In English Only In English Only In English Only In English Only

Carlo Federico's MANIFESTO




Unfortunately the majority of people prefer grandiose programmes, accompanied by rumble and thunder. People prefer Utopia, alas. And here let me say that the utopian-fool are much more threatening than passive slogan-wielding-fools.
Utopians are the main cause of human wreckages in history.
Hitler's Ka-Zett Lagers and Pol Pot's millions of skulls are somehow easily recognizable as practical accomplishments of ancient utopian dreams in Plato's Republic, Campanella's Sun City, Raphael Hythloday's two books.... The tragedy is that the utopians' dreams - to give us a perfect world - go unchallenged until new foolish dreams let the old ones subside.
Ennio Flaiano said "When a fool falls for a dream, he will build a system on it, and pretend to oblige the rest of mankind to live within it" and Keynes: "Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the air, are distilling their frenzy from some scribblers of some years back, and it is these dreams, not vested interests, which are hellish dangerous". Hellish.

And the Hell consists in Organizations conceived by Utopians. Think of Charles Fourier's Phalansteries designed to hold 1620 persons each, 1620 prisoners expected to live HAPPILY there (all utopians dream happiness for everybody, and, as Bernard Levin wrote, their tutelary deity is Procruste, to make sure that equality give equal happiness to all, and no one can be luckier than anyone else). Yet are you convinced that the worst cages are made from brick and steel bars? Look how Rousseau's [debatable] idea "Man was born free and everywhere he is in chains" was concocted in his Social Contract into the suffocating cage of the General Will where man's individual freedom is put into the hands of the Lenins and Hitlers of any century, charged by the utopian Jean Jacques with determining what the General Will is. The consequences can be rather depressing, as the many five-star guests of Gulags and other leisure residences established by indefatigable Gosplan originators could asseverate (those who survived, you know). But there is a great deal of glee in it, with hindsight: utopian intellectuals are not the top Boeotians on earth, they are surpassed by their colleagues the intelligent dupe, the gullible, those who fell in love with their visions and vociferously kept professing their laughable faith in Willi Muenzenberg's Otdel Mezhdunarodnyk Sujazev: he himself, the old Willi, in private derided them as Useful Idiots, but hardened puerile dreamers, like Fabian idealists Beatrice and Sidney Webbs, wrote so many pages applauding the Home of Socialism (and interpreting penury and famine there just as conspiracy of the peasant counter-revolutionaries, who stole grains from each ear of wheat to sabotage the proletarian paradise) that sundry respected brains, Edouard Herriot, Walter Duranty, Sir Bernard Pares and many others followed suit. Now their opus might be pretty facetious to read, with hindsight, but few seem to care.

Organizations are to be looked upon warily, even when they are not an utopian's creature: in too many cases they seem to me sort of granted kleptocracies, where somebody is taking advantage of somebody else, where the individual is often forced to work for the unqualified, doing the unnecessary for the ungrateful: but this is out of my present subject. Only one point to mention: sometimes you may find a Rich colleague even in the dark maze of an organization, where he or she is doing his honest work. In many a post-office, hospital, laundry shop, kitchen, school or any other gloomy enterprise you recognize him or her because of his/her excellence in anything is being done (excellence in humble tasks is a telltale sign of the Rich), because of his/her plain unselfishness (or, more precisely: sensible selfishness!), because of his/her quality service, because of his/her compassion for the Fool and the Poor around. You recognize them because the Rich do often smile, and, at times, laugh. Beasts neither smile nor laugh. It requires a highly human understanding of incongruence. Humour is a seal of the Rich's superiority.
And, if anything might save humankind on the brink of destruction, that's irony, not solemnity. Do you agree? Just fancy a humorous genius like Charlie Chaplin gesturing his sarcastic mime at a high-level meeting: a jester's mockery at the grandiloquent vacuum of solemn empty populist rethoric!

It is clear, anyway, that the Rich shall never accept to be ORGANIZED into any "structure" of their own. Just fancy what a ludicrous outcome, banding together in regimental order with leaders, assistant leaders, vicarious leaders, regional leaders and super-leaders up to the Alpha Male managing annual conventions with drums gonfalons colours and trumpets to celebrate... what? our richness, which is inherently "inner"? Leave such shenanigans to the fool.

(18.To be continued)

Have you anything to say? Please, do on line in The Web Park Speaker's Corner