Loading...

24 noiembrie 2017

3. Compulsia la repetitie: cusca invizibila a sclavului

Reperele evolutiei sclaviei din antichitate pana in prezent 3. Compulsia la repetitie: cusca invizibila a sclavului


Acest articol se continua de aici

Principalul dezavantaj al sclaviei, fie ea clasica, fie camuflata in relatii de munca de aparent liber schimb este constituirea unui fond psihopatologic depresiv. Intre depresia simpla a fatalismului specific stilului de viata al sclavului clasic si la depresia majora care degenereaza in sinucidere, exista un spectru de depresii intermediare in care sunt implicate experiente traumatice de sorginte sclavagista. Am aratat in primele doua articole din aceasta serie in ce mod sclavul depresiv a preferat sa se lase ucis sau sa se afunde in fantasmatica lume a raiului de pe lumea cealalta mai curand decat sa continue sa traiasca ca sclav. Iar civilizatia postconstantineana a stiut sa-i ofere sclavului clasic acest zaharel iluzoriu in schimbul unei selectii mai atent facute fata de potentialii sclavi care ar fi putut initia o revolta cu pagube de ambele parti.

Pe langa acest strigat de ajutor intru eliberare din lanturile sclaviei, din partea opusa se manifesta o pulsiune conservatoare a sclavului de a ramane in starea de sclavie. Aceasta pulsiune ce salasuieste in creierul fiecaruia este cel mai important dintre factorii care contribuie la consolidarea si folosirea sclaviei. Psihanaliza clasica a observat aceasta ciudata tendinta a unor pacienti de a retrai o trauma. Freud a numit-o „compulsie la repetitie”. El a observat-o la unii pacienti care pareau sa dezvolte un fel de comportament opus fobiei, un fel de atractie paradoxala fata de lucrurile frustrante, unele traite in prealabil.

Fobia si compulsia la repetitie sunt aflate la antipozi. Prima exagereaza frica iar cealalta o minimizeaza, ba chiar este sedusa de potentialul traumatism al unei situatii. Daca fobia are dezavantajul unui comportament de generalizare a aprecierii traumatice catre obiecte sau fiinte inofensive, dimpotriva compulsia la repetitie are dezavantajul ca indeamna constant spre bucluc. In primul caz comportamentul e anacronic pentru ca vede teroare acolo unde nu e, sau ii exagereaza mult ponderea. In celalalt caz comportamentul e anacronic datorita incapacitatii paradoxale de a se feri de factorii traumatici.

Psihopatologia a folosit formula oarecum poetica de „masochism moral” pentru a-l descrie, deoarece subiectul traieste ambivalent teroarea traumatismului prin frica si seductie. Prima se manifesta prin respingere si indepartare, iar seductia se manifesta prin atractie. Jocul de noroc patologic este poate cel mai bun exemplu in acest caz. Persoana cu aceasta tulburare isi pierde averea prin pariere compulsiva, pana la ruinare pe improbabil. In acelasi fel precum pariorul patologic si compulsivul la repetitie pariaza ideatic (superior cognitiv) pe improbabilitatea neproducerii traumei, dar si psihic profund tocmai pe probabilitatea producerii ei. Angajarea in actiunea traumatica sau parierea improbabila consta in paradoxala si falimentara nevoie de retraire a traumei.

In acelasi fel precum cel dominat de compulsia la repetitie traumatica si sclavul este cuprins de ambivalenta fata de starea de sclavie, dupa ce esteeliberat. Exista un proverb romanesc folosit de acest gen de oameni: „E rau cu rau dar e mai rau fara rau”. Putem observa aici o adevarata poetica de atractie fata de „rau”.

Sclavul eliberat isi traieste astfel ambivalenta fata de sclavie. Pe de o parte el o detesta, dar pe de alta parte o cauta cu predilectie in mod masochist-moral. Explicatia sta exact in descendenta familiala pe care subiectul o vrea retraita: parintii, bunicii, strabunicii etc., au fost ei insisi sclavi iar urmasul lor nu stie alt stil de viata. Asemenea unei pasari de colivie care nu mai vrea sa zboare si se simte bine acolo, si sclavul are un anumit confort in a executa ordinele si de a se sti apreciat de stapan. Mitul pesterii relatat de Platon descrie perfect pentru aceasta stare mentala. Din aceasta cauza pierderea locului de munca pentru executantul modern de ordine provoaca o frustrare in plus fata de frustrarea naturala a marginalizarii sociale la care e supus somerul.



In ciuda unei intregi civilizatii care s-a format in urma protestului sclavilor, paradoxul este ca sclavul traditional transgenerational este atat de legat de sclavie incat nu se poate desprinde de ea odata eliberat; in acelasi fel, dupa abolire, multi sclavi au ramas in continuare slujitori fostilor si actualilor stapani. Sunt enorm de multe cazuri de acest fel consemnate dupa abolirea sclaviei in SUA. Acelasi lucru s-a intamplat si in perioada finalului antichitatii si cea imediat urmatoare. Lipsindu-i imaginea puterii stapanului clasic, sclavul a creat imaginea unui megastapan cosmic, model pentru stapanul sau ideal de care nu se poate desprinde: Dumnezeu.

Analizata strict psihologic, constructia mentala a Crestinismului a fost o simpla intoarcere la un stapan mai eficient. Crestinul catacombelor si-a ingropat ulterior viata in rugaciune si misticism dupa ce predecesorii sai isi ingropasera viata in executarea ordinelor stapanilor. Exact dupa acelasi tipar mintal se comporta astazi tanarul contemporan naiv. Modelat de valorile consumeriste ale ascensiunii sociale bruste, el isi ingroapa tineretea in cariera, urcand treptele promovarii in functie sau trecand de la o corporatie la alta mai mare. Cele doua stari mentale sunt identice. Diferenta dintre ele consta doar in valorile cultivate de fiecare societate: Crestinismul promitea ascensiunea sociala intr-o iluzorie viata de dincolo, de nimeni experimentata si comunicata anturajului conform regulilor stiintifice. Dimpotriva, corporatismul promite ascensiunea sociala printr-o iluzorie colectie de produse si obiecte inutile. Diferenta dintre cele doua statute culturale consta in gradul de acceptare a iluziei: primul este inalt culturalist, abstract i timp ce celalalt este mercantil, concret.

Sclavul „eliberat” care ramane de buna voie in curtea stapanului, sau angajatul supranumit liber, ce consuma mereu si mereu acelasi „altceva”, par guvernate de doua mentalitati ce par total diferite; una conservatoare si cealalta progresista. In realitate ele sunt unul si acelasi lucru: sclavul clasic tocmai transformat in sclav salarial nu poate pleca din starea de subordonare dupa cum nici sclavul salarial nu poate iesi din cercul vicios al alegerilor de false cai diverse, care de fapt sunt aceeasi optiune cu diferit ambalaj.

Trauma fugii a ramas atat de intiparita in sufletul sclavilor pe parcursul a mai multe generatii incat singuri, ei nu se pot elibera. Aerele de vedeta pop sau de persoana superimportanta pe care majoritatea adolescentilor le arata sunt de fapt contracarari ale acestui sentiment de inferioritate sociala. Sistemul capitalist stie atat de bine sa recunoasca sclavul exact in aceste manifestari „de clasa”, creand pentru acesti copii adevarate industrii de exploatare a iluziilor lor. Cultura pop exact cu asta se ocupa.

E foarte usor a recruta slujitori din randurile adolescentilor in schimbul satisfacerii mai mult sau mai putin reale ale viselor lor de ascensiune sociala. In ultimele decenii noile generatii sunt crescute in spiritul vedetismului. Acest model educational are rolul de a-i pregati pentru un astfel de moment. Sclavii contemporani accepta sa lucreze pentru bani si cauta cu obstinatie joburi atat in virtutea obisnuintei si mutilarii genealogice dar, mai nou, din nevoia de a calatori si de a avea sentimentul ca pot evada legal si ambivalent de la „locul de munca”. Din pacate pentru ei, cu cat aceasta nevoie de evadare e mai mare cu atat laturile sclavagiste se strang mai tare in jurul lor. Plata vacantelor diverse ca turisti se face, de fapt, cu munca si mai asidua in timpul sezonului. Adica profit mai mare pentru angajator. Ceea ce se urmarea de la inceput.

Compulsia la repetitie de care vorbea Freud, care il atrage pe nevrotic la retrairea paradoxala a traumei, se aplica perfect si aici. Miscarile de emancipare democratica incepute in Franta sa sfarsitul secolului al XVIII-lea odata cu Revolutia Franceza, si continuate in secolul al XIX-lea si inceputul celui de-al XX-lea, au esuat lamentabil acolo unde sclavului i s-a dat libertatea absoluta. Cu aceasta libertate el a refacut tirania. Asa s-a intamplat in secolul al XIX-lea cu Napoleon in Franta. Asa s-a intamplat in secolul al XX-lea cu nazismul in Germania si stalinismul in Rusia. In acelasi fel, ignorand drepturile care i s-au dat dupa celebra declaratie universala, sclavul modern a preferat sa se intoarca in pestera lui mai curand decat sa isi cunoasca si sa isi asume acele drepturi pe care stramosii lui le-au cucerit prin eroismul rascoalelor. Exista si exceptii notabile in persoanele marilor figuri culturale si artistice, insa ele n-au putut influenta cursul politic al istoriei. Capitalismul a vazut aceasta predispozitie si a facut presiuni asupra politicienilor si legislatiei pentru camuflarea a cestor drepturi. Astfel ca, in acest moment cineva aflat la baza piramidei sociale trebuie sa lupte din greu pentru a-si castiga aceste drepturi presupus garantate.

Sclavul somer are doua variante de evolutie psihica dupa demisie, in functie de intensitatea compulsiei la repetitie: daca ea este mai puternica decat aceasta angoasa a subordonarii fata de stapan, atunci revine la vechiul loc de munca, eventual chiar si cerandu-si scuze. „Se maturizeaza”, le place unora sa spuna despre aceasta situatie. Dupa o perioada de „meditatie”, sclavului „ii vine mintea la cap” si decide sa nu mai faca probleme la locul de munca si sa accepte zambind (mai mult sau mai putin simulat) ordinele venite pe linie ierarhica. De fapt nu se poate vorbi de nicio maturizare aici si de nicio lectie invatata. Sclavul isi va relua viata de zi cu zi in banalitatea ei insignifianta de dinainte de demisie. Revenirea se explica prin faptul ca pur si simplu ca el nu a facut fata angoaselor reiesite in urma evadarii simbolice din relatia traumatica cu stapanul. Intoarcerea la trauma reprezinta acceptul sau moral pentru incetarea haituirilor care urla in profunzimea mintii sale din haul istoriei mostenit transgenerational.

„Maturizarea” sa este doar un soi de plafonare spirituala, de retezare a viselor din copilarie si adolescenta in favoarea unei vieti conservatoare. Psihopatia anacansta (numita in DSM-V „Tulburare de personalitate de tip Obsesiv-compulsiv”) este modelul acestei configurari psihopatologice. Marx a descris foarte sugestiv aceasta stare prin conceptul sau de „alienare”. Executantul modern de ordine e amabil, binevoitor si optimist la locul de munca, insa acasa devine un bombanicios ursuz, gata oricand sa gaseasca nereguli si sa le critice virulent in virtutea obisnuintei de la locul de munca.

In celalalt caz, daca compulsia la repetitie e mai slaba decat angoasa subordonarii, atunci executantul modern de ordine nu mai accepta intoarcerea la vechiul loc de munca sau la ceva similar, desi ambivalenta il roade si pe el constant in interior. Dar totusi el fie isi schimba profesia, fie cauta tot felul de supape de exprimare a furiei acumulate in timp ca urmare a acestei presiuni culturaliste. Comportamentul sau indica constant frustrarea. Spre deosebire de alienatul din primul caz, care isi traieste in interior drama, frustratul inca se exprima, proiecteaza in exterior aceasta angoasa a compulsiei la repetitie. El poate deveni activist politic sau de mediu, poate deveni suporter huligan al cluburilor sportive sau chiar se poate angaja in armata sau politie pentru a-si revarsa furia pe „inamic”. Psihopatia exploziva („tulburarea de personalitate de tip exploziv”) este efectul pe termen lung al acestei realitati sociale.

In urmatorul articol o sa analizez in detaliu aceste strategii micro si macrosociale de atragere a celor cu o astfel de puternica compulsie la repetitie spre inregimentarea ca sclavi salariali.




»»  read more

7 noiembrie 2017

2. The Christianity and the promise of eternal life and happiness



The benchmarks of slavery evolution from the antiquity to the present 2. The Christianity and the promise of eternal life and happiness


In the pre-Christian age, the ancient Greeks used to consider the slave as "someone who deserves to be killed but left alive for some reasons". This was because, generally, the classical slaves were gained as prey, through the war prisoners’ transformation into slaves. Any kind of rebellion had to be severely punished. The situation was similar in all the ancient empires.

But this strategy worked only for a while. Many slaves committed suicide. Others preferred to fight the Roman legions to death rather than continue to live as slaves. Others, the Christians, were killing themselves into prayer after the social system had converted their will to live into profitability and spread desolation into their souls. The above mentioned slave's definition was no longer relevant to the slave of the Greek-Roman antiquity end period. The slave was beginning to stop accepting such a social stigma of animal that could be sacrificed anytime after the master's cheer.

a. The Catacomb Christianity: an antisystem ideology

The first forms of ideological rebellion against slavery coincide with the emergence of Christianity that brought symbolically the first such revolution. It disavowed the Greek-Roman slavery mentality, and promised a ore credible lie, which is the all people brotherhood.

In the pre-Christian age, the ancient Greeks used to consider the slave as "someone who deserves to be killed but left alive for some reasons". This was because, generally, the classical slaves were gained as prey, through the war prisoners’ transformation into slaves. Any kind of rebellion had to be severely punished. The situation was similar in all the ancient empires.

But this strategy worked only for a while. Many slaves committed suicide. Others preferred to fight the Roman legions to death rather than continue to live as slaves. Others, the Christians, were killing themselves into prayer after the social system had converted their will to live into profitability and spread desolation into their souls. The above mentioned slave's definition was no longer relevant to the slave of the Greek-Roman antiquity end period. The slave was beginning to stop accepting such a social stigma of animal that could be sacrificed anytime after the master's cheer.

According to any revolution, initially the authorities tried the first Christians eradication. After their belief, the Catacomb Christians preferred to be killed rather than being treated as classical slaves. The return of the other cheek for the abuser to slap, as Jesus did, has totally confused the executioners and mercenaries of the Roman administration and army. Just like a predator that fails to act when the prey counterattacks instead of running, neither the Roman Empire knew what to do with these depressants that developed delusions and religious hallucinations. The Catacombs Christians could not be blamed for a possible punishment. Jesus' moral superiority to the Roman bureaucratic administrative spirit was clear from miles. The Roman soldier conversion to its beliefs was only a matter of time.

Putting into practice the master death threat for the slave did not bring him much benefit. The Christians were highly persecuted, but the more persecutions, the stronger the cult became. Once with the slaves’ revolts, especially in Athens and Rome, their status had somehow to be changed. So, after some such unsuccessful attempts to persuade others to execute the master's orders, the master had to think of a new exploitation strategy rather than using the constant threat of death. And this has brought the classical slave some liberation or, at least, a social status increasing. As it is known, after he murdered a few, Constantine had to accept the cult and leave it be. Probably he could have eradicated it altogether if he had not found a solution to modify the slavery in such a way that he would cover to the new ideological- religious conditions. The Christians after him rushed to even make him a holy saint, which is unreasonable if compared to other saints who believed and lived like Christ. All that Constantine did was to change himself according to the Christian cult rather than change it after his own requirement.

The Christianity accepting as a main religion was a normal thing to do by any inspired ruler. Its recognition meant the new rights granting to the classical slaves. Unlike the destiny based deterministic mentality of the Greek-Roman religion, the Christianity has recognized the slave as a man who has the chance of salvation, which is, the chance of living a happy life somewhere in another world, the other world. We still have no proof to know if this promise would have been made till now. Personally, I would bet on the negative option, knowing that there are many institutions that are functioning today on the basis of the lying promises. But even so, a false promise was better for the classical slave than the Greek-Roman fatalism based on the idea of absolute destiny.

Unlike the Greek-Roman polytheism, the post-Christian society "listened" to the miserable slaves’ opinion. It finally admitted that yes, the world is ugly, depressing, in vain, etc. But it also maintained its promise that Heaven or Heaven still exists as well. And, according to the Christian doctrine, at the second coming of Christ, the world will be for sure as in Heaven. Here is the backbone of the Christian religion and its huge expansion in the subsequent centuries. If the slave’s ugly life was proof that the Greco-Roman deities were false, on the contrary, after the Christianity, this recognition became an evidence of the existence of a heaven, a Paradise somewhere in the world. The belief in such an endless happiness is a psychical need to counteract the slave’s everyday life sadness. The psychical system creates such a fantastic constructs precisely to balance itself against daily frustrations. The Christianity Parents often said that only the poor and the suffering ones would be saved. But in fact it is that only they are able to create such an after death world fantasy due to their own social status and psychogenic constitution. The Christianity implemented into the state has allowed the slave to dream in its world that somewhere the sacrifices made will be eventually rewarded.



Nietzsche shocked his contemporaries, saying that the Christianity is a slavery religion, although this is an incontestable historical truth. If we pay attention to the prayers content and many holy texts, we see that the believer has a strong propensity for servitude. The catacomb Christian was not sure about his desire for liberation, like any slave: he wanted more to serve an unbeatable master in order to secure her/his survival and salvation. Here is the origin of contemporary corporatism! It is no surprise that the main corporatist heads of the modern age have religious behavior, even if it is a fake one. The cave myth has once again materialized on a remarkable page of history.

It is this promise that seduced the public opinion in joining the Christianity. The Greek-Roman polytheism did not do so with its mechanistic mentality based on faith in destiny. With the industrial age, this promise has turned into the welfare that, basically, the wage slavery permits. Observing this availability, the slavery social system reformed through faith preferred the cross instead of the sword, at least at a first level of interaction.

b. The State Christianity: a reformulation of the slavery

Nietzsche said very honestly that Christianity is a slaves’ religion, although they are unhappy. However, the willingness to "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's", as affirmed by Jesus himself, held the door open for some negotiation of a slave new social status, namely the promise that he will go to heaven and live there happily. And here comes an essential factor of the new slavery, namely that of testing the slave's willingness to accept orders from a master. The mystics could not be persuaded to serve a master anymore, but they could however become an educational factor to convince the less intellectually ones to do it. We can see here the origin of corporatism: "I try to make you buy; if you refuse, I'll try to make you an advertiser by advertising me."

The right to live even at an illusory level, another life than the oppressed one was a first freedom that the Roman authorities gave to the slaves to persuade them to continue serving. All they had to do further on was to act more or less credible like a divine entity. By identifying with the Messiah himself, the political leader became stronger than ever after the Christian worshiping. A certain percentage of slaves were lost, namely those who decided to immerse themselves into prayer rather than serve. However they could still not be persuaded to continue serving neither by death nor by torture. Constantine saw this directly after exercising it in the first phase. Then, instead of losing them all, he preferred to use them more as an educational factor, cultivating the others belief that he himself was a kind of Jesus whom they worshiped. This is the model of capitalism and state institutions in general. Adopting Christianity as an official religion, Constantine was one of the first corporatists, creating the church as a religious corporation.

The Christianity was adopted as a state religion, thus becoming a parallel institution of the army in order to promote the classical (seizure) slavery or the “free” (wage) one. Unfortunately, such a political measure actually corrupted the peaceful spirit proposed by Jesus. Its first followers were the Roman soldiers themselves caught in the middle between the army hierarchic superiors’ threats and the subjugated communities threats. The refugee into the religious reverie was for them a fantastic escaping from the war terror. Beyond that, especially, the "poor in spirit" threats were raised up. The transformation of the catacombs peaceful Christianity into the war state Christianity was a betrayal. In fact, this event marked one of the greatest betrayals in the history of civilization. As with other religions, the Christian priests also bless the armies when they go to war. Nothing new under the sun; like all the state institutions, the church has reached a psychological prolongation of the army among its servants. The role of religion in wars is older than Christianity. Novelty is the breaking away from the very basic principles of its main prophet, Jesus.

It is said that at one point, I. Kant made a petition to the authorities of the Kaliningrad city (named Königsberg at that time) to prevent the imprisoned criminals from a prison near his home to play moral songs with a very strong voice. This way of playing contriteness seemed hypocritical to him. In the same way we can think of Christian colonists who simply were stealing the locals land. Although they were nonchalantly breaking one of the 10-th essential “Christianity commandments”, namely, "You shall not steal!", they were doing it with the cross in their hands, hypocritically simulating their Christian piety. This image is the quintessence of the Christianity moral disintegration after it has become an state institution.

The slave liberation through adherence to faith was as much a whopping lie as the one declared by law in the 19th century. Yet the post-Christian subordinate person was better treated than its ancestor, namely the Greek-Roman slave. The Christianity has recognized the human value of the order taker person, its power of self-salvation, and to achieve the happiness from the heaven in the after death life. Killing the slave because it was not productive was not a crime in the Greco-Roman antiquity. But killing someone during the post-Christian period for refusing to subordinate was no longer well seen in the post-Christian period.

The Middle Age modified the classical slavery, using an ideological compromise with Christianity, but continuing precisely with what is actually the essence of slavery, namely the serfdom. Instead of classical threats with beatings or death, the Christian feudal nonchalantly claimed that he own all the land as far as it can be seen, with its surroundings. If someone wants to live on it then, he/she should pay tribute for using that land. The medieval order taker was free to leave or not to work (with some exceptions in which classical slavery was maintained). But where to go? The neighboring land, besides being far away, belongs to another feudal. The difference between classical slavery and medieval serfdom is big and small at the same time.

If the serf does not want to serve then he/she is not beaten or killed, but can no longer receives food and shelter. The threat of inactivity death or the whims of time is not immediately put into practice as it happens to sectarian slavery. He/she does not immediately die of hunger or lack of shelter, but this eventually happens in the long run. The feudal or the lander does not offer the serf or the poor a sufficient property to provide a decent living, and extends his property far beyond those necessary for his own living. That is why extending the property in such a way that some people can no longer have a property generating food and shelter in agreement with the other members of society is still an abuse.

If serf does not want to serve, then it no longer gets beaten or killed but it no longer receives food and shelter. The starvation or death due to vagaries of the weather threat is not immediately put into practice as it happens in sequestration slavery case. Someone does not immediately die from hunger or homelessness, but that still happens in long term. The lord or the large territories master does not offer the serf or the poor enough property that would make a decent living, but extends their property far beyond the necessary for living. Therefore the property expansion so that other people can not have a generating food and shelter property in agreement with other members of society is still abuse.

The implementation of Christianity as an official religion in the state involved the feudalism appearance, meaning the owners of huge land surfaces. This new slave owner was called Lord, as God himself. Bringing the image of God into the political leader was not a novelty in history. The Egyptian pharaoh was recognized as a living God. The Greek or Roman aristocrats were showing themselves as descendant from one or another God. The Christianity, however, has given an uncanny power to the human God from the social pyramid top. His/her adherence, even mimicked, to the Christianity humanistic values, has led to calming down the feudal servant appetite for rebellion inherited from the Greek-Roman slave.

On the contrary, miming the God on earth, the new slave master has become adored by its "obedient people" Isolated in his opulent castle, the feudal had an image of a holy icon. There is a colossal difference between Middle Age Lord and the classical master according to the slave's contempt. Giving more freedom to the classical slave was a real successful business. It led to the master divination, besides the same profit as that of classical slavery used to bring. The Sundays, when the Lord went to the church, were a holiday by itself. The same happened with a Lord visit to the peasants’ workplace. They would take their hats off at its appearance as if they had seen a miracle. I am fascinated by how Constantine was named "The Great" and was declared an important saint after he killed and tortured many of the Catacomb Christianity heroes! From the great persecutor of Christianity, the slavery system eventually has come to be grateful to it for offering the solution to the numerous slave rebellions.

Stepping forward in this direction, the contemporary corporatism is now simulating the fulfillment of this promise. We can go beyond Nietzsche's statement and interpret Christianity as the birth of the PR. After the Christians persecution failed, as they were not convinced to worship the Caesar more than Christ, the Caesar began to behave like Christ in order to become more credible. The industrial era had to appear for the religious peasants to question the true divine character of the Lord. The city's patron gave the peasants more rights and attracted them to the factory from its land. Only then they thought that the fact that all lands belong to the Lord, while they had nothing to live from, may not be a fair thing. The following article show another cause of this Middle Age peasant's credulity, which has worked for over a millennium and a half in western history.




»»  read more

14 octombrie 2017

„Viva Arte Viva”, o tema cat un manifest. Bienala de la Venetia, 2017

Anul asta s-a desfasurat (de fapt este pe final de desfasurare) la Venetia probabil cel mai important eveniment periodic de arta contemporana din lume, respectiv cea de-a 57-a editie a Bienalei, un amalgam de expozitii si evenimente concepute de artisti din toata lumea. Editia de anul asta mi s-a parut foarte inspiratoare asa ca am impartit textul scris pe aceasta tema in doua, o parte publicata aici iar alta pe Baldovin Arte.

Tema de anul acesta este „Viva Arte Viva”, foarte potrivita cu insusi contextul si statutul artei in pragul celei de-a treia decade a secolului XXI. Iata ca insasi ideea temei de anul acesta fost sprijinita si de restul artelor. Prin acest proiect artele parca s-au reunit intr-un singur eveniment pentru a sustine vitalitatea si rezistenta artei (umaniste) in fata unui paradoxal iconoclasm al manipularii si publicitatii in care arta de main-stream a fost atrasa. De fapt o astfel de industrializare a emotiilor artei consumeriste a condus la inflatia de arta din perioada contemporana. Pavilionul francez din acest an a avut interesanta inspiratie de a expune un studio muzical cu toate instrumentele si facilitatile acestuia, in care se tineau periodic concerte. Cand l-am vizitat eu, nu se tinea nimic insa aceste decoruri ready-made vorbeau mai bine ca multe alte „maiestrii” despre muzica ce se tinea acolo si parca se auzea inca chiar si dupa terminarea spectacolului, asemenea unei ruine sonore.





De asemenea, o combinatie intre muzica experimentala, teatru experimental, dans experimental si happening s-a putut vedea la Mariechen Danz, o artista irlandeza cu talent muzical pe langa cel din artele vizuale si performative in care activeaza. La min. 17 actiunea sa devine un adevarat musical, ea cantand efectiv pe ritmuri de trip-hop si soul care ar putea fi pusa la radiourile de profil.



Dupa ce actiunea scenica s-a terminat, au ramas decorurile pe loc, devenind o expozitie de arta contemporana distincta, dar in relatie cu ce se intamplase acolo la deschidere. Pe ecranele albe din spatele ei a rulat ulterior inregistrarea acestui spectacol general, aducand practic actiunea in prezent si pentru spectatorii care au vizitat bienala mai tarziu.



Editia de anul acesta a Bienalei este o replica fata de blazarea (semi)culturalista contemporana. Ideea mortii artei se aude din ce in ce mai pregnant in ultima jumatate de secol. Sentimentul de decadenta exista in mod vizibil la toate nivelurile. Inclusiv campaniile publicitare care iau ochii celor mai putin educati cu istoria artei ajung la gunoi sau creeaza la un moment dat un sentiment de lehamite. O astfel de atitudine este intr-un fel justificata. La nivelul strict al imaginii si al relatiei traditionale artist-public nu s-a mai creat nimic nou de 60 de ani. Imi vine in minte ideea teoreticianului american Clement Greenberg care credea ca expresionismul abstract ar fi atins apogeul artei moderne, terminand astfel drumul artei spre defigurativizare pornind de la Renastere. Dupa expresionismul abstract s-au facut doar extinderi ale zonei educate a artei catre kitsch si consumerism, sau reinterpretari ale unor forme deja consacrate. Pop-artul, e cel mai bun exemplu pentru prima varianta. Minimalismul si op-ul pot fi oricand insumate abstractionismului geometric de la inceputul secolului al 20-lea. Fractalismul cel atat de popular printre dreamerii diletanti, este un minimalism ceva mai detaliat. El s-a nascut supraponderal, intr-o maculatura ce se multiplica automat conform cu automatismul computerizat care l-a facilitat.



Dupa cum am spus in lucrarile mele teoretice „The basics of theoretical art” sau „Contradictiile iluziile si virtutile postmodernismului” , singurul lucru cu adevarat nou in perioada asta este conceptualismul. Dar el nu este o revolutie a imaginii, ci a insele ideilor noastre estetice despre imagine. Pentru ca, repet, in materie de imagine s-a facut totul.

Practic, dupa clasicism, arta s-a extins catre toate mentalitatile si a folosit toate rezervele de semne ale umanitatii. Nimic nu a scapat neacoperit. De la realismul clasicismului, ce a atins apogeul in dexteritatea neoclasicismului pana la informalismul expresionismului abstract, imaginea e epuizata. S-a scos totul din ea ca dintr-un rezervor care s-a golit treptat. Singura evolutie este doar a materialelor imaginii figurative facuta automat de camerele digitale. Am putut-o observa trecand de la HD, la superHD, 4K , 8 K, 12 K, etc.

Dar evolutia asta nu mai are legatura cu artistul care inoveaza tehnica din dorinta de a reda un anumit aspect al modelului, (vezi plina-pasta lui Leonardo care a revolutionat tehnica flamanda a glassi-urilor pentru a reda carnatia Giocondei). De data asta detaliile superioare ale imaginii ce marcheaza evolutia in cauza sunt date de factorul ingineresc. Puterea noilor camere de luat vederi de reprezentare fidela a realitatii nu depind de cautarile unor artisti ci de inovatiile tehnice ale unor ingineri. Si aici avem o problema legata de institutia artei. Poate e prejudecata noastra traditionala, dar inginerii nu pot crea curente in istoria artei. Din aceasta cauza multi au preferat sa declare moartea artei sau decadenta din perioada ei contemporana absoluta decat sa le recunoasca inginerilor vreun astfel de rol.

Cat de departe pare astazi ideea lui Kant despre „geniul care creeaza legi noi artei”! Cat de inactuala pare ideea lui René Huyghe despre „puterea imaginii” care ar avea un efect magic, de intiparire religioasa in mintea spectatorului. Astazi puzderia de imagini au efect doar cateva secunde, eventual suficient pentru a-l face pe destinatar sa cumpere un produs. Dupa aceea imaginea e aruncata la cosul de gunoi, si propriu, al incaperii, si figurat, al uitarii. Moda e repede inlocuita si la fel imaginea de alta imagine. Omul simplu nu mai da doi bani pe ea in sine. Atasamentul mentalitatii comune fata de imaginea contemporana se face doar din motive tematice, respectiv teme cu membrii familiei, animale dragute, situatii extraordinare, evenimente istorice sau religioase etc. Singurele imagini ramase sacre ce nu intra in aceste categorii sunt cele ale artei traditionale, via educatie. Respectul sau pentru arta clasica e constituit in mare parte din snobismul iluziei de a fi facut parte din cercurile in care a aparut.

Insasi ideea noutatii si revolutiei in arta este o prejudecata comercialista, in lipsa de criterii temeinice pentru determinarea valorii. Noul, sau aparenta de nou, se vinde bine. Iar arta nu a putut iesi din acest model al falsei revolutii cu aspect de reclama. Daca ne uitam la scandalurile din trecut legate de cate un stil care a socat, vedem mai curand strategie comerciala mai curand decat adevarate revolutii. Scandalul aparitiei impresionismului sau al cubismului s-au dovedit la mai bine de 100 de ani a fi niste baloane de sapun, evolutii firesti si cuminti ale artei in aceeasi matca. Adevaratele revolutii sunt cele din dadaism, abstractionism, ready-made si actionism. Aceste manifestari artistice au intrat in scena atat de timid incat abia daca au fost observate. Iata ca expectativa asta a superstarurilor revolutionare pare mai curand o lene culturala.

Si totusi o astfel de atitudine e tributara prejudecatii lui Hegel despre sfarsitul istoriei de la inceputul secolului al XIX-lea, imbratisata de multi varstnici care regreta in primul rand irosirea propriei vieti. Ea creeaza o evidenta ambivalenta emotional-ideologica in randul tuturor celor implicati in fenomen.

Realitatea sociala arata totusi ca, asa automatista si supradecorata comercial cum e, arta devenita design n-a fost niciodata atat de prezenta in viata cotidiana in istorie ca acum. Nu ne mai inchinam la ea ca in trecut insa e parte din noi insine, devenind banalitate, la fel cum insasi Gioconda a fost in casele celor ce au pastrat-o pana sa ajunga la Luvru. Ne lipsesc superstarurile, insa s-ar putea ca insasi ideea de superstar sa fie o prejudecata datorata imersiunii religioase in arta, de care nu ne putem debarasa. Plangaciosii (printre care si eu intr-o oarecare masura, dupa cum se vede) sunt(em) dominati de o viziune arhaica despre arta ca pilon al religiei menita sa provoace dovezi despre existenta lui Dumnezeu si nemurirea sufletului. Sunt teme importante in arta, intr-adevar. Iar arta moderna si contemporana continua sa le furnizeze, chiar daca stiinta s-ar putea sa le infirme validitatea. Dar arta e mai mult decat furnizarea acestor dovezi. Iar asta e un fapt.

Cumva arta traditionala a „geniului care schimba regulile artei” se afla la sfarsit, iar „Viva Arte Viva” este un cantec de lebada. Designul preia nevoia umana de forme poetice si le da aspect comercial. Arta facea acelasi lucru cu multimile in trecut. Metamorfoza asta e un dat istoric inevitabil. S-a terminat epoca bazata pe stratificarea sociala bazata pe dreptul divin sustinut de filiatia aristocratica sau religioasa si a inceput epoca bazata pe publicitate. Ca o limba moarta, arta exista in cercurile stramte ale unor oameni educati sau formati in scoli de arta. Ceilalti vorbesc limba comertului din design. In ciuda aducerii arhitecturii in Bienala, Christina Macel a rejectat orice manifestare care ar aduce cat de cat cu designul in interiorul pavilioanelor. In ultimele editii s-au facut multe concesii designului si publicitatii, dupa cum am scris aici si aici . De asemenea nici kitcsh-ul nu a mai intrat fara prelucrari formale evidente. Imi vine in minte aceasta suprapunere de fragmente de bibelouri kitsch supradimensionate care devine altceva decat forma lor originara.



Da, lipsesc superstarurile din secolele trecute. Da, lipsesc revolutiile. Dar daca scoatem arta din campul experientei umane contemporane, asa facila cum e declarata ea de unii, omul este teleportat in epoca pre-pietrei. Poate ca e o solutie pentru unii. Dar pentru cei ce am ales sa continuam sa traim in civilizatie, arta e parte din viata noastra de zi cu zi, indiferent daca luam contact direct cu ea sau prin intermediul multiplicarii mediatice. Atata timp cat avem psihic vom avea si arta. Asa ca arta va trai pe mai departe atata timp cat specia umana va trai in civilizatie. Afirmatia Christinei Macel e concludenta: „Astazi, intr-o lume plina de conflicte si socuri, arta e martorul celei mai pretioase parti a ceea ce ne face umani”.




»»  read more

29 septembrie 2017

2. Crestinismul si promisiunea de viata si fericire eterne



Reperele evolutiei sclaviei din antichitate pana in prezent 2. Crestinismul si promisiunea de viata si fericire eterne


In perioada precrestina, grecii antici considerau ca sclavul este „cineva ce merita sa fie ucis dar din diferite motive a fost lasat sa traiasca”. Aceasta pentru ca, in general, sclavii clasici se obtineau ca prada de razboi, prin transformarea in sclavi a prizonierilor. Orice fel de rebeliune trebuia aspru pedepsita din ratiuni educative, pe post de exemplu dat celor care ar fi putut face la fel. Situatia functiona asemanator in toate imperiile antice.

Dar, acest lucru nu a functionat decat o perioada. Multi sclavi s-au sinucis. Altii au preferat sa se lupte cu legiunile romane pana la moarte decat sa continue sa traiasca ca sclavi. Altii, crestinii, se sinucideau in rugaciune dupa ce sistemul convertise in profitabilitate vointa lor de a trai si lasase in ei suflete pustiite. Definitia de mai sus a sclavului nu mai avea relevanta pentru sclavul sfarsitului antichitatii greco-romane. Acesta incepea sa nu mai accepte un astfel de stigmat social de animal ce putea fi sacrificat oricand, dupa cheremul stapanului.

a. Crestinismul catacombelor: o ideologie antisistem

Primele forme de razvratire ideologica impotriva sclavagismului coincid cu insasi aparitia Crestinismului care a adus la nivel simbolic o prima astfel de revolutie. Acesta a dezavuat sclavagismul greco-roman, promitand oarecum mincinos fratia tuturor oamenilor.

Conform oricarei revolutii, initial s-a incercat eradicarea primilor crestini. Prin credinta lor, ei preferau sa fie din start omorati decat sa fie tratati ca sclavi clasici. Intoarcerea si a celuilalt obraz in fata palmuitorului, asa cum a facut Isus, i-a pus in mare incurcatura pe calaii si mercenarii din administratia si armata romana. Asemenea unui animal de prada care nu mai reuseste sa actioneze atunci cand prada contraataca in loc sa fuga, nici Imperiul Roman nu stia ce sa faca cu acesti depresivi care dezvoltau deliruri si halucinatii religioase. Crestinilor catacombelor nu li se putea aduce vreo vina pentru a fi pedepsiti. Superioritatea morala a lui Isus fata de spiritul administrativ birocratic al romanului se vedea de la distanta. Convertirea soldatului roman la teoriile sale nu era decat o chestiune de timp.

Punerea in practica a amenintarii cu moartea venita din partea stapanului pentru sclav nu-i aducea prea multe beneficii. Crestinii au fost persecutati, dar cu cat persecutiile erau mai mari cu atat cultul devenea mai puternic. Odata cu revoltele armate, ideologice si religioase ale sclavilor, in special de la Atena si Roma, statutul lor a trebuit cumva schimbat. Asa ca, dupa cateva astfel de tentative nereusite de a-i convinge pe ceilalti sa execute ordinele stapanului, acesta a trebuit sa se gandeasca la o noua strategie de exploatare decat cea a amenintarii constante cu moartea. Si acest lucru i-a adus sclavului clasic pe de-o parte o anumita eliberare sau, cel putin, o crestere a statutului social. Dupa cum se stie, dupa ce a ucis cu mana lui cativa, Constantin a fost nevoit sa accepte cultul si sa-l lase in pace. Probabil ca l-ar fi putut eradica intru totul daca nu ar fi gasit o solutie de a modifica sclavia in asa fel incat sa se plieze conform noilor conditii ideologico-religioase. Crestinii de dupa el s-au grabit chiar sa-l faca sfant, lucru nejustificat in comparatie cu alti sfinti care chiar au crezut si trait intru Hristos. Tot ce a facut Constantin a fost sa se schimbe el conform cultului mai curand decat sa schimbe cultul dupa propria sa cerinta.

Oficializarea Crestinismului ca religie dominanta a fost un lucru normal facut de orice conducator de osti inspirat. Recunoasterea sa a insemnat acordarea de noi drepturi sclavului clasic. Spre deosebire de mentalitatea determinista bazata pe destin a religiei greco-romane, Crestinismul l-a recunoscut pe sclav ca fiind om ce are sansa mantuirii, adica a trairii unei vieti fericite undeva intr-alta lume, lumea cealalta. Inca nu avem, dovezi sa stim daca aceasta promisiune ar fi fost onorata. Personal as paria pe varianta negativa, stiind cum multe institutii functioneaza astazi pe baza promisiunilor neonorate. Dar chiar si asa, o promisiune mincinoasa tot era mai buna pentru sclavul clasic decat fatalismul greco-roman bazat pe ideea destinului absolut.

Spre deosebire de politeismul greco-roman, societatea postcrestina a „ascultat” si de parerea nenorocitilor de sclavi. El a recunoscut in sfarsit ca da, lumea e urata, deprimanta, desarta, etc. Dar el totusi si-a mentinut promisiunea ca mai exista si Cerul sau Raiul. Si, spune in continuare doctrina crestina, la a doua venire a lui Hristos, lumea garantat va fi precum in cer. Aici consta punctul forte al religiei crestine si expansiunea sa uriasa in secolele ce au urmat. Daca viata urata a sclavului era o dovada ca zeitatile greco-romane sunt false, dimpotriva, in timpul Crestinismului aceasta recunoastere a ajuns o dovada a existentei unui cer, a unui Rai undeva in lume. Credinta intr-o astfel de fericire etena este o nevoie psihica de a contracara nenorocirea vietii cotidiene. Psihicul isi creeaza astfel de constructe fantasmatice tocmai pentru a se echilibra in fata frustrarilor cotidiene. Parintii Crestinismului spuneau ca doar saracii si suferinzii se vor mantui. Insa de fapt doar acestia puteau sa-si creeze o astfel de lume fantasmatica de dupa moarte, datorita statutului lor social si a constitutiei lor psihogene. Crestinismul implementat in stat i-a dat voie sclavului sa viseze si el in lumea lui ca undeva sacrificiile pe care le face vor fi rasplatite.



Nietzsche si-a socat contemporanii, declarand ca crestinismul este o religie de sclavi, desi acesta este un adevar istoric incontestabil. Daca suntem atenti la continutul rugaciunilor si a multor texte sfinte vedem ca credinciosul are o puternica inclinatie de servitor. Crestinul catacombelor nu era prea sigur pe dorinta lui de eliberare, ca orice sclav: el voia mai curand sa slujeasca un stapan imbatabil pentru a-si asigura supravietuirea, mantuirea. Iata originea corporatismului contemporan! Nu e deloc de mirare ca principalii capi corporatisti din perioada moderna au comportament religios, fie el si unul de fatada. Mitul pesterii s-a mai concretizat inca odata intr-o remarcabila pagina de istorie.

Aceasta promisiune este cea care a sedus opinia publica spre Crestinism. Politeismul greco-roman nu facuse acest lucru cu mentalitatea sa mecanicista bazata pe credinta in destin. Odata cu epoca industriala aceasta promisiune s-a transformat in cea a bunastarii pe care, in principiu, sclavagismul salarial o permite. Observand aceasta disponibilitate, sistemul sclavagist reformat prin credinta a preferat crucea in locul sabiei, cel putin la un prim nivel de interactiune.

b. Crestinismul de stat: o reformulare a sclavagismului

Nietzsche a spus foarte just ca Crestinismul este o religie de sclavi, fie ei si nemultumiti. Totusi disponibilitatea de „a da Cezarului ce-i al Cezarului”, afirmata chiar de Isus insusi, lasa usa deschisa pentru o oarecare negociere a unui nou statut al sclavului, respectiv promisiunea ca va ajunge in rai si va trai fericit. Si aici intervine un factor esential al noului sclavagism, respectiv testarea disponibilitatii sclavului de a accepta ordine de la un stapan. Misticii nu mai puteau fi convinsi sa mai slujeasca lumeste un stapan. Insa ei puteau deveni un factor educational, de convingere a celor mai putin dotati intelectual sa o faca. Putem vedea aici originea corporatismului: „incerc sa te fac sa imi cumperi produsul; daca totusi refuzi incerc sa te fac un agent publicitar, facandu-mi reclama”.

Dreptul de a trai chiar si la nivel iluzoriu, o alta viata decat cea de oprimat a fost o prima libertate pe care autoritatile romane le-au dat-o sclavilor pentru a-i convinge sa continue sa serveasca. Tot ce le-a mai ramas de facut a fost o mimare mai mult sau mai putin credibila a comportamentului divin. Identificandu-l cu insusi Mesia, liderul politic va fi devenit mai puternic ca niciodata odata cu veneratia crestinului. S-a pierdut un anumit procent din sclavi, respectiv cei care au decis sa se cufunde in rugaciune mai curand decat sa serveasca. Dar, oricum ei tot nu puteau fi convinsi sa continue sa serveasca nici cu moartea si nici cu tortura. Constantin a vazut direct asta, dupa ce le-a exercitat in prima faza. Asa ca, in loc sa-i piarda pe toti, a preferat mai curand sa-i foloseasca in convingerea celorlalti cum ca si el ar fi un fel de Isus pe care ei il venerau. Aceasta intamplare este modelul capitalismului si a institutiilor statului in general. Adoptand Crestinismul ca religie oficiala, Constantin a fost unul dintre primii corporatisti, creand biserica precum o corporatie religioasa.

Crestinismul a fost adoptat ca religie de stat, devenind astfel o institutie paralela armatei in scopul promovarii sclaviei clasice (de sechestrare) sau celei libere (salariale). Din pacate o astfel de masura politica a fost de fapt o corupere a spiritului pasnic propus de Isus. Primii sai adepti au fost insisi soldatii romani prinsi la mijloc intre amenintarile superiorilor si cele ale comunitatilor subjugate. Refugiul in reveria religioasa era pentru ei o fantasmatica evadare din teroarea razboiului. Dincolo de asta, mai ales, s-au ridicat amenintarile sclavilor cei „saraci cu duhul”. Transformarea Crestinismului pasnic al catacombelor in Crestinismul razboinic al statului a fost o tradare. De fapt, acest eveniment a fost una dintre cele mai mari tradari din istoria civilizatiei. La fel ca in cazul celorlalte religii oficiale, si preotii crestini binecuvanteaza armatele atunci cand pleaca la razboi. Nimic nou sub soare; la fel ca toate institutiile statului, si biserica a ajuns o prelungire psihologica a institutiei armatei in randul servitorilor ei. Rolul religiei in razboaie e mai vechi decat Crestinismul. Noutatea e ruperea fata de principiile de baza ale insusi profetului sau principal, Isus.

Se spune ca, la un moment dat, Kant a facut o petitie fata de autoritatile orasului Kaliningrad (pe atunci se numea Königsberg) pentru a opri infractorii inchisi intr-o inchisoare din preajma locuintei sale sa mai cante cantece morale cu voce foarte puternica. Lui i s-a parut ipocrit acest mod de cainta. In acelasi fel ne putem gandi la colonialistii crestini care furau pur si simplu pamantul localnicilor. Desi incalcau cu nonsalanta una dintre cele 10 „porunci” esentiale ale Crestinismului, respectiv „Sa nu furi!”, ei o faceau cu crucea in mana, simuland in mod ipocrit evlavia lor crestina. Aceasta imagine este chintesenta dezintegrarii morale a Crestinismului devenit institutie in stat.

Eliberarea sclavului prin intermediul aderarii la credinta a fost o gogorita la fel de mare precum cea declarata prin lege in secolul 19. Si totusi subordonatul postcrestin era tratat altfel decat stramosul sau, sclavul greco-roman. Crestinismul a recunoscut valoarea umana a potentialului executant de ordine, puterea sa de mantuire de sine si ajungerea la fericirea raiului pe lumea cealalta. A ucide sclavul pentru ca nu-i productiv nu era o crima in antichitatea greco-romana. A ucide pe cineva in perioada postcrestina pentru ca refuza sa se subordoneze nu mai era vazut cu ochi buni in perioada postcrestina.

Evul Mediu a modificat sclavia clasica, recurgand la un compromis ideologic cu Crestinismul dar continuand tocmai ceea ce este de fapt esenta sclaviei, respectiv servitutea. In locul amenintarilor clasice cu bataia sau moartea, feudalul crestin declara nonsalant ca tot pamantul atat cat se vede si imprejurimile ii apartine. Daca cineva vrea sa traiasca pe el atunci, chipurile, ar trebui sa-i plateasca tribut pentru folosirea acestui teren. Executantul medieval de ordine era liber sa plece sau sa nu lucreze (cu unele exceptii in care sclavia clasica s-a pastrat). Dar unde sa se duca? Pamantul invecinat, pe langa faptul ca e departe, apartine altui feudal. Diferenta dintre sclavia clasica si servitutea medievala este mare si mica in acelasi timp.

Daca nu vrea sa slujeasca, iobagul nu mai este batut sau ucis insa nu mai primeste hrana si adapost. Amenintarea cu moartea de inanitie sau din cauza capriciilor vremii nu este pusa imediat in practica asa cum se intampla la sclavia de sechestrare. Nu se moare imediat de foame sau de lipsa de adapost, dar asta se intampla pe termen lung. Feudalul sau stapanul de mari teritorii nu-i ofera iobagului, serbului sau saracului o proprietate suficienta care sa ii asigure un trai decent, si isi extinde proprietatea sa mult peste cele necesare propriului trai. De aceea extinderea proprietatii in asa fel incat unii oameni nu mai pot avea o proprietate generatoare de hrana si adapost in acord cu ceilalti membri ai societatii este inca un abuz.

Implementarea Crestinismului ca religie oficiala in stat a adus aparitia feudalilor, adica a proprietarilor de uriase suprafete de pamant. Acest nou proprietar de sclavi era numit Lord sau Domn, precum insusi D-zeu. Imprumutarea de catre liderul politic a imaginii lui D-zeu nu a fost o noutate in istorie. Faraonul egiptean era recunoscut ca zeu in viata. Aristocratul grec sau roman isi aroga filiatie la un zeu sau altul. Crestinismul insa i-a conferit omului zeu din varful piramidei sociale o putere nemaiintalnita. Aderenta sa chiar si mimata la valorile umaniste ale Crestinismului a condus la calmarea apetitului sclavului greco-roman spre revolta.

Dimpotriva, mimand rolul de D-zeu pe pamant, noul stapan de sclavi a ajuns sa fie adorat de „supusi”. Izolat in castelul sau opulent, feudalul parea o icoana sfanta. Diferenta fata de dispretul sclavului clasic pentru stapanul lui e colosala. Acordarea de libertati sclavului clasic a fost o adevarata afacere de succes. Ea a condus la divinizarea stapanului, pe langa profitul identic cu cel al sclaviei clasice. Ziua de duminica, atunci cand putea fi vazut la biserica, era o sarbatoare in sine. La fel se intampla si cu o vizita la locul de munca al supusilor. Acestia isi dadeau caciula jos de pe cap la aparitia feudalului de parca ar fi vazut un miracol. Sunt fascinat de modul in care Constantin a fost numit „Cel Mare” si a fost declarat mare sfant, dupa ce a ucis si torturat pe multi dintre eroii Crestinismului catacombelor! Din mare prigonitor al Crestinismului, sistemul sclavagist a ajuns sa-i fie recunoscator acestuia pentru ca i-a oferit solutia la numeroasele revolte ale sclavilor.

Facand un pas mai departe in directia asta, corporatismul contemporan simuleaza in zilele noastre in plan concret implinirea acestei promisiuni. Putem trece dincolo de afirmatia lui Nietzsche si sa interpretam Crestinismul ca fiind nasterea PR-ului. Dupa ce prigoana crestinilor a esuat, si acestia nu au fost convinsi sa venereze pe cezar mai mult decat pe Hristos, cezarul a inceput sa se comporte precum Hristos pentru a deveni ceva mai credibil. A trebuit sa apara era industriala pentru ca „supusul” sa puna la indoiala caracterul divin al feudalului. Patronul de la oras i-a dat taranului mai multe drepturi si l-a atras in fabrica de pe pamanturile feudalului. Abia atunci s-a gandit si el ca faptul ca toate pamanturile apartin feudalului in timp ce el nu are nimic s-ar putea sa nu fie un lucru echitabil. Urmatorul articol va explica si prin alta cauza aceasta credulitate a taranului medieval care a functionat mai bine de un mileniu si jumatate in istoria Occidentului.




»»  read more

29 august 2017

1. The classical slavery ideological fatalism, disappointment and mysticism back-downing that comes after subordination


The benchmarks of slavery evolution from the antiquity to the present



In the previous nine entries so far I have detailed the difference and the similarities between the classical slavery and the free trade working subordination relationships of the modern age. During these entries I have shown that there are more similarities than differences between the two types of labor relations. The classical psychoanalysis has shown how the long-term inhibition of sexual instinct evolves into neurotic symptoms. It is time now to show how the inhibition of the human top position in the trophic chain, by slavery subordinating leads to psychopathological degeneration. From now on I will start other entries series in which I am trying to explain the milestones of this evolution, together with their psychopathological implications.

1. The classical slavery ideological fatalism, disappointment and mysticism back-downing that comes after subordination


The classical slave was made out from the army conquest or personal bankruptcy. An inferior soldier that has lost a battle or an alcohol addicted person accepts the slavery as a bonus for his finished life or for the joy of continuing practicing the vice. But when you want to turn these people whole descendancy into slaves then things complicate. The slavery condition is not specific to the human nature. Therefore, if the slaves’ descendants will not have a better life than their parents in the future then they will eventually upraise. This is a natural state of human consciousness.

The human being has detached from the other animals as the absolute top of the food chain, as an unbeatable predator species. It is not made to execute orders from a superior authority, except that when it is a child, but, we all know, many times not even at that age. It is true that the subordination state exists in the animal world and has been practiced throughout the entire human species evolution. But it is a condition to which only animals species have adapted, not the human being. Not even animal species predatory individuals will accept subordination on long-term. The dominant males are constantly dethroned from their top position by the others after a certain period of time. Furthermore, this subordinate relation to other members of its own species is very unnatural for the behavior encoded in the human genetic code, formed in the millions of years in the spirit of dominance to other species.

The state of domination over other individuals agrees with human nature only for the commanding master. But it disagrees with the subordinate. The genealogical formation of each human individual is that of a winner in the struggle with rival species. Today we have developed an ecological behavior , to protect endangered species after we have decimated many of them in a few millennia of speeded up technological evolution. But the dominant behavior that has brought us here is still natural to us. The violent response of some certain Arab religious fanatics or other cultures to Western economic domination is not a manifestation of the devil, as (slavery) authorities want us to believe. It is a natural reaction of resistance to the domineering that in modern times has a free-trade allure.


The human being naturally accepts an equality and partnership relationship with others, according to this natural state of evolution of its species. Such of dominant spirit inhibition is possible only by the importance of the subsequent profit that results from the teamwork. The subordinating state is a short-term solution, like the children who learn from the adults how to solve the problems. That is why the exclusive use of weapons to reduce and re-educate human being to become a talking sheep has only functioned in the short term, just as the classic civilization itself.

But the on long-term subordination brings a sinister anguish to the human being. If the humans would not have defeated this fear and would not have eliminated the rival species for food and other resources, then it would never have got out of the wilderness state. The classical civilization has lamentably failed believing that it can hold in chains a free and nature domineer individual and successfully turn it into a kind of robot meant to only execute orders. The human being can be projected millions of years back into the life evolution from the top predator to that of dominated pray only through the spiritual and genetic degeneration. The subordination involves perverting and psychopathologizing of the human species natural condition.

Not only the Arab "terrorists" respond by violence to the Western corporations meanly intention to recruit new slaves from their territories, according to a very dirty plan . This phenomenon also happened with the classical Western slave who rebelled against the masters. Just like those times, the so-called "fighting against terrorism" is just another kind of rebellion suppression, as it always has been in the history of humanity. The media news constantly presents cases of the Western people who go with a gun in the former job place after let go and randomly shoot everyone. So the individual or small group microterrorism is not specific to the Arabs, as shown in the article linked above. It is a natural human reaction to the dehumanization arising from the state of subordination.

The direct threat with death for this purpose has proven to be insufficiently productive in the modern society. The slave also learned how to use weapons and defend itself against the terror of the authorities. Of course, the newest and best performing weapons are kept hidden to the ordinary people. That is why the slave is always surprised by the master's weapons performance in a possible revolt. That is why none of the slaves revolts in the history was successfully in the slave's desirable meaning. But each of them led to new granted rights in addition to those before the revolt, through which some were convinced to quit the struggle. Today, the same principle is used to curb the street protests, by suddenly lowering down the price products, as I directly have seen here.

So, on the long-term the human subordination has led to many social disorders. The slavery system has learned this over time and has tried numerous solutions to resolve the situation. The inherent revolts of the slaves led to losses on both sides, especially felt by the masters. They had to bear the family members loss, killed by slave revenges. Then, by killing their own slaves and making an example to others, they virtually destroyed their own property. Moreover, beyond these losses in their own grave, every brutal intervention of the authorities for demonstrators stopping causes disappointment, disgust and apathy among the subordinates. The loss of their enthusiasm implies a decrease in economic productivity and lowering the profit obtained by the masters.



The mechanistic conception of the world perfection, developed by the ancient slavery mentality in general and Spartan in particular, theoretically confirmed by the Roman emperor and philosopher Marcus Aurelius, was meant to convince the classical slave to join this false idealistic perfection but with very mercantile implications. The life must have seemed perfect indeed for Marcus Aurelius and other ancient slaves’ owners. In fact, who would not perceive it like this when every need is satisfied by a slave threatened with beating or death if not obeyed?! We imagine that for the slave the life seemed a torment.

That's why the classical slavery cannot normally function for more than 3-4 genealogically related generations. That is about a century long. About that long worked the American slavery, before the escapes or the suicides occurred. About that long worked the Athenian slave democracy. After that, the rebellions appeared, with their bloodshed. Although the slaves were seen as rational animals that could be sacrificed at any time, losing their lives was negatively felt in the ancient Greek society. New conquering wars for requiting other slaves had to be started, that eventually led to the collapse of the classical Athenian civilization and the entire Hellenic World. The Greek fortresses had conquered each other and the old slaves’ masters forced each-others to become slaves in the absence of primitive resources communities for recruiting new slaves, which were already exhausted.

The Romans took the slavery further on They understood that the slaves worn out in several generations and that they should be replaced. Therefore, they introduced of continuous expansion strategy. By conquering new territories and transforming them into provinces, the Romans came to make a slave selection from the very beginning: the most docile ones were sent to Rome to replace the rebels; The most stubborn in resisting the armed assault were convinced to fight for the Romans rather than against them. The promise of receiving a life reward after the end of the military stage has made many to engage in the Roman army. And those placed between these two categories stayed on their land to work, supervised by their former community colleagues, later converted into soldiers. Instead of bringing slaves to work on their own lands, the Romans preferred to take their products directly in the form of a tribute to the Emperor. Here is the origin of the medieval feudalism and even of the very free-trade relationship specific to the state taxes collector of the contemporary period. Instead of losing their armies in confrontations with revolted slaves, as the Greeks did, the Romans created a selection of potential slaves. So the Romans learned from these errors, corrected them, and thus realized a remarkable evolution of slavery. By doing this they created a selection of potential slaves, lifting those at risk of future rebellious one up on the social scale, and giving them superior tasks to complete, thus avoiding possible revolts as much as possible.

The rebellions could not be totally avoided, but they were reduced to the minimum possible and thus the empire survived almost a millennium. The fall of the Roman Empire had the same cause as in all the slave societies: the exhaustion of the resources of new slaves. The empire has expanded until it could not conquer new territories because it faced fierce opposition from its opponents. This means that the Roman Empire also entered the same crisis as that of the Greek cities before. And the cause of this crisis is the slaves very disappointment of, their loss of the appetite for life.

The Roman soldier status has also deteriorated. By the end period before the big empire scission, the living rent was no longer enough for a decent living. The former Legionnaire who wasted his youth in wars was very disappointed as unable to enjoy the promise that persuaded him to join the army. Moreover, it has come to the soldiers’ ears the empire’s marching practice of sending those who are at the end of a military service in the heaviest missions, precisely to increase their risk of losing their lives in order to avoid the obligation of the initial promise of the rented life. So we see that the Roman Empire organization is also the root of the modern capitalism. Step by step the Roman soldier fell into disappointment, finding himself cheated by an inequitable social system, based on threats and fear.

The personal salvation of both the deceived soldier and the exhausted slave came from a religious cult. As if waiting for imminent death as a result of lack of profitability, the followers of this cult retreated to a state of inertial meditation. It is the Christianity. The Christianity came and convinced the slave that somewhere there was perfection in the world to which she or he could aspire. This is the fair life after the death. This promise of reaching perfection and eternal happiness was lacking in Greek-Roman polytheism. The Christianity has introduced it into its religious perceptions in a postmortem reality. Although initially persecuted, the number of Christian followers continued to rise. Eventually it was adopted by the Roman authorities as an official religion, but this could not stop the disintegration of the Roman Empire. However, even after the collapse of the Greek-Roman ancient slave society, the linguistic and social structure state influences were found in the new form of slavery, the feudal one. I will analyze this in detail in the following entry.





»»  read more

29 iulie 2017

1. Fatalismul ideologic, dezamagirea si ingroparea in misticism specifice subordonarii. Esecul moral al sclaviei clasice


Reperele evolutiei sclaviei din antichitate pana in prezent


In seria de 9 articole de pana acum am detaliat diferenta si asemanarile dintre sclavia clasica si relatiile de subordonare liber consimtite din epoca moderna. Am aratat pe parcursul lor ca intre cele doua tipuri de relatii de munca exista mai multe asemanari decat deosebiri. Psihanaliza clasica a aratat in ce mod incercarea de inhibare pe termen lung a instinctului sexual refuleaza in simptome nevrotice. E timpul sa aratam in continuarea ei in ce mod inhibarea pozitiei umane de varf al lantului trofic, prin subordonare sclavagista conduce la degenerare psihopatologica. Urmeaza de acum incolo o alta serie de articole in care incerc sa explic reperele acestei evolutii, impreuna cu implicatiile psihopatologice ale lor.

Fatalismul ideologic, dezamagirea si ingroparea in misticism specifice subordonarii. Esecul moral al sclaviei clasice


Sclavul clasic era obtinut prin cucerire armata sau prin faliment personal. Un soldat inferior cea fost infrant pe campul de lupta sau un alcoolic irecuperabil accepta starea de sclavie ca un bonus pentru viata lui incheiata sau pentru bucuria practicarii in continuare a viciului. Insa atunci cand vrei sa transformi in sclavi intreaga descendenta a acestor oameni lucrurile se complica. Starea de sclavie nu este una specifica naturii umane. Prin urmare daca urmasii sclavilor nu vor avea o viata mai buna decat a parintilor lor atunci se vor revolta. Este o stare naturala a constiintei umane.

Omul s-a desprins din celelalte animale ca varf absolut al lantului trofic, respectiv ca specie de pradator imbatabil. Se poate spune ca el nu este facut sa execute ordine de la un superior decat atunci cand e copil dar, stim fiecare, de multe ori nici atunci. Intr-adevar, starea de subordonare exista si in lumea animala si a fost practicata pe tot parcursul evolutiei speciei umane. Insa ea este o stare la care s-au adaptat doar speciile de animale nu si omul. Nici macar indivizii speciilor de animale pradatoare nu accepta subordonarea pe termen lung. Masculii dominanti sunt detronati din pozitia pe care o au de catre ceilalti, dupa o anumita perioada de timp. Cu atat mai mult o astfel de relatie de subordonare fata de alti membri ai propriei specii este total nefireasca pentru comportamentul intiparit in codul genetic uman, format de milioane de ani in spiritul dominarii celorlalte specii.

Starea de dominatie asupra celorlalti indivizi este in acord cu natura umana doar pentru stapanul ce comanda. Insa este in dezacord cu cel subordonat. Formarea genealogica a fiecarui individ uman este una de invingator in lupta cu speciile rivale. Astazi am dezvoltat un comportament ecologic , de protectie a speciilor pe care le-am decimat in cateva milenii de evolutie tehnologica galopanta. Dar comportamentul dominant care ne-a adus aici ne este inca specific. Raspunsul violent al unor fanatici religiosi arabi sau de alta cultura la dominatia economica occidentala nu este o manifestare a diavolului, asa cum vor autoritatile (sclavagiste) sa ne faca sa credem. Ea este o reactie naturala de rezistenta in fata dominatorului, care in epoca moderna are alura de comerciant.

Omul accepta in mod natural o relatie de egalitate si parteneriat cu ceilalti, conform cu aceasta fireasca stare a evolutiei speciei sale. O astfel de inhibare a spiritului dominant se face doar prin importanta profitului ulterior ce reiese din munca in echipa. Subordonarea este o solutie de termen scurt, ca in cazul copiilor care invata de la adulti cum se rezolva problemele. De aceea folosirea exclusiva a armelor pentru reducerea si reeducarea omului spre a deveni o vita vorbitoare a functionat doar pe termen scurt, precum insasi civilizatia clasica.

Insa subordonarea pe termen lung ii aduce omului o angoasa sinistra. Daca omul nu si-ar fi invins aceasta teama si nu si-ar fi eliminat speciile rivale pentru hrana si alte resurse, atunci el nu ar fi iesit niciodata din starea de salbaticie. Civilizatia clasica a esuat lamentabil crezand ca poate lua un individ uman liber si dominator din natura si il poate tine in lanturi si transforma intr-un robot menit doar sa execute ordine. Omul nu poate fi proiectat milioane de ani inapoi in evolutie de la starea de pradator de top catre cea de prada dominata decat prin degenerare spirituala si genetica. Subordonarea este pervertire si psihopatologizare a conditiei speciei umane.

Nu doar „teroristii” arabi raspund prin violenta la intentia parsiva a corporatistilor occidentali de a recruta noi sclavi din teritoriile lor, conform unui plan foarte marsav . Acest fenomen s-a intamplat si cu sclavul clasic occidental care s-a rasculat impotriva stapanilor. La fel ca si atunci, asanumita „lupta impotriva terorismului” este doar o noua inabusire a rascoalei, precum au tot fost in istoria consemnata a omenirii. Constant la stiri se dau vesti despre cate un fost angajat occidental care intra cu o arma in fostul loc de munca si trage la intamplare. Iata ca microterorismul practicat individual sau de grup restrans nu este specific arabilor, asa cum aratam in articolul linkat mai sus. El este o reactie umana naturala la adresa dezumanizarii reiesita din starea de subordonare.

Amenintarea directa cu moartea pentru acest scop s-a dovedit a fi insuficient de productiva in societatea recenta. Sclavul a invatat si el sa foloseasca armele si sa se apere de teroarea autoritatilor. Desigur, cele mai noi si mai performante arme sunt tinute ascunse omului de rand. De aceea sclavul mereu e surprins de performanta armelor stapanilor intr-o eventuala rascoala Din aceasta cauza niciuna din rascoalele sclavilor in istorie nu a invins in sensul dorit de sclavi. Dar fiecare dintre ele a condus la primirea de drepturi in plus fata de cele avute inainte de rascoala, prin care unii au fost convinsi sa renunte la lupta. Si astazi se foloseste aceeasi reteta pentru domolirea protestelor de strada, prin ieftinirea subita a produselor, dupa cum am observat direct aici.

Asadar, pe termen lung subordonarea a condus la numeroase tulburari sociale. Sistemul sclavagist a invatat asta de-a lungul timpului si a incercat numeroase solutii de rezolvare a situatiei. Rascoalele inerente ale sclavilor au condus la pierderi de ambele parti, resimtite negativ in special de stapani. Acestia au trebuit sa suporte in primul rand pierderea membrilor familiei, ucisi de razbunarea sclavului. Apoi, prin uciderea propriilor sclavi rasculati si dati ca exemplu celorlalti, ei isi distrugeau practic insasi proprietatea lor. Mai mult decat atat, dincolo de aceste pierderi in propria ograda, fiecare interventie brutala a autoritatilor pentru imprastierea manifestantilor provoaca dezamagire, dezgust si apatie in randul subordonatilor. Pierderea entuziasmului lor implica scaderea productivitatii economice si a profitului obtinut de stapani.



Conceptia mecanicista despre perfectiunea lumii dezvoltata de mentalitatea sclavagista antica in general si spartana in special, confirmata teoretic de imparatul filosof roman Marcus Aurelius, convingea sclavul clasic sa se alature acestei false perfectiuni idealiste dar cu implicatii foarte mercantile. Lui Marcus Aurelius si altor proprietari antici de sclavi viata trebuie sa li se fi parut perfecta, intr-adevar. De fapt cui nu i-ar parea astfel cand orice nevoie e satisfacuta de catre un sclav amenintat cu bataia sau moartea daca nu se supune ordinelor?! Ne imaginam ca pentru sclav viata tare parea un chin.

De aceea sclavia clasica nu poate functiona normal mai mult de 3-4 generatii legate genealogic. Asta inseamna cam un secol. Cam atat a durat sclavia americana, dupa care au aparut evadarile sau sinuciderile. Cam atat a durat si democratia sclavagista ateniana. Dupa aceea au aparut rascoalele, cu inabusirea lor in sange. Desi sclavii erau vazuti ca niste animale rationale care puteau fi oricand sacrificate, totusi pierderea vietii lor s-a resimtit negativ in societatea greceasca antica. Au trebuit initiate noi razboaie de cucerire si inrobire a altor sclavi, care in cele din urma au condus la prabusirea civilizatiei clasice ateniene si a intregii Elade. Cetatile grecesti s-au cucerit una pe alta si vechii stapani de sclavi s-au transformat unii pe altii in sclavi in lipsa de resurse primitive de inrobire, deja epuizate.

Romanii au dus sclavia mai departe. Ei au inteles faptul ca sclavii se uzeaza dupa cateva generatii si ca trebuie inlocuiti. Prin urmare, ei au inventat procedeul expansiunii continue. Prin cucerirea de noi teritorii si transformarea lor in provincii, romanii au ajuns sa faca o selectie a sclavilor la fata locului: cei mai docili erau trimisi la Roma pentru a-i inlocui pe cei razvratiti; cei mai incapatanati in a rezista asaltului armat erau convinsi sa lupte mai curand pentru romani decat impotriva lor. Promisiunea primirii unei rente viagere dupa incheierea stadiului militar i-a facut pe multi sa angajeze in armata romana. Iar cei aflati intre cele doua categorii au ramas pe pamanturile lor sa le lucreze, supravegheati de fostii lor colegi de comunitate, convertiti ulterior in soldati. In loc sa aduca sclavii la munca pe propriile terenuri, romanii au preferat sa le ia direct produsele sub forma de tribut adus imparatului. Aici isi are originea feudalismul medieval si chiar insasi relatia de munca de tip liber schimb a statului perceptor de impozite din perioada contemporana. In loc sa isi piarda armatele in confruntarile cu sclavii rasculati, asa cum au facut grecii, romanii au creat o selectie a potentialilor sclavi. Ei invatat din erorile grecilor, le-au corectat, si au realizat astfel o evolutie remarcabila a sclaviei. In acest fel ei i-au ridicat pe scara sociala si le-au dat sarcini superioare celor cu risc de potential viitor rasculati, evitand astfel pe cat posibil eventualele rascoale.

Rascoalele n-au putut fi evitate total, dar au fost reduse la minimul posibil si astfel imperiul a supravietuit aproape un mileniu. Decaderea Imperiului Roman a avut aceeasi cauza ca in toate societatile sclavagiste: epuizarea resurselor de noi sclavi. Imperiul s-a tot extins pana nu a mai avut ce cuceri deoarece a intampinat rezistenta feroce din partea oponentilor. Asta inseamna ca si Imperiul Roman a intrat in aceeasi criza precum cea a cetatilor grecesti inainte. Iar cauza acestei crize este dezamagirea sclavului, pierderea apetitului pentru viata.

Statutul soldatului roman s-a deteriorat si el. Spre sfarsitul perioadei de dinainte de marea scindare a imperiului, renta viagera nu mai era suficienta pentru un trai decent. Fostul legionar si-a ingropat tineretea in razboaie s-a trezit ca nu se poate bucura de promisiunea care l-a convins sa se alature armatei. Plus de asta, a ajuns la urechile soldatilor practica marsava a trimiterii celor aflati la final de stagiu militar in cele mai grele misiuni, tocmai pentru a le creste riscul pierderii vietii si evitarea obligatiei promisiunii initiale a rentei viagere. Iata ca radacinile capitalismului s-au regasit si din acest punct de vedere in Imperiul Roman. Treptat dezamagirea subordonarii a cuprins inclusiv soldatul roman, inselat de un sistem social inechitabil, bazat pe amenintari si frica.

Salvarea personala atat a soldatului inselat cat si a sclavului epuizat a venit de la un cult religios. Parca asteptandu-si iminenta moarte ca urmare a lipsei de profitabilitate, adeptii acestui cult se retrageau intr-o stare de meditatie inerta. El este Crestinismul. Crestinismul a venit si l-a convins pe sclav ca totusi undeva exista o perfectiune in lume la care el poate aspira. Adica viata de apoi. Promisiunea aceasta a atingerii perfectiunii si fericirii eterne lipsea politeismului greco-roman. Crestinismul a introdus-o in perceptele sale religioase intr-o realitate postmortem. Desi initial a fost persecutat, numarul adeptilor a continuat sa creasca. In cele din urma el a fost adoptat de autoritatile romane ca religie oficiala, dar acest fapt nu a putut opri dezmembrarea Imperiului Roman. Dar chiar si dupa prabusirea societatii sclavagiste greco-romane antice totusi influentele lingvistice si statale s-au regasit in noua forma a sclaviei, cea feudala. Despre acesta voi analiza detaliat in urmatorul articol.




»»  read more

29 iunie 2017

9. Redefining the slavery according to its modern changes.

The similarities and the differences between the classical slave and the modern order taker 9. Redefining slavery according to its modern changes. The criteria of the slavery surviving inside the contractual free trade relationship



So, in this entries series I have shown that there are two main differences between the classical slave and the modern order taker. The first one is the slave direct threat with death or beating in order to execute the master's orders. The other one is the leaving work interdiction, which is, the impossibility of resignation. However, the similarities between the two social statuses are much closer than these two differences. The formal freedom given to classical slave by granting the resignation or vacation modern liberties leave is a false freedom because in the meantime many other traditional liberties have been suppressed. Even though they seem unimportant, yet their number is surprisingly large. So the number of suppressed liberties get to counteract these granted new rights that modern order taker have in addition compared to the classical slave like inflation cuts down eventually the wage increases. Per total, these new freedoms are suppressed by the modern order taker social condition.

Despite the basic free and respect relationship between chief and subordinate, most contemporary jobs contain higher or lower slavery remains. For example, this happens when the chief has a subhuman and disrespectful attitude towards the subordinate who strives to do a good job. Another example is the subordinate under-valuation job to its true value. The main reason for this relationship is to make it even more profitable and to bring it more productivity. These are the main signs of slavery slippage from the freely agreed labor relationship to the forced labor. Here’s how the classical slavery definition through lack of freedom to leave the workplace and the according to job done contractual payment is not good enough to keep the modern working relations out of the slavery mentality remains.

So, despite some insignificant differences, the contemporary society has generally the same principles as the past centuries classical (slavery) one. We are still living in a slavery society, but we do not recognize it out of shame, embarrassment, or even because we are too greedy to earn even greater profits after negotiating the modern slaves lives. The modern order taker is more motivated to fulfill the social superiors’ orders and to produce more if has an illusively self-perception as a free person.



There is a slavery mentality typical reaction to identify the potential slaves and exploit them or to identify the potential masters and promote them in the privileged social positions. The first ones produce something concrete in their job as the others get bureaucratic jobs, pretend to produce something but they actually produce absolutely nothing. They only mimic the work just in order not to look cynical profiteers in front of the simple people that are educated in the hard work and hard life humble attitude. The similarities do not stop there: as in the past, the masters do little else for the community except of eventually amusing behind the slaves' silliness, the human caricatures and the spiritual mutilation after initially bringing them into this degrading situation. The differences I have dealt with in these entries series mainly consist in the different packaging specific to these two social statutes. In the past, the orders takers were simply called slaves, and each accepted their social position by virtue of the death and beating threats. Today they are called "misters", "gentlemen", "managers", "directors", etc.

The principle of slavery infiltrated into freely consensual working relationships consists precisely in manipulating the servant's environment to make her/him take certain orders more than she/he would do from her/his own inner initiative of free will. Both the classical slave and the modern order taker is a person whose natural or social environment was previously so influenced and manipulated as to reduce her/his living standard in such a way that eventually ends up into accepting those orders that she/he would not normally have taken.

The individual education received from school prevents it from making a return to the nature and set itself free. Being professionally formed in another area and having a supersaturated mind with information, the modern order taker either does not have time for this or she/he becomes too conservative to build her/his own shelter and to directly create her/his own food. Taking advantage of this conservatism, the modern slavery system is still today able to make the most of its slaves through the industry of illusions and threats.

The modern order taker acceptance of the underpaid job, below the market value, is a slavery consequence rather than its functional principle. Increasing the remuneration does not release the slave into a free man at all. The abuse of will manipulation to execute a specific order can not formally be compensated by payment. In this case, after being subordinated, it does not matter whether that person once will also have some higher or lower profit. If the subordination to the command hierarchy is a result of this negative influence of the market or the social environment, and not out of her/his personal conviction after the contact with the free market, then that person is not a free one, but a slave. Her/his free will was abused.

Here is how the slavery social reality principle is not the fact that a person is held in physical chains, without reward and without the possibility of resignation. These are classical slavery signs only that does not meet the contemporary modified one. That is why there is a need for a new slavery definition in order to fit not just for the classical slavery relationship but also for the common points area with the modern employee - employer relationship too. Therefore, the redefining the "slavery" notion to the reality of modern consented working relations must take into account its paradoxical expansion beyond the limits imposed by the official slavery ideology.

So, in order to include the wage slavery among the classical one, I propose an extension of the notion of "slavery" as follows:

The slavery is the state of performing certain profitable activities for one person or more whose social range is positioned at the social system pyramid top, at a specific request, that a person offers in exchange for food and shelter, and which requires more effort and time to achieve than if that person would have obtained directly through the free access to natural resources.

The classical slavery prevented the slave access to natural resources by the leaving workplace prohibition. The feudalism made this maneuver by the feudal huge expansion property so that it was no resources left for others. The modern age of freely agreed labor relations, has became specialized in diverting the slave out of these resources through confuse education, exchange scum deceiving and unspecific threats that act inside the deep, unconscious mind. Whether there is insufficient remuneration for an indispensable activity or there is progressive mental disorder that the social system produces in time to the modern order taker through continuous stress or social damnation , the result is the same: a second-hand person. A slave.

The contemporary official ideology that shows a radical distinction between the notion of "slave" and the "manager" or "director", used for the modern order taker, has to be corrected for the sake of clarity. The lying on these terms in the modern craft nomenclature is directly deduced from the very slavery abolition lie. The terminology needs to be adjusted according to this well camouflaged but painful reality through the huge state institutions. I will write a special entry in the future about this contemporary ideological scum.

Of course, the terms still in use for the two social categories designation can be used further on. It possible to generally adopt the distinction between classical and wage slavery, as I have done during this entries series . However, as I have said for many years in this space, to say that there is a radical differentiation between the two social statutes, as it is stated by this classical slavery abolition ideological circus, is a not only a squeezed lie but even a hideous one. I will show in the following entry why the slavery was immoral in the civilized world.

Many theorists have used the phrase "wage slavery" since the 19th century, and many independent contemporary theorists still use it today. The best known of them is the great linguist and sociologist Noam Chomsky. Unfortunately, such an expression is ideologically countered by lot of armies of philosophers and contextual sociologists, mercenary theorists employed by the contemporary mafia system as ideological advocates through the universities around the world to counteract this painful truth. They write PHD theses, and are awarded for convincing the humble minds that the contemporary society is free. For them, the expression "wage slavery" seems to be a contradiction in terms. The Plato's cave myth perfectly fit this situation.

Of course, authorities and all the traditional-privileged social classes have every interest in equating the slavery with the classical slavery only. The purpose of this ideological scam is to overlap an ambivalent inner desire that the modern order taker has to set herself/himself free. These people are emotionally predisposed to subordinate themselves to others due to the both childhood education and the genetically inherited slave mentality legacy that is still alive in their hearts. As brilliantly Nietzsche said at the beginning of the slavery abolition lie social generally implementation, there are “master-morality” and “slave-morality” I will analyze in detail this ambivalence in one of the following entries. The slavery reducing only to these signs has a very practical purpose in terms of social benefactor mentality. It consists in creating the illusions of political and economic freedom, the psychoactive substances culture development with which the slave daily celebrates the freedom wanted for centuries by its genealogical branch, as a came true beautiful dream. Such alcohol-and- psychoactive substances freedom looks like that of a rat that is self-stimulates its own hypothalamic (the brain pleasure centre) to the exhaustion by the electrical impulses caused by its own pedaling that causes impulses, as seen in the following film:


Min 02. 23 

So, at the end of this entry and this entries series, we are now able to develop this idea by exposing the criteria of extended slavery to the modern free trade working relations between two partners. They are the following:

(after the false free exchange relationship)
  • 1. the low work quality in concern to the human dignity;
  • 2. the excessive work volume in concern to the free time;
  • 3. the excessive work volume in concern to the received payment;

(after the indirect threats from society)
  • 4. the artificial wars created and maintained, without justification or poorly justified by their initiators;
  • 5. the insufficient received payment to ensure decent shelter and healthy food;
  • 6. the insufficient social assistance after retirement;
  • 7. the bosses’ tyrannical attitude;




»»  read more

Postati un comentariu

Nume

E-mail *

Mesaj *

If you want to receive the entries that I write

insert your e-mail address here and then push the button bellow:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Facebook