SENZA CENSURA N.17

JULY 2005

 

EDITORIAL

"Every military victory that German gun flesh helps to conquer outside means a new political and social triumph by reaction inside the Reich. To every force against the red army in Finland and in Southern Russia grows the power of the Junker and the pan-Germanic capitalism in the east of Elba. To every town destroyed in the Fiandres falls down a position of German democracy."
R. Luxemburg, "Towards catastrophe", 1918

The recent repressive attacks diffused by regime mass media, from the criminalization of the unemployed and temporary workers movement ( with consequent arrests and inquiries ) to the operations of raking of anarchists, put on the agenda of the debate of the "movement" the question of an "unexpected" repressive escalation.
Some subjective expressions of this movement hurried to "run after" these "judicial" initiatives trying to limit their effects putting on the ground a lot of "defensive" arguments and keywords inadequate to real concrete strenght relationships among social classes in our country and on international level.
Some openly speak about "emergency anomaly" denouncing a disproportion between facts and accusations, following then unprobable proposals to "reform" the penal discipline in force in our country (under the auspices of a next center-left government), or trying to run the movement itself towards self-referential perspectives of territorial political "clash" ( like for the attack to local representatives as Cofferati in Bologna, or for the revaluation of the local ground for the "negotiation of social struggles).
Some, demanding to place themselves "to the left more then others", propose as only immediate solution able to "stop repression" a sudden and wide resumption of these "social struggles", without being worried to individuate concrete conditions of development, possible subjects and consequent methods of political intervention.
Others believe in the vain proposal of an amnisty or pardon law ( maybe "modernizing" it ,establishing a theorical link between the "exiles" question or the survivors from an historical period of our country's history - which themselves try to "liquidate" from history - with the concrete situation lived today by militants engaged in "social struggles" ) without considering the only "formal" data of the great difficulty this iniciative should face on the ground of parliamentary "works" thanks to the constitutional reform of the art. 79 (majority qualified of the two thirds of the members of every Chamber for the approvation).
All these inadequate proposals, also obstaculate ( dispersing into an inconclusive "activism", may be linked to some bourgeois part ) the process of accumulation of forces and reconquest of thought and action autonomy by the proletariat, central question in the present situation of realignment of imperialist countries.
What the movement's debate risks to exclude from this process is the exact perception and representation (with "internal" consequences ) of the specific role carried on by Italy since decades on power relationships and on the path of structuring of the European pole.
By this point of view, it's important to remember that since decades - and the most during the last one - our country took charge of Albany's military occupation in the 90s, the most recent substantial contribution to the second Gulf war and, in the next future, to strenghten the "humanitarian mission" in Afghanistan and the starting mission in Sudan, using italian military bases as managing and logistic support centers (in particular that situated in Solbiate-Olona).
This data combines with two "historical specificities" of our country : a relative weakness of Capitalistic production structures and a consequent level of management of class clashes and structuring of "formal" strenght relationships among classes.
On the first side, it's enough to remember the recent public criticism of the President of Confindustria ( who gained credit as champion of "productive" capitalism ) to "rentier capitalism",
the controversies about the "life position" of the Italian Bank's governor or the recent "new-protectionist" ideas into EU. That, if on one side confirms Italian capitalism weakness, on the other side denies those interpretations wich tend to link the present repressive escalation to a new structuring of the penal system (and repressive in general) adequate to a new-liberist form of the Capital itself.
On the second side, we have to remember that since time Italy propose itself as "reactionay vanguard" in the managing of class conflicts.
Think to the "military forcing" imposed to the management of mass mobilizations in 2001 or the great quantity of "reforms" of the law system since the 90s, not only by the mere penal point of view, but also about discipline into trade unions relationships, working relationships, management of foreigner workers, social safety...
This role represents a structural condition of our country and this is shown by the fact that yet first it was carried out the project of "mass imprisonment" of the new Italian proletarian generation matured during the 70s, it was observed that "more important of the whole, arcaic penal and jail structure, can be considered the use ideologically terroristic of the penal accusation, of the incrimination and the trial without effective sanctions or definitive condemnations; the potestative police measures, from arrest to warnings to obliged repatriations; and, besides, old and new systems of citizens filing, form the court records to police archives and to the Berufsverbot; spy tecniques used by public and private agencies for social control (...), data systems for authoritarian centralization of legal interpretation (...). These structures for the production of agreement seem to stand out like a differentiated system for social control..." (L. Ferrajoli - D. Zolo, "Authoritarian democracy and mature Capitalism", 1978).
This structural condition of class relationships in our country unites with the nearer militarist and imperialist initiatives imposed to proletarians by the various governments of our bourgeoisie , in the vain perspective of assuring a compatibility in the class conflict, causing its expressions' withdrawing.
In a certain sense, the "withdrawing" of subjective positions expressed at the present moment by the "movement" (like those expressed by "sincere democratics" or representatives of bourgeois Left) represent a reflection of this initiative of imperialist bourgeoisie: to terroristic wars against emerging countries and oppressed peoples, corresponds a terroristic use of "legitimate" violence by the State.
In this situation, staying on self-referential logics about grounds of "political agibility", thought to be practicable because thought compatible with the formal relationship among classes in our country, should be a double error: on one side, because this king of logic doesn't understand the real development of these relationships consequently to the role of our country and Europe itself on the international level; on the other side, because it should obstacle and not favourish that process of accumulation of a "critical mass" able to unify the resistance to militarism and war to the resistance to the authoritarian structuring of Italy and EU and to the continuous worsening of material living conditions.
In these conditions, even a "different legality" should have to deal with a differentiated system of social control which, like well known by the subjects in different ways involved in the class struggle in our country, has yet made actual and effective a "suspension of constitutional guarantees" towards them.