The necessary anarcho-communist International

[Last edited on Saturday, 27 January 2024]

TL;DR (AKA: an abstract)

It is necessary now more than ever before in history to take the means of production and the cultivated lands in the context of an anarcho-communist International, like Pëtr Kropotkin, Errico Malatesta, Emma Goldman and so many other anarchists advocated and fought to make happen, because today we not only need to finally end it with the domination of exploitation, violence and death that patriarcapitalism is in the whole world, and with any other domination of man on man and of man on the other species, but we also need to save ourselves, our children and the future generations of our species, and so many others, from the decimation or, more probably, the extinction that otherwise would happen in some decades, or even before, by spreading and growing wars and by ecosystemic catastrophes like the escalating reduction of biodiversity, the escalating frequency of pandemics, and global warming driven disasters like the droughts, floods, fires, hurricanes, sea level rise, unlivable temperatures in the summer, and more and more cold winters, which are already happening and causing so much pain and death everywhere, but especially in areas of the planet that have less temperate climate conditions than ours, less financial and material resources to mitigate the effects of these disasters, and, in many cases, even more pollution than our countries.

Moreover: tomorrow it would be much easier than ever before to make a global, federated community of many little communities that would self-manage themselves with open-to-all, consensus driven assemblies (i.e. real, direct democracy, that is a necessary condition for achieving and maintaining good or very good levels of equality and social justice, along with periodic redistribution of wealth accumulation, to be culturally ritualized in the context of festivities), because when the huge advancements in technology that humanity has done since the ancient times when big self-managing communities existed before, particularly those in the many-to-many communications and in the increasingly immersive fiction production and fruition fields, would grant paritary confrontation and creative sublimation and cathartic release of our dark sides (competitiveness, aggressiveness, and so on) to all, when they actually were, hardware and software, in the hands of everybody.

Also: the anarcho-communist International could and would much better start from rich countries, where conscience of the huge inequalities of patriarcapitalism is more widespread and material and cultural conditions are still better than in those many countries where the vast majority of the people of the world lives: by putting an end to the domination of the masters and rulers in our countries we would directly and greatly alleviate the near-slavery conditions of  the populations of the poorest countries, where the local rulers and masters would then no longer receive the more or less overt or covert support and the weapons they receive today from our governments and masters, who are interested only in securing for themselves the possibility to obtain at very low prices the raw materials to be used in the production of tools which are so often overpowered, or even useless or damaging, and also designed, with planned obsolescence, to last much shorter than they could.

Finally: although it would still require being armed, if we managed to be many enough to take the means of production and the cultivated lands in our rich countries, maybe not even a single drop of blood, neither ours nor of our adversaries, would be shed; but time is running fast and it’s very improbable that we will be that many soon enough, so, and in any case, we’d better start or continue with more conviction to organize ourselves secretly, in groups, on an operational level, while continuing to spread our knowledge and ideas publicly.

Like Pëtr Kropotkin, Errico Malatesta, Emma Goldman and so many other anarchists said, we have to take the means of production and the cultivated lands in order to finally end it with this domination of exploitation, violence and death that patriarcapitalism is, and with every other domination and exploitation and violence; and, nowadays, also to save ourselves, our children and the future generations: because in addition to the “usual” exploitation and violence, there’s the immense ecological problem of the average temperature of the world rising, that no one “from above” has even put a curb on (globally, greenhouse gas emissions continue to increase, instead of decreasing), despite more than two decades of peaceful pressures which we acted in every sauce from below; and there is covid with its variants, this never-ending tragic affair which is predominantly and by far yet another consequence of the material and cultural misery that patriarcapitalism produces, also in its state version (see [1], [2], and [3], or just mind that if it was not because of these miseries, in that Chinese market people would not have sold animals at the risk of causing that virus to jump to humans), and to date has already painfully killed almost 7 million persons worldwide, and would otherwise continue; because yes, the anti-covid vaccines which are currently disposable in the richest countries do work: they are statistically very effective in preserving from getting ill those who accept to get vaccinated, although they provide a rather brief cover; but, despite the fact their development was financed to a great extent by rich states with money from tax payers, these same states buy them at a price per dose that is up to 24 times its cost of production, while the states where the large majority of the people of the world lives can’t afford to buy them and the bosses of pharmaceutical multinationals producing them don’t remise, not even temporarily, to the related patents, and don’t publish the know-how that’s necessary to build the machines to produce them, nor are they disposable to help in building these machines and to train the people who could use them within less rich and poor countries; thus, covid and its variants would otherwise continue spreading, and new viruses would otherwise born and spread – see [1], [2], and [3] again – even in rich countries: viruses, in fact, know no borders, as covid and its variants proved.

These are some of the reasons why we need to take the industrial infrastructures and turn off those that produce the bulk of the global warming that threatens to drive us to extinction, and why we need to take and close the industrial “meat factories”, and why we need to take the cultivated lands, whose cultivation today produces the second most important part of the greenhouse effect, to cultivate them without resorting to fossil fuels burning,  which today is mostly used to produce synthetic nitrogen, letting instead work the good old little mushrooms that have taken billions of years to learn how to make nitrogen for good and without polluting, in synergy with the roots of the plants, and thus also letting the lands rest by turning the cultivated plants from year to year, etc., and soon build lots of wind, photovoltaic and photothermal, hydroelectric infrastructures, and produce the necessary batteries without polluting and exploiting people, and start anew everywhere as a world of small federated communities, more or less on the model of Kurdish democratic confederalism, which in the cities could be neighborhoods, and in smaller towns the town itself, where decisions and rules will be defined and refined in assemblies that will be open to all, and which will commercially relate one another by public assemblies as well, through the internet, basing their commercial relations on the answer to the question “which is the closest among other communities that can exchange that resource or that product or that service?”, that will be publicly available information, and socializing through the internet the knowledge they will develop so that, for example, with respect to viral pandemics – that would be then much more seldom anyway –, they would be globally stopped for real and also in a much shorter time; and because we should be clear, by now, also due to the historical experiences of “real communisms,” with their marxist nonsense of the “dictatorship of the proletariat,” which by the way has never been real and produced some of the worst nefariousness in history, that social justice and good levels of social equality require to be backed, along with periodic redistribution of wealth accumulation, that would be culturally ritualized and much more real than today in the context of festivities, by the constant possibility of openly and publicly, verbally confronting in open-to-all assemblies, in every community, about what to do with common goods and common spaces, and about which rules to give ourselves, as this happened already in history, and would happen much better tomorrow due to global free access for all to lay, egalitarian education and knowledge of horrors of the past, that would be widespread everywhere in the world also thanks to the technologies we have developed in the meantime, which should be common heritage of everybody, and due to the abolition of licenses, patents and trade or industrial secrets, and to the possibility that then everyone in the world would have to sublimate their “dark sides” in creativity and lash them out in almost or totally harmless ways, to an extent and with an immersivity that we, as a whole, never had before: the possibility for all to build fictional worlds, with or without fictional stories, using open hardware and software produced by the communities, and to virtually live some time there, and to play and fight and love and build there too, with or without other avatars of others’ selves. This is what arts have always been about, and tomorrow it would be just freely accessible for all, and it would be a great contribution to sublimation and catharsis of our “dark sides”, along with frugal sports and more usual arts and free, respectful love.

And we need to do the anarcho-communist International because it’s our interest not only to save ourselves and the future generations, but also to make the world a much better place for us and our children and everyone else.

There’s no alternative, and time is crucial at this historical stage, and it’s running out not least with respect to the risk of extinction by climate change, that otherwise would happen in this very century, but especially with respect to the increasingly less remote possibility that this umpteenth crisis “of capitalism” will end up again, through the spread of worse and worse nationalisms and wars in which access to those fossil fuels we should have stopped burning yesterday is still one of the main justifications, in an unfolded third world war with a decimation of the global population that would be much heavier than in the previous two (or perhaps, even in this case, with the total extinction of the human species, and so many others): because, in short, this crisis “of capitalism” that we are living today is not only the umpteenth of a series of crises which, on average, have been increasingly damaging, but it’s also totally unprecedented, with its enormous ecological implications which are now, already tragic, with the amount of death and pain they have already caused and are causing now in the world, and which will get much more tragic with the worsening of the already and since long ongoing crisis in the ability of the living to reproduce, even in order to feed us, and with the worsening of water scarcity and drought that is already ongoing, and with so many other problems that patriarcapitalism has caused and is causing, which will certainly worsen and will form a whole that, as if one or a few of its “pieces” wasn’t enough, will be totally fatal for our species and so many others, unless we actually organize and do the anarcho-communist International we need to do, quickly, to transform what otherwise would certainly be a bitter and very painful end for most or all of us, into the foundation and the beginning of a new and much more peaceful, and much more just, and much more happy world for all to live in, and, quite soon, also out of, when anyone who will so desire will have the ability to peacefully live with anyone else, members of terrestrial and non terrestrial species as well, on other planets too, to bring life to those planets were life is not already present and to protect it on those where it is. Because that which is holy and sacred is not much our individual lives, but life itself, that just can’t be stopped, and in order to be a living and healthy part of it, and to peacefully live our individual lives in it, we still have to understand that it is the only “god”, and we have so much more to learn from and about it.

The anarcho-communist International could and would much better start from rich countries, where conscience of the huge inequalities of patriarcapitalism is more widespread and material and cultural conditions are still better than in those many countries where the vast majority of the people of the world lives: by putting an end to the domination of the masters and rulers in our countries we would directly and greatly alleviate the near-slavery conditions of  the populations of the poorest countries, where the local rulers and masters would then no longer receive the more or less overt or covert support and the weapons they receive today from our governments and masters, who are interested only in securing for themselves the possibility to obtain at very low prices the raw materials to be used in the production of tools which are so often overpowered, or even useless or damaging, and also designed, with planned obsolescence, to last much shorter than they could.

Finally: although it would still require being armed, if we managed to be many enough to take the means of production and the cultivated lands in our rich countries, maybe not even a single drop of blood, neither ours nor of our adversaries, would be shed; but time is running fast and it’s very improbable that we will be that many soon enough, so, and in any case, we’d better start or continue with more conviction to organize ourselves secretly, in groups, on an operational level, while continuing to spread our knowledge and ideas publicly.

The problem with libertarian and egalitarian education at the present time

The problem with libertarian and egalitarian education, at the present time, is that the more we adopt an education in which rules are established with children, as they begin to understand the language, and always remain open to being improved and modified, which is necessary and foundational for a wider education to sharing, the more likely it is that children, once they become adults, will have difficulty adjusting to this ultra-hierarchical present, in which social justice is only a verbal expression with such a small correspondence to reality, and that is currently decimating and would possibly extinguish our species and so many others.

But i think it would be worth it all the same, if we made children aware early enough that, at the present time, the adult world is mostly like that; and, above all, if we organized ourselves, for this and so many other reasons, for the necessary anarcho-communist International.

The Christ: Jesus’ twin

I think it’s probable that “the Christ” was the unknown twin brother of Jesus, and that he was kept imprisoned in Mary’s and Joseph’s poor home basement since not long after he and his brother Jesus were born, as per this previously stipulated contract between “the Magi”, which were actually some guys working for the early and then unknown Catholic Church, and Mary and Joseph themselves, until they pulled him out all of a sudden to let the romans put him on the cross and kill him instead of Jesus, to stage Jesus’ death, and then his resurrection.

Before that, Jesus, who was educated mostly by “the Magi”, and agreed to their contract and their plan very early in his life, also because Mary and Joseph made that contract before he and his brother were assigned to them by “the Magi” themselves, was mainly reciting “in sunlight”, with the oppressed, a plot and precepts which was written by “the Magi”, who based them on many more, selected madmen’s and “saints’” beliefs and, to some extent, even on his brother’s obviously growing madness, although it was probably mostly driven, in its development, and particularly in “the Christ’s” increasingly sincere conviction of being the son of “God”, by “the Magi” themselves, who were visiting him periodically in the basement.

After his brother died as one more poor christ on the cross in his stead, Jesus acted for the oppressed that last touching “bye, see you at the end of the world” scene that “the Magi” had written for him, and then he, Mary and Joseph got the big money that “the Magi” promised to them, and a permanent vacation far away from those territories, in exchange for their good services to the early Catholic Church, that was already planning to gain complete hegemony over the whole world.

The only christ i like is the one my father, who died in 2009, imagined and sang in 1979 and still tells in his Il sogno and Il cristè songs, which are as one song. You can read its lyrics in the video description, both in the italian original and in the translation i’ve done.

“The dawn of everything”, the “always turn the other cheek” Christian commandment, the Anarchic International and immersive fiction

In their The dawn of everything, David Graeber and David Wengrow prove with archaeological evidence that, in a relatively distant past, there were big cities where people already knew and practiced agriculture, and where, in some cases for more than one millennium, decisions and rules about the commons were taken in open assemblies; thus, they also had good levels of equality in distribution of wealth and resources.

At some point in the book they ask themselves, and obviously their readers too, why, at least now, there is no archaeological evidence of later examples of such big societies which worked that way, and they make an hypothesis: that when three issues or “traits” of centralized accumulation of power and wealth and resources, which i won’t summarize here (read the book! 🙂), intertwine in a given society (like our present societies, since very long time), it’s very difficult to get back, or forward, to equality in distribution of power, work, wealth and resources.

They also emphasize that it is an hypothesis, and that more studies should be done to prove it more, or modify it, or extend it.

Anyway, i have an hypothesis about something that has probably worsened the situation: the Christian commandment to “always turn the other cheek” when anyone treats you bad: although i guess nobody can sincerely tell to really always behave like that, i think it’s a commandment which worked and still works a lot as a moral condemnation of some of the most effective actions any oppressed people can implement against their oppressors, and as a self-justification of fear of implementing it or, sometimes, even of thinking about it.

This bugs me a lot, also because i think that today it would be much easier to build equal societies, after an Anarchic International like this, i.e. after taking the lands to cultivate them without polluting, and the industrial facilities to shut down the polluting ones and build the sustainable alternatives while consuming less and better, which would also save our species and many others from the already ongoing decimation and the otherwise very probable future extinction caused by the current ecological catastrophe and-or the equally severe risks of the ongoing and future wars that the ecological catastrophe itself is very intertwined with: after an Anarchic International like this, in the liberated context it could foster (i.e. a global context of many federated little-to-medium sized communities where decisions and rules about the commons would be defined and refined in open assemblies, and thus we would have very good levels of equality in distribution of work, wealth and resources too, and where two or more communities would settle about exchanges of resources and products with inter-communal assemblies which could be made through the internet), tomorrow we would also have a hugely wider possibility to access and share all knowledge, and to build fictional worlds, with or without fictional stories, using open hardware and software produced by the communities, and to virtually live some time there, and to play and fight and love and build there, with or without other avatars of others’ selves, thus sublimating our dark sides in creativity and lashing them out in almost or totally harmless ways to an extent and with an immersivity that we, as a whole, never had before.

This is what arts have always been about, and tomorrow it would be just freely accessible for all.

Chi​dove​quando​come​cosa​perché

In risposta a questo post fediversico di Gubi: si sono tutte cose belle e giuste e utili e sarebbe bello si diffondessero di più, ma sono anche cose che non si è mai smesso di fare e che non si sono mai diffuse granché, anzi a occhio mi pare siano sempre più minoritarie, forse soprattutto per la repressione sempre più pesante e, per quanto riguarda il tirare in mezzo più gente, secondo me anche o forse soprattutto perché non si definisce in modo almeno vagamente unitario cosa vogliamo fare per risolvere i problemi sempre più enormi in cui stiamo precipitando, e non solo per ammortizzarne gli effetti; ma tra l’altro penso nessuno creda davvero che i sacrosantissimi, meravigliosissimi e sempre sian lodati orti autogestiti, la guerriglia piantamento alberi, filiere corte e mangiare poca carne o niente, occupazioni di case e posti sociali, masse critiche, server sicuri, recupero di hardware vecchio, videogiochi raramente indipendenti, commenti critici più o meno ficcanti e-o efficacemente ironici sui social intorno alle cose sempre più turpi che stanno accadendo, antiproibizionismo non sempre tanto consapevole per non dire poco, e far l’amore ognun* come gli va ma non sempre (porco dio) rispettoso di come davvero va a ognun* — penso nessuno poi creda davvero che tutte queste cose, sacrosante e meravigliose ma a volte anche poco, se anche si diffondessero tanto di più sarebbero una rete in grado di ammortizzare più che poco il dilagare dello spremimento lavorativo a cui sempre più gente è costretta per sopravvivere male, quello del fascismo, quello della miseria materiale – anche quella di chi ancora può tentare di scappare da inferni per ora comunque ben peggiori del nostro -, di quella culturale, e poi soprattutto le siccità e le alluvioni, il clima che ieri era primavera e oggi è autunno inoltrato e in mezzo c’è stato il vento che fa danni sempre più gravi e la grandine coi chicchi da 2 etti che distrugge le coltivazioni, il probabile estendersi della guerra tra russia e ucraina e-o di altri fronti a venire, la relativa crescita della probabilità di ricorso ad armi atomiche, ecc. — figuriamoci fermarli e magari svoltarli.

Chiarito ormai che dall’alto nessun* ha fatto, sta facendo o farà mai cose utili anche solo ad arginare tutto ciò, e che ne sta facendo e continuerà a farne invece di sempre più dannose, cos’altro potremmo fare in pratica per fermare questo disastro, e magari svoltarlo, se non un’Internazionale per tentare di prendere le terre, gli allevamenti, le infrastrutture industriali critiche per spegnere quelle inquinanti e costruire le alternative sostenibili per la produzione energetica e coltivare la terra coi trattori a elettricità pulita e lasciandola riposare invece di usare l’azoto di sintesi che ha un consumo energetico enorme, e chiudere gli allevamenti industriali in cui gli animali, oltre a fare vite d’inferno, consumano quantità immani di acqua e cibarie che vengono da coltivazioni ad azoto di sintesi, ecc., ecc.?

Forse se definissimo meglio di come ho fatto qui come fare queste cose sempre più necessarie anche solo per uno straccio di sopravvivenza, delineando meglio anche come ci organizzeremmo socialmente nell’anarchia distribuita, riusciremmo a tirare in mezzo abbastanza gente per farle davvero.

O forse no.

Boh, però magari avrebbe senso provarci, forse un contesto buono per cominciare a parlarne anche informalmente potrebbe essere questo.

Cani e gatti sciolti, il mio ricordo di Genova G8 2001

Antefatto: ero ancora in analisi, dal ’96 mi pare: 4 incontri a settimana. Avevo 25 anni, ora ne ho 45. Avevo detto alla mia analista che con un amico, F., sarei andato a Genova per partecipare alle manifestazioni contro il G8. L’intenzione era di andare il 19 luglio, il giorno del corteo dei migranti, e fare 19, 20 e 21. Non ricordo cosa disse lei di questo progetto, probabilmente niente (facevo analisi “classica”, “freudiana”, steso sul lettino con lei alle spalle, spessissimo non diceva niente su quel che dicevo e raccontavo), ma quando le chiesi esplicitamente “Lei ci sarà?” mi rispose “Ah io no!” con un tono da “Fossi matta!” che mi dette fastidio. Tempo dopo seppi che suo marito, anche lui analista freudiano, col quale lei condivideva appartamento e studio nello stesso palazzo, era andato a Genova con un gruppo organizzato di psicologi, anche con pazienti mi pare.

Non ricordo per che motivo, non partiamo il 19 mattina ma la mattina seguente, il 20. Il corteo dei migranti del 19 è stato bello partecipato e tranquillo, e noi siamo abbastanza tranquilli. Del viaggio di andata ricordo solo che col mio amico ci sedemmo per caso in un vagone su cui la maggioranza delle persone erano del centro sociale Vittoria, che allora (forse anche adesso) stava in via Muratori a Milano. Ricordo che a un certo punto un compagno del Vittoria ci dette delle mascherine leggere, tipo le FFP1 di adesso, “per difendervi dai gas, facile che ci saranno”. Per il resto situazione nostra, mia e del mio amico, che mi pare di ricordare un po’ tesa, emozionata, ma in chiave di presa bene.

Continua a leggere Cani e gatti sciolti, il mio ricordo di Genova G8 2001

Malatesta sulla strage del Diana (oggi, cento anni fa) e la violenza

Oggi, cento anni fa, intorno alle ventitrè, si compì la strage al teatro Diana di Milano, in cui morirono diciassette persone e altre ottanta rimasero ferite, e mi pare giusto ricordare anche questo, che credo fu tra gli errori nostri più tragici. Anarcopedia riporta, a chiusura della pagina linkata qui sopra, che Malatesta «sempre condannò risolutamente il gesto ma mai gli autori», dei quali disse: «Quegli uomini hanno ucciso e straziato degli incolpevoli in nome della nostra idea, in nome del nostro e del loro sogno d’amore. I dinamitardi del “Diana” furono travolti da una nobile passione, ed ogni uomo dovrebbe arrestarsi innanzi a loro pensando alle devastazioni che una passione, anche sublime, può produrre nel cervello umano […]», e penso che a questa posizione pervenne in particolare quando seppe che la loro intenzione non era di compiere una strage, ma di colpire soltanto il questore; però – citando dal bel librone di Vincenzo Mantovani Mazurka blu – La strage del Diana – il primo commento noto a proposito dell’attentato al Diana, che Malatesta fece dal carcere, fu più duro nei loro confronti:

I giornali parlano di attentato anarchico. Ebbene io ci tengo a dichiarare che quel triste fatto non può aver niente a che fare con le idee anarchiche. Quell’orribile gesto di massacro non corrisponde, anzi è contro, alla dottrina e alla tattica anarchica. Gli anarchici sono per la insurrezione armata contro lo stato capitalistico, contro il governo borghese, al fine di instaurare un ordine sociale nuovo, di formare una società di giustizia e di libertà, ma restano assolutamente contrari alla piccola o grande violenza individuale, alla vana guerriglia contro le persone, alla inutile strage. Io ricorderò ai miei giudici e al popolo le antiche e le recenti mie polemiche contro gli atti terroristici individuali, contro il ravasciolismo, contro il cosiddetto banditismo rosso, contro la propaganda col fatto. L’umanità nuova non si prepara, non si costruisce con azioni selvagge e pazzesche, uccidendo donne, bambini e pacifici spettatori in un ritrovo popolare. Anch’io qualche volta mi recavo al teatro al Diana. Neanche come rappresaglia ad altre violenze può esser compreso quell’attentato. Se tu hai colpito me io risponderò colpendo te, non mai facendo del male a un terzo che non sa niente delle nostre querele, che vi è perfettamente estraneo. La morale anarchica deve essere una morale superiore, non scendere alla barbarie. Se coloro che hanno compiuto l’opera di distruzione e di sangue dovessero o volessero chiamarsi anarchici, restano però sempre degli individui che non sanno che cosa è l’anarchismo.

E Mantovani prosegue citando un articolo di Malatesta apparso nel 1892 sulla rivista parigina En-dehors

Siamo rivoluzionari per amore degli uomini; né colpa nostra è se la storia ci ha costretti a questa dolorosa necessità; ma soprattutto rispetto alla rivoluzione occorre tener conto dell’uso del minimo mezzo, del più parsimonioso, giacché il dispendio si totalizza in vite umane.

Conosciamo abbastanza le spaventevoli condizioni materiali e morali in cui si trova il proletariato per spiegarci gli atti di odio, di vendetta, persino di ferocia che potranno prodursi. Ma altro è spiegarli, certi eccessi selvaggi, altra cosa è l’ammetterli. Non sono questi gli atti che possiamo accettare, incoraggiare, imitare.

Dobbiamo essere risoluti ed energici, ma dobbiamo anche sforzarci di non oltrepassare mai il limite segnato dalla necessità. Dobbiamo fare come il chirurgo che taglia quando occorre ma evita d’infliggere inutili sofferenze; insomma dobbiamo essere ispirati dal sentimento dell’amore degli uomini, di tutti gli uomini.

Ci sembra che questo sentimento d’amore sia il fondo morale, l’anima del nostro programma; ci sembra che solamente concependo la rivoluzione come il grande giubileo umano, come la liberazione e la fratellanza di tutti gli uomini, qualunque sia la classe o il partito al quale hanno appartenuto, il nostro ideale potrà realizzarsi. La ribellione brutale si produrrà certamente e potrà anche servire a dare l’ultima spinta che deve atterrare il sistema attuale; ma se non trovasse il contrappeso dei rivoluzionari che agiscono per un ideale si divorerebbe da se stessa. L’odio non produce l’amore; per mezzo dell’odio non si rinnovella il mondo. E la rivoluzione dell’odio o fallirebbe interamente o farebbe capo a una nuova oppressione, che potrebbe magari chiamarsi anarchia, come si chiamano liberali i governi attuali, ma che non sarebbe meno un’oppressione e non mancherebbe di produrre gli effetti che produce ogni oppressione.

…e poi un altro, scritto cinque anni dopo per l’Agitazione di Ancona:

L’atto di rivolta collettivo, a priori, a parità di circostanze, è più importante dei fatti individuali; ma sarebbe illogico misurare la bontà di un atto dal numero di quelli che l’hanno compiuto. Noi protestiamo contro certi fatti che ci sembrano cattivi e dannosi perché sono quei tali fatti, e non già perché sono stati commessi da un uomo isolato. Così, per esempio, io disapprovo l’attentato al caffè Terminus [che fu del genere di quello del Diana, benché le sue conseguenze fossero state molto meno gravi: un morto e venti feriti][…] perché mi pare ingiusto, feroce, insensato, intendendo con ciò di giudicare, non le intenzioni e la personalità di Henry, ma l’atto obbiettivo nella sua portata sociale, cioè sul bene o sul male che poteva produrre agli altri uomini.

La rivoluzione messa ai voti

Da Mazurka blu. La strage del Diana, di Vincenzo Mantovani,
Seconda parte, cap. 45: La rivoluzione messa ai voti

Nell’estate del 1920, in seguito a un dissidio di carattere amministrativo e personale con Nella Giacomelli, Mario Perelli lasciò Umanità Nova[I]. Da una ditta genovese ricevette l’incarico di raccogliere inserzioni per una pubblicazione destinata alle Camere di commercio. Nonostante l’inesperienza, il lavoro gli andò bene. La giornata del neo-agente pubblicitario finiva spesso al Grand’Italia, il lussuoso ristorante della Galleria. Così, tra contratti e buone cene, Perelli passò il mese di agosto.

Io abitavo al rondò Cagnola [oggi piazza Firenze]. Da quelle parti c’è via Ruggero di Lauria, dove c’era l’officina dell’ingegner Romeo.

Una mattina sono a letto – non ho urgenza di andare a lavorare – quando sento un vociare, un tramestio. Mi alzo, vado giù. La Romeo s’è messa in sciopero. C’era una controversia che si trascinava da un certo tempo, credevano di risolverla così. Loro vanno alla Camera del lavoro, e io dietro. Pensavo: caso mai farò un servizio per Umanità Nova.

Vado là, e la discussione pare che si allarghi, perché viene convocato il consiglio delle leghe. Quelli della Romeo non si muovono. Io non vado neanche a mangiare.

Verso le quattro c’è la decisione: il consiglio generale delle leghe proclama l’occupazione delle fabbriche. Figurati, con la notizia calda! Attraverso Garlaschelli – il portinaio, che vendeva anche i giornali – cerco di avere informazioni precise. «Sì, ti assicuro, hanno deliberato così.» Via! Corro a Umanità Nova, porto la notizia.1

Continua a leggere La rivoluzione messa ai voti

Quel brutale finalmente!

Quel brutale finalmente! - Copertina

«Un giorno un maestro tradizionale, prima di portare i suoi alunni in classe, li mette in fila e dice: l’ordine è la prima cosa da imparare! Arrivati in classe i bambini pregano e dopo si siedono. Il maestro subito dà il tema da svolgere e scrive il titlo alla lavagna. Giacomo Carta dice di andare al gabinetto, ma il maestri gli dice no. Un alunno (Carmine Carrato) sta prendendo l’astuccio, ma gli cadono i colori ed allora il maestro gli dà una bacchettata sulla mano. Il maestro ritira i compiti e dice: Adesso problema. Giacomo Carta ridice di andare al gabinetto, ma la risposta è la solita. Il maestro dopo aver fatto svolgere il problema assegna un compito di analisi grammaticale. Il nostro Giacomo ritenta di andare al gabinetto. Ma la risposta non cambia. Poi fanno l’intervallo, ginnastica nei banchi. Il maestro ritira i compiti. Giacomo per la quarta volta ridice la solita frase, e incomincia a farsela addosso. Siccome incomincia a fare una puzza tremenda gli altri scolari se ne accorgono e cominciano a ridere. Il maestro scaccia Giacomo, che mentre va al gabinetto se la fa addosso e sporca il corridoio. Così si effonde una puzza tremenda che a poco a poco si espande nella classe, così gli alunni sono costretti a tapparsi con la mano il naso e ridono come matti. Il maestro li rimprovera e li punisce. I bambini escono inquadrati. Il maestro rimasto solo dice: Capiranno l’ordine!

Ma Giacomo Carta prese una carabina e sparò al maestro, così quel brutale morì finalmente.»