I Need Dick Before Bed

Simone Weil between pacifism and nonviolence (from "without violence")

As Hannah Arendt, Simone Weil drew from the political lifeblood of his thinking, and strive for a Marxist anarchist libertarian footprint and a strong ethical inspiration.

The first phase of the thought of Weil, complex and often contradictory, is marked by the predominance of political and social issues in 1934 but resigned to practice any form of political activity aimed at a mystical-religious reflection with strong traits pessimistic. Of Jewish origin, converted to Catholicism ideally, "par excellence the religion of slaves, without ever being baptized.

thought and life of Simone Weil (1909-1943) are based on the greatest moral rigor and consistency in search of a difficult truth, least religious, "insisted that there was no inconsistency between the minimum their convictions and the life "[S. Pétrement, Life of Simone Weil , p. 65].

Yet Weil, pacifist, he participated briefly in the English Civil War in the summer of 1936. Pacifism heard, then?

If in the last years of his life will support the French Resistance militating in the organization De Gaulle, still a student Simone Weil was a pacifist "pure". He joined in 1927 to the small group Volonté de Paix and after the Ligue des droits de l'homme . At that time she had been for the crucial influence of the pacifist Alain (Emile Auguste Chartier), his professor of philosophy in the preparation classes at the Ecole Normale Supérieure.

Politically, Simone Weil was close to syndicalism. The Marxist concept of class struggle complicated his views on nonviolence. Reflections on the war in of 1933 writes: "Until the period following the last war, the revolutionary movement in its various forms, had nothing in common with the pacifism [...]. It is clear that the Marxist tradition has not, as regards the war, or device, or clarity. One point at least was common to all theories, namely the categorical refusal to condemn the war as such. Marxists, especially Lenin and Kautsky, paraphrased welcomes the affirmation of Clausewitz, that war would only continue the policy of peace time, but by other means. The conclusion was that a war must be judged not by the violence of the means employed, but by the objectives pursued by these means [ Reflections on the war in On War, p. 29].

But, as Gandhi also thought about the relationship means-ends, to try to "evaluate every war from the purposes and not by the nature of the means" is "the worst way possible," although "this does not mean that in general it is better to condemn the use of violence, like the pure pacifists, war is good in every age a particular species of violence which we must study the mechanism before making any judgment [ there , p. 31].

Here Simone Weil plays the card of Marxist materialism in an original way: "The materialist method is to first examine taking into account any fact much of the human consequences necessarily implied that the means put in the game of the purposes. You can not solve, nor pose a problem on the war without having firstly removed the mechanism of military struggle, ie without analyzing the social relations that it implies certain technical conditions, economic and social. [...] And the war proves to be ultimately a war waged by all the state apparatus and the larger states against all the able-bodied men "[ there , p. 32].

Thus the Weil pacifist first way, which is still a "pure pacifist."

Then comes the brief participation in the English Civil War. In his letter to Georges Bernanos Simone Weil writes: "In July 1936 I was in Paris. I do not like war, but in war, what has always made me more horror is the condition of those who are in the backline. When I realized that despite my efforts, I could not help morally participate in this war, that is to wish every day, every hour, the victory of some, the defeat of others, I said that Paris was to me the backline, and I took the train to Barcelona with the intention to enlist. It was the beginning of August 1936 [Letter to Georges Bernanos in On War, p. 50].

The reasoning that leads her to cross the border is so clear and brave and the behavior that follows is anything but adversarial.

moral participation from behind the scenes is not ethically acceptable, "Simon thought that when we can no longer prevent a war, we must bear their share in this calamity with the group to which he belongs" [S. Pétrement, Life of Simone Weil , p. 65].

Staying on the sidelines is not possible for his particular psychological tendency to compassion. Simone de Beauvoir reminds her: "A great famine had recently ravaged China and I was told that, in learning this news broke out into sobs [ there , p. 75]. And his friend and biographer Simon Pétrement this self-assessment report to Simon, "My imagination always runs in a very painful way for me. The thought of the suffering of the dangers which do not participate fills me with horror, pity, shame and remorse, a mix that I take away all freedom of spirit, only the perception of reality frees me from everything "[ therein].

to perceive the reality of the English Civil War, Simone Weil crossed the English border on August 8, 1936 in Port-Bou.

It integrates a small international group where some knowledge of French. They teach her to handle weapons. You will immediately notice its lack of ability: "Comrades, exercise, avoid going into the path of his gun" [ therein, p. 365].

On 17 August, after the Franco's air force dropped a small bomb on the ground, "Suddenly I understand that one goes in shipment [...] So, I very excited (I can not evaluate the usefulness of the thing and I know that if we take, we shoot). " Would later write: "The first and only time I was scared during his stay in Pina [ therein].

There is no doubt that wants to fight, despite the objections of the delegates who commanded the group: "Stubborn, states that came to Spain as a tourist or an observer, but to fight and promises to honor his place in the ranks of the group '[ therein, p. 366].

While fellow is coming to a house that must be made clear, she sort of waiting with a German cook named: "He obviously afraid. Not me. But like everything around me, there is intense! War with no prisoners. If you're caught it and shot. " And yet, with a peace of mind even more if possible, "aerial reconnaissance. Hide. [...] I do I lie back, look at the leaves, the blue sky. Beautiful day. If they catch me, kill me ... But it is fair. Our people paid enough blood. They are morally complicit. "

The next day, it burns badly by putting one foot in a pan filled with boiling oil placed at ground level and do not see the fire from above. Did not see it because of its strong myopia. The burn is severe and the doctor father, meanwhile arrived in Spain with his wife, after much persuasion fails to persuade her to return to France for treatment.

Simone Weil never return to Spain. In the letter to Bernanos explains why: "I left Spain in spite of myself and with the intent to return, later, I have not done voluntarily, nothing. I did not feel any inner need to participate in a war that was not, as seemed to me at first, a war of starving peasants against the landowners and clergy accomplice of the owners, but a war between Russia, Germany and Italy "[Letter to Georges Bernanos in On War, p. 50].

thus justifying French non-intervention on the side of the Republicans in the English Civil War: " Even when I was in Aragon and Catalonia, in the midst of the climate of struggle between militants who were unable to find sufficiently severe to qualify the policy of Blum [ the chairman of the French Socialist], I approve of this policy. The point is that I refuse, on my behalf, deliberately to sacrifice the peace, even if it comes to saving a revolutionary people threatened with extermination [ not general surgery, Reflections on the war in , cit., P . 45] .

come to a point consider the hegemony of Europe Hitler's Germany is a lesser evil of war.

But after the invasion of Czechoslovakia changed his mind and began to reproach the former pacifism, now called a "criminal mistake".

In Simone Weil pacifism and rejection of violence do not overlap. Indeed, it is just after the abandonment of its pacifist positions in the strict sense that Weil intensified reflection on nonviolence.

In Notebooks, written mostly between 1941 and 1942 and published posthumously, is a clear ethical program, "Strive to replace more and more in the world non-violence effective violence. Non-violence is good only if effective. Strive to become likely to be non-violent. "

Texts cited:

JM Muller, The need for nonviolence, EGA, Torino 1994;

S. Pétrement, Life of Simone Weil , Adelphi, Milano 1994;

S. Weil, On the war, publishing practices, Parma 1988.

(Taken from Without Violence. Ideas and stories of peace movements, by Edward Acotto, "Days of History" No 38, The Unit, 2004)

Closets Para The Sims

Pacifism skeptical of Sir Bertrand Russell (from "without violence")

Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) is one of the greatest philosophers of the twentieth century. In addition to his books on mathematical logic and philosophy, many are those of policy and ethics. The world wars of the twentieth century mark the test of her pacifism: Russell was the first non-interventionist war but not the second. It seemed in fact that pacifism, even in its radical Gandhi, could not succeed against the Nazis, because "the power [of nonviolence] depends on the presence of certain virtues in those against which is used. "

However, after World War II was one of the greatest entertainers of initiatives for peace and nuclear disarmament.

The great British philosopher Bertrand Russell pacifist suddenly discovered in 1901 at the age of 29 years. He had a sudden crisis that could be called "mysticism", during an episode of acute suffering wife of the philosopher Whitehead: "Within five minutes I passed through the mind thoughts such as: the loneliness of the human soul is unendurable; nothing can penetrate it except the most intense form of that kind of love preached by the great mystics, all that does not arise from this impulse is harmful or at least unnecessary, it follows that war is a mistake, that the education you receive in the major college English is abominable, that the use of force is regrettable [...]. At the end of those five minutes I had become a completely different person. For a while I was dominated by a sort of mystical illumination "[ Bertrand Russell's autobiography, I, pp. 239-240].

Nonviolence was not so ingrained, it is instead the case of other peace activists (one for all: Simone Weil), nor was part of the his education, as Russell was an aristocrat of liberal ideas but also nourished by love of country.

Besides his position on pacifism will change with changing historical conditions, highlighting an ethical pragmatism irreconcilable with the religious or radical pacifism with Gandhian nonviolence.

During the First World War, Russell was committed to fund the cause of peace, fighting for the non-intervention: "It seemed impossible that the European nations commit the madness to start a war, but I had no doubt that if the War broke out he really was, England would have been dragged to participate. I felt however, with all your soul, that our country should remain neutral and thus caused many professors and members of the various colleges to make a declaration of principle which was published in the Manchester Guardian . The day of our entry into the war almost all changed their minds "[ there , II, p. 11].

Membership of Russell's pacifism is not mediated by philosophical considerations, is rather a spontaneous attitude, emotional. Neither pacifism tactical or strategic, short, or pacifism "of conviction."

Russell would later admit that adherence to pacifism not was immune from his natural skepticism: "I imagined now be liberal, socialist hours, Pacific time, but in the deepest sense I have never been neither one thing nor the other nor the other. Ever the skeptical mind, when I wanted more silent, he murmured his doubts, he cut off the easy enthusiasm of others and transported me into a desolate loneliness "[ there , p. 51].

While working with associations democratic pacifist, he realizes that the consent to the war is broader and more spontaneous than they could imagine: "I, like almost all anti-war, I always naively thought that wars were imposed by despotic and Machiavellian governments reluctant to populations. [...] The first days of war were the most shocking for me. My closest friends, such as, for example, Whitehead, proved interventionists believe [there , pp. 12-13].

The war reserve love surprises and provides a starting point for considerations shiny and disconsolate about human nature: "Until then I had thought that people in general, he loved money more than anything else, I realized that they loved even more destruction. I imagined that intellectuals especially loved the truth, but here again I found that those who preferred the truth were known to less than ten percent [ there , p. 15].

Col pressure of events the specific commitment of Russell is becoming more determined and courageous.

With the introduction of conscription has been fighting full-time for the defense of conscientious objectors, who face the death penalty.

holds public lectures: "I spent three weeks in the mining districts of Wales [...] None of the meetings was always stopped and found that the majority, the public was not hostile, not at all: as long as I just speaking areas industry. In London, things went differently [ there , p. 28].

In 1916 he was taken off the job at Trinity College, Cambridge for his unpopular pacifist commitment to the academic authorities and colleagues.

also undergoes an absurd decision of the authorities: he was prohibited from visiting the industrial and coastal areas of the country, fearing that could make recommendations to the enemy submarines!

Finally, in May 1918, was imprisoned for six months to get released on a small pacifist magazine news of military already relatively public.

Actually Russell is gradually convinced of the ineffectiveness, given the state of any practical action to sign peace, "On the other hand, it was useful or not the action had begun, I was not able to stop just when it seemed he could forced to abandon the work for fear of the consequences.

The fact remains that just as I drove in prison, I was convinced that everything we were trying to do was useless, "[there , p. 44].

The outbreak of World War II saw a Russell convinced of the need to actively resist, with arms, Nazi barbarity: "I was able imagine with acquiescence, albeit reluctant, the possibility of a rule of the Kaiser's Germany, believing that, though he could be a calamity, would not be a bad thing as bad as a world war with all its consequences. Ben else was Hitler's Germany. I felt an indescribable loathing for the Nazis: cruel, fanatic and stupid. I was hateful, no less morally and intellectually. Although I still cling to my pacifist convictions, I did more and more difficult, and when, in 1940, weighed the threat of an invasion on England, I realized that throughout the first war I had never seriously contemplated the possibility of a total defeat . This idea I was unbearable and finally, in all conscience, I decided it was my duty to support all that seemed necessary to achieve victory, as there are rarely as they were painful and the likely consequences of World War II "[ therein, pp. 338-339].

pacifism A "spontaneous" can easily fail in the face of an opponent 'exceptional' as fascism, an example of violence without redemption.

Severus and then becomes almost a caricature of the proceedings on the Gandhian nonviolence Russell: "I believe however that the method of resistance passive or, saying better, the resistance without violence, could have a broader scope than it turned out the light of the facts.

certainly has great power in India, against the British, Gandhi brought a triumph. But the strength of it depends on the presence of certain virtues in those against whom it is used. When the Indians they lay on the railroad tracks challenging the authorities to crush them under trains, the British left off from committing a similar cruelty. The Nazis but had no scruples in analogous situations. The doctrine preached by Tolstoy so persuasive, namely that those in power can be reclaimed if you are morally opposed a passive resistance, was obviously of no value in Germany after 1933 "[ there , II, p. 340].

obscured only by a sincere desire not to seem self-contradictory, Russell says finally: "I never had absolute faith in the idea of \u200b\u200bpassive resistance, and will not ever totally rinnegai. But in practice the difference between the opposition to World War I and the consensus was the second big enough not to let see the considerable degree of theoretical coherence that actually existed between [my] two attitudes [ there , II p . 341].

Di Faced with these statements, the nature of pacifism skeptic Bertrand Russell appears quite clearly and the limitations of a policy may not sufficiently theorized in terms of ethical and philosophical.

However, after the Second World War, Russell continued to strive admirably to the cause of peace and justice by establishing the so-called Russell Tribunal, composed of independent persons with the task of denouncing the crimes of war silenced by the media .

In the last years of his life, individually and through Bertrand Russell Peace Foundation , Russell has "devoted more time and thoughts to Vietnam War [ there , III, p. 289].

It is also very much committed to avoid the risk of nuclear war, writing appeals to heads of state of the superpowers: in 1955, among other things, was the initiator of the so-called Russell-Einstein Manifesto against the use of nuclear weapons.

Texts cited:

B. Russell, Bertrand Russell's autobiography , Longanesi, Milano 1969.

(Taken from Without Violence. Ideas and stories of the movement Peace, edited by Edward Acotto, "Days of History" No 38, The Unit, 2004)

Elimination Period Vs Waiting Period

The sick planet, Underworld and Space 1999 (my note of 2007)

"In 1971 Debord writes an essay, The sick planet, which seems to be written today. Talk of pollution such as material production and the the same time spectacular (ideological), and pollution as something as a discourse on the thing.

Twenty years later, Don DeLillo has written his masterpiece, Underworld that features an expert on disposal of radioactive waste also, and as common thread to bind together the many stories But from the centrifugal rather than a non-existent compared to the center, the history of baseball ... the historic game, perfect emblem of ideological nothing that America West had already fallen before September 11.

It will not be an accident but a so-called sign of the times, even if the popular science fiction series for television, Space 1999, begins with the detachment of the moon from its orbit in the explosion of the lunar deposits of radioactive waste , representing how spectacularly wrong solution ideological , as science fiction, the nuclear problem (the story that nuclear waste can be space ship still uses today, however, was fashionable in the seventies and eighties, years of childhood for viewers to Space 1999). "

to add that one of my generation (1972), first still of the Chernobyl accident, was instrumental vision of The day after: the fear of the disaster, the search for possible mental fallout shelters, the comparison of risk compared to other countries other than Italy, fear of the fallout and any after , have always accompanied my childhood paranoid.
I grew up with the fear of atomic destruction, a fear almost disappeared (for the new ideology of involuntary assoribimento post-'89) until 2001, and now finally returned to the guilty folly of the rulers insist the Western way of atomic energy loser.

Each divine curse fall on their wicked leader.