noam Chomsky, linguist and political philosopher
Tom Pritzker, American tycoon and philanthropist
Chris Tucker, American comedian and actor known for his role in the Rush Hour films
Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York, former wife of Prince Andrew
Robert F Kennedy Jr, American politician and conspiracy theorist
James Michael Austrich
Juan and Maria Alessi, husband and wife working at Epstein’s home in Florida
Janusz Banasiak, served as Epstein’s Palm Beach house manager
Bella Klein or Klen (documents differ), a former accountant in Epstein’s New York office
Leslie or Lesley Groff (documents differ), Epstein’s former secretary, who was named as a co-conspirator in his 2008 plea deal but reportedly will not be charged
Victoria Bean
Rebecca Boylan
Dana Burns
Ron Eppinger, sex trafficker
Daniel Estes
Annie Farmer, accused Epstein of sexual assault
Maria Farmer, Annie Farmer’s sister, who also accused Epstein of sexual assault
Anouska De Georgiou, a model who accused Epstein of rape
Louis Freeh, former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
Frédéric Fekkai, celebrity hairstylist
Alexandra Fekkai, son of celebrity hairstylist
Jo Jo Fontanella, Epstein’s butler
Doug Band, longtime Bill Clinton aide who says he urged Mr Clinton to cut ties with Epstein
Virginia Giuffre, formerly known as Virginia Roberts, accused Prince Andrew of sexual assault
Lynn Miller, mother of Virginia Giuffre
Crystal Figueroa, sister of Anthony Figueroa, who dated Virginia Giuffre in the early 2000s
Anthony Figueroa, Virginia Robert’s former boyfriend
Eric Gany
Meg Garvin, represented Virginia Giuffre
Sheridan Gibson-Butte,
Ross Gow, Maxwell’s press agent
Fred Graff
Robert Giuffre
Philip Guderyon
Alexandra Hall
Joanna Harrison
Shannon Harrison
Victoria Hazel
Brittany Henderson
Brett Jaffe
Forest Jones
Sarah Kellen, Epstein’s former assistant, named as an unindicted co-conspirator in his 2008 plea deal
Adriana Ross, Epstein’s former assistant, named as an unindicted co-conspirator in his 2008 plea deal
Carol Kess
Dr Steven Olson
Stephen Kaufmann
Wendy Leigh, author
Peter Listerman
Tom Lyons
Nadia Marcinkova, alleged friend of Epstein’s, named as an unindicted co-conspirator in his 2008 plea deal
Bob Meister
Jamie Melanson
Donald Morrell
David Mullen
David Norr
Joe Pagano
May Paluga
Stanley Pottinger
Detective Joe Recarey, former Palm Beach police officer who investigated reports of sexual abuse against children by Epstein
Chief Michael Reiter, responsible for investigation of sexual abuse against children by Epstein
Rinaldo and Debra Rizzo, husband and wife who worked for Epstein’s alleged friend Glenn Dubin
Sky Roberts
Kimblerley Roberts
Lynn Roberts
Haley Robson, named as a “teen recruiter” for Epstein in police documents
Dave Rodgers, private jet pilot for Epstein
Alfredo Rodriquez, butler at Epstein’s Florida home
Scott Rothinson
Forest Sawyer
Dough Schoetlle,investigator
Johanna Sjoberg, claims she was sexually abused while underage by Epstein. Also claimed Prince Andrew touched her breast
Cecilia Stein
Marianne Strong
Mark Tafoya
Emmy Taylor, Maxwell’s ex-personal assistant
Brent Tindall
Kevin Thompson
Ed Tuttle
Les Wexner, founder of L Brands and a former business partner of Epstein
Abigail Wexner, wife of Les Wexner
Cresenda Valdes
Emma Vaghan
Anthony Valladares
Christina Venero, licensed massage therapist
Maritza Vazquez
Vicky Ward, investigative journalist and author who claims she was blocked from covering Epstein’s misdeeds while working at Vanity Fair
Jarred Weisfield
Sharon White
Courtney Wild
Daniel Wilson
Mark Zeff, New York decorator
Kelly Spamm, unknown person listed as flying on Epstein’s private jet
Alexandra Dixon, unknown person listed in Epstein’s ‘little black book’
Alfredo Rodriguez, Epstein’s former household manager, jailed in 2012 for hiding and trying to sell Epstein’s ‘black book’
Ricardo Legorreta, Mexican designer listed as a passenger on Epstein’s private jet
Dr Chris Donahue, physician who treated Virginia Giuffre, included on a list of all her previous medical providers requested by Maxwell’s defence team
Dr Wah Wah, physician who treated Virginia Giuffre
Judith Lightfoot, psychologist who treated Virginia Giuffre
Dr Karen Kutikoff, physician who treated Virginia Giuffre
Dr Carol Hayek, psychiatrist who treated Virginia Giuffre
Dr John Harris, physician who treated Virginia Giuffre
Dr Darshanee Majaliyana, physician who treated Virginia Giuffre
Dr John Harris, physician who treated Virginia Giuffre
Dr Mona Devansean, physician who treated Virginia Giuffre
Dr Scott Robert Geiger, physician who treated Virginia Giuffre
Dr Michele Streeter, physician who treated Virginia Giuffre
Donna Oliver, physician assistant who treated Virginia Giuffre.
As Listed By Source Two, Yahoo article
Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s former girlfriend, convicted in 2021 of sex trafficking in connection to Epstein’s activities
Prince Andrew, Duke of York, second son of Queen Elizabeth II of Great Britain. Brother of King Charles III
Bill Clinton, former US president listed on flight logs
President Donald Trump listed on flight logs and in Epstein’s book
Marla Maples, the former wife of Donald Trump listed on flight logs
Tiffany Trump, the daughter of Marla Maples and Donald Trump listed on flight logs
Alan Dershowitz, prolific lawyer and media pundit who represented Epstein in 2006 listed on flight logs and in Epstein’s book
Jean Luc Brunel, French model agency boss and alleged Epstein co-conspirator who died in an apparent suicide while awaiting trial
Michael Jackson, famed musician known as the “King of Pop” named in Epstein’s book
Marvin Minksy, artificial intelligence pioneer listed on flight logs
Naomi Campbell, British model listed on flight logs
Courtney Love, American singer named in Epstein’s book
Mick Jagger, English musician and frontman of the The Rolling Stones named in Epstein’s book
Bill Richardson, former governor of New Mexico named in Epstein’s book
Glenn Dubin, an American hedge fund manager who was allegedly friends with Epstein listed on flight logs and named in Epstein’s book
Eva Andersson-Dubin, former Miss Sweden and wife of Glenn Dubin, who once dated Epstein listed on flight logs and named in Epstein’s book
Tom Pritzker, American tycoon and philanthropist listed on flight logs
Chris Tucker, American comedian and actor known for his role in the Rush Hour films named in Epstein’s book
Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York, former wife of Prince Andrew listed on flight logs
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Secretary of Health and Human Services named in Epstein’s book
Mary Kennedy, the late wife of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. named in Epstein’s book
Dana Burns listed on flight logs
Frédéric Fekkai, celebrity hairstylist listed on flight logs and named in Epstein’s book
Alexandra Fekkai, son of celebrity hairstylist listed on flight logs and named in Epstein’s book
Jo Jo Fontanella, Epstein’s butler listed on flight logs
Doug Band, longtime Bill Clinton aide who says he urged Clinton to cut ties with Epstein listed on flight logs
Virginia Giuffre, formerly known as Virginia Roberts, accused Prince Andrew of sexual assault
Eric Gany named in Epstein’s book
Sheridan Gibson-Butte listed on flight logs
Shelly Harrison listed on flight logs
Victoria Hazell listed on flight logs
Forest Sawyer listed on flight logs
Sarah Kellen, Epstein’s former assistant, named as an unindicted co-conspirator in his 2008 plea deal listed on flight logs
Adriana Mucinska, formerly Ross, Epstein’s former assistant, named as an unindicted co-conspirator in his 2008 plea deal listed on flight logs
Peter Marino, listed on flight logs
Nadia Marcinkova, alleged friend of Epstein’s, named as an unindicted co-conspirator in his 2008 plea deal listed on flight logs
David Mullen, listed on flight logs
Joe Pagano, listed on flight logs
Kristy Rodgers, listed on flight logs
Patsy Rodgers, listed on flight logs
Mark Epstein, brother of Jeffrey Epstein listed on flight logs
Emmy Taylor, Maxwell’s ex-personal assistant listed on flight logs
Brent Tindall, chef for Epstein listed on flight logs
Ed Tuttle, listed on flight logs
Les Wexner, founder of L Brands and a former business partner of Epstein, named in Epstein’s book
Abigail Wexner, wife of Les Wexner, named in Epstein’s book
Cresencia Valdez, listed on flight logs
Maritza Vasquez, former bookkeeper for Jean-Luc Brunel, listed on flight logs
Sharon Reynolds, listed on flight logs
Courtney Wild, listed on flight logs
Mark Zeff, New York decorator, named in Epstein’s book
Kelly Spamm, listed on flight logs
Alexandra Dixon, listed on flight logs
Ricardo Legoretta, Mexican designer, listed on flight logs
Nobody’s Girl: A Memoir of Surviving Abuse and Fighting for Justice, Virginia Roberts Giuffre
Nobody’s Girl by Virginia Roberts Giuffre review – a devastating exposé of power, corruption and abuse
Giuffre’s posthumously published memoir lays bare the life-wrecking impact of Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes – but it is also the story of how a young woman becomes a hero
*Tony Pentimalli is a political analyst and commentator fighting for democracy, economic justice, and social equity. Follow him for sharp analysis and hard-hitting critiques on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100070286948364
Survival and resistance, the price of liberty and the necessity of solidarity, the fragility of power and the futility of tyrannies of force and control before the unanswerable power of refusal to submit or obey, the redemptive power of love as community and the alliance of autonomous peoples in a free society of equals, and the transformational nature of freedom as the choice to remain unconquered; on this day of the twin anniversaries of the Carnation Revolution in Portugal and Italian Liberation Day we celebrate the glorious triumph of our forebears as antifascists and the lessons we can learn from our history.
In the glorious victory for all humankind of Portugal’s Carnation Revolution, which we celebrate today in Portugal and throughout her former colonies also liberated by this historic act of solidarity by the citizens of a colonial empire with the peoples of her dominion, we find affirmation of our universal human rights of sovereignty, independence, and self-determination, of our humanity, of the inevitability of liberation under imposed conditions of struggle of force and control, falsification, commodification, and dehumanization, and the strategies of division of those who would enslave us.
Here upon the stage of history and the world, unerasable and indelibly written in our flesh as truths we have together dreamed and made real, the people of Portugal have demonstrated for us all the power of solidarity.
What can we learn from the Carnation Revolution as antifascists, revolutionaries, truth tellers, and bearers of the Promethean Fire which is democracy?
The great secret of power is that it is fragile and brittle; force and control fail at the point of disobedience and disbelief.
Law serves power, order appropriates, and there is no just Authority.
Who cannot be compelled by force is free. In resistance and refusal to submit to authority we become Unconquered.
To resist is to be free, and this is a kind of victory which cannot be taken from us. Refusal to submit is the defining human act and seizure of power, and this is the first revolution in which we all must fight; the struggle for ownership of ourselves.
In this we are all brothers, sisters, and others; all of us a United Humankind with a duty of care for each other beyond all differences.
Time to make an end to the age of empires, to monarchies and to tyrannies of force and control, to hegemonies of elite wealth, power, and privilege, to fascisms of blood, faith, and soil, and to divisions of elite belonging and exclusionary otherness; let us throw open the gates of our prisons and our borders, and be free.
As written by Fernando Camacho Padilla in The Conversation, in an article entitled The 50th anniversary of Portugal’s Carnation Revolution – the peaceful uprising that toppled a dictatorship and ended a decade of colonial war; “Across Portugal, a number of photography exhibitions are currently on display that commemorate the ousting of the Estado Novo, the dictatorial, authoritarian and corporatist political regime that had ruled the country since 1933.
The work of photographer Alfredo Cunha features prominently in many – he authored a book compiling the most emblematic images of this period. Many of those who organised the revolution are still alive today and have been present at events to mark the anniversary.
The roots of the revolution
In April 1974, over a decade of colonial wars had left Portugal’s army fatigued, yet Marcelo Caetano – who succeeded prime minister António de Oliveira Salazar in 1968 – was still unwilling to let go of African territories. This led a section of the country’s army to rise up.
Carlos de Almada Contreiras, a captain in the Portuguese navy, played a prominent role in the revolution. It was he who instructed that the song “Grândola Vila Morena”, an ode to fraternity, be the signal to commence the military operation that morning.
De Almada Contreiras has said that the idea of using a song as a signal to the troops came from the coup staged by Pinochet in 1973, which they had learned about from the Libro Blanco del cambio de gobierno en Chile (White Paper on the Change of Government in Chile). This document had just been published by the Chilean armed forces to justify their actions against Salvador Allende’s democratic government on 11 September 1973.
Interestingly, the reforms implemented in Portugal from the revolution on 25 April 1973 to November of the same year bore many similarities to the Popular Unity movement in Chile (1970-1973), especially its agrarian reforms.
International support
Though the Portuguese revolution caused uproar and turmoil in Spanish society, there has been little reflection on Salazar’s relationship with Spanish dictator Francisco Franco. Some researchers have recently published books on Spanish-Portuguese relations before and during the revolution which demonstrate its historical impact and relevance. María José Tiscar, for example, argues that Franco repaid Salazar’s help during the Spanish civil war with political, military and diplomatic support during the Portuguese colonial war (1961-1974), sometimes covertly.
Even less attention has been paid to Cuba’s role in the Carnation Revolution: while the Caribbean nation was not directly involved in the events, it did play an indirect part. From 1965 onward, Cuba provided support in training guerrilla forces from the colonial liberation movements fighting the Estado Novo, first in Guinea Bissau and Cape Verde, and then in Angola and Mozambique.
In addition, around 600 Cuban internationalists fought alongside the PAIGC (African Party for the Independence of Guinea and Cape Verde) in Guinea Bissau against the Portuguese army, and a smaller group in Angola for a short period.
In 1969, Cuban army captain Pedro Rodríguez Peralta was captured by Portuguese paratroopers near the border with Guinea-Conakry, and was transferred to Lisbon shortly after. He remained there until the fall of the Estado Novo, when he was released and allowed to return to Cuba.
Several members of the armed wing of the Portuguese Communist Party, known as the Armed Revolutionary Action (ARA), were also trained in Cuba. The ARA committed several attacks and acts of sabotage in Portugal in the early 1970s.
A year after the final departure of Portuguese troops from Africa in 1976, the Portuguese far-right, with the support of the CIA, bombed the Cuban embassy in Lisbon, claiming the lives of two diplomats. This was done in revenge for Cuban actions against the Estado Novo.
Celebrating peace
In recent weeks, Lisbon has been plastered with countless posters commemorating the 50th anniversary of the revolution. Images abound of young soldiers with carnations in their rifles, and of the joyous faces of those celebrating the fall of the Estado Novo. The city’s streets and boulevards are also adorned with many murals paying tribute to the events of 25 April 1974.
Such celebration is unique in Western Europe. No other country in the region has so recently experienced a revolution that gave way to its current democratic government.
Unlike other countries that had conservative dictatorships after the Second World War, the Portuguese Right shows little nostalgia for the days of António de Oliveira Salazar, or for the Estado Novo. This lack of nostalgia is reflected in actions such as the opening of archives housing the dictatorship’s documents to the public.
The only exception can be found among certain leaders of the extremist far-right party Chega, which recently had its strongest ever electoral performance in March this year.
Democratic revolution
Five decades after the revolution erupted, Portugal has followed a unique path to democracy.
Once the Estado Novo and its apparatus of oppression had been dismantled, power was swiftly handed over to civilians, and military officials ceased to hold political positions.
Portugal also fulfilled its pledge to grant full independence to its colonial territories. There were no attempts to establish a system of neocolonial rule which could have allowed the country to maintain political influence, or to grant Portuguese businesses control over sectors of the economy in former colonies.”
Portugal’s Carnation Revolution not only exorcised the ghosts of fascism and dethroned a brutal regime, but did so explicitly in the context of liberating its colonies. A coup led by soldiers who refused to fight for the profits of the wealthy or to oppress their fellow workers in Portugal’s African colonies was embraced by workers in Portugal itself and became a true democratic revolution.
As explained by Raquel Varela in a Jacobin interview with David Broder; “The country spent thirteen years fighting against the anticolonial revolutions in Guinea, Mozambique, and Angola, with more than one million troops mobilized, over eight thousand dead on the Portuguese side and one hundred thousand dead on the African side.”
“What began on April 25 as a coup d’état led immediately to the complete dismantling of the dictatorship’s political regime, but more than that, it was also the seed of a social revolution.
What happened in Portugal in 1974-5 was the last revolution in Europe to call into question the private ownership of the means of production. According to official data, it resulted in a considerable shift in the balance of class forces — some 18 percent of national income was transferred from capital to labor. It achieved gains like the guarantee of the right to a job, living wages (above the level of subsistence or biological reproduction alone), and equal and universal access to education, health, and social security.
What differentiates Portugal’s revolutionary period from a democratic transition process like Spain’s was not the staging of elections or their results, but rather the overall dynamic visible in this period. The holding of elections was, obviously, a major achievement, after forty-eight years of dictatorship: the first contest saw 95 percent of the people turn out to vote! But what sets a revolution apart from other processes is the way the population get stuck in, and directly take their lives into their own hands.
Paul Valéry used to say that politics is the art of turning the citizens away from their own lives. A revolution is precisely the opposite, a unique moment in history. We enacted one of the twentieth century’s most important revolutions. The right to vote was one of its elements, but its most crucial feature was that for nineteen months, three million people directly took part in workers’, residents’, and soldiers’ councils, which decided what to do on a daily basis. People voted and discussed what to do for hours and hours. All of this made it possible for our revolution to accomplish wonderful things. To take just one example, look at the women organized in the residents’ councils, who together with Carris (Lisbon public transport) drivers rerouted the buses so that social housing districts distant from the city center would finally be served by public transit.
The banks were nationalized and expropriated with no compensation whatsoever. And the right to free time was absolutely pivotal. Take the case of the demonstration by bakers working long hours, whose slogan was “we want to sleep with our wives.” As a slogan, it is very interesting, because nowadays we take it for granted that at eleven at night there are people selling socks in supermarkets or working on Volkswagen assembly lines. People won not just price freezes so that they could have decent meals, but the right to leisure and culture. They also won the right to housing, indeed by occupying vacant houses that were destined for speculation. Even judges sometimes backed them, as in the city of Setúbal. I’ll remind you that today in Portugal there are seven hundred thousand vacant houses, owned by real-estate funds, which do not pay taxes.
As well as four thousand workers’ councils there were 360 companies managed by their own workers. Dryland farming areas tripled, as peasants occupied the land. These occupations are obviously in contrast with what we have today: the stalling of production during the crisis. Amid mass unemployment, people are instead paid to stop producing.
1979 would also see the creation of a National Health Service. However, the unification of a universal health system was introduced on the aftermath of April 25. The first person in charge of that was an absolutely wonderful figure within the Armed Forces Movement, Cruz Oliveira. He took the hospitals out of the charities’ hands and turned them into a single service, and banned the selling of blood — since then, the blood used in hospitals has been donated. All of this happened with the people on the streets, demanding that health access should not be a commodified good, but rather a universal right.”
“Never in Portuguese history have as many people spoken for themselves as they did in those months. Politics ceased to be separated between elites and people, and there was a close connection between manual and intellectual work, between Africa and Europe, between doctors and nurses, men and women, students and teachers.”
“In these two years, human beings were reunited with their humanity. This legacy still lasts today. And it is the only one that can save us from the abyss of the present.”
The 50th anniversary of Portugal’s Carnation Revolution – the peaceful uprising that toppled a dictatorship and ended a decade of colonial war
Journey to Portugal: history and culture, Jose Saramago
Prince Henry “the Navigator”: A Life, Peter E. Russell
Conquerors: How Portugal Forged the First Global Empire, Roger Crowley
Literature
The Lusiads, Luís de Camões
The Crime of Father Amaro, Eça de Queirós
The Book of Disquiet, Fernando Pessoa
The Great Shadow, Mário de Sá-Carneiro
The Inquisitors’ Manual, The Natural Order of Things, Act of the Damned, An Explanation of the Birds, The Return of the Caravels, Knowledge of Hell, What Can I Do When Everything’s on Fire?, António Lobo Antunes
Baltasar and Blimunda, The Gospel According to Jesus Christ, All the Names, Blindness, Death with Interruptions, Seeing, Caim, The Double, The Cave, The Tale of the Unknown Island, The Year of the Death of Ricardo Reis, The Stone Raft, The History of the Siege of Lisbon, Manual of Painting and Calligraphy, The Notebook, José Saramago
Portuguese
25 de Abril de 2025 Aniversário da Revolução dos Cravos em Portugal
A sobrevivência e a resistência, o preço da liberdade e a necessidade de solidariedade, a fragilidade do poder e a futilidade das tiranias de força e controle diante do poder irrespondível da recusa em submeter-se ou obedecer, o poder redentor do amor como comunidade e a aliança de forças autônomas. povos numa sociedade livre de iguais, e a natureza transformacional da liberdade como a escolha de permanecer invicto; neste dia dos dois aniversários da Revolução dos Cravos em Portugal e do Dia da Libertação Italiana, celebramos o glorioso triunfo dos nossos antepassados como antifascistas e as lições que podemos aprender com a nossa história.
Na gloriosa vitória para toda a humanidade da Revolução dos Cravos de Portugal, que hoje celebramos em Portugal e em todas as suas ex-colónias também libertadas por este acto histórico de solidariedade dos cidadãos de um império colonial com os povos do seu domínio, encontramos a afirmação da nossa direitos humanos universais de soberania, independência e autodeterminação, da nossa humanidade, da inevitabilidade da libertação sob condições impostas de luta de força e controle, falsificação, mercantilização e desumanização, e as estratégias de divisão daqueles que nos escravizariam .
Aqui, no palco da história e do mundo, inapagáveis e indelevelmente escritas na nossa carne como verdades que juntos sonhamos e tornamos realidade, o povo de Portugal demonstrou-nos todo o poder da solidariedade.
O que podemos aprender com a Revolução dos Cravos como antifascistas, revolucionários, contadores da verdade e portadores do Fogo Prometeico que é a democracia?
O grande segredo do poder é que ele é frágil e quebradiço; a força e o controle falham no ponto da desobediência e da descrença.
A lei serve o poder, a ordem se apropria e não existe Autoridade justa.
Quem não pode ser compelido pela força é livre. Na resistência e na recusa em nos submeter à autoridade, tornamo-nos Invictos.
Resistir é ser livre, e esta é uma espécie de vitória que não nos pode ser tirada. A recusa em submeter-se é o ato humano definidor e a tomada do poder, e esta é a primeira revolução na qual todos devemos lutar; a luta pela propriedade de nós mesmos.
Nisto somos todos irmãos, irmãs e outros; todos nós, uma Humanidade Unida, com o dever de cuidar uns dos outros, além de todas as diferenças.
É hora de pôr fim à era dos impérios, às monarquias e às tiranias de força e controle, às hegemonias de riqueza, poder e privilégios das elites, aos fascismos de sangue, fé e solo, e às divisões de elite pertencentes e excludentes. alteridade; abramos as portas das nossas prisões e das nossas fronteiras e sejamos livres.
Survival and resistance, the price of liberty and the necessity of solidarity, the fragility of power and the futility of tyrannies of force and control before the unanswerable power of refusal to submit or obey, the redemptive power of love as community and the alliance of autonomous peoples in a free society of equals, and the transformational nature of freedom as the choice to remain unconquered; on this day of the twin anniversaries of the Carnation Revolution in Portugal and Italian Liberation Day we celebrate the glorious triumph of our forebears as antifascists and the lessons we can learn from our history.
What can we learn from the Liberation of Italy, and from all liberations from fascist regimes throughout history and the world, as antifascists, revolutionaries, truth tellers, and bearers of the Promethean Fire which is democracy?
The great secret of power is that it is fragile and brittle; force and control fail at the point of disobedience and disbelief.
Law serves power, order appropriates, and there is no just Authority.
Who cannot be compelled by force is free. In resistance and refusal to submit to authority we become Unconquered.
To resist is to be free, and this is a kind of victory which cannot be taken from us. Refusal to submit is the defining human act and seizure of power, and this is the first revolution in which we all must fight; the struggle for ownership of ourselves.
In this we are all brothers, sisters, and others; all of us a United Humankind with a duty of care for each other beyond all differences.
Time to make an end to the age of empires, to monarchies and to tyrannies of force and control, to hegemonies of elite wealth, power, and privilege, to fascisms of blood, faith, and soil, and to divisions of elite belonging and exclusionary otherness; let us throw open the gates of our prisons and our borders, and be free.
As I wrote in my post of April 25 2020, Anniversaries of the Italian Victory Over Fascism and End of the Italian Civil War and the Carnation Revolution of Portugal; Celebrate with me today the twin anniversaries of the Italian victory over fascism and the Carnation Revolution which liberated Portugal from fifty years of tyranny. Together these two historical events and processes provide us with exemplary models of effective action in the struggle toward democracy and the true equality of humankind.
Three decades of Antifascism in Italy, culminating in the twenty months of Resistance to the German Occupation, not only shaped the Allied victory and the Liberation of Europe, but was also a struggle to transform the cultural basis from which fascism arose; authoritarianism, patriarchy, nepotism and graft, and the networks of patron-client relationships which have persisted as the formal basis of European society since the Roman Empire. As Stephanie Prezioso writes in Jacobin “the Resistance was not only a war of national liberation, but also a civil war and a class war — a social war that implicated the population itself.”
But what is most relevant to us today is the way in which this multifaceted war was waged and won; for it was anarchic and destructured, self-organizing and embodying forms of mutualism, nonhierarchical and democratic in the best sense of free societies of equals. As the people of Hong Kong say of their art of revolution, “Be like water”. Again as described by Stephanie Prezioso; “Autonomy, anti-bureaucratic demands, voluntarism, “free initiative from below,” and the role of the individual – not of the “mass” – were the inner secrets to this libertarian and revolutionary liberalism, attached to social revolution”.
How does the history of the Italian Antifascist Resistance continue to shape and inform our struggle today? Here we must dive into the deep well of memory, and situate our moment in the context of the century which has unfolded since our origins in the world’s first Antifascist Resistance, that of the Arditi del Popolo founded in 1921 to resist Mussolini and the rise of Fascism. The Aditi del Popolo, a worker’s army whose defense of the communes at the Barricades of Parma became legendary, arose in mutual interdependence with the anarcho-syndicalism of Bakunin’s comrade Enrico Malatesta and the Free State of Fiume of the poet and General Gabriele D’Annunzio, the latter of which continues to influence the global Autonomous Zones movements today.
When we founded the first of the current network of such, the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone in Seattle, having seized the business and state government district, I had a copy of Bruce Sterling’s novelization of D’Annunzio’s Fiume, Pirate Utopia, from which I read to the masses who seized the police headquarters. A cautionary tale as well as an inspiring and romantic model, for in the Free State of Fiume D’Annunzio both established an iconic anarchist-syndicalist commune but also created Fascism; it is a foundational study of the recursive forces of fear, power, and force and why revolutions become tyrannies. In centering my idea of Living Autonomous Zones in a critique of the historical emergence of Fascism from the Anarchist total rejection of state power and of nationalism from internationalist socialism, I question the social use of force as a ground of struggle intrinsic to all human exchange in the duality of its forms as fear and belonging.
As I wrote in my post of June 11 2023, Remembering the Glorious Seattle Autonomous Zone; Strange and unknown remains the Undiscovered Country, as Shakespeare called the future, for it is a thing of relative and ambiguous truths, ephemeral and in constant motion and processes of change, and limitless possibilities of becoming. “An undiscovered country whose bourne no travelers return—puzzles the will”, as the line in Hamlet goes, in reference to death and what may lie beyond the limits of human being and knowing.
But it applies equally to the myriads of futures from which we must choose, shaped by our histories and systems of being human together as imposed conditions of revolutionary struggle and by our poetic vision in the reimagination and transformation of human being, meaning, and value.
The emergence of the Autonomous Zones as a spontaneous adaptation to universal conditions of unequal power and brutal repression by carceral states was in part an echo and reflection of the Occupy Movement which began in New York’s Zuccotti Park on September 17 2011; by October nearly a thousand cities in 82 nations and in 600 American communities had ongoing and sustained sister protests and Occupy movements. The Black Lives Matter movement began in July of 2013 in protest against the acquittal of Trayvon Martin’s murderer, and in 2020 with the death of George Floyd ignited the Summer of Fire; some 26 million Americans joined protests in 200 cities, joined by sister protests in two thousand cities in sixty nations. The Autonomous Zones were a prodigy of the harmonic convergence of these two global movements of social justice, as shaped by influences of the #metoo antipatriarchal movement and Greta Thunberg’s Fridays for Future school strike and other global ecological movements.
In the Autonomous Zones global protest movements against white supremacist terror, patriarchal sexual terror, tyranny and state terror both as democracy movements and as the police abolition movement, recombined and integrated as an agenda of revolutionary struggle against systems of unequal power.
And as we brought a Reckoning for systemic evils, epigenetic trauma, and the legacies of our histories, we also sought to launch humankind on a total revisioning of our being, meaning, and value, and the reimagination and transformation of the limitless possibilities of becoming human.
Here is a journal entry of mine speaking as a witness of history to that time of revolutionary struggle and liberation; as I wrote in my post of June 11 2020, Utopia Now: Seattle’s Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone; Marvels and jubilation in the streets, a carnival of transgressions of the Forbidden and masquerades of possible identities and futures of becoming human, anarchy and chaos and joy, running amok and being ungovernable, and the frightening of the horses; come and dance with us, America. Come find your heart and be free.
Whosoever remains unconquered is free. For each of us who defies injustice and tyranny, who resists subjugation, dehumanization, and enslavement, who questions, mocks, and challenges authority, becomes an agent of Liberty who cannot be silenced, and who passes the torch of freedom as an uncontrollable catalyst of change to everyone with whom we interact, and thereby can never be truly defeated.
Each of us who in resistance becomes Unconquered and a bearer of Liberty are also become a Living Autonomous Zone, and this is the key to our inevitable victory. We ourselves are the power which state terror and tyranny cannot conquer.
The people of Seattle have answered brutal repression and police violence, an attempt to break the rebellion against racial injustice and hate crime enacted by Homeland Security and the police throughout America and the world led by Trump and his white supremacist terrorists both within the police as a fifth column and operating in coordination with deniable forces like the gun-toting militias now visible everywhere, by storming the citadel of city government with waves of thousands of citizens demanding the right to life and liberty regardless of the color of our skin.
The people have seized control of six city blocks, including the police precinct and City Hall, and established the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone, a name which rings with history and reflects the Paris Commune and the Italian Anarcho-Syndicalists of the 1920s, Rojava in Syria and Exarcheia in Athens, but was directly modeled on the ideals, methods, and instruments of the Occupy Movement founded in New York’s Wall Street.
Such beautiful resistance by those who will not go quietly to their deaths. To all those who tilt at windmills; I salute you.
Let us take back our government from our betrayers, and our democracy from the fascist tyranny of blood, faith, and soil which has attempted to steal our liberty and enslave us with divisions of exclusionary otherness.
When the people have reclaimed the government of which they are co-owners and this new phase of protest, a movement to occupy City Hall in defiance of tyranny, has seized every seat of power in the nation and restored democracy to America, we can begin the globalization of the Revolution and the reforging of our society on the foundation of equality and racial justice, and of our universal human rights.
Let us join together in solidarity and restore America as a free society of equals, and liberate all the nations of the world now held captive by the Fourth Reich.
There can be but one reply to fascism and state terror; Never Again.
As written by David Broder in Jacobin, in an article entitled The Lost Partisans; “Today Italy celebrates Liberation Day. But the true spirit of the antifascist resistance has long been obscured.
Italy’s April 25 bank holiday marks the anniversary of the country’s liberation from fascism. This day in 1945, antifascist partisan units freed the northern industrial centers of Milan and Turin from the grip of Hitler and Mussolini’s remaining loyalists, after Allied forces had swept through the country. Just three days later, in a humiliating epitaph to the twenty-year regime, partisans captured and executed il Duce and his entourage, hanging them upside down in Milan’s Piazzale Loreto.
Marking the partisans’ victory over both German occupation and Italian fascism, April 25 is a patriotic holiday that honors the deeds of an armed minority. The festival was first celebrated in 1946, as the parties of the National Liberation Committee (CLN) from Christian Democrats to Socialists and Communists sought to identify themselves with “universal” values of freedom, democracy, and national unity.
Tellingly, Liberation Day would be celebrated on the day that the CLN for upper Italy declared its power, not the date of the Allies’ final liberation of Italian territory.
However, while the CLN parties’ claim to represent “a whole people in arms” delimited a broad national community excluding only the last fascist loyalists — held to be German stooges, and not true patriots — April 25 has never really lived up to its pretentions of national unity.
This is not only because the remaining battalions of the far right have their own war commemorations at Mussolini’s Predappio hometown, but also because the armed resistance has always been principally identified in popular culture with Italy’s once-mass Communist Party (PCI).
Although still today presidents and prime ministers commemorate April 25 as a founding moment of Italian democracy, the street rallies marking this holiday above all represent the politics that did not shape the postwar republic.
Whereas 60 percent of partisans fought in PCI-organized units, the Communist Party shared the CLN’s political leadership with Christian Democrats, liberals, socialists, and others; and as the intense antifascist mobilization turned into the foundation of a parliamentary democracy, old elites soon reasserted their control over the state.
Indeed, if the CLN parties governed Italy in coalition after liberation — together drafting a constitution and founding a republic — by May 1947 Cold War pressures forced the PCI out of office. As justice minister in 1946, the Communist leader Palmiro Togliatti had issued a sweeping amnesty applying even to fascists, in order to pacify social tensions; yet as the Left was sidelined, partisans themselves became the target of political trials pursued by ex-fascist judges and policemen.
The gap between the partisan fighters and the postwar establishment was further symbolized on April 25, 1947, with the dissolution of the second-most resistance force, the republican-socialist Action Party.
The anticommunist counteroffensive following liberation peaked in July 1948, with an assassination attempt against Togliatti. The far-right assailant’s attack not only sparked an unruly general strike but was also a trigger for many ex-partisans who had held onto their weapons, who mounted widespread armed occupations of workplaces and police stations in subsequent days.
Frightened PCI leaders feared provoking a civil war like in Greece, where British-backed royalists bloodily crushed the Communist partisans after 1945. With the party thus reining in its more adventurist members, and Italy becoming a founder member of NATO in 1949, the hope of resistance turning into revolution quickly dissipated.
Having been the main resistance party, the PCI was thus condemned to an ambivalent relationship with the state born of April 25, and whose constitution it helped to write. The country’s second party — securing between 22 and 34 percent of the vote in every election until its 1991 collapse — the PCI was barred from power-sharing by Italy’s strategic position in the Western bloc, even despite leader Enrico Berlinguer’s 1970s efforts to reach a “historic compromise” with Christian Democracy.
Indeed, if April 25 is still today marked by rallies appealing to the constitution’s promise of a “democracy founded on labor,” for four decades the state was more than anything based on structural Christian Democratic dominance, the anticommunist linchpin of all Italian governments until the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Although the Christian Democrats had been the PCI’s partners in the CLN and then in government in 1943–47, they had made a much lesser military contribution to the resistance, and on anniversaries like April 25 tended to emphasize the US Army’s role in liberating Italy far more than did the Communists.
Without doubt, the partisan war was greatly less important to Christian Democratic identity: a big-tent party of many factions, but also strong anticommunist tendencies, its further right-wing shore tended to portray the resistance as a bloody endeavor essentially unnecessary to the Allies’ success in freeing the country.
As such, whereas the Christian Democrats’ internal cohesion and claim to political authority in Cold War Italy was heavily premised on their binary opposition to the PCI, the Communists’ central means of asserting their democratic legitimacy was the commemoration of their non-sectarian, patriotic record in the war against Nazism.
This stemmed from resistance strategy itself: the Communist-led working class played the leading role in mobilizing for the patriotic struggle, but, as Togliatti explained in an April 1945 circular, PCI partisans establishing CLN authority in each location should not “impose changes in a socialistic or communist sense,” even if acting alone. The PCI had committed to a common antifascist cause, not sought to enforce its own control.
The party had thus used mass mobilization to secure itself a place in institutional life, but without antagonizing other democratic forces. Indeed, the PCI press of 1943–45 (and later party mythology) cast even the most evidently class-war aspects of the resistance — mass strikes, land occupations, draft resistance — in “patriotic” terms, a mass working-class contribution to a progressive national movement more than an assertion of workers’ anticapitalist class interests.
It was this conjugation of patriotism, democracy, and a sense of workers’ centrality to national reconstruction that informed the constitutional promise of a “democratic republic founded on labor.” In this same productivist spirit, in the 1945–47 coalition the PCI backed wage freezes and implemented an effective strike ban, the better to rebuild Italian industry.
That said, while the PCI portrayed its gradualist, institution-centric “Italian road to socialism” as an extension of Antonio Gramsci’s thinking, it in fact tended to invert Gramsci’s idea of hegemony, as leading socialist Lelio Basso emphasized in a 1965 piece for Critica Marxista.
“Notwithstanding the working-class movement’s organizational preponderance in the resistance, it was our opponents who managed to hegemonize it politically,” he explained. “National or antifascist unity had a sense in terms of the pure goal of winning the war,” but “only with a tighter working-class unity over immediate postwar goals could the workers’ movement have really hegemonized the liberation struggle, imposing its own spirit, stamp and will, its own ideology and objectives upon it.”
Founded on Labor
Indeed, by the time of Basso’s article the PCI strategy of a gradually expanding “progressive democracy” had begun to ring hollow, the party’s commitment to republican legality clashing with its Cold War reduction to an oppositional role.
Christian Democracy reigned supreme, and the far right was also seemingly on the rise, with Prime Minister Fernando Tambroni’s 1960 effort to form government resting on fascist MSI support, as well as the provocative attempt to stage an MSI congress in antifascist Genoa that same year. If violent protests blocked these efforts to rehabilitate the far right, the “democratic republic founded on labor” was not living up to the promise of the resistance.
The weakening of the PCI dream of progressive democracy also coincided with changes in the shape of the working class, with the high industrial growth rates of Italy’s 1950s-1960s “economic miracle” drawing masses of workers from the underdeveloped south to the factories of the north.
These workers, on the fringes of the traditional labor movement and suffering a semi-racialized discrimination, were central to the attentions of the 1960s New Left arising off the back of the PCI’s impasse.
Young and coming from a south little-marked by the resistance, these workers had a profound cultural split from the largely older, more skilled northern workers for whom the antifascist strikes of March 1943 represented a key moment of collective memory and class pride.
Tellingly, the operaista and autonomist literature (broadly conceived) of this period, breaking with the Communist Party’s rhetorical preoccupations, was notable for its lack of interest in resistance history, tending to see April 25 as a kind of PCI jamboree attached to patriotic-institutional politics, distant from the interests of the workers they sought to influence.
To the extent that the resistance did enter into the extra-parliamentary left’s consciousness, this was above all thanks to armed-struggle groups and their efforts to replicate the most spectacular military actions of 1943–45, also inspired by a wider veneration of guerrilla struggles in Vietnam and elsewhere.
Not only the Red Brigades’ invocation of the “continuing resistance” but also Giangiacomo Feltrinelli’s creation of Gruppi d’Azione Partigiana (GAP) consciously imitating the similarly named wartime PCI terrorist cells reflected the desire to recapture the militancy of that period.
What rarely went considered in any of this was the political critique of the PCI strategy that had already in the 1940s been advanced by the most radical wing of the Italian resistance. Indeed, even the 1970s extra-parliamentary left tended to invoke the most militant forms of struggle from the war period (mass strikes, sabotage, terrorism) as abstract evidence of the potential for social change, rather than recover the history of those movements who had sought (and failed) to challenge the politics of national unity as such.
This was the reason why even a 1970s Guevarist paramilitary group like the GAP could copy the name of 1940s partisan units that were in fact entirely PCI-controlled and subordinate to its patriotic alliance strategy.
It seems that these groups were little aware that in 1943–45 there had also been revolutionary antifascist forces outside of the CLN, involved in armed struggle yet excluded from institutional resistance memory. Certainly, in a broad sense we could say that the symbolism of even PCI-led partisans (with their Bella Ciao, Bandiera Rossa, Fischia il Vento, red neckerchiefs . . .) and resistants’ individual motives for joining the struggle often reflected hope in some sort of socialist change, even if defined in vague terms.
But there were also thousands-strong 1940s movements who organized with this explicit political perspective, rejecting national unity in favor of class warfare — from Stella Rossa in Turin to Rome’s Bandiera Rossa and Naples’s “red” CGL union.
These were no minoritarian sects: in fact, Bandiera Rossa was the largest resistance force in Wehrmacht-occupied Rome. Arising from clandestine groups that had formed in the fascist period while PCI leaders were still in exile, and combining militant antifascism with an almost millenarian faith in imminent revolution, this autodidact-led movement built something of a mass base in the capital’s borgate slums in winter 1943–44, waging nine months of urban warfare at the cost of some 186 fatalities.
Believing that Red Army successes on the Eastern Front reflected the world-historic advance of socialism (“turning war into revolution like Lenin in 1917”) this curiously ultra-Stalinist movement ultimately entered into bitter clashes with the official PCI, which sought to infiltrate and destroy its organization.
Indeed, the movement’s radicalism threatened not only the PCI’s internal discipline, but also the orderly transition to democracy itself: as one military police report warned the Allied forces approaching the Italian capital in May 1944, Bandiera Rossa had “the secret aim, together with the other far-Left parties, of seizing control of the city, overthrowing the monarchy and government, and implementing a full communist program while the other parties are preoccupied with chasing out the Germans.”
The subversive threat these communists posed saw their militias (deemed by British intelligence to have been “mainly drawn from the criminal classes”) immediately banned upon the Allies’ liberation of the capital.
The suppression of Bandiera Rossa’s incendiary press and the forcible disarming of its partisans was no isolated case: the state’s assertion of a monopoly of violence and criminalization of its opponents was, in a sense, the founding act of republican legality, with the Allies combining with the CLN parties simultaneously to liberate territory and to impose a quick return to social peace.
The state born of the resistance was, therefore, also a state born of the neutering of the resistance; the channeling of antagonistic class warfare into working-class representation in the state via the Communist and Socialist parties. Such was the democratic republic “founded on labor.”
Postmodern April 25
Today the PCI, self-declared “party of the resistance,” is dead, much like its Socialist and Christian Democratic counterparts. The collapse of the USSR exploded the Italian system’s Cold War binary in 1991, with the removal of the Communist threat finally detonating the rotten corruption networks that had so long flourished in its Christian-Democratic rival. If April 25 still lives on as a day of memorialization, it does so absent of the parties who actually took part in the struggle.
With ever-reduced ranks of surviving veterans, and the Left in a dire state of collapse, the resistance’s role in Italian public life seems to be on the wane. Indeed, the end of the once mass PCI has clearly handed the initiative to the long-time opponents of the antifascist cause.
Not only have revisionist historians increasingly sought to establish an equivalence of the crimes perpetrated by each side in the “civil war,” but the last Berlusconi government even toyed with getting rid of the Liberation Day bank holiday.
Simultaneous to this, resistance memory is also undermined from within, as former PCI-ers adapt the old slogans to their now neoliberal politics, as in president Giorgio Napolitano’s April 25 intervention in 2013. Speaking at a former SS prison, the ex-Communist called on the incoming government to show “the same courage, resolve, and unity that were vital to winning the resistance battle” in dealing with the country’s economic crisis.
The coalition he was orchestrating was a lash-up of the centrist Democrats with Silvio Berlusconi and Goldman Sachs technocrat Mario Monti; national unity had now became the banner of austerian collective belt-tightening.
No wonder, then, that April 25 seems increasingly distant from the concerns of today’s unemployed and precarious youth — the “national day” instead living on mainly in the memory of the various fragments of the former PCI.
Yet with that party’s hegemonic project dead, it seems unlikely that talk of “defending constitutional values” or invoking “national unity” or the “republican ethics” of seventy years ago can play any role in the regeneration of the Left.
If anything, it is dissecting and questioning this legacy that can return the memory of the partisans to its proper place, turning April 25 from a day of national unity into a day of anti-institutional antagonism.”
As written by STEFANIE PREZIOSO in Jacobin, in an article entitled The Anti-Fascist Revolution: Remembering the Action Party, one of Italy’s biggest anti-fascist partisan movements.; “Over the last two decades, the Italian Resistance has been a subject of sharp public debate, with both political and historical efforts “radically to repudiate the role and significance” of anti-fascism in Italy’s contemporary history. As Pier Giorgio Zunino wrote in 1997, “for the Italian history of the second half of the twentieth century, anti-fascism is the villain.”
Indeed, most often simply identified with its Comintern (Communist International) variant, the anti-fascism of the 1920s, 1930s, and 1940s is branded “anti-democratic” because of its “blind[ness]” to the other “enemies of democracy,” as the Italian revisionist Renzo de Felice put it. Attacks on the twenty-month-long Resistance are essentially concentrated on its minoritarian character (thus seeing the anti-fascist parties as a mere second edition of the National Fascist Party itself) and the “cruelty” of the “violence” committed during the civil war and the months following Liberation.
Italy is a country where the “negative memory” of this experience fuses with the political uses made of that memory. In this context, what is especially challenged “decade after decade” is the central, epoch-defining character of this period for the history of the dominated.
This is because, between September 8, 1943 — the date that the Badoglio’s post-fascist government signed an armistice with the Allies, triggering a German occupation of northern-central Italy — and April 25, 1945 — the date of the final liberation of Italy’s great northern cities — the Resistance was not only a war of national liberation, but also a civil war and a class war — a social war that implicated the population itself.
Of course, not all “the people” were in the “maquis,” as the title of Communist leader Luigi Longo’s Un popolo alla macchia might suggest. But a large part of the Italian population thought that the end of fascism should mean a challenge not just to the regime itself, but also to the Italian state as it had formed after the Risorgimento [national unification struggle of the mid-nineteenth century], and indeed, to bourgeois society as a whole. In this sense, anti-fascism really represented a positive struggle, with a political and social charge that projected itself into the future.
In this context of a radical challenge to the existing order, the Action Party (Partito d’Azione or Pd’A), throughout its brief existence, played a very specific role. Created in 1942 and dissolved in 1947, over the twenty months of civil war the Pd’A was an advocate for the radical transformation of Italian society.
This advocacy also translated into practice; in the war of Resistance that raged, especially in Northern Italy, from September 1943 onward, the Action Party made a relatively unparalleled contribution, offering the greatest number of combatants to the armed struggle. Giovanni de Luna captured this reality with his reference to the “party of the shot.” The Pd’A made a major contribution to the insurrections of April 1945, in particular in Turin.
The living embodiment of a revolutionary “wind from the North,” azionismo also laid down a lasting system of values founded on anti-fascism. It considered anti-fascism not only in conjunctural terms — as a fight against the regime Mussolini had established from 1922 onward — but as a perpetual duty.
This was summarized in April 1934 by Carlo Rosselli, founder of the secular, non-communist Justice and Liberty (Giustizia e Libertà or GL) movement. A figure whose memory was forever part of the Pd’A after his 1937 murder by fascists, Rosselli spoke of anti-fascism as “a struggle for eternity.”
“We Are at War”
Azionismo was rooted in the anti-fascism of the liberal revolutionary Piero Gobetti, who died in 1926 under the blows of the fascist squadristi; as well as its early 1930s political actualization by GL, the movement of the revolutionary socialist Carlo Rosselli and, among others, Emilio Lussu, a member of the Sardinian Partito d’Azione. Based in Paris in the 1930s, Rosselli and Lussu were both escapees from the island of Lipari, where they had been confined by the Fascist regime.
For Piero Gobetti, fascism was “the autobiography of the nation.” On November 23, 1922, in a famous article entitled “Eulogy to the guillotine,” he wrote:
Fascism… has been the autobiography of the nation. A nation that believes in class collaboration; a nation that renounces political struggle, on account of its own sloth…. Fascism in Italy is a catastrophe, and it is an indication of a decisive infantileness, for it marks the triumph of facility, of confidence granted, of optimism, of enthusiasms.
This interpretation emphasized the elements of continuity between liberal Italy and fascist Italy and the idea of a missed Risorgimento – meaning an unaccomplished process of political unification and economic modernization. From this perspective, fascism was the result of this missing liberal/bourgeois revolution, and the expression of a backward and “uncultured” country whose only political experience was one of systems of government that combined clientelism, paternalism, transformism and authoritarianism.
Fascism was thus the expression of “an old ill, rooted in the distant past of Italian history.” This interpretation combined with the idea that it was necessary to fight not only fascism itself, but all that had made it possible. This emphasized the role of the Italian ruling class in the affirmation and stabilization of the regime.
During the 1930s, this line of interpretation would develop, in the context of an anti-fascist struggle waged in secrecy and exile. This fight now confronted a clearly established regime and a regimented country, in years that the revisionist historian Renzo de Felice described in terms of “consensus.”
The revolutionary socialist Carlo Rosselli developed his own analysis of fascism based on Gobetti’s reflections, among others, discussing the development of what he from the early 1930s called “the anti-fascist revolution,” and refining its repertoires of action.
In January 1932, the first issue of the Quaderni di Giustizia e Libertà asserted the need to pass from “the phase of a negative and indistinct anti-fascism” to that of the affirmation of a “constructive anti-fascism that understands and transcends the fascist experience and the experiences of post-[World War I] Europe.”
Founded on the combined Mazzinian imperatives of “thought and action,” in a March 1931 circular addressed “To the Workers,” GL presented itself as a “revolutionary movement” aimed at overthrowing fascism by insurrectionary means. Carlo Rosselli and the members of GL conceived their political engagement as a radical rupture from fascism, but so, too, from pre-fascist Italy.
In this sense, they constantly repeated that there could be no question of fighting to return to “l’Italietta di Facta” [referring to pre-Mussolini liberal prime minister Luigi Facta]. What united the militants of GL was “the revolt against the men, the mentality, and the methods of the pre-fascist political world” (“Per l’unificazione politica del proletariato,” GL, May 14, 1937).
It also targeted the Italian Socialists, who had reduced themselves to impotence. We might particularly note the rather severe analysis Emilio Lusso gave of the Socialists’ collapse faced with the rise of fascism in his February 1934 article “Orientamenti”:
The masses were brilliantly guided toward catastrophe… It took just a few mercenary brigands, gathered in such little time, to destroy the results of forty years of proletarian organization. It took not a flurry of machine-gun fire but only the rumble of a milk truck to disband what ought to have been the revolutionary army.
The renewal of socialism and the anti-fascist struggle were thus envisaged as two interdependent and inextricably linked phases. GL advocated the defeat of pre-fascist political configurations, presenting itself in terms of “unity of action” among socialists, republicans, and liberals, and seeking to revive the struggle on Italian territory, if necessary using illegal and violent means.
From 1930 onward, GL cells formed mainly in the towns of Northern Italy and in intellectual circles. This was the only non-Communist movement to construct a real network, and the Pd’A [formally constituted in 1942] would base itself on this, as it built its forces around such figures as Riccardo Bauer, Ernesto Rossi, Francesco Fancello, Nello Traquandi, Umberto Ceva, Vincenzo Calace, Dino Roberti, Giuliano Viezzoli, Ferruccio Parri, and many others. While this social and militant base was principally among intellectuals, this small circle would become a hardened troop, ready to take up arms.
GL, the Pd’A, and the Revolution
Indeed, fascism placed the young (liberal and/or socialist) intellectuals, as the basis of GL, and the Pd’A in a paradoxical situation. The regime established by Mussolini seemed to position the “rearguard” fight for the defense of democratic freedoms as the order of the day. There is no doubt that the anti-fascist engagement of liberals like Ernesto Rossi or Riccardo Bauer was built precisely around this primary revolt, more moral than political.
Yet it was at precisely this moment that the fight for freedom emancipated itself from the historical and theoretical frameworks in which it had emerged. It broke away from the revolutions of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries as it adopted more complex notions that resolutely anchored it in the era beginning in October of 1917.
Piero Gobetti was again at the heart of this way of conceiving anti-fascism, which combined liberalism with exhortations to revolution. Over the course of his short life, he consistently emphasized that his liberalism was rooted in the concrete experience of the struggles of the downtrodden, with the Turin factory councils of 1919-20 and the soviets in Russia in his view marking their most complete expression.
Gobetti thus saw the workers’ movement as “freedom on the way to establishing itself” and the October Revolution as “an affirmation of liberalism” because it broke “a centuries-long slavery” in creating an “agrarian democracy,” a state in which “the people have faith.”
Autonomy, anti-bureaucratic demands, voluntarism, “free initiative from below,” and the role of the individual – not of the “mass” – were the inner secrets to this libertarian and revolutionary liberalism, attached to social revolution and fully anchored in the twentieth century. GL drew on this same thread in the 1930s. Thus, the question posed was “reconciling the political and social potential of the Russian Revolution with the scientific, humanistic, liberal legacy of the West.”
If fascism reflected Italians’ moral, political, and cultural immaturity – in short, a “lack of character” – then building a new political order must inevitably proceed via a revolutionary struggle. This was a struggle in which active minorities would play an exemplary role, and which would “then spread among wide layers of the population.”
One of the challenges this posed was how to envisage a revolutionary process in a country that had never seen any large-scale revolutionary phenomenon, the “popular and revolutionary Risorgimento” having been swept aside by the monarchy, the clergy, agrarian feudalism, and finance.
From this perspective, the anti-fascist revolution could be a “social and moral” second Risorgimento, which would result in the emancipation of the workers. Over the 1930s – for GL’s Carlo Rosselli in particular – the revolution became more clearly proletarian, and anti-fascism became synonymous with anti-capitalism.
This was not an abstract anti-capitalism, but a “concrete and historical” one founded on the observation and the conviction that liberal democracy had exhausted its historical role. The post-World War I crisis of democracy and the crisis of capitalism thus became potent factors in the interpretation of the struggle that must now be fought.
The Pd’A structured itself around themes linked to the origins of fascism and the anti-fascist revolution, questions which Carlo Rosselli in particular had posed within GL. While the onset of World War II broke up the networks constituted in exile (especially in France) it would also constitute the terrain in which these new political orientations could be tested in practice.
As Leonardi Paggi put it, we can here see “the war’s absolutely leading role not only as a factor for the destruction of the old order, but also as the site of the reconstruction of a new one.”
Indeed, “the fascist war” (from 1940–43) would play a fundamental role in driving the rise of a properly anti-fascist social and political consciousness, taking on ever wider proportions. The strike wave of March 1943 and the outpourings of joy on July 25 of that same year, as Italians greeted the news of Mussolini’s downfall, each bore witness to this.
Moreover, during the civil war of 1943 to 1945, the anti-fascism that had built up over twenty years of fascism and that etched itself on the body of a devastated, “marytred” country, now transformed into a real movement driven by men and women and by their hopes and expectations. The immediate trigger for the formation of the Action Party was, of course, the war. Yet it was also driven by the heartfelt need for an unremitting struggle, by and through the war, against everything in the process of modern Italy’s construction that had led to disaster.
From its creation in June 1942, the Pd’A presented itself as the rallying point for the diverse elements of non-Communist anti-fascism of both socialist and liberal orientations. The Pd’A was, first of all, composed of members of the liberal-socialist movement founded among young intellectual circles in central Italy in 1937 by Guido Calogero and Aldo Capitini, whose 1940 program called for the formation of a “common front for freedom.”
In July 1943, this current was joined by the militants of GL, which became a socialist unity movement under the direction of Emilio Lussu after the 1937 assassination of Carlo Rosselli. On March 3, 1943, GL, the Socialist Party, and the Communist Party signed a pact for unity in action, advocating “a national insurrection to smash fascism’s policy of war.”
As Giovanni de Luna emphasizes in his book (which is sadly yet to be translated), the different souls of the Action Party were nonetheless united by the conception of politics its militants constructed – a politics considered inextricably linked to morality – and by the constant search for means of action to respond to Italy’s concrete needs, particularly those of its peasant, worker and intellectual layers, in order to radically change the social and political order.
Hence the party’s “republican prejudice” and its calls for change in Italy’s state structure and its economy. Among the seven points of the Pd’A’s June 1942 political program, we might mention: decentralization of power to the local level; the nationalization of monopolies; land reform; trade-union freedom; and the separation of church and state. The Italian historian Claudio Pavone thus recalled how the “Action Party spoke in its program of its intent to establish a socialism for new times” and how this party had expressed a “utopia, as the aspiration for the utmost.”
The question of the means of struggle was at the center of the debates at the Pd’A’s national congress on September 5-7, 1943 – a congress held before the armistice [between the post-coup Badoglio government and the Anglo-Americans] was declared, and with German troops having spread across Italian territory from July to September. The idea of a war of national liberation here translated into the understanding that it would now be necessary to wage a large-scale war. The GL brigades would now constitute the Pd’A’s armed wing, under Ferruccio Parri’s command.
These brigades were conceived as sites for the consolidation and/or emergence of a social and political consciousness, even if recruitment for the Pd’A brigades was a lot more selective than that which took place in the Communist-led Garibaldi brigades. Dante Livio Bianco wrote:
[T]rue political work in partisan formations consisted not so much of giving ‘lectures’ or of forcing partisans to read the political press, as of touching (and that was how it was – even only touching) on the key points, uncovering them and bringing them out of the generic, the confused, the indistinct, and instead proposing these points – even in their most basic form – to the individual consciousness, thereby drawing out new motives for action.
But the debate also concerned the definition of the struggle itself: was this a struggle for national liberation and/or a “democratic” revolution? For the militants of the Pd’A, the one necessarily went hand-in-hand with the other, but the contents of this democratic revolution were differently defined even within the party – more radically so among former GL militants, and in more liberal terms among others.
Yet all agreed on an intransigent opposition to Badoglio’s post-fascist regime under the “Kingdom of the South” [ruling Allied-occupied regions after September 1943], and on a relentless search for unity in action among the parties of the Left. Throughout the Resistance war, the azionisti thought that Italy’s concrete situation could result in processes “of a revolutionary character.”
“You are either for revolution or for reforms,” Pd’A secretary for Northern Italy Leo Viliani wrote, “and we are for revolution.” The “revolution” even became a “permanent revolution,” “whose goals can never be determined once and for all, but rather are continually redefined.”
However, the Communist Party leader Palmiro Togliatti’s return to Italy in late 1944 and the international realignment of the Allied forces – who were now clearly focused on the future of Western Europe’s reconstruction – marked the end of the “revolutionary” hopes of azionismo and the anti-fascist revolution. Palmiro Togliatti’s speech at Salerno would mark their swansong.
In this Southern town, the Communist leader asserted the need for the unity of anti-fascists of whatever political or religious orientation, and proposed that the institutional question (monarchy or republic?) be put off until after the war. Azionismo’s revolutionary and Jacobin anti-fascism had truly resonated with the aspirations of the popular, peasant, and working-class layers of Northern Italy, but this would now be defeated by the new situation of Allied “diplomatic” anti-fascism, to which Togliatti’s Communist Party added decisive impetus, shortly before the Allies reached Rome in June 1944.
There now began to emerge the image of a “betrayed” or at least “unfinished” Resistance, meaning “the incompletion of an ideal that was never fully realized, but nonetheless continued to feed hopes and to awaken stresses and energies for renewal.” As Marco Revelli wrote, “…the true mortal sin of anti-fascism consisted in its struggle against the roots, against the tradition of Italy, in its destructive charge dissolving the fundamental aggregations of fatherland and family.”
And azionismo’s “mortal sin” was not only that it kept this memory alive, but that it was able to transmit this experience over time, as well as the questions it posed to the Italy of the past, their own present, and the future. This was especially the case of Piero Calamandrei (a father of the 1948 Italian Constitution), Giorgio Agosti, Leo Valiani, Aldo Garosci, and Alessandro Galante Garrone.
Of course, the Pd’A’s was a short experience, doubtless linked to its variety of political souls and its inability to provide a common substance to the anti-fascist revolution that it considered so necessary. But azionismo remains a thorn in the side of those who hope to see the subversive potential of the Resistance experience die away as the years pass.
And indeed, with the commemorations every April 25, what is put on the agenda anew is the fact that this past can again become a force in the present. Without doubt, this is the sense in which azionismo and its “anti-fascist revolution” remain a rallying point for the oppositional Italian left today. The slogan “Now and always, Resistance!” was chanted once more on April 25, 2017, renewing the subversive potential of militant azionismo and the living force of its “permanent revolution.”
And where are we now, on this glorious anniversary of victory over fascism?
As I wrote in my post of July 22 2022, Now Is the Time of Monsters; Hope and Despair: Italy on the Cusp of Change; The government of Italy has collapsed, an act of sabotage by fascist revivalists who have abandoned the political coalition which has thus far prevented it from tumbling off the edge of a precipice into the abyss, an existential threat to the survival of her peoples and the basic services of any state which include healthcare.
But if the abyss holds terrors of a precariat held hostage by death and the material needs of survival, the abyss is also where hope lies, for here the balance of power may be changed in revolutionary struggle.
In this liminal time of the reimagination and transformation of our possibilities of becoming human, of seizures of power and the performance of the Four Primary Duties of a Citizen, Question Authority, Expose Authority, Mock Authority, and Challenge Authority, let us look to our glorious past in the Resistance which was victorious in the Liberation of Italy on April 25 and the hanging of Mussolini on April 28 1945.
As Slavoj Zizek’s favorite saying goes, a French mistranslation or paraphrase of Antonio Gramsci’s line in his Prison Notebooks “La crisi consiste appunto nel fatto che il vecchio muore e il nuovo non può nascere: in questo interregno si verificano i fenomeni morbosi piú svariati”, literally “The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born, in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear”, as “Le vieux monde se meurt, le nouveau monde tarde à apparaître et dans ce clair-obscur surgissent les monstres”, which introduces the idea of monstrosity, referential to the historical development of the idea in Michel de Montaigne, Michel Foucault, and Georges Canguilhem’s work The Normal and the Pathological, a dialectical process of mimesis which results in the form of the principle as; “The old world is dying, and the new world struggles to be born; now is the time of monsters.”
Meanings shift, adapt, and change as they transgress boundaries, inhabit public and private spaces, and unfold over vast gulfs of time, and so must we.
“What is to be done?”; as Lenin asked in the essay which ignited the Russian Revolution.
As I wrote in my post of August 30 2022, Centenary of the Barricades of Parma and the Antifascist Resistance of Guido Picelli and L’Ardito del Popolo;
One hundred years ago this August, the antifascist resistance of Guido Picelli and L’Ardito del Popolo fought a glorious battle for the soul of humankind and the fate of the world against the tide of fascism and Mussolini’s blackshirts in Parma, prelude to the March on Rome which opened the door to the Holocaust and World War Two, so very like our own January 6 Insurrection which threatens us still with the return of fascism as the Fourth Reich.
Now as then, and in every generation of humankind, we are defined by how we face those who would enslave us and the darkness within ourselves which threatens to consume us, the flaws of our humanity and the brokenness of the world; in solidarity as a band of brothers and a United Humankind, or subjugated through hierarchies and divisions of elite belonging and exclusionary otherness, as a free society of equals or with fascisms of blood, faith, and soil. As the Oath of the Resistance given to me by Jean Genet in Beirut goes; “We swear our loyalty to each other, to resist and yield not, and abandon not our fellows.”
For Antifa and the Resistance the Arditi are an important historical ancestor, but also for all who love Liberty, where ever men hunger to be free.
Here also is a cautionary tale, of the necessity of Solidarity and the dangers of ideological fracture, for the Arditi failed to defeat fascism at its birth for the same reasons Rosa Luxemburg and the Social Democrats of Germany were unable to counter the ascendence of Hitler.
To this pathology of disconnectedness and the terror of our nothingness, to division and despair in the face of overwhelming force, I make reply with Buffy the Vampire Slayer quoting the instructions to priests in the Book of Common Prayer in episode eleven of season seven, Showtime, after luring an enemy into an arena to defeat in battle as a demonstration to her recruits; “I don’t know what’s coming next. But I do know it’s gonna be just like this – hard, painful. But in the end, it’s gonna be us. If we all do our parts, believe it, we’ll be the one’s left standing. Here endeth the lesson.”
Rome, Open City film by Roberto Rossellini
Here Endeth the Lesson: Buffy the Vampire Slayer, season seven, episode eleven
August 23 2023 Anniversary of the 1922 Founding of Antifa: the Barricades of Parma and the Antifascist Resistance of Guido Picelli and L’Ardito del Popolo
25 aprile 2026 Festa della Liberazione Italia: lezioni dalla storia per antifascisti, rivoluzionari, sinceri e portatori del fuoco prometeico che è la democrazia
Sopravvivenza e resistenza, il prezzo della libertà e la necessità della solidarietà, la fragilità del potere e l’inutilità delle tirannie della forza e del controllo di fronte al potere incontestabile del rifiuto di sottomettersi o di obbedire, il potere redentore dell’amore come comunità e l’alleanza di persone autonome. i popoli in una società libera di eguali e la natura trasformativa della libertà come scelta di rimanere invincibili; in questo giorno del gemello anniversario della Rivoluzione dei garofani in Portogallo e della Festa della Liberazione italiana celebriamo il glorioso trionfo dei nostri antenati come antifascisti e le lezioni che possiamo imparare dalla nostra storia.
Cosa possiamo imparare dalla Liberazione dell’Italia, e da tutte le liberazioni dai regimi fascisti nel corso della storia e del mondo, come antifascisti, rivoluzionari, rivelatori di verità e portatori del Fuoco Prometeico che è la democrazia?
Il grande segreto del potere è che è fragile e fragile; la forza e il controllo falliscono al punto di disobbedienza e incredulità.
La legge è al servizio del potere, l’ordine si appropria e non esiste un’Autorità giusta.
Chi non può essere costretto con la forza è libero. Nella resistenza e nel rifiuto di sottometterci all’autorità diventiamo Invitti.
Resistere è essere liberi, e questa è una sorta di vittoria che non ci può essere tolta. Il rifiuto di sottomettersi è l’atto umano determinante e la presa del potere, e questa è la prima rivoluzione in cui tutti dobbiamo combattere; la lotta per la proprietà di noi stessi.
In questo siamo tutti fratelli, sorelle e altri; tutti noi un’Umanità Unita con il dovere di prenderci cura l’uno dell’altro al di là di tutte le differenze.
È tempo di porre fine all’era degli imperi, alle monarchie e alle tirannie basate sulla forza e sul controllo, alle egemonie di ricchezza, potere e privilegio delle élite, ai fascismi di sangue, fede e suolo e alle divisioni di appartenenza ed esclusione delle élite. alterità; spalanchiamo le porte delle nostre prigioni e dei nostri confini e siamo liberi.
Come ho scritto nel mio post del 25 aprile 2020, Anniversari della vittoria italiana sul fascismo e fine della guerra civile italiana e della rivoluzione dei garofani in Portogallo; Celebrate con me oggi il gemello anniversario della vittoria italiana sul fascismo e della Rivoluzione dei garofani che liberò il Portogallo da cinquant’anni di tirannia. Insieme, questi due eventi e processi storici ci forniscono modelli esemplari di azione efficace nella lotta verso la democrazia e la vera uguaglianza del genere umano.
Tre decenni di antifascismo in Italia, culminati nei venti mesi di resistenza all’occupazione tedesca, non solo determinarono la vittoria degli Alleati e la liberazione dell’Europa, ma furono anche una lotta per trasformare la base culturale da cui sorse il fascismo; autoritarismo, patriarcato, nepotismo e corruzione, e le reti di rapporti cliente-cliente che sono persistite come base formale della società europea fin dall’Impero Romano. Come scrive Stephanie Prezioso in Jacobin “la Resistenza non fu solo una guerra di liberazione nazionale, ma anche una guerra civile e una guerra di classe – una guerra sociale che coinvolse la stessa popolazione”.
Ma ciò che è più rilevante per noi oggi è il modo in cui questa guerra dalle molteplici sfaccettature è stata condotta e vinta; poiché era anarchico e destrutturato, auto-organizzato e incorporante forme di mutualismo, non gerarchico e democratico nel miglior senso di società libere di eguali. Come dicono gli abitanti di Hong Kong della loro arte rivoluzionaria: “Sii come l’acqua”. Ancora una volta come descritto da Stephanie Prezioso; “L’autonomia, le rivendicazioni antiburocratiche, il volontarismo, la “libera iniziativa dal basso” e il ruolo dell’individuo – non della “massa” – erano i segreti interiori di questo liberalismo libertario e rivoluzionario, legato alla rivoluzione sociale”.
In che modo la storia della Resistenza antifascista italiana continua a plasmare e informare la nostra lotta oggi? Qui dobbiamo tuffarci nel profondo pozzo della memoria e situare il nostro momento nel contesto del secolo che si è svolto fin dalle nostre origini nella prima Resistenza antifascista mondiale, quella degli Arditi del Popolo fondati nel 1921 per resistere a Mussolini e all’ascesa del movimento Fascismo. Gli Aditi del Popolo, esercito operaio la cui difesa dei comuni sulle Barricate di Parma divenne leggendaria, nacque in reciproca interdipendenza con l’anarcosindacalismo del compagno di Bakunin Enrico Malatesta e lo Stato Libero di Fiume del poeta e generale Gabriele D’Annunzio. , quest’ultimo dei quali continua ancora oggi a influenzare i movimenti globali delle Zone Autonome.
Quando fondammo la prima dell’attuale rete, la Zona Autonoma di Capitol Hill a Seattle, dopo aver occupato il quartiere degli affari e del governo statale, avevo una copia del romanzo di Bruce Sterling del Fiume di D’Annunzio, Pirate Utopia, da cui lessi alle masse che hanno sequestrato la questura. Un racconto ammonitore oltre che un modello ispiratore e romantic, , poiché nello Stato Libero di Fiume D’Annunzio entrambi fondarono un’iconica comune anarchico-sindacalista ma crearono anche il fascismo; è uno studio fondamentale sulle forze ricorsive della paura, del potere e della forza e sul perché le rivoluzioni diventano tirannie. Nel centrare la mia idea di Zone Autonome Viventi in una critica dell’emergere storico del fascismo dal rifiuto totale anarchico del potere statale e del nazionalismo dal socialismo internazionalista, metto in discussione l’uso sociale della forza come terreno di lotta intrinseco a ogni scambio umano in la dualità delle sue forme come paura e appartenenza.
Come ho scritto nel mio post dell’11 giugno 2023, Ricordando la gloriosa zona autonoma di Seattle; Strano e sconosciuto rimane il Paese da scoprire, come Shakespeare chiamava il futuro, perché è una cosa di verità relative e ambigue, effimere e in costante movimento e processi di cambiamento e possibilità illimitate di divenire. “Un paese sconosciuto dal quale nessun viaggiatore ritorna – lascia perplessi la volontà”, come recita il verso dell’Amleto, in riferimento alla morte e a ciò che può trovarsi oltre i limiti dell’essere umano e della conoscenza.
Ma si applica ugualmente alle miriadi di futuri tra cui dobbiamo scegliere, modellati dalle nostre storie e dai nostri sistemi di essere umani insieme come condizioni imposte di lotta rivoluzionaria e dalla nostra visione poetica nella reimmaginazione e trasformazione dell’essere umano, del significato e del valore.
L’emergere delle Zone Autonome come adattamento spontaneo alle condizioni universali di disuguaglianza di potere e di brutale repressione da parte degli stati carcerari è stato in parte un’eco e un riflesso del movimento Occupy iniziato allo Zuccotti Park di New York il 17 settembre 2011; a ottobre quasi mille città in 82 nazioni e in 600 comunità americane avevano proteste sorelle e movimenti Occupy in corso e sostenuti. Il movimento Black Lives Matter è iniziato nel luglio del 2013 per protestare contro l’assoluzione dell’assassino di Trayvon Martin, e nel 2020 con la morte di George Floyd ha acceso l’estate del fuoco; circa 26 milioni di americani si sono uniti alle proteste in 200 città, a cui si sono aggiunte proteste sorelle in duemila città di sessanta nazioni. Le Zone Autonome sono state un prodigio della convergenza armonica di questi due movimenti globali di giustizia sociale, modellati dalle influenze del movimento antipatriarcale #metoo e dello sciopero scolastico Fridays for Future di Greta Thunberg e di altri movimenti ecologici globali.
Nelle Zone Autonome i movimenti di protesta globali contro il terrore suprematista bianco, il terrore sessuale patriarcale, la tirannia e il terrore di stato sia come movimenti democratici che come movimento per l’abolizione della polizia, ricombinati e integrati come un’agenda di lotta rivoluzionaria contro sistemi di potere ineguale.
E mentre portavamo una resa dei conti per i mali sistemici, i traumi epigenetici e le eredità delle nostre storie, abbiamo anche cercato di lanciare l’umanità verso una revisione totale del nostro essere, significato e valore, e la reimmaginazione e trasformazione delle illimitate possibilità di divenire. umano.
Ecco un mio articolo di diario che parla come testimone della storia di quel periodo di lotta rivoluzionaria e di liberazione; come ho scritto nel mio post dell’11 giugno 2020, Utopia Now: Seattle’s Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone; Meraviglie e giubilo nelle strade, un carnevale di trasgressioni del Proibito e mascherate di possibili identità e futuri di divenire umani, anarchia, caos e gioia, impazzire ed essere ingovernabili, e lo spavento dei cavalli; vieni a ballare con noi, America. Vieni a trovare il tuo cuore e sii libero.
Chi rimane non vinto è libero. Ciascuno di noi che sfida l’ingiustizia e la tirannia, che resiste alla sottomissione, alla disumanizzazione e alla schiavitù, che mette in discussione, deride e sfida l’autorità, diventa un agente della Libertà che non può essere messo a tacere e che passa la fiaccola della libertà come catalizzatore incontrollabile di cambiare per tutti coloro con cui interagiamo, e quindi non potrà mai essere veramente sconfitto.
Ognuno di noi che resistendo diventa Invitto e portatore di Libertà diventa anche una Zona Vivente Autonoma, e questa è la chiave della nostra inevitabile vittoria. Noi stessi siamo il potere che il terrore di stato e la tirannia non possono conquistare.
La popolazione di Seattle ha risposto alla brutale repressione e alla violenza della polizia, nel tentativo di spezzare la ribellione contro l’ingiustizia razziale e i crimini d’odio messi in atto dalla Homeland Security e dalla polizia in tutta l’America e nel mondo guidata da Trump e dai suoi terroristi suprematisti bianchi sia all’interno della polizia che come gruppo quinta colonna e operando in coordinamento con forze negabili come le milizie armate ora visibili ovunque, assaltando la cittadella del governo cittadino con ondate di migliaia di cittadini che chiedono il diritto alla vita e alla libertà indipendentemente dal colore della nostra pelle.
Le persone hanno preso il controllo di sei isolati, compreso il distretto di polizia e il municipio, e hanno istituito la Zona Autonoma di Capitol Hill, un nome che risuona di storia e riflette la Comune di Parigi e la A italiana narco-sindacalisti degli anni ’20, Rojava in Siria ed Exarcheia ad Atene, ma fu modellato direttamente sugli ideali, i metodi e gli strumenti del movimento Occupy fondato a Wall Street a New York.
Che bella resistenza da parte di coloro che non andranno tranquillamente incontro alla morte. A tutti coloro che lottano contro i mulini a vento; Ti saluto.
Riprendiamoci il nostro governo dai nostri traditori e la nostra democrazia dalla tirannia fascista del sangue, della fede e della terra che ha tentato di rubare la nostra libertà e di schiavizzarci con divisioni di alterità escludente.
Quando il popolo avrà rivendicato il governo di cui è comproprietario e questa nuova fase di protesta, un movimento per occupare i municipi in spregio alla tirannia, avrà conquistato ogni sede del potere nella nazione e riportato la democrazia in America, potremo iniziare la globalizzazione della Rivoluzione e il riforgiamento della nostra società sul fondamento dell’uguaglianza e della giustizia razziale e dei nostri diritti umani universali.
Uniamoci insieme in solidarietà e ripristiniamo l’America come una società libera di eguali e liberiamo tutte le nazioni del mondo ora tenute prigioniere dal Quarto Reich.
Non può esserci che una risposta al fascismo e al terrore di stato; Mai più.
E dove siamo adesso, in questo glorioso anniversario della vittoria sul fascismo?
Come ho scritto nel mio post del 22 luglio 2022, Now Is the Time of Monsters; Speranza e disperazione: l’Italia sull’orlo del cambiamento; Il governo italiano è crollato, un atto di sabotaggio da parte dei revivalisti fascisti che hanno abbandonato la coalizione politica che finora gli ha impedito di precipitare dall’orlo del precipizio nell’abisso, una minaccia esistenziale alla sopravvivenza dei suoi popoli e dei fondamentali servizi di qualsiasi Stato che includano l’assistenza sanitaria.
Ma se nell’abisso si nasconde il terrore di un precariato tenuto in ostaggio dalla morte e dai bisogni materiali di sopravvivenza, nell’abisso è anche il luogo della speranza, perché qui gli equilibri di potere possono essere cambiati nella lotta rivoluzionaria.
In questo momento liminale di reimmaginazione e trasformazione delle nostre possibilità di diventare umani, di presa di potere e di adempimento dei quattro doveri primari di un cittadino, interrogare l’autorità, esporre l’autorità, simulare l’autorità e sfidare l’autorità, guardiamo al nostro passato glorioso nella Resistenza che vinse con la Liberazione dell’Italia il 25 aprile e l’impiccagione di Mussolini il 28 aprile 1945.
Come dice il detto preferito di Slavoj Zizek, una traduzione errata o parafrasi francese del verso di Antonio Gramsci nei suoi Quaderni del carcere “La crisi consiste appunto nel fatto che il vecchio muore e il nuovo non può nascere: in questo interregno si verificano i fenomeni morbosi più svariati”, letteralmente “La crisi consiste proprio nel fatto che il vecchio muore e il nuovo non può nascere, in questo interregno compaiono una grande varietà di sintomi morbosi”, come “Le vieux monde se meurt, le nouveau monde tarde à apparaître et dans ce clair-obscur surgissent les monstres”, che introduce l’idea di mostruosità, riferimento allo sviluppo storico dell’idea nell’opera Il normale e il patologico di Michel de Montaigne, Michel Foucault e Georges Canguilhem, un processo dialettico di mimesi che sfocia nella forma del principio come; “Il vecchio mondo sta morendo e il nuovo mondo fatica a nascere; ora è il momento dei mostri”.
I significati cambiano, si adattano e cambiano mentre trasgrediscono i confini, abitano spazi pubblici e privati e si dispiegano su vasti abissi di tempo, e così dobbiamo fare noi.
“Che cosa si deve fare?”; come chiedeva Lenin nel saggio che infiammò la Rivoluzione russa.
Come ho scritto nel mio post del 30 agosto 2022, Centenario delle Barricate di Parma e della Resistenza Antifascista di Guido Picelli e L’Ardito del Popolo;
Cento anni fa, in agosto, la resistenza antifascista di Guido Picelli e L’Ardito del Popolo combatteva a Parma una gloriosa battaglia per l’anima dell’umanità e il destino del mondo contro l’ondata del fascismo e delle camicie nere di Mussolini a Parma, preludio alla Marcia sul Roma che ha aperto le porte all’Olocausto e alla Seconda Guerra Mondiale, così simile alla nostra insurrezione del 6 gennaio che ci minaccia ancora con il ritorno del fascismo come Quarto Reich.
Ora come allora, e in ogni generazione dell’umanità, siamo definiti dal modo in cui affrontiamo coloro che vorrebbero schiavizzarci e l’oscurità dentro di noi che minaccia di consumarci, i difetti della nostra umanità e la frattura del mondo; solidali come un gruppo di fratelli e un’umanità unita, o soggiogati attraverso gerarchie e divisioni di appartenenza alle élite e alterità escludenti, come società libera di eguali o con fascismi di sangue, fede e terra. Come recita il giuramento di resistenza prestatomi da Jean Genet a Beirut; “Giuriamo lealtà gli uni agli altri, di resistere e di non cedere, e di non abbandonare i nostri simili”.
Per Antifa e la Resistenza gli Arditi sono un importante antenato storico, ma anche per tutti coloro che amano la Libertà, ovunque gli uomini abbiano fame di essere liberi.
Qui c’è anche un avvertimento sulla necessità di Solidarnosc e sui pericoli di frattura ideologica, poiché gli Arditi non riuscirono a sconfiggere il fascismo alla sua nascita per le stesse ragioni per cui Rosa Luxemburg e i socialdemocratici tedeschi non furono in grado di contrastare l’ascesa di Hitler.
A questa patologia della disconnessione e al terrore del nostro nulla, alla divisione e alla disperazione di fronte a una forza soverchiante, rispondo con Buffy the Vampire Slayer citando le istruzioni ai sacerdoti nel Book of Common Prayer nell’episodio undici della settima stagione, Showtime , dopo aver attirato un nemico in un’arena per sconfiggerlo in battaglia come dimostrazione alle sue reclute; “Non so cosa succederà dopo. Ma so che sarà proprio così: duro, doloroso. Ma alla fine saremo noi. Se tutti facciamo la nostra parte, credeteci, saremo quelli che rimarranno in piedi. Qui finisce la lezione”.
There are things which define the limits of the human, as the line of the hero in the telenovela Dark Winds goes; “there is a line in the human heart that separates men from monsters, and I have crossed that line.” Nothing constitutes such a line like genocide, and all genocides bear a special duty of remembrance and of reckoning, among them that of the Armenians, once weaponized by Hitler as justification for the invasion of Poland and for the Holocaust with the words; “”Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?” or in the original Gereman “Wer redet heute noch von der Vernichtung der Armenier?.”
Such things we must remember, if we are to preserve our humanity.
Biden’s historic Armenian Remembrance Day speech of 2021 on this day, the first official recognition of the Armenian Genocide by America, went as follows; “Each year on this day, we remember the lives of all those who died in the Ottoman-era Armenian genocide and recommit ourselves to preventing such an atrocity from ever again occurring. Beginning on April 24, 1915, with the arrest of Armenian intellectuals and community leaders in Constantinople by Ottoman authorities, one and a half million Armenians were deported, massacred, or marched to their deaths in a campaign of extermination. We honor the victims of the Meds Yeghern so that the horrors of what happened are never lost to history. And we remember so that we remain ever-vigilant against the corrosive influence of hate in all its forms.
Today, as we mourn what was lost, let us also turn our eyes to the future—toward the world that we wish to build for our children. A world unstained by the daily evils of bigotry and intolerance, where human rights are respected, and where all people are able to pursue their lives in dignity and security.”
Thus has our President of times past, possibly the last true American President, and our nation before the collapse of the Restoration and the recapture of the stater by the Fourth Reich, given warning to the tyrannies of the world that we will defend the universal human rights which supersede the claims of any nation, and defend the people from unjust governments when necessary. In the context of the Armenian Genocide, especially this warrant is served to the regimes of Erdogan of Turkey and Putin of Russia, who between them now contest for the dominion of the Middle East and the Mediterranean in pursuit of refounding their former historic empires prior to the First World War.
With recognition must come reparations by Turkey, and the restoration of a sovereign and independent Armenian homeland. While the boundaries of Tigranes the Great’s Armenia included Jerusalem and all of Syria from Damascus and Palmyra to the sea, I think some compromise may be able to be worked out, considering that Turkey wants NATO support for its seizure of Libya’s oil fields through a puppet regime which is threatened by Russia’s massive line of Libyan fortifications and mercenary army; surely this vast wealth and dominion of the Mediterranean would be worth the price of justice for Armenia. Turkey and Iran may also find a buffer state useful, to join newly liberated Syria in that role.
There remains the smouldering powder keg of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Russian and Turkish proxy forces, both a Civil War and Great Powers conflict which has been a theatre of World War Three. In this Turkish interests align with those of Europe and of America as a guarantor of our universal human rights and of democracy.
A Turkish fleet, especially one allied and integrated with joint NATO-EU forces, could end the war in Ukraine by liberating the seaboard and the Black Sea.
So also could such a Grand Alliance end the Israeli genocide of the Palestinians now ongoing, and bring a Reckoning to the criminal Netanyahu regime.
But these are dreams for a different time, when America is no longer a Vichy state captured by a Russian puppet tyrant bent on the subversion of democracy and the Fall of America to a totalitarian Nazi revivalist theocracy of patriarchal sexual terror and white supremacist terror.
My hope is that the world’s champions and guarantors of democracy, freedom, equality, truth, and justice, may yet find a way forward to throwing words instead of stones, as Sigmund Freud taught us.
After all, we know all too well what happened the last time.
As written by the historian Heather Cox Richardson in her daily current events newsletter; “In his first major speech as Secretary of State, Antony Blinken laid out the principles of the Biden administration in foreign policy, emphasizing that this administration believed foreign and domestic policy to be profoundly linked. Biden’s people would support democracy at home and abroad to combat the authoritarianism rising around the world… including in the U.S.
“The more we and other democracies can show the world that we can deliver, not only for our people, but also for each other, the more we can refute the lie that authoritarian countries love to tell, that theirs is the better way to meet people’s fundamental needs and hopes. It’s on us to prove them wrong,” Blinken said. “So the question isn’t if we will support democracy around the world, but how.” He answered: “We will use the power of our example. We will encourage others to make key reforms, overturn bad laws, fight corruption, and stop unjust practices. We will incentivize democratic behavior.”
President Joe Biden has set out a foreign policy that focuses on human rights and reaches out more to foreign peoples than to their governments, heartening protesters in authoritarian countries.
On Saturday, Biden issued a document declaring that the displacement and slaughter of 1.5 million ethnic Armenians at the hands of the Ottomans in 1915 was a “genocide.” The U.S. had previously refused to recognize the ethnic cleansing for what it was because of the strategic importance of Turkey to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO (among other things, Turkey holds the straits that control access to the Black Sea, on which Russia and Ukraine, as well as other countries, sit).
Biden’s recognition of the Armenian genocide is a reflection of the fact that Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, is increasingly close to Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Taliban, and appears to be abandoning democracy in his own country, giving Biden the room to take a step popular in America but previously too undiplomatic to undertake. (Remember when Erdogan’s security staff beat up protesters in Washington, D.C., in 2017 and prosecutors dropped the charges?)
Erdogan greeted Biden’s announcement with anger, demanding he retract it, but he also said he expected to discuss all of the disputes between the U.S. and Turkey at the June NATO summit. Geopolitics in Erdogan’s part of the world are changing, as Putin is struggling at home with protests against his treatment of opposition leader Alexey Navalny and with the new U.S. sanctions that, by making it hard for him to float government bonds, could weaken his economy further. It is looking more and more likely that Biden and Putin will also have a summit early this summer.”
As written in the website of the Genocide Museum; “What is the Armenian Genocide?
The extermination of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire and the surrounding regions during 1915-1923 is called the Armenian Genocide.
Those massacres were masterminded and perpetrated by the government of Young Turks and were later finalized by the Kemalist government.
The First World War gave the Young Turks the opportunity to settle accounts with Armenians living in the Ottoman Empire, thus implementing the decision of the secret meeting of 1911 in Thessaloniki. The plan was to tukify the Muslims and to exterminate the Armenians living in the Ottoman Empire. Talaat Pasha (Interior Minister), Enver Pasha (Minister of Military Affairs), Djemal Pasha (commander of the Palestinian Front), Behaeddin Shakir Bey (Young Turk Central Committee member) and others were among the orchestrators of the project.
Intending to annihilate Armenians, they wanted to eliminate the Armenian Question. Armenia and Armenians were an obstacle on the way of the project of the Young Turks. Their dream of “Great Turan” was to stretch from the Bosphorus to Altai. During the First World War the Young Turks perpetrated massacres against Assyrians, Greeks and Arabs living in the Ottoman Empire.
In February 1915 the military minister Enver Pasha ordered to eliminate the Armenian soldiers serving in the Army. On April 24 and the following days 800 Armenians were arrested in Constantinople and exiled to the depths of Anatolia. Armenian writers, journalists, doctors, scientists, clergymen, intellectuals including Armenian members of the parliament were among them. A part of them died on the way of the exile, while others died after reaching there. The first international response to the violence resulted in a joint statement by France, Russia and the Great Britain in May 1915, where the Turkish atrocities against the Armenians were defined as “a crime against humanity and civilization”. According to them, Turkish government was responsible for the implementation of the crime.
Why was the Armenian Genocide perpetrated?
When WWI erupted, the government of the Young Turks adopted the policy of Pan-Turkism, hoping to save the remains of the weakened Ottoman Empire. The plan was to create an enormous Ottoman Empire that would spread to China, include all the Turkish speaking nations of the Caucasus and Middle Asia, intending also to turkify all the ethnic minorities of the empire. The Armenian population became the main obstacle standing in the way of the realization of this policy. Besides, the constitution restored after the Revolution of 1908 promised equal rights to all citizens of the Ottoman Empire. Armenians enthusiastically embraced this opportunity, however the change of status of previously deprived Armenians increased the hostility of the Turks towards Christians. This hostility was formed long ago, as even in the conditions of deprivation Armenians of the Ottoman empire provided unprecedented social, cultural and economic development. The genocide was a means to suppress this ascent, as well as to seize the Armenian wealth created during decades.
The Young Turks used WWI as a suitable opportunity for the implementation of the Armenian genocide, although it was planned in 1911-1912.
How many people died in the Armenian Genocide?
There were an estimated two million Armenians living in the Ottoman Empire before the First World War. Approximately one and a half million Armenians were killed from 1915-1923. The remaining part was either islamized or exiled.
The mechanism of implementation
A genocide is the organized extermination of a nation aiming to put an end to their collective existence. Thus, the implementation of the genocide requires oriented programming and an internal mechanism, which makes genocide a state crime, as only a state possesses all the resources that can be used to carry out this policy.
The first phase of the Armenian Genocide was the conscription of about 60,000 Armenian men into the Ottoman army, their disarmament and murder by their Turkish fellow soldiers.
The second phase of the extermination of the Armenian population started on April 24, 1915 with the arrest of several hundred Armenian intellectuals and representatives of national elite (mainly in the capital of the Ottoman Empire, Constantinople) and their subsequent elimination. Hereinafter, Armenians worldwide started to commemorate the Armenian genocide on April 24.
The third phase of the genocide is characterized with the exile of the massacres of women, children, elderly people to the desert of Syria. Hundreds of thousands of people were murdered by Turkish soldiers, police officers, Kurdish bandits during the deportation. The others died of epidemic diseases. Thousands of women and children were subjected to violence. Tens of thousands were forcibly islamized.
The fourth phase is the universal and absolute denial of the Turkish government of the mass deportations and genocide carried out against Armenians in their homeland. Despite the ongoing process of international condemnation of the Armenian Genocide, Turkey fights against recognition by all means, including distortion of history, means of propaganda, lobbying activities and other measures.”
As to more recent events which echo and reflect the Genocide of 1915 in the unfolding Nagorno-Karabakh Theatre of World War Three, here follow my journals of its progress.
September 26 2023 Victory in the Nagorno-Karabakh Theatre of World War Three As the Ukrainian Liberation of the Black Sea Gathers Momentum
Nagorno-Karabakh liberates herself from Russian occupation as Ukraine liberates the Black Sea, with glorious destruction of the Russian forces of occupation in Crimea and the deaths of the Russian Navy high command.
These event are related, as well as concurrent, for Russia is losing her grip on her colonies as Putin’s regime loses its authority.
Erdogan has outplayed Putin in this theatre of World War Three, one made complex with old vendettas and the legacies of history. But a predator is most dangerous when it is cornered and must win or be destroyed, and this is the moment when Putin will attack with the greatest possible savagery.
The liberation of the Black Sea and the Turkish eclipse of the Russian Empire in dominion of the Mediterranean means the end of threats of Russian conquest of Europe, Africa, and the Middle East, but we are now in a race to regime change before Putin loses all his options of survival, for he might do anything, even unpredictable things.
For his finger rests on a button of global nuclear annihilation, and like an evil genie in a bottle it calls to him, whispering; “Set me free, and I’ll make you powerful.” This is why we must take his toys away with decisive action now, while we still can, before he realizes his cause is hopeless and his empire is lost.
Now is the time to destabilize the Russian client states of puppet tyrants throughout the world, sever the Gordian Knot of the Russia-China-Belarus pact, leverage American and international solidarity with Ukraine, and bring confusion to the enemy.
As written by Edwin Markham in The Gates of Paradise and Other Poems ”When you are anvil, bear; When you are hammer, strike.”
As written by Dan Sabbagh in The Guardian, in an article entitled Azerbaijan’s Nagorno-Karabakh victory highlights limits of Russia’s power: With Moscow’s resources ‘clearly finite’ the Kremlin has had to adapt to Baku’s rising power; “Azerbaijan’s military victory in the extended 35-year conflict over the disputed territory of Nagorno-Karabakh is a notable geopolitical setback for Russia, traditionally Armenia’s partner and ally.
Moscow’s post-Soviet strategy has often been to stoke conflicts to weaken its near neighbours, creating crises in Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia. But on this occasion the Kremlin has had to adapt to Azerbaijan’s rising power – showing a willingness to sacrifice an old ally.
At the beginning of the month, before the current crisis, Nikol Pashinyan, Armenia’s prime minister, rued that his country’s historic “99.999%” dependence on Russia as security partner had amounted to “a strategic mistake”.
By then it had long been clear Russia had become embroiled in a quagmire in Ukraine – and so would be unable to prevent Azerbaijan from finally regaining control of an enclave of territory in ethnic Armenian hands over which it had wanted to assert control since the fall of the Soviet Union.
“Russian resources are clearly finite,” said James Nixey, a Russia expert with the Chatham House thinktank. “Karabakh is clearly an issue of lesser importance to Moscow, it is not a place like Crimea or Syria from which it is possible to project force.”
“In a way, Russia chose the wrong country,” said Neil Melvin, a director at the Royal United Services Institute thinktank. “Azerbaijan is much closer to Russia: the two share a border. It is clear who is now the dominant force in the south Caucasus, and looks like it wants to align to them.”
Azerbaijan is a larger, wealthier country than Armenia and an autocracy, like Russia. The country’s economy, supported by large oil and significant gas reserves, is able to afford a more powerful military – its $2.64bn (£2.16bn) defence budget is 3.5 times its neighbour’s in dollar terms, according to figures from the International Institute for Strategic Studies.
Baku had already formed an effective alliance with Turkey that provided the Bayraktar TB2 drones that helped it win the last war in 2020, a 44-day autumn conflict in which Azerbaijan took control of the skies, bombing Armenia’s Soviet-era tanks and its allies in Nagorno-Karabakh.
It recaptured territories lost in 1994 and in the ensuing peace left only the core of Nagorno-Karabakh in ethnic Armenian hands, with nearly 2,000 Russian peacekeepers in place to control the borders and the protect the small Lachin corridor to Armenia proper.
But in the run-up to the Ukraine war, Azerbaijan also turned to Moscow. Its president, Ilham Aliyev, whose father was once a KGB official and a politburo member, travelled to Moscow two days before the invasion to sign an alliance agreement with Vladimir Putin. Azerbaijan later agreed to buy gas from Russia, raising questions whether it was using that to meet commitments to the EU.
Azerbaijan’s latest attack last week on Nagorno-Karabakh lasted only 24 hours. During the assault, a number of Russian peacekeepers were killed by Baku’s forces. Aliyev rang the Kremlin to apologise the next day, and the matter appears largely closed without Moscow making any significant complaint.
South of Azerbaijan lies Iran, one of Russia’s few close allies, and the three countries agreed in May they would build a new rail corridor along the Caspian Sea, although claims from Мoscow that it could create a trade route to rival that of the Suez Canal seem notably optimistic.
Armenia’s prime minister, meanwhile, has complained that the Moscow-dominated six-country Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) did not come to its aid, and some hope that it will now try to pivot to the west. Its parliament will now consider signing up to the international criminal court, which, if ratified, could prevent Putin, because he is indicted by The Hague, from visiting.
But that is a long way from Yerevan turning to the EU and Nato. “Look at the difficulties Ukraine is having joining the EU and Nato. A country like Armenia has no chance,” Nixey said. With a long-established Russian base, Gyumri, to protect it from Turkey to the west, a rapid realignment is impossible.
Russia’s inability or lack of desire to protect Armenia may not have any major implications for other post-Soviet frozen conflicts, because the countries involved have less power than Azerbaijan or simply less hostility to Moscow.
Magomed Torijev, a journalist and expert on the Caucasus region, said Georgia’s government was “increasingly friendly with Russia”, with no strong interest in trying to reclaim either South Ossetia or Abkhazia, while Moldova, with its own Transnistria separatists, was not ready to challenge the Kremlin.
In other countries, such as Syria, Russia’s alliance with the governing regime will help protect its position, and Moscow’s presence is likely to endure unless it is directly challenged. But what has changed, experts say, is that stronger countries such as Ukraine and Azerbaijan are willing and able to challenge Russia as never before.
“The reality is that Russia has been weakening for some time,” Melvin said.
As I wrote in my post of September 19 2022, Renewal of the Nagorno-Karabakh Theatre of World War Three; Among the many horrors of the multifront Third World War now being waged by Russia against democracy in the mad imperial conquest and dominion of Putin’s regime of war criminals and plutocrats, the renewal of the Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict along with the destabilization operations of the Russian puppet tyranny of Serbia against Bosnia and Kosovo together signal an active threat to Europe and the world.
As Putin’s conquest of Ukraine collapses in failure and ruin, with Russian soldiers running from the battlefields in total panic, rout, and mass desertions before the victorious army of Ukraine, and his plans of glorifying the power of his regime ending in self-demonization and delegitimation, Putin now seeks to generalize the conflict. Russian tanks are not yet massing along the border of Poland, nor ships positioning for the capture of the Romanian port of Constantia and the invasion of the Danube, nor nuclear missiles hurtling through the skies to bring the extinction of humankind, but all of these possibilities are now far more likely. A predator is most dangerous when cornered.
Some voices yet speak of peace as something which may be clung to in the face of an enemy which does not recognize our humanity nor respect any laws or limits regarding our universal human rights, or seek mercy through danegeld and becoming de facto vassal states of an imperial master, though this has never worked and we should have learned this from the failure of Chamberlain’s “peace in our time” speech of 1938 to save Europe from Hitler.
To this I say; the best time to stop a war, a genocide, acts of terror and tyranny, and crimes against humanity, is before it happens.
Those who respect no laws and no limits may hide behind none.
We may disambiguate robber-baron Russia in this moment from the fallen Soviet Union it replaced by one simple fact, of enormous implications; Russia now funds, trains, arms, and directs fascist and nationalist alt-right political parties globally where it once did the same for communist revolutionaries.
We all of us who love Liberty, including those who now challenge the Russian imperial dominion and hegemony in the many theatres of this the Third World War, in Russia and America, Ukraine and Syria, Libya, Belarus, Kazakhstan, West Africa, the Sahel, and Lake Chad, Nagorno-Karabakh, and now the Gordian Knot of Serbia and Bosnia as Putin launches his campaign for the conquest of Europe, and as skirmishes signal an emerging Tajik-Uzbek conflict which will bring Afghanistan and Pakistan into an unhappy alliance with Turkey and rekindle the dream of a united Sunni Mughal-Ottoman alliance against Shia Persia, now Iran and Russia’s ally in Syria, in this moment as the world burns and civilization begins to collapse utterly it seems to me that we must face a great truth; it doesn’t matter who we are or what we call ourselves, only what we do.
This is the principle of impartial justice and equality before the law on which democracy is founded, and it has consequences for our duty of care for others; all that matters in the end is what we do with our fear, and how we use our power.
How can we understand and process Russia’s historical volte-face from liberator to conqueror and betrayal of our solidarity as human beings?
In the second episode of the series premier of the beloved and iconic epic and allegory of antifascist Resistance, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, The Harvest, we have a gruesomely parallel situation. Our heroes have learned that the enforcers of The Master are about to deliver the world in his dominion and need sacrifices which they will find at the local nightclub, and are ambushing the malefactors in a spoiling raid. Xander is focused on rescue of his friend Jesse who has been taken by the vampires, and says: “We’ve gotta get in there before Jesse does something stupider than usual.” I say to you now as Giles says to Xander; “Listen to me… Jesse is dead. You have to remember that when you see him, you’re not looking at your friend. You’re looking at the thing that killed him.”
I say again and directly to fellow Democratic Socialists, Progressives, Anarchists, and Left intellectuals of all kinds; Putin’s Russia is a criminal syndicate which embodies the final form of capitalism as totalitarian kleptocracy and the elite hegemonies of wealth, power, and privilege and fascisms of blood, faith, and soil which she once so heroically fought against. In this I speak as a witness of history who fought alongside Russian soldiers in the liberation of South Africa from Apartheid and in other causes, and in Mariupol fought against them in the reformed Abraham Lincoln Brigade which we modeled on that of the Spanish Civil War.
The origins of evil lie not in an evil impulse as an inherent flaw of human design, but in the operations of systemic power and weaponized inequalities and wealth disparity.
And this we must resist, always and in whatever form it arises through all of history and the world.
As written by Isabelle Khurshudyan, Erin Cunningham and Miriam Berger in Huffpost; “The conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the contested Nagorno-Karabakh region has simmered for decades. In 2020, the two sides fought a bloody war for territory — one that ended with a fragile Russian-brokered truce.
But on Monday night, fierce clashes erupted again near the disputed region, which is inside Azerbaijan but controlled by ethnic Armenian separatists.
Armenian officials said at least 49 people were killed in attacks by Azerbaijan’s military. Azerbaijan acknowledged launching the strikes — but said it was responding to Armenian provocations.
The renewed fighting prompted the State Department to call for an immediate end to the hostilities. Reuters reported Tuesday morning that Secretary of State Antony Blinken spoke overnight with both the Armenian prime minister and president of Azerbaijan.
Russia is a key ally of Armenia, and some observers speculated that Azerbaijan may have sought to attack while Moscow is bogged down by a tough fight in Ukraine.
Here’s what you need to know about the fight over Nagorno-Karabakh, the longest-running conflict in the post-Soviet sphere.
What are the roots of the conflict? Why did Azerbaijan attack Armenia on Sept. 12?
Armenia’s Defense Ministry said Azerbaijan attacked the areas of Goris, Sotk and Jermuk in Nagorno-Karabakh using drones and large-caliber weapons. Azerbaijan’s military admitted to the attacks but accused Armenian forces of planting mines along the border to disrupt supply routes. Yerevan denied the accusations.
At least 49 people were killed in the strikes, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said Tuesday, adding, “Unfortunately, it’s not the final figure.” Azerbaijan also said it suffered losses but did not provide a casualty count.
Regional analysts said Azerbaijan could have tried to capitalize on recent Russian setbacks in Ukraine.
“This escalation takes place when (1) Russia is distracted as never before after the collapse of the Kharkiv front; and (2) offensive action against Armenia can surf the global wave of revulsion for Russia since Armenia is formally Russia’s ally,” Laurence Broers, an associate fellow of Chatham House’s Russia and Eurasia program, said on Twitter.
Baku has “unprecedented leverage in every direction,” Broers added, as an increasingly isolated Moscow is now also reliant on land routes through Azerbaijan for trade with Asia and Iran.
In July, the European Commission and Azerbaijan reached a deal to double gas exports to the E.U. within the next two years as the continent seeks out alternatives to Russian energy.
The E.U. is pushing to “diversify away from Russia and to turn toward more reliable, trustworthy partners. And I am glad to count Azerbaijan among them,” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said at the time.
Armenia on Tuesday appealed to Russia, the United States and France for help in ending the hostilities. Russia’s Foreign Ministry said it helped broker a truce for Tuesday morning.
“As we have long made clear, there can be no military solution to the conflict,” Blinken said Monday in a statement. “We urge an end to any military hostilities immediately.”
What are the roots of the conflict?
As part of a divide-and-rule tactic, the Soviet government first established the autonomous region of Nagorno-Karabakh, where at least 95 percent of the population is ethnically Armenian, in Azerbaijan in the 1920s.
But it wasn’t until 1988, as Moscow’s grip began to weaken, that the enclave became a flash point within the Soviet Union. Authorities in Nagorno-Karabakh sought to unite with the then-Soviet republic of Armenia and declared independence from Azerbaijan, another Soviet republic.
In 1992, after the Soviet Union collapsed, a full-scale war broke out between the two new countries over control of the region. Nagorno-Karabakh is located within the internationally recognized borders of Azerbaijan but is mostly controlled by political factions linked to Armenia.
Between 20,000 and 30,000 people were killed in that conflict and hundreds of thousands were displaced before a cease-fire was declared in 1994. Not only did Armenia end up controlling Nagorno-Karabakh but it also occupied 20 percent of the surrounding Azerbaijani territory, according to the Council on Foreign Relations.
Between 1994 and 2020, periodic skirmishes flared along the border, including the use of attack drones, heavy weaponry and special operations on the front lines. In 2016, particularly fierce clashes between Azerbaijan and Armenian-backed forces in Nagorno-Karabakh raged for four days.
But in 2020, a full-scale war broke out after Azerbaijan launched an offensive across the line of contact held by Armenian forces and local fighters. The campaign, which began on the morning of Sept. 27, sparked a six-week-long war.
“The fighting is the worst it has been since the Karabakh War of 1992 to 1994, encompassing the entire line of contact, with artillery, missile, and drone strikes deep past Armenian lines,” Michael Kofman, director of the Russian studies program at the Center for Naval Analyses in Virginia, and Leonid Nersisyan, CEO of the Armenian Research & Development Institute, wrote at the time.
The war, they said, featured “modern weaponry … representing a large-scale conventional conflict.”
One of the major features of the war was the military support Turkey, a regional power and longtime foe of Armenia, gave Azerbaijan. In the months before the conflict broke out, Turkey’s military exports to Azerbaijan rose sixfold, according to exports data analyzed by Reuters. The sales included drones and other military equipment, which experts say helped turn the tide for Azerbaijan.
As part of the Russia-mediated cease-fire, Armenia had to cede swaths of territory it controlled for decades. More than 7,000 combatants were killed, according to the International Crisis Group, and Russian peacekeepers were deployed to patrol the region.
The cease-fire Russia brokered “brought neither full stability nor security to the region,” Alexa Fults and Paul Stronski of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace wrote in April. “And even before the Ukraine war, Moscow’s peacekeepers have struggled to do their jobs.”
Russia, they said, arguably has the most influence of any outside power to push peace forward. But its resources and attention have been sapped by the war in Ukraine.
“After the 2020 war, the front line has become longer and more volatile than before,” according to the International Crisis Group.”
And in a previous essay on this conflict, April 15 2022, A History of the Third World War and Russia’s Imperial Wars of Dominion Since 2020, Part Six: the Nagorno-Karabakh Theatre of War; That which is not spoken of becomes forgotten, and ceases to be real as a historical informing, motivating, and shaping force of our identity. This is why the witness of history is important to our adaptive range and our possibilities of becoming human, and why meaning and value can be created in the present as an unfolding and realization of the past.
Memory, history, identity; such recursive processes sculpt us across vast epochs of time as a stone is formed by wind and water. We are prochronisms, a record in our forms biological, psychological, and sociocultural-civilizational of how we solved problems of adaptation to change like the shell of a fantastic sea creature.
This is true of nations as well as individuals; and here I practice my art of seeing futures that might be in the stories of which we are made, using methods of literature, history, and psychology in an archeology of the future, as originated by Robert G.L. Waite in his study of Hitler, The Psychopathic God. I first read it as a senior in high school, and its why I chose these three disciplines of scholarship at university in my life mission to understand the origins of evil.
Here is the sixth and final part of my interrogation of the theatres of World War Three, that of Nagorno-Karabakh.
As I wrote in my post of October 10 2020, Armenia and Azerbaijan: Today a Fragile Peace in a Century Old Conflict; An ephemeral moment of peace stilled the thunder of war in the developing third front of the historic civilizational Great Powers conflict of dominion between Russian and Turkey; adding the Armenian-Azerbaijan theatre to those of Syria and Libya, which have destabilized Europe and cast the fate of the Middle East and the Mediterranean to the winds of fate.
That today’s cease fire falls within days of the historic 1920 Baku Congress which shattered the grip of European colonial powers on the world is no accident, but a distant echo of that vigorous idealism and vision of a new future for humankind.
Here are the ringing words of the closing call to action at the end of the Congress; “Go forward as one in a holy war against the British conquerors! …this is a holy war to liberate the peoples of the East; to end the division of humanity into oppressor peoples and oppressed peoples; and to achieve complete equality of all peoples and races, whatever language they may speak, whatever the color of their skin, and whatever the religion they profess.”
They are words which still hold true today, as we battle for our humanity, our liberty, our equality, and our lives against tyrannies of force and control in the streets of Portland, Seattle, New York, and across America and the world; in Hong Kong, Syria, Yemen, Chile, Bolivia, Kashmir, India, and that dual entity which is both al Quds and Jerusalem, among many others.
Yet Armenia holds a unique symbolic position in the iconography and mythology of genocide and survival, for the events of the 1914-1917 campaign of genocide and ethnic cleansing by the Ottoman Empire were Hitler’s justification for the invasion of Poland. The text of the Obersalzberg address on 22 August 1939, provided by Admiral Wilhelm Canaris, chief of German military intelligence, to an allied agent is as follows; “Our strength consists in our speed and in our brutality. Genghis Khan led millions of women and children to slaughter – with premeditation and a happy heart. History sees in him solely the founder of a state. It’s a matter of indifference to me what a weak western European civilization will say about me. I have issued the command – and I’ll have anybody who utters but one word of criticism executed by a firing squad – that our war aim does not consist in reaching certain lines, but in the physical destruction of the enemy. Accordingly, I have placed my death-head formation in readiness – for the present only in the East – with orders to them to send to death mercilessly and without compassion, men, women, and children of Polish derivation and language. Only thus shall we gain the living space which we need. Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians.”
So it is that Armenia has become a symbol of the struggle between civilization as human meaning and value on the one side and the atavistic barbarism of an amoral modernity and nihilism in which only power is real on the other. And of the beauty of resistance, by which the powerless become unconquerable and free.
As written by Bryan Gigantino in Jacobin; “In 1994, representatives of Azerbaijan, Armenia, Russia, and the Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh signed the Bishkek Protocol. After six years of deadly fighting and ethnic cleansing, this document provided a much-needed reprieve — and an immediate end to the bloodshed. But this produced only a fragile peace, and far short of addressing the root causes of the conflict, it institutionalized mutual enmity and the uncertainty over Nagorno-Karabakh’s future.
A quarter-century later, this September 27, military clashes between Armenia and Azerbaijan broke out once more. Again, the fighting between these South Caucasus neighbors centered on Nagorno-Karabakh — a mountainous, unrecognized de facto independent state surrounded by Azeri territory. Once populated by both Azeris and Armenians, since the war of 1988–1994 the territory has become increasingly homogenous, with its 150,000 Armenians. The region is de jure part of Azerbaijan, but since 1994 it has been both controlled by local Armenian armed forces and wholly dependent on Armenia for security, economic survival, and access to the outside world.
Following the latest two weeks of violence, on Saturday, October 10, a cease-fire was hastily agreed. This came after ten hours of talks between the foreign ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan, who met in Moscow with Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov. Yet even this truce is fragile — only an hour into the truce and both sides immediately accused the other of breaking it, as reports of shelling abounded.
While the post-1994 cease-fire was broken by repeated skirmishes, the recent fighting was the most severe in decades. Previous instances such as the clashes in 2008, the April War of 2016, and fighting this July pale in comparison; this time, hundreds of civilians and military personnel have been killed and thousands forced to flee their homes. Previous upticks were often sparked by murky circumstances or accidents. But this time was different: for the Azeri offensive had been months in the making.
After armed confrontations in July resulted in the death of Azerbaijan’s major general, Polad Hashimov, massive pro-war demonstrations flooded the capital, Baku. Missteps over Karabakh had ended the careers of many Azeri elites in the 1990s; this was not lost on President Ilham Aliyev, who, especially given the economic pressure from the COVID-19 crisis, could not ignore the nationalist rage. Aliyev publicly stated that searching for a peaceful solution with Armenia was pointless. On September 24, just three days before the fighting started, Azerbaijan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs ominously released a list of so-called provocative actions taken by Armenia since reform-oriented Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan came to power in that country’s 2018 Velvet Revolution.
Following Azerbaijan’s initial offensive on September 27, the fighting rapidly escalated. Azeri rockets and heavy artillery bombarded the regional capital Stepanakert almost daily. Towns within Armenia and military positions along the two-hundred-kilometer “line of contact” separating Azerbaijan from Nagorno-Karabakh also came under fire. Armenian forces unsurprisingly responded, attacking Azeri positions and repelling drones — one of which was shot down alarmingly close to Armenia’s capital, Yerevan. But they also shelled targets within Azerbaijan’s territory, including its second city, Ganja.
There is, indeed, a substantial asymmetry between the two countries, with Azerbaijan’s defense budget, military hardware, and total personnel far outweighing Armenia’s. With a population of nearly ten million, Azerbaijan has a defense budget of $2.73 billion at 5.4 percent of GDP, whereas Armenia has a population of slightly under three million and a defense budget of $500 million at 4.7 percent of GDP. Notably, Turkish- and Israeli-made drones have played a central role in Azerbaijan’s military operations: Amnesty International confirms that Israeli-made cluster munitions were used in residential areas of Stepanakert.
State officials in both Armenia and Azerbaijan have fueled the fighting with a concomitant information war, unleashing a deluge of accusations, misinformation, and false data. Each state’s intransigent rhetoric thickens the abyss of unverifiable information widely circulating on Twitter and Facebook. Despite the best efforts of well-intentioned journalists and analysts, these conditions filter much of the conflict to the outside world. Even when more or less accurate information is available, the overall picture remains foggy. For example, Armenia releases consistent updates on military casualties but not civilian ones, whereas Azerbaijan does the inverse.
Yet such details alone do not explain why two neighboring post-Soviet countries with deep and intertwined histories are still locked in conflict. Fundamentally, irreconcilable official narratives and national understandings are central to the persistence of tensions and the reproduction of enmity. The region’s recent history can put this dynamic into a much clearer perspective.
For Armenians, the defense of Nagorno-Karabakh, or Artsakh as it is traditionally called, is an existential struggle. Between 1914 and 1917, 1.5 million Armenians perished in the genocide at the hands of Ottoman soldiers and Kurdish irregulars. The combination of forced deportation and indiscriminate slaughter depopulated Eastern Anatolia of nearly its entire Armenian population. Though the cities of Tbilisi and Baku were far more culturally, economically, and politically significant for Armenians, nationalists of the time had seen Eastern Anatolia as the future home of an independent Armenian state.
The permanent loss of this land created a territorially dismembered nationalism, in which not only a shared language and religious traditions but a sense of loss and popular memory of the genocide shape the Armenian national idea. This, in turn, fuels its intransigence over Nagorno-Karabakh — much like how Israeli irredentism often invokes the fear of a second Holocaust.
For Azeris, too, Karabakh is also critical to the national imagination. This mainly owes to the nearly six hundred thousand Azeris who became internally displaced persons (IDPs) in the fighting before the 1994 cease-fire. While some IDPs came from Nagorno-Karabakh, the vast majority fled seven districts in Karabakh’s historically Azeri-populated flatlands currently (according to Azerbaijan) under Armenian occupation. Since the end of the last war in 1994, the reclamation of these lost territories and the eventual return of their residents has been a pillar of Azeri nationalism.”
As I wrote in my post of April 27 2021 Biden Recognizes the Armenian Genocide; Biden’s historic Armenian Remembrance Day speech last Saturday, the first official recognition of the Armenian Genocide by America, went as follows; “Each year on this day, we remember the lives of all those who died in the Ottoman-era Armenian genocide and recommit ourselves to preventing such an atrocity from ever again occurring. Beginning on April 24, 1915, with the arrest of Armenian intellectuals and community leaders in Constantinople by Ottoman authorities, one and a half million Armenians were deported, massacred, or marched to their deaths in a campaign of extermination. We honor the victims of the Meds Yeghern so that the horrors of what happened are never lost to history. And we remember so that we remain ever-vigilant against the corrosive influence of hate in all its forms.
Today, as we mourn what was lost, let us also turn our eyes to the future—toward the world that we wish to build for our children. A world unstained by the daily evils of bigotry and intolerance, where human rights are respected, and where all people are able to pursue their lives in dignity and security.”
Thus has our President and our nation given warning to the tyrannies of the world that we will defend the universal human rights which supersede the claims of any nation, and defend the people from unjust governments when necessary. In the context of the Armenian Genocide, especially this warrant is served to the regimes of Erdogan of Turkey and Putin of Russia, who between them now contest for the dominion of the Middle East and the Mediterranean in pursuit of refounding their former historic empires prior to the First World War.
With recognition must come reparations by Turkey, and the restoration of a sovereign and independent Armenian homeland. While the boundaries of Tigranes the Great’s Armenia included Jerusalem and all of Syria from Damascus and Palmyra to the sea, I think some compromise may be able to be worked out, considering that Turkey wants NATO support for its seizure of Libya’s oil fields through a puppet regime which is threatened by Russia’s massive line of Libyan fortifications and mercenary army; surely this vast wealth and dominion of the Mediterranean would be worth the price of justice for Armenia. Turkey and Iran may also find a buffer state useful, as Iran and Russia support the brutal Assad regime in Syria against the Turkish army and liberation forces of secular democracy.
And with America undergoing a Restoration of democracy and independence from Russian conquest in the wake of our repudiation of her puppet Trump, a new willingness to challenge Russia’s imperial conquest of Ukraine, Russia’s vassal state Belarus in the process of an independence struggle, and a popular democracy movement in Russia itself leading the resistance to Putin, now is an excellent moment for a realignment of Turkey with America.
We have a chance to forge a peace together, Turkey and America, in which both of us win. My hope in this is that the world’s champions and guarantors of democracy, freedom, equality, truth, and in the case of the Armenian people most especially justice, may yet find a way forward to throwing words instead of stones, as Sigmund Freud taught us.
As written by the historian Heather Cox Richardson in her daily current events newsletter; “In his first major speech as Secretary of State, Antony Blinken laid out the principles of the Biden administration in foreign policy, emphasizing that this administration believed foreign and domestic policy to be profoundly linked. Biden’s people would support democracy at home and abroad to combat the authoritarianism rising around the world… including in the U.S.
“The more we and other democracies can show the world that we can deliver, not only for our people, but also for each other, the more we can refute the lie that authoritarian countries love to tell, that theirs is the better way to meet people’s fundamental needs and hopes. It’s on us to prove them wrong,” Blinken said. “So the question isn’t if we will support democracy around the world, but how.” He answered: “We will use the power of our example. We will encourage others to make key reforms, overturn bad laws, fight corruption, and stop unjust practices. We will incentivize democratic behavior.”
President Joe Biden has set out a foreign policy that focuses on human rights and reaches out more to foreign peoples than to their governments, heartening protesters in authoritarian countries.
On Saturday, Biden issued a document declaring that the displacement and slaughter of 1.5 million ethnic Armenians at the hands of the Ottomans in 1915 was a “genocide.” The U.S. had previously refused to recognize the ethnic cleansing for what it was because of the strategic importance of Turkey to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO (among other things, Turkey holds the straits that control access to the Black Sea, on which Russia and Ukraine, as well as other countries, sit).
Biden’s recognition of the Armenian genocide is a reflection of the fact that Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, is increasingly close to Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Taliban, and appears to be abandoning democracy in his own country, giving Biden the room to take a step popular in America but previously too undiplomatic to undertake. (Remember when Erdogan’s security staff beat up protesters in Washington, D.C., in 2017 and prosecutors dropped the charges?)
Erdogan greeted Biden’s announcement with anger, demanding he retract it, but he also said he expected to discuss all of the disputes between the U.S. and Turkey at the June NATO summit. Geopolitics in Erdogan’s part of the world are changing, as Putin is struggling at home with protests against his treatment of opposition leader Alexey Navalny and with the new U.S. sanctions that, by making it hard for him to float government bonds, could weaken his economy further. It is looking more and more likely that Biden and Putin will also have a summit early this summer.”
We celebrate today the 54th Anniversary of the Vietnam Veterans Against War March on Washington which began the Soldier’s Strike that five years later ended the Vietnam War, an enduring example of solidarity over division and the triumph of love over hate.
Newly relevant as a primary strategy of ending Russia’s war in Ukraine and the Israel-American Wars in Palestine and Iran, the refusal of soldiers to fight unjust wars for the profit of others has always been about solidarity against those who would enslave us as revolutionary class struggle; nowhere is there a more stunning, revelatory, and immediate example of this than in the peace movement of the American soldiers who ended the Vietnam War, and on this week’s anniversary of the Vietnam Veterans Against War March on Washington we celebrate the truly heroic and visionary warriors for humanity whose actions will illuminate our path throughout history.
This is our best hope for ending the horrors of the vast war crimes that are the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Israel genocide of the Palestinians, the complicity of the American Fourth Reich in both, and for ending all wars forever; the voluntary abandonment of the use of social force by the people on whom authority must rely for the enforcement of their hegemony of wealth, power, and privilege.
The redemptive power of love can triumph over hate, solidarity over divisions of elite membership and exclusionary otherness, exposure and the sacred pursuit of truth over falsification and the propaganda and lies of authority, and refusal to submit or obey over tyranny and terror both as war and as the carceral police state.
“The way to stop war is to just walk away, and say fuck it”; with these immortal words Ken Kesey proclaimed to the masses gathered in protest against the war in Vietnam in 1964 the sacred path of renunciation of violence, and of its industrialization as war. Words which will echo through history, enshrined in the The Electric Kool Aid Acid Test, Tom Wolfe’s novelization of the great trek on the bus Furthur in 1964 to enlighten humankind with Dionysian rituals of music and ecstasy through free love and LSD.
And stop the war they did, not simply with this incantation but with the mass action of veterans and serving members of the Armed Forces who went on strike all over the world, lay down their arms, and refused to fight for a government which had deceived and betrayed them.
Mass action protests and communal rituals of exaltation and transcendence share common origins as theatre, and as aspects of revolutionary struggle serve to challenge authority but also act as forces of social cohesion and interdependence. Here is the great opportunity of the dispossessed; the marginalized and the powerless, the silenced and the erased, in seizures of power and autonomy.
Here also is the danger, for the alliance of sectarian and political ideologies harnessed to narratives of victimization, plus submission to charismatic leaders and the emergence of authority which shapes generalized and overwhelming fear into identitarian nationalisms of blood, faith, and soil, is how we find ourselves enslaved to tyrannies of force and control and exploited by divisions of exclusionary otherness in service to elite hegemonies of wealth, power, and privilege.
In the history of humankind few events have demonstrated the power of solidarity to transform the nature of our relationships as liberation than a war ended by soldiers who refused to fight it. And this is its great lesson for our future.
Let the forces of fascism and tyranny find not a humankind abject in learned helplessness and submission to authority, crippled and dehumanized by the legacies of historical inequalities and injustices and divided by hierarchies of exclusionary otherness, but united in solidarity and refusal to submit to force and control; for in resistance we become Unconquerable and free.
For we are many, we are watching, and we are the future.
As described by the Zinn History Project; “On April 24, 1971, 500,000 people demonstrated against the Vietnam War in Washington, D.C. It was the largest-ever demonstration opposing a U.S. war. Simultaneously, 150,000 people marched at a rally in San Francisco.
Prior to the massive rally, Vietnam Veterans Against the War staged a week-long series of demonstrations culminating in a protest at the U.S. Capitol where veterans threw back their service medals.
During the weeks following the April 24 protest, massive civil disobedience was conducted attempting to shut down the U.S. government during the People’s Coalition for Peace & Justice and Mayday demonstrations.”
“In the 1960’s an anti-war movement emerged that altered the course of history. This movement didn’t take place on college campuses, but in barracks and on aircraft carriers. It flourished in army stockades, navy brigs and in the dingy towns that surround military bases. It penetrated elite military colleges like West Point. And it spread throughout the battlefields of Vietnam. It was a movement no one expected, least of all those in it. Hundreds went to prison and thousands into exile. And by 1971 it had, in the words of one colonel, infested the entire armed services.”
As witnessed in the newspaper of the VVAW, The Veteran, April 1977 volume 7, number2; “On Friday morning, the final day of the demonstration, the veterans lined up and marched to the Capitol Building. By now the number had grown to over 1000. Once at the Capitol they placed a sign marked “Trash” on a statue. One by one each vet approached the statue and a microphone. The vets told their names, their units, and many made statements against the war; then, angrily, they threw their war medals over the fence at the statue and at the Capitol Building itself.
One veteran threw away his nine Purple Hearts. Another threw over the fence a can he used as a result of a war injury. And on and on it went. Discharge papers, Silver Stars, Bronze Stars, Purple hearts. In all, literally thousands of medals were thrown back at the government that had sent each of the veterans to fight for the US ruling class. Never before had such a demonstration occurred by war veterans. It was unprecedented in the history of the country that veterans protested in such a unified and dramatic way their opposition to a war that was still raging on the other side of the world.
The sentiments of the vets was expressed best by one veteran who tossed his medals away and stated: “If we have to fight again, it will be to take these steps.”
With this action the demonstration ended. It abounded in lessons for all vets. During the course of the week the veterans had stood up to and beat all the attempts that the government had used to stop the demonstration. The vets backed down the most powerful apparatus of the country–the President, the Supreme court, the Congress. It forged a unity that was carried on afterwards among the veterans and their organization, VVAW. It precipitated the largest demonstration that ever occurred in Washington–on Saturday, April 24th. It gave impetus to the May Day demonstrations where over 10,000 demonstrators were arrested for fighting against the war. And it gave the American people a clear insight that the war in Vietnam was opposed even by those who fought it.”
As the film Sir! No Sir! Teaches us, “We truly believed that what will stop this war is when soldiers stop fighting it.”
Celebrate with me the Feast of St George, a multiethnic figure whose historical basis was the son of a Turkish man and a Palestinian woman, and whose veneration spans all three Abrahamic faiths as Elijah, Khidr, and St George. May we embrace our diversity and inclusion on this commemorative occasion.
I write today because it has come to my attention that English fascists, nationalists, and white supremacists are using the Flag of St George as a symbol of hate directed toward Muslims and generally as a rally point for identity politics, and this I cannot abide for it reverses everything St George means traditionally and historically.
What must be done, as Lenin and Tolstoy asked with such very different results?
Of this I say; cede nothing to the enemy. Fly your St George’s flag as a symbol of an inclusive and diverse society, and most especially in the context of rebuttal to the lies of the enemy as a symbol of the fundamental unity of Jewish, Christian, and Islamic faiths as paths of sacralization of the human.
For Christians St George is a figure of the valor of resistance to tyranny, a Palestinian Christian who served in the Roman army and rebelled against the Emperor Diocletian’s avowal of paganism and upon capture and refusal to deny his faith was martyred on this day in 303 AD. As heroes of the Resistance go, he will serve us in antifascist struggle as he did the cause of freedom of faith.
But there are so many more echoes and reflections of the figure of the martyr across history, and these draw on unfathomably ancient and opaque sources. Where does Camus’ idea of The Rebel as culture hero come from, beyond the Trial of Socrates? Why is it connected with the pursuit of truth as a sacred calling, what Foucault called parrhesia?
I have always found it curious that the historical Frankenstein family have on their crest as displayed in the family tomb beneath their castle the iconic image of St George slaying the dragon, as they were heredity enemies of the Dracula family whose most infamous figure was made a Knight of the Order of the Dragon by Sigismund of Hungary. Sigismund modeled the order he founded in 1408 on the Knights of St George from the previous century, so like the dragon entwined by its tail like an ouroboros which was the badge of the order, history here encompasses itself in an infinite loop of recursion.
This rabbit hole of history interests me as my family were driven out of Bavaria in 1586 as werewolves and witches or sorcerers at the start of an eighty year witch hunt. Martin Luther, a torturer of the Inquisition before founding the Protestant Reformation, called my ancestors Drachensbraute, Brides of the Dragon, which we adopted as a title with some enthusiasm. Were they members of a secret chivalric order fighting the Inquisition?
Faith as a ground of revolutionary struggle against tyranny and terror and carceral states of force and control like the medieval Church and the monarchies it authorized here becomes a Rashomon Gate of ambiguous and secret histories, relative truths, propaganda, lies and illusions, a Wilderness of Mirrors as Atherton used the term to describe intelligence work. Such a contrast with the Quaranic principle which commands the faithful to learn throughout their entire lives, no matter the source or where it leads; surely among the most radical ideas of truth and freedom of education among faiths, and why I regard Islam as a sacred calling in pursuit of Truth, second only to its meaning as lived truths of universal brotherhood and love.
As we have identified St George with Khidr and Elijah as heroes of resistance and as champions of unauthorized Truth, we now turn to these alternate identities of St George, especially that of Khidr, the Trickster figure of Islam who guides Moses to the Truth.
In accordance with the principle of Virginia Woolf that “We cannot tell the truth about others if we do not tell the truth about ourselves”, I signpost that I have used Al Khidri, “of the path or tribe of Khidr” in Arabic, as part of my name when I wish to identify myself as a Sufi, a nisba or adjective of origin which can refer to tribe, place, or profession. This from my time as a scholar of the Naqshbandi order of Sufism in Srinagar, Kashmir in the early 90’s, when I alternated living in Kathmandu Nepal as a monk and Dream Navigator of the Buddhist Vajrayana Kagyu order; both practice methods of dreaming and dream interpretation and realization which interested me as a Jungian psychologist who grew up an enthusiast of Surrealist arts and occult wisdoms and in formal Zen study, and influenced by Coleridge, Blake, and Keats. So, I may claim some knowledge of Islam, to which my route was through the poetry of Rumi, from years of research, study, and personal transmission from a Sufi master, and ongoing now for thirty six years.
Though if asked directly to identify my religion, especially by men with badges and guns, I answer either with Keats; “I am certain of nothing but of the holiness of the Heart’s affections and the truth of Imagination—What the imagination seizes as Beauty must be truth—whether it existed before or not—for I have the same Idea of all our Passions as of Love they are all in their sublime, creative of essential Beauty”, or Rumi; “Let the beauty you love be what you do”, depending on who is asking, and in what language and nation.
Peace be upon us all.
Arabic
23 أبريل 2026: يوم القديس جاورجيوس (مار جرجس) – الخضر – إيليا؛ شخصية ثلاثية الأوجه ترمز إلى السمو والارتقاء فوق حدود أشكالنا المادية وهوياتنا المحددة بالجنسية والعرق والعقيدة.
احتفلوا معي بعيد القديس جاورجيوس، تلك الشخصية متعددة الأعراق التي تستند تاريخياً إلى أصول رجل تركي وأم فلسطينية، والتي يحظى بتبجيلٍ يمتد ليشمل الديانات الإبراهيمية الثلاث جميعها، حيث يُعرف باسم “إيليا” و”الخضر” و”القديس جاورجيوس”. فلنعمل معاً على احتضان تنوعنا وقيم الشمولية في هذه المناسبة التذكارية.
أكتب إليكم اليوم بعد أن نما إلى علمي أن فاشيين إنجليز، وقوميين متطرفين، وأنصاراً لتفوق العرق الأبيض، قد اتخذوا من “علم القديس جاورجيوس” رمزاً للكراهية الموجهة ضد المسلمين، وبشكل عام، نقطةَ حشدٍ لسياسات الهوية الضيقة؛ وهو أمرٌ لا يسعني القبول به أو السكوت عنه، إذ يمثل نقيضاً تاماً لكل ما يرمز إليه القديس جاورجيوس تقليدياً وتاريخياً.
ما الذي يجب فعله إذن؟ وهو السؤال ذاته الذي طرحه كلٌ من لينين وتولستوي، وإن جاءت إجاباتهما ونتائج مساعيهما متباينةً إلى حدٍ بعيد.
وفي هذا الصدد، أقول لكم: لا تتنازلوا عن شيءٍ للعدو. ارفعوا علم القديس جاورجيوس عالياً ليكون رمزاً لمجتمعٍ شاملٍ ومتنوع؛ وخصوصاً في سياق الرد على أكاذيب العدو، ليكون دليلاً على الوحدة الجوهرية التي تجمع بين الديانات اليهودية والمسيحية والإسلامية، باعتبارها مساراتٍ مقدسةٍ تهدف إلى تقديس الإنسان والارتقاء به.
بالنسبة للمسيحيين، يمثل القديس جاورجيوس رمزاً لبطولة المقاومة في وجه الطغيان؛ فهو مسيحيٌ فلسطينيٌ خدم في الجيش الروماني، ثم ثار على إعلان الإمبراطور “دقلديانوس” اعتناقه للوثنية. وحين أُلقي القبض عليه ورفض التخلي عن إيمانه، نال شرف الشهادة في مثل هذا اليوم من عام 303 ميلادية. وكما هو شأن أبطال المقاومة العظماء، سيظل القديس جاورجيوس سنداً لنا في نضالنا ضد الفاشية، تماماً كما كان سنداً لقضية حرية العقيدة والإيمان.
غير أن أصداء هذه الشخصية “الشهيد” وتجلياتها عبر التاريخ تتجاوز ذلك بكثير، إذ تستمد جذورها من مصادر قديمةٍ وغامضةٍ إلى حدٍ لا يمكن سبر غوره. فمن أين استمد “كامو” فكرته عن “المتمرد” (The Rebel) باعتباره بطلاً ثقافياً، بعيداً عن سياق محاكمة “سقراط”؟ ولماذا ارتبطت هذه الفكرة بالسعي وراء الحقيقة باعتبارها نداءً مقدساً، أو ما أطلق عليه الفيلسوف “فوكو” اسم “الباريسيا” (Parrhesia)؟ لطالما أثار استغرابي وجود صورة القديس جورج وهو يقتل التنين على شعار عائلة فرانكشتاين التاريخية، كما هو معروض في مقبرة العائلة أسفل قلعتهم، مع أنهم كانوا أعداءً لدودين لعائلة دراكولا، التي نال أشهر شخصياتها لقب فارس من فرسان التنين على يد سيغيسموند ملك المجر. استوحى سيغيسموند فكرة النظام الذي أسسه عام ١٤٠٨ من فرسان القديس جورج في القرن السابق، فكما يلتف التنين حول ذيله كالأوربوروس، وهو شعار النظام، فإن التاريخ هنا يدور في حلقة مفرغة من التكرار.
يثير هذا الغموض التاريخي اهتمامي، إذ طُردت عائلتي من بافاريا عام ١٥٨٦ بتهمة المستذئبين والسحرة، في بداية حملة مطاردة الساحرات التي استمرت ثمانين عامًا. أطلق مارتن لوثر، جلاد محاكم التفتيش قبل تأسيسه للإصلاح البروتستانتي، على أسلافي لقب “عرائس التنين”، وهو لقب تبنيناه بحماس. هل كانوا أعضاءً في جماعة فروسية سرية تحارب محاكم التفتيش؟
يتحول الإيمان، بوصفه أرضيةً للنضال الثوري ضد الطغيان والإرهاب وأنظمة السجون القائمة على القوة والسيطرة، كالكنيسة في العصور الوسطى والملكيات التي أقرتها، إلى بوابة راشومون لتاريخ غامض وسري، وحقائق نسبية، ودعاية، وأكاذيب، وأوهام، أشبه بمتاهة من المرايا، كما وصفها أثيرتون لوصف العمل الاستخباراتي. يتناقض هذا تمامًا مع مبدأ القرآن الذي يأمر المؤمنين بالتعلم طوال حياتهم، بغض النظر عن المصدر أو الوجهة؛ وهو بلا شك من أكثر الأفكار جذريةً حول الحقيقة وحرية التعليم بين الأديان، ولذا أعتبر الإسلام دعوةً مقدسةً في طلب الحقيقة، لا يضاهيها إلا معناه كحقائق حية للأخوة والمحبة العالمية.
… بعد أن ربطنا القديس جورج بالخضر وإيليا كأبطال للمقاومة وناصرين للحق غير المصرح به، ننتقل الآن إلى هذه الهويات البديلة للقديس جورج، وخاصةً هوية الخضر، الشخصية المخادعة في الإسلام الذي يرشد موسى إلى الحق.
… انسجاماً مع مبدأ فرجينيا وولف القائل: “لا يسعنا أن نقول الحقيقة عن الآخرين ما لم نقل الحقيقة عن أنفسنا”، أود أن أوضح أنني قد اتخذت لقب “الخضري” —الذي يعني في اللغة العربية “المنتمي إلى مسلك الخضر أو قبيلته”— جزءاً من اسمي، وذلك حين أرغب في التعريف بنفسي بصفتي صوفياً؛ وهي “نسبة” أو صفة دالة على الأصل، قد تشير إلى القبيلة أو المكان أو المهنة. ويعود هذا الاختيار إلى الفترة التي قضيتها باحثاً في “الطريقة النقشبندية” الصوفية في مدينة سريناغار بإقليم كشمير، وذلك في أوائل تسعينيات القرن الماضي؛ وهي حقبة كنت أتنقل فيها بين الإقامة هناك وبين العيش في كاتماندو (نيبال) راهباً و”مرشداً للأحلام” ضمن “الطريقة البوذية الفاجرايانا-كاغيو”. وتجدر الإشارة إلى أن كلتا الطريقتين تتبنيان منهجيات خاصة في ممارسة الأحلام وتأويلها وتحقيقها، وهو أمر استأثر باهتمامي بصفتي عالماً نفسياً “يونغياً” (نسبةً إلى كارل يونغ)، نشأتُ شغوفاً بالفنون السريالية والحكم الباطنية، كما خضت دراساتٍ منهجية في فلسفة “الزن”، وتأثرتُ بأعمال شعراء كبار أمثال كولريدج وبليك وكيتس. وعليه، يحق لي أن أدعي امتلاك قدرٍ من المعرفة بالإسلام —الذي كان مسلكي إليه عبر أشعار جلال الدين الرومي—…
As written on the site of Path to the Maypole of Wisdom, a project of Sufi Path of Love, in an article entitled St George and Al Khidr; “Note on Al Khidr: His original name seems to have been al-Khadir (“the green one”), which over time in many places became al-Khidr or Khidr or Hizr. In the modern Middle East the spelling as Khodor is often used as a person’s name. We shall use the shortened form, Khidr.
Prayer of Intercession to Saint George:
“Faithful servant of God and invincible martyr, Saint George; favored by God with the gift of faith, and inflamed with an ardent love of Christ, thou didst fight valiantly against the dragon of pride, falsehood, and deceit.
Neither pain nor torture, sword nor death could part thee from the love of Christ. I fervently implore thee for the sake of this love to help me by thy intercession to overcome the temptations that surround me, and to bear bravely the trials that oppress me, so that I may patiently carry the cross which is placed upon me; and let neither distress nor difficulties separate me from the love of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Valiant champion of the Faith, assist me in the combat against evil, that I may win the crown promised to them that persevere unto the end. “
Prayer for intercession of Al Khidr (Alaihi Salaam)
Bismillah hir Rahman nir Raheem
Bismillah hir Rahman nir Raheem Bismillahi al Amaan al
Amaan
Ya Hanaan al Amaan al Amaan
Ya Manaan al Amaan al Amaan
Ya da Yaan al Amaan al Amaan
Ya subhan al Amaan al Amaan
Ya burhaan al Amaan al Amaan
Min fitna tiz zAmaani wa jafaa
Il ikhwani wa shar rish shaitan
Wa zulmis sultan be fadhlika
Ya Raheem Ya Rahman
Ya zul Jalaali wal ikraam
Wa sall Allahu ala khairi khaliqi
hi Muhammadin wa alihi wa as haabi hi ajmaeen bi
Rahmatika
Ya Arham ar Rahimeen
Wa sall Allahu ala Khairi
Khaliqi Hi Muhammadin
wa alihi wa as Haabi
hi Ajmaeen bi Rahmatika
Ya Arham Ar Rahimeen
At first sight there seems to be little connection between Elijah, George and Khidr, apart from the fact that in the Middle East they are frequently associated with the same place by different religious traditions. Is it then a simple case of overlapping traditions, Jewish, Christian and Muslim, all of whom focus on the Holy Land as part of their own heritage and take Abraham as their forefather?
Certainly there is a view which suggests that Khidr is to Muslims what Elijah is to Jews, in respect of them both acting as initiator to the true believer, and which in itself is testimony to attempts to find common ground between the three traditions.
In the Talmudic literature, Elijah would visit rabbis to help solve particularly difficult legal problems. Malachi had cited Elijah as the harbinger of the eschaton. Thus, when confronted with reconciling impossibly conflicting laws or rituals, the rabbis would set aside any decision “until Elijah comes.”[60]
One such decision was whether the Passover Seder required four or five cups of wine. Each serving of wine corresponds to one of the “four expressions of redemption” in the Book of Exodus:
“I am the Lord, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will deliver you from their bondage, and I will redeem you with an out-stretched arm and with great acts of judgment, and I will take you for my people, and I will be your God; and you shall know that I am the Lord your God, who has brought you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians” (Exodus 6:6–7).
The next verse, “And I will bring you into the land which I swore to give to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob; I will give it to you for a possession. I am the Lord.” (Exodus 6:8) was not fulfilled until the generation following the Passover story, and the rabbis could not decide whether this verse counted as part of the Passover celebration (thus deserving of another serving of wine). Thus, a cup was left for the arrival of Elijah.
In practice the fifth cup has come to be seen as a celebration of future redemption. Today, a place is reserved at the seder table and a cup of wine is placed there for Elijah. During the seder, the door of the house is opened and Elijah is invited in. Traditionally, the cup is viewed as Elijah’s and is used for no other purpose.[61][62]
Havdalah
Havdalah is the ceremony that concludes the Sabbath Day (Saturday evening in Jewish tradition). As part of the concluding hymn, an appeal is made to God that Elijah will come during the following week. “Elijah the Prophet, Elijah the Tishbite, Elijah from Gilead. Let him come quickly, in our day with the messiah, the son of David.”[61]
The sacred sites associated with Elijah, George and Khidr over centuries seem to have accumulated worship in various forms, so that one sits quite literally on top of or next to another. The sites often exhibit similar attributes: for instance, the presence of water and greenness, suggesting fertility in a barren land; or perhaps a cave, which represents a meeting-place of two worlds, the manifest and the hidden (and on occasion both elements are present, as at Banyas).
Then there is the ancient theme of the spiritual side of man being dominant over the material, as suggested in the stories by the holy rider on a chariot or horse (or in the case of Khidr, a fish).
This is a clear picture of the divinised human, who comes to deliver mankind.
Elijah is zealous for God and the destroyer of false prophets,
while St George is the conqueror of animality in the form of the dragon;
Khidr’s role is rather less vividly martial – he brings real self-knowledge, delivering the individual from the false and base nature of the soul.
In all three cases one can remark the polarity of the monotheist or true believer and the pagan or ignorant: Elijah and the prophets of Baal, St George and the emperor Diocletian, for example and perhaps most strikingly in this respect, Khidr who points out the interior meaning of this opposition and is thus the educator of Moses.
However, we should note significant differences in their status, which in part reflect the religious context in which they appear: Elijah is a prophet, in a long line of prophecy; St George is a saint, martyred for his faith in the tradition of Christianity; Khidr, however, is almost a nobody – he is neither saint nor prophet, but an ordinary person graced with immortality and initiatic significance. While the first two are usually portrayed as mounted, Khidr has his feet upon the ground (or just above it in some stories) or walks on water; as we shall see, he has a most particular role to play in mystical teaching.
Khidr – the Green One – is very important in Sufism: St George and Al kidhr
The sufi master of the Golden Chain, the Sultan al-Awliya Shaykh Nazim al-Haqqani(, has confirmed that Saint George is Sayyidina Al-Khidr, The word “confirmed” is appropriate, since this identification has been widely made for a long time. According to HRH Prince Charles, for example: “We forget too easily that the veneration of the Virgin is shared in the Middle East to this day by Christians and Muslims alike; that the mysterious prophet of the Muslims, Al-Khidir, was identified with…the Christian St George…”
Perhaps most obviously, St. George’s Day in the Ottoman Empire was better known as Hidrellez, a name deriving in part from the title al-Khidr or “the Green.” If it is objected that Hidrellez falls on the 6th of May rather than the 23rd of April, that is, St. George’s Day in those regions of Western Europe still holding to this tradition, let it not be forgotten that the 6th of May is simply St. George’s Day in the Eastern liturgical calendar.
St George and Hidirellez in Turkey
St. George is also honored by Muslims as his figure has become a composite character mixing elements from Biblical, Quranic and folkloric sources, at times being identified with prophet Al-Khidr.
Hıdırellez or Hıdrellez (Turkish: Hıdırellez or Hıdrellez, Azerbaijani: Xıdır İlyas or Xıdır Nəbi, Crimean Tatar: Hıdırlez, Romani language: Ederlezi) is celebrated as the day on which the Prophets Hızır (Al-Khidr) and Ilyas (Elijah) met on Earth.
Hıdırellez is regarded as one of the most important seasonal bayrams (festivals) in both Turkey and countries above mentioned. Called Day of Hızır (Ruz-ı Hızır) in Turkey, Hıdırellez is celebrated as the day on which the prophets Hızır (Al-Khdir) and İlyas (Elijah) met on Earth. The words Hızır and İlyas fused to create the present term. Known as Aid al-Khidr it is also one of the most important social celebrations in Syria. Hıdırellez Day falls on May 6 in the Gregorian calendar and April 23 in the Julian calendar. In other countries the day has mostly been connected with pagan and Saint George cults.
The word Hıdırellez, born out as a compound form of Hızır and İlyas, they are regarded as two different persons. In respect to religious sources, there are several references on İlyas; However, there is no slight mention about Hızır. The perception of seeing Hızır and İlyas as identical arises from the fact that İlyas stands as an obscure figure within the context of Tasavvuf (Sufism) and popular piety when compared to Hızır and there are numerous legends on Hızır, whereas little is known about İlyas and furthermore, there are many great maqams of Hızır, yet there are only few maqams for İlyas. Ali the Fourth Caliph is associated with Hızır within Alevi-Bektaşi belief system.
St. George is the figure corresponding to Hızır in Christianity. Besides being associated with St. George, Hızır is also identified with İlyas Horasani, St. Theodore and St. Sergios. St. George believed to be identical with Hızır, is believed to be similar to some Muslim saints; St. George is identified with Torbalı Sultan and Cafer Baba in Thessaly, Karaca Ahmet Sultan in Skopje, which is a mounting evidence how St. George and Hızır have influenced St. George’s Day and Hıdrellez Day ceremonies.
Hizir-Elijah cult and Hidrellez tradition in Anatolia
Hidrellez is one of the spring festivals which is celebrated in Turkish world. Formerly this day was called Ruz-i Hizir, but today it is also called Hizir-Elijah day. The name of Hidirellez, was born out as a compound form of Hizir and Elijah among the people. They are regarded as two different people. In respect to religious sources, there are several references on ̄lyas. However, there is no slight mention about Hizir. The cult of Hidir-Elijah, which is a folk belief in Anatolia and the Spring festival Hidrellez and was consequently emitted, has pre-Islamic extension. Hidrellez refers to the junction day of the Hidir and Elijah. There are enough resources available about hidir belief but, there is no written source about Hidrellez. Hidrellez is synonymous with spring holidays departing from belief in Hidir and is further enriched with Christian influence in Anatolia. Christian community has Saint Nicholas and Saint Georges like Hidir beliefs Turkish folk. These folk beliefs’ common feature is both of them are mystical. Hidir has been called the highest authority in the Turkish Islamic Sufism. The most enthusiastic celebrations of Hidirellez is done in Hatay region. There are many maqams given named hidirlik in this region. Muslim and non-Muslim population lived together for centuries in Hatay. It is a city of tolerance.
Who was the Hızır in Hıdırellez?
May 5 and 6 is known as Hıdırellez, a festival that marks the start of spring and summer in parts of the Middle East and in particular among Turkish-speaking communities.
The night of May 5 and day of May 6 are known as Hıdırellez or Hızırellez, a festival that marks the start of spring and summer in parts of the Middle East and in particular among Turkish-speaking communities. (One has to wonder at the number of festivals that mark the coming of spring.) The word Hıdırellez is supposed to have come from a combination of Hızır (Khidr) and İlyas (Elijah).
Who were these two men and how are they connected?
Khidr and Elijah
Although Khidr is not mentioned in the Quran, Muslim exegetes identify him as the “servant of God” mentioned in Q 18:65. The story of Moses and Khidr is widespread in Muslim and Jewish stories of the medieval period.
Khidr is also associated with immortality and fertility. These are also attributes given to Elijah who is mentioned in the Quran. It is also reported that Elijah and Khidr meet every uear during the month of Ramadan in Jerusalem, that they perform the Pilgrimage together every year, and that they drink from Zamzam enough to keep them until the next year. It is also said that they meet in Arafat each year.
Khidr (which means Green Man in Arabic) has been tied to early Middle Eastern legends of spring, the renewal of warm weather among the Mesopotamians and the Egyptians, the reflowering of plants and the growth of new crops. Similar beliefs and celebrations were to be found among the various peoples of Anatolia and Central Asia. But the origin of Khidr or Hızır is obscure. His name is not mentioned in the Bible or in the Quran. There’s no real explanation as to why this person is called the Green Man (Khidr) although some say it was because the Prophet Muhammad wore a green cloak while others attribute it to his role in the greening of the earth in spring time.
One of the Islamic traditions, however, says that the Prophet Moses went to Ethiopia to acquire knowledge and, while there, he met a man named Khadir (Hızır). In the story, the two men have a fish which they intend to eat; however, they forget it and it gets away. (This is why Hızır is portrayed with a fish.) It’s possible that this was Hızır. The latter is supposed to have then tested Moses by insisting that he not ask the reason why he performed three acts. But Moses was unable to understand the meaning of the actions and impatiently asked why each time, at which point the man refused to teach Moses because of his impatience (Quran, 18: 60-82).
As for the history of this holy person, how are we to understand the life of one who has drunk of the Water of Life, and how are we explain his activities when these could not even be understood by Sayyidina Musa, without explanation? The Christian history of the martyrdom of Saint George is related in Islamic sources also, as the history of Jirjis. According to the latter, Jirjis is granted martyrdom repeatedly, only to be restored to life, in keeping, perhaps, with the qualities of one who has tasted the Water of Life.
It is of further interest to note that in Christian accounts, the event with the dragon involves a miraculous appearance of the saint subsequent to, and not preceding, his martyrdom. In other words, it concerns a mysterious glimpse of a saint who lives beyond the limitations of history but who sometimes enters it in various guises, and such are all his appearances from the time of Musa onwards, including, of course, his involvement in the expeditions of Iskandar Dhul-Qarnayn.”
Islam: Religion, History, and Civilization – A Clear, In-Depth Guide to the Doctrines, Beliefs, and Practices of 1.2 Billion Adherents, Seyyed Hossein Nasr
The Hand of Poetry: Five Mystic Poets of Persia: Translations from the Poems of Sanai, Attar, Rumi, Saadi and Hafiz, by Coleman Barks (Translation), Sanai, Rumi, Saadi, Attar of Nishapur, Hazrat Inayat Khan (Commentaries by)
The Illuminated Hafiz: Love Poems for the Journey to Light
by Hafez, Michael Green (Illustrator), Saliha Green (Illustrator), Nancy Barton (Editor), Omid Safi (Foreword), Coleman Barks (Translator), Robert Bly (Translator), Peter Booth (Translator), Meher Baba (Translator)
Suhrawardi: The Shape of Light, by Shahab al-Din Suhrawardi, Tosun Bayrak (Preface), Shaykh Muhammad Sadiq Naqshbandi Erzinjani (Afterword), Hadrat Abdul-Qadir al-Jilani (Foreword)
Fakhruddin Iraqi: Divine Flashes, by Fakhruddin Iraqi, William C. Chittick (Translator), Peter Wilson (Goodreads Author) (Translator), Seyyed Hossein Nasr (Foreword)
The Four Last Great Sufi Master Poets: Selected Poems, by Paul Smith (Translator), Shah Latif, Nazir Akbarabadi, Mirza Asadullah Khan Ghalib, Muhammad Iqbal
To cast the bones of our futures; what prima materia shall we sift from among all our limitless possibilities of becoming human, to choose our best selves as a defining seizure of power?
How shall we choose how to be human together?
The emergence of the soul as a defining human act of revolutionary struggle against authorized identities and the legacies of our histories, of becoming Unconquered and a Living Autonomous Zone as self creation through refusal to submit to authority and its systems of oppression as force and control, and as finding balance under such imposed conditions of struggle between those truths immanent in nature and written in our flesh and those we ourselves create as human being, meaning, and value; such is the real work of becoming human.
We face two interdependent and mutually reinforcing existential threats, civilizational and ecological collapse, driven by the centralization of power to tyrannies and of wealth to elites, and these systems of oppression originate in our fear of the wildness of nature and the wildness of ourselves.
In the end, all that matters is what we do with our fear, and how we use our power.
Do something beautiful with yours.
As I wrote in my post of May 22 2023, Our War Against Nature and Ourselves: Humankind at the Tipping Point Between Extinction and Transformation; The human war on nature is ancient, both a motive and a consequence of our civilization itself; it is also primarily a war against our own animal nature, a titanic struggle against the prison of our flesh and its dark and chaotic syllabus of needs and desires.
We may imagine this as did Mary Shelly in her luminous and prophetic work Frankenstein, of whom I have written in celebration of her birthday; Our Monsters, Ourselves; genius, madness, inspiration, the quest to become as gods; who among us has not longed to steal the divine fire, to look beyond ourselves, to defy all limits and laws? To be, even for a moment, the Unconquered Victor Frankenstein?
Yet as Prospero said of Caliban, we must also say of Frankenstein’s monster; “This thing of darkness I acknowledge mine.”
As I have written of VanderMeer’s retelling of Frankenstein in the novel Borne, Mary Shelly’s glorious novel was also about the abandonment of a child who is no longer perfect, among a number of other themes, including the origins of violence and the need to dominate and control nature.
Frankenstein addresses themes of science versus nature, reason versus passion, and both of these within a Promethean rebellion against God, Authority which is a term I apply politically as a generalized reference to those who claim to speak for the Infinite, and universal Law as a form of Idealism; this from the perspective of the monster’s creator.
From the monster’s view, the novel portrays the disfigurement of the soul through abandonment by a parent who also functions as a figure of a creator-god and of Authority, known as the problem of the Deus Absconditus which refers to the god who made everything and then ran away before he was caught, and who drives the child to achievement and supremacy as his champion and proxy- what the Greeks called Arete or Virtue but also denoting superiority as with Achilles in the Iliad, one of Mary Shelly’s sources- in a chosen arena but who like Alberich in Wagner’s Ring cannot love because he is offered none, rendering all victory meaningless and hollow, dehumanizing the child and shaping a vessel of rage and vengeance, with the iron self discipline and will to enact subjugation of others in their turn, terrible and pathetic and with the grandeur of a tortured defiant beast trapped in the same flesh as the innocent who needs to be loved and cannot understand why he seems monstrous to others. It is about birthing monsters, and the chaotic plasticity of identity and relationships; thus do tyrants shape tyrants.
Who cannot see himself in such a monster, or in his Miltonic creator? This is the dilemma and doom of our civilization, and the true genius of the novel as a bidirectional critique of power and the origins of evil as violence.
Here also is a breathtaking song of revolutionary struggle and an interrogation of the state as an inherent evil of force and control, for all states are embodied violence. As George Washington once said; “Government is about force; only force.”
A story which is at once Greek tragedy and Freudian study of the process and relations between the id, ego, and superego, with a third parallel storyline relating a Romantic reimagination of Biblical Genesis like that of Blake, it is both the apotheosis of Romantic Idealism and its first criticism which breaks free of it, exegesis and classical myth, dialectic on responsibility and discourse on Aristotle’s categories of being, critique of Rousseau’s natural man and of Nietzsche’s Superman which it also inspired in a recursive loop of influence across the seas of time. Its author was a Pythian visionary whose insight reached centuries into the future, and whose immense scholarship reimagined some of the greatest works of our historical civilization.
Mary Shelly’s influence echoes through time, multiplies, and reshapes the contexts of its polymorphous meanings. One cannot think of Kafka’s Gregor Samsa without thinking of his original, the dual-aspected monster-child created to bind our nature with reason, nor read her sources and references in the prophecies of William Blake and Milton’s Paradise Lost without reevaluating them in terms of Mary Shelly’s novel; her work resonates through past and future, and what touches, it changes.
Who can read the work of Emily Bronte without the meaning of her great novel Wuthering Heights changing with our awareness that its author thought of herself as Victor Frankenstein and as the titan Prometheus cast out of heaven like Milton’s rebel angel? That Heathcliff is her monster, a character she based on her dog whom she baited into savage acts during her psychotic rages in a most transgressive relationship, imagined as a demon or wolfman as in the Cocteau film Beauty and the Beast, a theriomorphic and chthonic shadow self to be united with in an exalted Nietzschean rapture of transformative rebirth? And does this not change one’s reading of her source Frankenstein?
A nested set of puzzle box themes and contexts, multiple narrative threads which create paradoxes of meaning, role reversals and inversions of identities, and the questioning of the mission of civilization and the morality of progress; Mary Shelly created the modern world with her great book Frankenstein.
We are that monster and its creator, mad god of reason and his degraded figure of vengeance, of uncontrollable and free but twisted and destructive passion. Ours is the future modernity she warned us of, a civilization which consumes itself through the mechanical failures of its internal contradictions as has happened twice now in our two World Wars and in the Third World War now unfolding in ten theatres; Russia in the peace and democracy movements against Putin’s mad wars of imperial conquest and dominion, America in our elections and criminal wars against Venezuela, Iran, and Cuba, in Ukraine, Libya, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Nagorno-Karabakh, Africa, Syria until we liberated it from Putin’s talons, and the beast with two heads which is Israel and Palestine.
When I think of the destructive effects on the environment of our mad quest to control and impose order and human values on nature, I do so in the context of a specific ideological lineage which I share with one of the great public intellectuals of our time, whose works reflect the themes of Mary Shelly.
In her foundational classic Sexual Personnae: Art and Decadence from Nefertiti to Emily Dickinson, Camille Paglia, trickster figure and provocateur, whose many masks include a Guide of the Soul which echoes Ariadne, a chthonic figure of the Queen of the Underworld which recalls Persephone, and a truth teller like Pythia or the Jester of King Lear, provides us a definition of Beauty as the apotheosis and motive force of human civilization, one which references her major influences among the British Romantic Idealists, Keats and Coleridge; “Beauty is our weapon against nature; by it we make objects, giving them limit, symmetry, proportion. Beauty halts and freezes the melting flux of nature.”
Hers is a vision which extends Nietzsche’s thesis in The Birth of Tragedy that human civilization is an artifact of the struggle between the Dionysian and the Apollonian as oppositional forces which together create human being, meaning, and value. Civilization is thus a prochronism or history expressed in our form of how we solved problems of adaptation, like the shell of a fantastic sea creature.
She refers to Beauty as a cypher of the Infinite, in reference to Keats, as does Umberto Eco in his magisterial On Beauty. Compare her definition to that of Keats, in the phrase which I quote when asked to identify my faith; “I am certain of nothing but of the holiness of the Heart’s affections and the truth of Imagination—What the imagination seizes as Beauty must be truth—whether it existed before or not—for I have the same Idea of all our Passions as of Love they are all in their sublime, creative of essential Beauty.”
Her traditional identification of Apollonian rationality and the will to impose order with the animus or masculine side of a whole person and the Dionysian or ecstatic principle as feminine and equal to chaos and nature is found in Free Women, Free Men: Sex, Gender, Feminism; “Western science is a product of the Apollonian mind: its hope is that by naming and classification, by the cold light of intellect, archaic night can be pushed back and defeated.”
Here is the rotten heart of our corruption which consumes this fragile ark of life, this earth, to destruction and humankind to annihilation; our need to control and impose order on a fundamentally irrational universe and the conquest and dominion of nature which flows from it.
Thus far I share with Camille Paglia the three ideological lineages from which this analysis develops; British Romantic Idealism, Nietzsche’s aesthetics of ontological politics, and the classicism of Joseph Hillman and his sources in Jung’s transformational psychology. Where we diverge importantly is her total rejection of postmodern critical theory, which she calls out as Derrida, Lacan, and Foucault; here I am more aligned with Iris Murdoch in balancing classicism with modernity as a complementarity. We need both conserving and revolutionary forces; both T.S. Eliot and James Joyce, Virginia Woolf and Flannery O’Connor.
And to complete my image of the cosmos and the place of humankind in it, we must add one thing more; Holism as expressed in Gregory Bateson’s Mind and Nature: a necessary unity, and explicated in Morris Berman’s The Re-Enchantment of the World. A reimagination of Schiller’s idea of “the disgodding of nature”, Bateson’s work rewired my brain when I encountered it as a graduate student, and for this I shall be eternally grateful. Only Godel’s Theorem and the poetry of Nietzsche, Blake, Basho, and Rumi struck me with the force of lightning as did he.
What does all this mean?
As the earth dies in fire and ice and humankind with it, victims and slaves consumed by the fathomless greed of a handful of oligarchic and plutocratic czars of a global hegemonic elite, we witness the horror of our extinction with helpless submission to our destroyers but are able to describe it with great beauty, a beauty and vision which nonetheless fail to transform our fate.
Unless we act to seize our power and liberate ourselves and the common heritage of our resources from our destroyers.
As written in Jacobin in an article entitled The Ministry for the Future, a vision of possible survival and the transformation of catastrophic policies of capitalism and human extinction: Imagining the End of Capitalism With Kim Stanley Robinson interviewed by Derrick O’Keefe; “The Ministry for the Future is Kim Stanley Robinson’s latest attempt to fill in a major gap in the utopian fiction tradition. Rarely dealing with the transitional phase toward a better and different society, speculative fiction of this type instead explores the final stages of a utopian experiment. The Ministry is an exception to this tendency.
A speculative history of the next few decades, the novel revolves around an international ministry assembled to help implement the Paris climate agreement. The novel’s action spans the globe, featuring popular uprisings, ecoterrorism, asymmetrical warfare, student debt strikes, and geoengineering. Green New Deal–style programs in a number of the world’s biggest economies feature prominently — with a post-BJP India leading the way — and the commandeering of many of the world’s key central banks to finance the work toward a just transition off fossil fuels is explored.
This is the meat and potatoes of the long transition — that which has dismissively been called “a cookshop of the future.” But while it may not service as a political blueprint, it is undeniably fertile ground for a novel. And genre disregard for the subject matter has been to Robinson’s gain.
Looking backward from the mid-twenty-first century, The Ministry helps open our minds to a world in transition away from capitalism. Imagining is a necessary precondition for solving the ecological crisis of our times. It provides the pivot for leveraging the horizon of the possible. By envisioning possible routes forward, Robinson has done us an invaluable service.
Jacobin’s Derrick O’Keefe, a Vancouver-based organizer and writer, caught up with KSR to talk about politics, economics, climate change, sci-fi, and the journey from now to the future.
DERRICK O’KEEFE
This past month, Vancouver, where I’m based, has had a few days with the worst air quality in the world, thanks to the smoke from the California and West Coast wildfires. This was an appropriate backdrop for reading The Ministry of the Future, which opens with a catastrophic weather event. That event, which takes place in India, helps trigger a wave of political change and climate action worldwide. Do you think it’s going to take something really extreme to trigger the changes we need?
KIM STANLEY ROBINSON
I think we’re already there, with the pandemic and with the fires and hurricanes — the level of extremity has brought a sense of general awareness that something is going to have to be done, and the sooner the better. That said, I think we’re on the brink of even worse events happening, as the book makes clear. It’s been a memorable year, a traumatic year — so this may be a stimulus to the start of some changes.
DERRICK O’KEEFE
The Ministry is dedicated to Fredric Jameson, who was your PhD supervisor.
KIM STANLEY ROBINSON
Fred was my PhD supervisor, and while I was working on my PhD, he moved from UC San Diego to Yale, and when that happened, he stayed on my committee — but the actual supervision shifted over to my undergraduate advisor.
DERRICK O’KEEFE
I wanted to ask you about the now-famous quote attributed to Jameson, which is actually a bit of a paraphrase: “It is easier to imagine the end of the world than to imagine the end of capitalism.” It strikes me this book is coming out in a year when it’s become pretty easy to imagine the end of things, and that the real challenge is to imagine the beginnings of some kind of socialist system. As much as The Ministry is about the future, it suggests that those beginnings we need are already here with us now and that it’s really a matter of scaling up some of those alternatives.
KIM STANLEY ROBINSON
I’m a novelist, I’m a literature major. I’m not thinking up these ideas, I’m listening to the world and grasping — sometimes at straws, sometimes just grasping at new ideas and seeing what everybody is seeing.
If we could institute some of these good ideas, we could quickly shift from a capitalism to a post-capitalism that is more sustainable and more socialist, because so many of the obvious solutions are contained in the socialist program. And if we treated the biosphere as part of our extended body that needs to be attended to and taken care of, then things could get better fast, and there are already precursors that demonstrate this possibility.
I don’t think it’s possible to postulate a breakdown, or a revolution, to an entirely different system that would work without mass disruption and perhaps blowback failures, so it’s better to try to imagine a stepwise progression from what we’ve got now to a better system. And by the time we’re done — I mean, “done” is the wrong word — but by the end of the century, we might have a radically different system than the one we’ve got now. And this is kind of necessary if we’re going to survive without disaster. So, since it’s necessary, it might happen. And I’m always looking for the plausible models that already exist and imagining that they get ramped up.
DERRICK O’KEEFE
The cooperative economy of Mondragon, in the Basque region, comes up as one such model in a number of your books. And in The Ministry, there is the example of Kerala, because India is so central to the book’s action as a leader of the transition to dramatic climate action.
KIM STANLEY ROBINSON
I’m very interested in both these examples. I’ve actually never been to either region, but I’ve got contacts in both. In Mondragon, they are aware of me as an American science fiction writer who likes them, because my Mars trilogy books are translated into Spanish and do quite well in Spain. With Kerala, I’ve been studying it for twenty, twenty-five years. Like, why is it different and how is it different? Could it be a tail-wagging-dog situation for the rest of India? And so on.
We’re in a science fiction novel, as a culture. Science fiction is the realism of our time.
I did put places that I’ve been in the novel, because I needed some anchoring points — principally Zurich [where the titular ministry is headquartered]. My wife and I lived in Zurich for years, and I finally managed to put that into fiction, which was a great pleasure. But as for the rest of the world, and for these kinds of leftist precursors, or already existing leftist states that are at a regional or town level, I’ve often thought to myself, “Is there any reason that these can’t be taken as models?” Is there any real reason — since obviously there are ideological reasons; if you’re a defender of capitalism per se, then you would say these are outliers of sorts or too small to be relevant — but if you’re a leftist, you look at them and see the public support for what they’re doing, and you ask, “Why couldn’t that work at a larger scale?” Especially if you’re trying to imagine futures that are working better, which is what a utopian science fiction writer does, then you’re kind of desperate for real world-models.
DERRICK O’KEEFE
When I originally heard the synopsis for this book, it struck me immediately as something like an ecosocialist Looking Backward 2000–1887. The main character in that work by Edward Bellamy had fallen asleep for over a century and then woke up in a sort of post-capitalist utopia in the year 2000. In contrast, The Ministry is more about the journey to 2050 or so, a world that is very different from today both economically and politically. How do you situate this work, and your work more broadly, within the utopian tradition?
KIM STANLEY ROBINSON
Well, Bellamy’s is a good book to think about, because it had an impact in the real world. There were Bellamy clubs, and the whole progressive movement was energized by Looking Backward.
I’ve steeped myself in the utopian tradition. It’s not a big body of literature, it’s easy to read the best hits of the utopian tradition. You could make a list, I mean roughly twenty or twenty-five books would be the highlights of the entire four hundred years, which is a little shocking. And maybe there’s more out there that hasn’t stayed in the canon. But if you talk about the utopian canon, it’s quite small — it’s interesting, it has its habits, its problems, its gaps.
Famously, from Thomas More (Utopia) on, there’s been a gap in the history — the utopia is separated by space or time, by a disjunction. They call it the Great Trench. In Utopia, they dug a great trench across the peninsula so that their peninsula became an island. And the Great Trench is endemic in utopian literature. There’s almost always a break that allows the utopian society to be implemented and to run successfully. I’ve never liked that because one connotation of the word “utopian” is unreality, in the sense that it’s “never going to happen.”
The Left needs to be much more aggressive, and say the problem is not globalization per se; the problem is bad globalization, which is capitalism.
So we have to fill in this trench. When Jameson said it’s easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism, I think what he was talking about is that missing bridge from here to there. It’s hard to imagine a positive history, but it’s not impossible. And now, yes, it’s easy to imagine the end of the world because we are at the start of a mass extinction event. But he’s talking about hegemony, and a kind of Marxist reading of history, and the kind of Gramscian notion that everybody’s in the mindset that capitalism is reality itself and that there can never be any other way — so it’s hard to imagine the end of capitalism. But I would just flip it and say, it’s hard to imagine how we get to a better system. Imagining the better system isn’t that hard; you just make up some rules about how things should work. You could even say socialism is that kind of utopian imaginary. Let’s just do it this way, a kind of society of mutual aid. And I would agree with anyone who says, “Well, that’s a good system.”
The interesting thing, and also the new stories to tell if you’re a science fiction novelist, if you’re any kind of novelist — almost every story’s been told a few times — but the story of getting to a new and better social system, that’s almost an empty niche in our mental ecology. So I’ve been throwing myself into that attempt. It’s hard, but it’s interesting.
DERRICK O’KEEFE
Amidst and between all the action of The Ministry, there are some polemics carried out, is that fair to say? One recurrent polemic is against mainstream economics, a theme running throughout the book that there’s a need for new metrics and new indices both to quantify the biosphere and to express what we truly value rather than just GDP and the stock market.
KIM STANLEY ROBINSON
There is a polemic for sure. First, I would want to make a distinction between economics and political economy, because by and large, economics as it’s practiced now is the study of capitalism. It takes the axioms of capitalism as givens and then tries to work from those to various ameliorations and tweaks to the system that would make for a better capitalism, but they don’t question the fundamental axioms: everybody’s in it for themselves, everybody pursues their own self-interest, which will produce the best possible outcomes for everybody. These axioms are highly questionable, and they come out of the eighteenth century or are even older, and they don’t match with modern social science or history itself in terms of how we behave, and they don’t value the natural biosphere properly, and they tend to encourage short-term extractive gain and short-term interests. These are philosophical positions that are expressed as though they are fixed or are nature itself, when in reality they are made by culture.
Political economy is a kind of nineteenth-century thing, a more open-ended idea where we could have different systems. And that accounts for a lot of the struggles of the twentieth century. But capitalism likes to pretend that it’s nature itself, and that’s what economics is today, largely.
Take the term “efficiency.” In capitalist economics, that’s just regarded as almost a synonym for “good,” but it completely depends on what the efficiency is being aimed at. You know, machine guns are efficient, gas chambers are efficient. So, “efficiency” as such does not mean “good.” It is a measure of the least amount of effort put in for the most amount gotten out.
I learned more about the central banks and realized that nationalizing the banks wouldn’t be going far enough.
One of the things you’re seeing during the pandemic is that the global system of creating masks is efficient, but it is also fragile, brittle, and unreliable because redundancy, robustness, and resilience are all relatively inefficient, if the only rubric of efficiency is profit.
Capitalist economics misunderstands and misjudges the world badly, and that’s why we’re in the mess we’re in — caught between biosphere degradation and radical social inequality. These are both natural results of capitalism as such, a result of the economic calculations we make under capitalist axioms.
Distinctions have to be made here. Quantification is really part of science. Social science has some tools for understanding and generalizing from the particulars of individuals to what the group might want.
Twenty-five years ago, I might have said, “Economics, we have to throw it out.” That doesn’t hold for me anymore. Economics has a set of tools. And social science tools, working with the right axioms, could make for a socialist economics. There could be a post-capitalist economic system. But what you’re then talking about is a different political economy.
That’s one of the things The Ministry is about. Can you morph, by stages, from the political economy that we’re in now, which is neoliberal capitalism, to what you might call anti-austerity, to a return to Keynesianism, and then beyond that to social democracy, and then beyond that to democratic socialism, and then beyond that to a post-capitalist system that might be a completely new invention that we don’t have a name for?
Right-wing thinking is supremely hypocritical and convoluted and self-contradictory, and that needs to be pushed on and pointed out at every chance.
This is why I hold myself to calling it “post-capitalism,” so as not to try and define it by any of the nineteenth-century political economies. I think many of the solutions can be found in socialism, but I don’t call myself a socialist. I would want to keep it a little more open to the idea that we have to morph capitalism as such, and that we might shove it to the margins, where we might have a market for the non-necessities. I think the market itself has to be reexamined, and this is so fundamental to the way that modern society works that it’s frightening, and, for me, it’s better to think in a stepwise fashion and to imagine society from where we are now transforming to an undefined better political economy.
DERRICK O’KEEFE
One of the axioms of that better political economy is expressed in The Ministry as “Public ownership of the necessities, and real political representation” — two things together that we are far from having, by greater or lesser degrees, really almost everywhere today.
A key part of getting from here to there, to a new political economy, involves the question of finance. In New York 2140, one of your characters is a Wall Street trader speculating on intertidal markets, and much of the action concerns finance and the banks. In The Ministry, even more radical measures are contemplated for putting finance at the service of a livable, non-submerged future. Where did you get the inspiration for Carbon Quantitative Easing and the rest of the transformation of finance imagined in this book?
KIM STANLEY ROBINSON
Carbon Quantitative Easing is not my idea. I really am just a listening facility here, trying to amplify ideas. That one is out there. Recently, even Lawrence Summers — who was the treasury secretary for Bill Clinton and a neoliberal of the first order — and his think tank have been putting out stuff about some kind of CQE. So it’s been spreading quickly as an idea, and I’m glad.
But in the years since I wrote New York 2140, I learned more about the central banks and realized that nationalizing the banks, which happens in 2140, wouldn’t be going far enough. It would be great if all banks were owned by the people, and if banks were not private profit-making enterprises, that would be great — but it would only be one step along the way; it would not be enough. Because, at this point, central banks are only concerned with stabilizing money and maybe helping employment levels, and they will not do anything else unless they are under enormous pressure. They need to be changed, and that’s a lot of what this novel’s about.
Changing the way we regard money, that would be a step toward post-capitalism right there. If money was created from scratch but not given to the banks to loan to whatever they wanted but given to decarbonization projects first, then flowing out into the general economy — the first spending money by governments, which make money in the first place, would be targeted toward decarbonization efforts. This strikes me as a good idea, a necessary idea.
Because saving the biosphere doesn’t make a profit in the capitalist order, we will never do it, and we are therefore doomed. So a very fundamental reform of how we regard money itself is absolutely necessary. I’m saying that a post-capitalist political economy that regards money as created for the public good and is spent on that first — and then trickles into the general economy — is a fundamental shift, and without it, we’re in terrible trouble.
DERRICK O’KEEFE
A lot of the action takes place in Switzerland, as you mentioned, because many of the main characters are members of the Ministry of the Future headquartered in Zurich. Do you worry that your story could evoke right-wing tropes like the globalist, world government bogeyman that nationalists talk about to avoid action on climate change?
KIM STANLEY ROBINSON
Well, maybe so, but I would say the Left has to fight fire with fire. Right-wing ideas are also conceptions of globalization, in terribly poor disguises as being nationalist. But the nationalist system is embedded in capitalism; it’s just completely international and global. These right-wingers, if they could make an extra dime an hour by selling out national citizens by sending their industries to China or India — they’d do it in a second, and they already have. So they need to be called out for being completely inconsistent and hypocritical. And the Left needs to be much more aggressive on that, and say the problem is not globalization per se; the problem is bad globalization, which is capitalism, as opposed to good globalization, which is mutual aid and cooperation among the nation states by way of international treaties and things like the UN.
Because saving the biosphere doesn’t make a profit in the capitalist order, we will never do it, and we are therefore doomed.
The Paris Agreement is crucial. It’s a major event in world history. It could turn into the League of Nations, in which case we’re screwed. Or it could turn into something new in history, a way to decarbonize without playing the zero-sum game of nation against nation.
So all this needs to be fought at the level of the discursive battle, and no concessions can be made on that point. I mean, right-wing thinking is supremely hypocritical and convoluted and self-contradictory, and that needs to be pushed on and pointed out at every chance — these supposed nationalists are also going to sell you out. This discursive battle, it’s very important.
DERRICK O’KEEFE
You talked about the Great Trench, of how we get from here to there, and it strikes me that this book is very grounded. There’s no reference to a lunar colony, let alone to any Elon Musk Inc. version of Mars, and there’s no mention of off-planet gated communities like in the film Elysium. Does this absence imply that saving the earth, or transitioning to a livable system, requires stopping the capitalist colonization of space? I kept waiting for an Elon Musk character.
KIM STANLEY ROBINSON
Well, since there are 106 chapters — I guess that I could have made it 107, and I could have talked about that. But maybe the absence does speak louder than words. All of those things are fantasies, and billionaire fantasy trips are not going anywhere.
In Red Moon and Aurora, I’ve made my statement about what’s possible and what isn’t. Because in the capitalist world, you have to make a profit, and even the billionaires don’t have enough money to properly fund these ventures on their own. So they talk about asteroid mining — that’s bullshit. They talk about Helium-3 mining on the moon — that’s bullshit. There is no profit in space. It’s just a fantasy of our culture right now, because everybody’s been convinced by science fiction writers [laughs], and they’re not paying attention to the numbers game, I guess.
I believe in space science. I’m totally in love with NASA, and with public space science, as part of government. There’s this saying of NASA’s, “space science is Earth science,” and I totally believe that.
DERRICK O’KEEFE
That strikes me as the theme of Aurora, right there. You have to go 150 years away from Earth into space to realize what you’ve got, and in that book, they actually turn the ship around.
KIM STANLEY ROBINSON
Yes, exactly. Aurora is my statement about leaving the solar system and that whole idea that humanity is destined for the stars. I try to put a stake in the heart of that idea. But the moon, Mars, the asteroids — that’s more local. But it’s not profitable. So, you’ll see China on the moon [as in Red Moon], you’ll see an international presence there. I’m confident it will be just like Antarctica. And Antarctica’s interesting. There’s a couple thousand people down there every summer. It’s not exploitable; there’s no profit to be made down there. And nobody’s interested. Like, if I say to people, “Oh, I went to Antarctica,” it’s like, “Who cares?”
DERRICK O’KEEFE
And I assume you have spent quite some time in Antarctica, because there’s so much detail to the action that takes place there, in both this book and your earlier works.
KIM STANLEY ROBINSON
Yes, I have been there twice. I have a whole novel about it. Sea level rise is so imminent that Antarctica will be important. And this idea of sucking out the water from beneath these glaciers to slow their melting and sliding into the ocean, this is an idea that glaciologists have, really an individual glaciologist. And when I ask their colleagues about this plan, they say, “Yeah, we have the technology.”
The question is whether the bottom [of the glaciers] is configured correctly. In other words, the earthy form of Antarctica that the ice is resting on may or may not be conducive to sucking water out. So it’s an open question whether my save-the-sea-level section of The Ministry would actually work… it’s probably the most speculative part of the novel, to suggest that that could be done and that it would work. That would be extremely useful geoengineering, but as of now, no one is confident that it would actually work, because we don’t know enough about what the bottom is like. So the Antarctic strand of the novel is a bit of wishful thinking.
DERRICK O’KEEFE
Geoengineering is sometimes a kind of “third rail” in left or ecological political circles. At one point, one of your characters in this book suggests that what’s needed is a new word.
KIM STANLEY ROBINSON
I know just what you’re talking about, this kind of third rail sensibility. I would say that conditions have changed such that we are now obviously actively experiencing climate change. I can see that a standard leftist analysis of this is that it’s just more capitalist excuse-making. But what I’m saying is, we’re doing it already, it might become necessary, and anyway, a nation like India, if they get hit by a heat wave, they’re not going to care about any kind of leftists clutching their pearls. Many leftists are fairly well off, well off enough to have a political philosophy that wants things to be better for everyone, partly, like in my case, so I don’t feel like a ridiculous aristocrat but just a precursor of what everyone will have later on.
What I want to say to all my leftist readers is, get over it. We’re in an all-hands-on-deck situation, where every possible thing that has ever been suggested to escape the mass extinction event is going to be on the table. And these theoretical arguments — it’s just another capitalist ploy, it’s a silver bullet, it’s a fantasy — well, some of that’s true and some of it isn’t. So there is no excuse for ideological rigidity about something this important. As a leftist, I would say to other leftists: Get over the prejudice against the term geoengineering and look again at the situation that we’re in. We need to decarbonize. Anything we do at scale to achieve that is a form of geoengineering.
I’m totally in love with NASA, and with public space science, as part of government.
Here’s one thing I’ve been saying to open eyes around geoengineering: women’s rights are a geoengineering technology. Here’s why: when women have developed and achieved rights, because we need to get to post-patriarchy as well as post-capitalism, the population replacement rate — a steady population is like 2.1 kids per woman — drops naturally from their own life choices to a rate of like 1.8 or 1.6. So, if you start talking about women’s rights as a geoengineering method, that takes it out of the techno-silver-bullet land, which is where we’re stuck right now. Because right now, when a leftist hears “geoengineering,” they think about an oil company pulling the wool over our eyes, suggesting we can keep burning carbon if we just throw dust into the atmosphere, and how we could end up in some kind of Snowpiercer or other extreme, far-fetched situation. So it serves as an allegory about things that could go wrong.
But I want to argue that humanity is now a major player in Earth’s biosphere, and anything we do to help Earth’s biosphere at scale — in other words, the whole civilization doing it on purpose — could be defined as geoengineering. And then you get software as well as hardware solutions.
So law, justice, post-capitalism, women’s rights, post-patriarchy — all these things could be defined as forms of geoengineering, and at that point, the term kind of falls apart. What we’re really talking about is civilization, as such, as a form of biosphere management. So this is what I’m going out there with over and over on this point, because there’s too much hardening of positions, and these positions are being taken on the basis of the situation as it existed in about 1980 or maybe 1990. The positions are behind the curve of the realities. So, as a leftist science fiction writer, it’s my responsibility to be politically incorrect in provocative ways.
DERRICK O’KEEFE
One of the Ministry characters wonders at some point, “Were they fools to have tried so hard for words in a world careening toward catastrophe?” Every writer working on the topic of climate, whether approaching it through fiction or nonfiction, probably has this thought from time to time. You’ve worked hard for decades in a genre that many have often dismissed. Against this snobbish trend, Ursula K. Le Guin once suggested abolishing genre and subgenre categories altogether, arguing that “literature is literature.” Do you feel like science fiction, or speculative fiction, is finally getting its due respect — especially in this year of the pandemic?
KIM STANLEY ROBINSON
We’re in a science fiction novel, as a culture. Science fiction is the realism of our time, as I’ve been saying over and over again. It’s the best way to describe the world that we’re in.
I read widely, I’m open-minded. As a writer, I chose science fiction consciously because it best expresses the realism of our lives today. Since the pandemic, everybody wants to hear what a science fiction writer has to say. Of course we don’t have the solution, and of course we can’t predict the future, but what I think is happening is people are realizing climate change is already here, it’s hammering us, and that we have to think more like how science fiction writers have been thinking for decades now.
This year, I’ve seen a bump in interest that’s doesn’t have to do with me personally. It has to do with science fiction as a genre. Now, you don’t see everybody interested. There’s a crowd of people who like to stay in a previous structure of feeling, to use Raymond Williams’s term. But that structure of feeling is now inadequate, and essentially reactionary. Now you’re in a science fiction world, and so what are you going to do? Maybe you’re going to read more science fiction!”
As written by Javier Sethness Castro in the Agency website in a review entitled Salvaging the Future: A Review of The Ministry for the Future; “After the basics of food and shelter that we need just as animals, first thing after that: dignity. Everyone needs and deserves this, just as part of being human. And yet this is a very undignified world. And so we struggle. You see how it is (551).
The Ministry for the Future is Kim Stanley Robinson’s latest contribution to the emerging genre of climate fiction, known as “cli-fi.” Climate fiction is a subset of science fiction, set in the near or distant future, that centers the projected dystopian effects of global warming and the sixth mass extinction on humanity and nature, while exploring creative and utopian ways of salvaging the future of our species, together with that of millions of others.
As in his other recent speculative works, from Aurora (2015) to New York 2140 (2017), Robinson here draws implicitly on the concept of “disaster communism” developed by the Out of the Woods climate collective—a form of mutual aid that relies on “a kind of bricolage.” Some concrete examples of this bricolage (“work made from available things”), as the collective explains in a 2014 article, include trucks being “repurposed to deliver food to the hungry, retrofitted with electric motors, stripped for parts, and/or used as barricades,” and ships being “scuttled to initiate coral reef formation.” Indeed, in Ministry, Robinson alludes to the repurposing of destroyed container ships as reef beds, and praises Robinson Crusoe for ingeniously “ransack[ing] the wreck of his ship” (229, 367). Thus history—and, by extension, the future—can be remade at the intersection of communal self-organization and the autonomous reconfiguration of existing technologies and infrastructures. As the Out of the Woods collective argues, “the unfolding catastrophe of global warming cannot and will not be stopped” without the “transgressive and transformative mobilization” of disaster communities agitating for a new, post-capitalist global system. As we will see, Robinson’s Ministry is animated by a parallel desire to put an end to the “strip-mining [of] the lifeworld,” and to “help us get to the next world system” (163, 317).
Compared with most of Robinson’s other twenty-five published works, Ministry is among the closest in time frame to our own. It starts in the mid-2020s, just five years after its publication date. Measured in terms of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration, the world of Ministry begins at 447 parts per million (as compared to earth’s current level of 417ppm). Unlike Aurora, Red Moon, the Mars trilogy (1992–1996), Galileo’s Dream (2009), or 2312 (2012), the plot in Ministry—with the exception of some lyrical scenes depicting airship flight—is earthbound, focused on terrestrial humanity and nature, rather than interplanetary or interstellar life and travel. Despite this difference, all of Robinson’s cli-fi books share humanistic, ecological, scientific, and historical themes, lessons, and quandaries, and Ministry is no exception. Efforts to address the catastrophic twin threats of a melting polar ice and sea level rise are central to the narratives of Green Earth and Ministry alike.
Although set centuries apart, and/or in differing parts of the solar system or galaxy, Robinson’s novels commonly feature radically subversive political struggles, journeys of existential discovery and loss, interpersonal romances, explorations of the relationship between humanity and other animals (our “cousins”), historical optimism, an emphasis on human stewardship and unity, and the creative use of science to solve social and ecological problems (502). In this sense, his latest work is no exception.
A Global Scope
The Ministry for the Future begins with a shocking illustration of capitalist hell, as Frank May, a young, white US aid worker, witnesses climate devastation firsthand in India, where an estimated twenty million people perish in an unprecedented single heat wave induced by global warming. As the only survivor of the heat wave in a village in the state of Uttar Pradesh, Frank experiences significant trauma and guilt, and goes somewhat mad. In this, he echoes the quixotic crossover of neurodivergence and heroic agency seen in several other of Robinson’s male protagonists, from Saxifrage Russell in the Mars trilogy to Frank Vanderwal in Green Earth and Fred Fredericks in Red Moon.
At the national level, this catastrophe delegitimizes the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which is voted out in favor of the nascent Avasthana (“Survival”) Party. In turn, the new government switches the Indian energy grid from coal to renewables, and launches thousands of flights to spray aerosols into the stratosphere, in an effort to double the effects of the 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines. This unilateral geoengineering scheme effectively cools global temperatures by 1 to 2°F (0.6–1.2°C). Dialectically, this “New India,” a formidable “green power,” promotes land reform, biosphere reserves, “communist organic farm[ing],” the decentralization of power, and a questioning of patriarchy and the caste system (141–42). Thousands of miles away, these sweeping changes resonates in arid California, where the state government recognizes all water as a commons, “blockchaining” it for the purpose of collective accounting and use in the face of sustained drought. This is before an “atmospheric river” destroys Los Angeles, “the [capitalist] world’s dream factory,” and a heat wave ravages the US Southwest, taking the lives of hundreds of thousands (285, 348–49).
Just prior to the South Asian heat wave, in 2025, the Ministry for the Future is founded as a “subsidiary body” to the Paris Climate Agreement of 2016. Headquartered in Zurich, Switzerland, the ministry is tasked with representing the interests of future generations, as well as the defense of entities that cannot represent themselves, such as nonhuman animals and ecosystems. Much like the US National Science Foundation (NSF) featured in Green Earth, this ministry is led by cutting-edge, clear-minded scientists; it is distinguished, however, by its international and global scope, as well as its use of artificial intelligence (AI). Part of its mission involves the identification and prosecution of climate and environmental criminals across the globe. Initially, the ministry utilizes legalistic methods to pursue these offenders, but, after a late night confrontation between the deranged Frank and the ministry’s Irish director, Mary Murphy (whom he kidnaps and harangues), decides to quietly support a black ops wing headed by the Nepali Badim Bahadur. The parallel organization, which may be the same as the “Children of Kali” group, and other underground cells, execute weapons manufacturers, disrupt the World Economic Forum at Davos, destroy airliners, sink container ships, and purposely infect cattle herds to prevent their consumption, all as part of the “War for the Earth.” Soon, the Children of Kali are joined by Gaia’s Shock Troops, along with fictionalizations of the real-world Defenders of Mother Earth and Earth First!
Under Bahadur’s direction, the ministry, led by Mary Murphy, not only pursues covert campaigns, but also develops two major proposals to save the world from the menaces of ecocide and militarism: First, it aims to appeal to the central banks of the most powerful states to stimulate decarbonization by replacing the dollar with a new global currency called “carboni.” This new currency is backed, in turn, by long-term bonds and applied in conjunction with progressive carbon taxes, intended to incentivize survival. But it is only after popular occupations of Paris and Beijing, demanding a “kind of commons that was post-capitalist,” and “millions [coming out to] the streets,” transferring their savings to credit unions, and launching a debt strike after the climatic destruction of LA, that the “useless” bankers and “corrupt” lawmakers feel compelled to take steps to adopt “carbon quantitative easing” and remove the profit motive from the fossil fuel industry (214, 252, 344). Second, to slow down the retreat of polar sea ice (and similar to a plan outlined in Green Earth), the ministry backs a proposal to drill into glaciers and pump their melted remnants back onto the surface for refreezing.
After Intervention, the “Good Future”
Once carbon taxes and the carboni currency have been introduced in Ministry’s world, progressive political changes begin to follow. The despotic al-Saud family is overthrown in Arabia, and the interim government pledges to immediately finance the suspension of oil sales and a full transition to solar power through compensation in the form of carboni. Likewise, the “Lula left” makes a roaring comeback in Brazil, stopping the country’s sale of oil and promising to protect and restore the Amazon rain forest, all in response to the newfound incentives created by carboni. The African Union backs the nationalization of all foreign firms, and their transformation into worker cooperatives, as a means of presenting “a united front toward China, [the] World Bank, [and] all outside forces” (324–25, 355).
In Russia, a democratic opposition movement overwhelms Putin’s regime. Refugees in Europe—overwhelmingly Syrian—are given global citizenship and worldwide freedom of movement. Reacting to the pressures of a “brave new market” on the one hand, and of relentless eco-saboteurs on the other, the transport and energy sectors decarbonize. New container ships are designed, partly with the assistance of AI, integrating a return to sail technology and innovative electric motors that run on solar energy. In line with E. O. Wilson’s proposal for “half of earth” to be set aside for nature, a number of habitat corridors are established in North America, connecting the Yukon with Yellowstone, and Yellowstone with Yosemite, incorporating the Rocky, Olympic, and Cascade Mountain Ranges. In these corridors, hunting is banned, roads are ripped up, and underpasses and overpasses are built to facilitate the safe movement of animal populations.
Across the globe, communal, national, and regional socio-environmental organizations coalesce to rewild, restore, and regenerate ecosystems and the human social fabric. Atmospheric carbon concentration peaks at 475ppm, then begins a sustained decline (454–55). The British, Russian, and American navies collaborate to support “Project Slowdown,” the systematic pumping of glacial meltwaters, in Antarctica. The Arctic Sea is dyed yellow, to salvage some degree of albedo, or reflection of solar radiation, in light of melted sea ice. Social inequality declines sharply as universal basic income is adopted and land is increasingly converted into commons.
Rights are extended to nonhuman animals. More and more people shift to cooperative, low-carbon living and plant-based diets, just as communism, participatory economics, workers’ cooperatives, and degrowth emerge as reasonable components of a “Plan B” response to a climate-ravaged world. Frank accompanies Syrian and African refugees, volunteers with mutual aid organization Food Not Bombs, and expresses his love for both Mary and his fellow animals (372–73, 435, 447).
This alternate future is not free of tragedy, however. Tatiana, the ministry’s “warrior,” is assassinated by a drone, presumably directed by Russians seeking revenge for the ouster of Vladimir Putin—much as the anarchist Arkady Bogdanov and his comrades are firebombed by capitalists toward the end of Red Mars. This leads Mary Murphy to go into hiding, something the revolutionaries on Mars and Chan Qi, the female Chinese dissident in Red Moon, must also do.
Questions and Critique
She clutched his arm hard. We will keep going, she said to him in her head—to everyone she knew or had ever known, all those people so tangled inside her, living or dead, we will keep going, she reassured them all (563).
The Ministry for the Future is an engaging, entertaining, and enlightening read. It presents a hopeful vision of the future, whereby mass civil disobedience and direct action against corporations and governments serve as the necessary levers to institute a scientific, ecological, and humanistic global transition beyond capitalism. The plot features conflicts between the market and the state, and it is obvious where Robinson’s allegiances lie. As Mary declares, in this struggle, “we want the state to win” (357). Paradoxically, as an internationalist and an ecologist, Robinson endorses the “rule of law” as an important means of bringing capital to heel (61). At least for the time being, he believes that money, markets, and banks will themselves need to be involved in the worldwide transition toward social and environmental justice—that is, their own overcoming: “Without that it’s castles in air time, and all will collapse into chaos” (410).
Undoubtedly, this vision is different than that of anarchism, which foresees bypassing the hopelessly compromised state and overthrowing capitalism directly through the self-organization of the international working classes. Robinson admits his narrative does not advocate “complete revolution,” as left-wing radicals would (380). Rather than advocating the overthrow of the state, he calls for changing the laws. Indeed, in his construction of an alternate future, Robinson defines the Paris Agreement as the “greatest turning point in human history,” and the “birth of a good Anthropocene” (475). Mary Murphy’s ministry seeks to appeal to the same “bank/state combination” that has caused, and continues to perpetrate, the very climate crisis that threatens humanity and the rest of complex life on earth (212).
To advocate such a statist strategy as a means of salvaging the future, even as an “insider” counterpart to the direct actions carried out by revolutionary “outsiders,” several assumptions must hold—many of them questionable. For instance, Robinson assumes that all countries will adopt the Paris Agreement in good faith; that the ministry would be allowed to come into existence in the first place; that the BJP in India would not only be voted out of power but also accept its electoral defeat peacefully; that Trumpism and the US Republican Party would be out of the picture; that the masses would mobilize radically for socio-environmental justice across the globe and not be brutally repressed, as they were in Mexico City’s Tlatelolco Plaza, Beijing’s Tiananmen Square, Occupied Palestine, Syria, or Myanmar/Burma, to name just a few examples; and that the bankers would consider, much less implement, a new global currency based on one’s contributions to carbon sequestration.
Of course, it is partly, if not largely, due to the imaginative assumptions and visions elaborated by speculative writers that audiences are so attracted to the genres of science fiction and fantasy. We must not chide Robinson for exercising his utopian imagination, as it has produced so much beautiful and critical art, including Ministry. At the same time, it is fair to question the intersection of philosophical statism and psychic optimism in his cli-fi. Such a constellation, for instance, unfortunately leads Robinson to compliment the organization of the US Navy, and to praise Dengist China as socialist (155, 381–83). An anarchist approach, in contrast, would prioritize the mobilizations, strikes, and other direct actions present in the text, while adopting a more critical and immediately abolitionist stance toward the state and market.
Conclusion
The Ministry for the Future continues Robinson’s critically visionary, optimistic, and reconstructive speculative fiction. In narrative form, he explains why we must change the system, and presents us with a panoply of means—revolutionary and reformist alike. He emphasizes the need for a “Plan B” to be developed ahead of time, to sustain the revolution, once it breaks out—much as the martyred Syrian anarchist Omar Aziz believed, and as the Frankfurt School critical theorist Herbert Marcuse’s own tombstone declares: Weitermachen! (“Keep it up!”)
Compared with the disastrous eco-futures depicted in such sci-fi novels as Aurora or New York 2140, The Ministry for the Future depicts a dynamically utopian story of estrangement, self-discovery, and creative struggle to ensure a better future. In this sense, it is reminiscent of Pacific Edge (1990), the most hopeful of Robinson’s Three Californias trilogy. At its best, Ministry conveys what could be.”
So for envisioning a future in which we all can live in harmony with nature and each other; how then shall the casting of the bones be read?
The study of our possible futures is an emergent art and science, which I read in current events through the instruments of literary criticism, history, psychology, and philosophy, a methodology inspired by my teenage reading of Robert G.L. Waite’s foundational analysis of Hitler in The Psychopathic God which with Jerzy Kosinski’s The Painted Bird fixed me on the origin of evil as my field of study.
As I map out our most probable futures today using iconic works of fiction to interrogate these pathways, I am struck by the ambiguity of much of our futurology; both utopian and dystopian in nuanced complexity and moral relativity, a discovery which both delights and reassures me as the founding and central project of civilization is still with us, that being to question ourselves, our ideas of self and other and of the world and our relationships with it, and how we choose to be human together.
Dystopian narratives and the Utopian ones they interrogate are important informing and motivating sources of political action and resistance not only because they provide vivid examples of the consequences of submission to tyrannical authority of force and control, and to disengagement from the struggle for the survival of nature and of humankind in the face of monstrous plutocratic devastation and greed, but because they allow us to read ourselves into the story and thereby shape our response as heroes in the story of our lives.
While the two main types of dystopian fiction, the totalitarian-dystopian genre and the post-apocalyptic genre, may historically have differing sets of themes and ways of handling them with unique references, allusions, and tropes, both allow us to solve adaptational crises by providing scaffolding for thinking through problems as we confront them in real time.
And the two existential crises we face today, and which will continue to challenge us in all of our tomorrows, are represented by these twin genres of literature and are interdependent and mutually reinforcing; tyranny and the fragility of democracy, and with it threat of our extinction and ecological disaster. We must confront them together as dyadic threats linked by our addiction to power and control as maladaptive responses to our fear of nature.
To this end of our education and models of direct action in resistance, I direct your attention to a short list of classics of the genre, including only those both worth reading on their merits as classics of world literature and as studies of futures we are overwhelmingly likely to witness as the unfolding of consequences of our choices:
Iggy Pop performs Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night
As a chiaroscuro of fear and hope, negative spaces which define us and our possibilities of becoming human in coevolution like Escher’s Drawing Hands, I set against this litany of woes the following visions of redemption and transformative change:
First, the Utopia we all grew up with, which has shaped our ideas of an ideal society in countless ways; Star Trek
1966 Intro
Original Series on Paramount- all of the many show series are worth watching
The New Annotated Frankenstein, by Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley, Leslie S. Klinger (Goodreads Author) (Editor), Guillermo del Toro (Introduction), Anne K. Mellor (Afterword)
The great novels of speculative fiction are numberless as the stars, and this brief list of prima materia from which to cast the bones of our futures doubtlessly leaves out some of the finest works humankind has yet created.
Here follows an expansion of such, not limited to utopian/dystopian works, which I compiled originally in 1982 when I began teaching, and continually updated since, as a choice reading list to compliment the Authorized Version of our canon of literature, always nothing less than an authorized set of identities, for students in my high school English classes. Jay’s Revised Canon of Literature as I called it grew to over twenty lists of national literatures plus Moden American Literature, including Modern American Science Fiction.
Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, The Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch, The Man in the High Castle, The Minority Report, Lies, Inc., Ubik, A Scanner Darkly, Valis, The Divine Invasion, The Transmigration of Timothy Archer, The Exegesis of Philip K. Dick, Philip K. Dick
Mind in Motion: the fiction of Philip K. Dick, Patricia Warrick
The Third Bear, City of Saints and Madmen, The Day Dali Died, Secret Life , The Ambergris Trilogy ( City of Saints and Madmen, Shriek: an afterword, & Finch), Dradin in Love: A Tale of Elsewhen & Otherwhere, The Surgeon’s Tale, Komodo, The Southern Reach Trilogy (Annihilation, Authority, & Acceptance), Borne. Monstrous Creatures: Explorations of Fantasy Through Essays, Articles and Reviews, Dead Astronauts, Jeff Vander Meer
The Left Hand of Darkness, The Lathe of Heaven, The Dispossessed, Ursula K. LeGuin
Ursula K. Le Guin’s The Left Hand of Darkness (Bloom’s Modern Critical Interpretations) Harold Bloom
Ring of Fire series, Eric Flint (1632 is the book that reminded me who we are, and what’s worth fighting for)
The Deep, Beasts, Engine Summer, Aegypt, Great Work of Time, Love and Sleep, Antiquities, John Crowley
Wild Cards Series, George R.R. Martin (also wrote Game of Thrones from which a most curious telenovela was filmed- set in a mythic past or future)
Intervention, Jack the Bodiless, Diamond Mask, Magnificat, Julian May
The Maker of Universes, Philip Jose Farmer
Creatures of Light and Darkness, Lord of Light, Roger Zelazny
The Gods Themselves, Isaac Asimov
Dune series, Frank Herbert
Venus Plus X, Godbody, Theodore Sturgeon
Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury
` Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 (Bloom’s Modern Critical Interpretations) Harold Bloom Editor
Vorkosigan Saga, Lois McMaster Bujold
Schrodinger’s Cat Trilogy, Illuminatus Trilogy, Robert Anton Wilson
Mindswap, Dimension of Miracles, Options, Compton Divided, The Tenth Victim, Robert Sheckley
Babel-17, The Einstein Intersection. Samuel Delaney
Gibbon’s Decline and Fall, The Fresco, The Visitor, The Companions, The Margarets, Sherri S. Tepper
Eight Worlds Series (The Ophiuchi Hotline, Steel Beach, The Golden Globe, Irontown Blues), Thunder and Lightning Series (Red Thunder, Red Lightning, Rolling Thunder, Dark Lightning) The Persistence of Vision, Good-bye Robinson Crusoe and Other Stories, John Varley
Hawksbill Station, Across a Billion Years, A Time of Changes, Dying Inside, The Stochastic Man, The Face of the Waters, Kingdoms of the Wall , Sailing to Byzantium, Majpoor series, Robert Silverberg
The Essential Ellison: a 50-Year Retrospective Revised & Expanded, Harlan Ellison, eds Dowling, Delap, and Lamont
Lyonesse Trilogy (Suldrun’s Garden, The Green Pearl, Madouc) The Languages of Pao, Jack Vance
The Boat of a Milliion Years, A Midsummer Tempest, Poul Anderson
Book of the New Sun series (The Shadow of the Torturer , The Claw of the Conciliator , The Sword of the Lictor ,The Citadel of the Autarch , and a coda, The Urth of the New Sun), The Book of the Long Sun series ( Nightside the Long Sun , Lake of the Long Sun , Caldé of the Long Sun , and Exodus From the Long Sun), The Book of the Short Sun series ( On Blue’s Waters, In Green’s Jungles and Return to the Whorl) Gene Wolfe
Aliens series, Gini Koch
Blood Music, The Forge of God, Anvil of Sars, Darwin’s Radio, Darwin’s Children, Queen of Angels, Slant, Heads, Moving Mars, City at the End of Time, Greg Bear
Song of Kali, Hyperion Cantos series (Hyperion, The Fall of Hyperion, Endymion, The Rise of Endymion) Ilium, Olympos, Dan Simmons
R. A. Lafferty: The Collected Short Fiction (The Man Who Made Models Volume 1, The Man With the Aura Volume 2, The Man Underneath Volume 3,
The Man With The Speckled Eyes Volume 4) The Devil is Dead trilogy (Archipelago, The Devil is Dead, More Than Melchisedech- consists of Tales of Chicago, Tales of Midnight, & Argo), Sinbad: the Thirteenth Voyage, R.A. Lafferty
Honor Harrington series, David Weber
Chanur series: (The Pride of Chanur, Chanur’s Venture, The Kif Strike Back, Chanur’s Homecoming, Chanur’s Legacy), The Faded Sun Series: (Kesrith,
The Sprawl Trilogy (Neuromancer, Count Zero, & Mona Lisa Overdrive), The Bridge Trilogy (Virtual Light, Idoru, & All Tomorrow’s Parties) the political-spy thriller trilogy (Pattern Recognition, Spook County, & Zero History), The Difference Engine, The Peripheral, Agency, William Gibson
Ascendancies: The Best of Bruce Sterling, Holy Fire, Zeitgeist, Islands in the Net, Schismatrix Plus, Pirate Utopia, Bruce Sterling