Le Monde
diplomatique
October
2000
WHY DO WE ALL
AGREE THE GLOBAL MARKET IS INEVITABLE?
'Do not forget
ideas are also weapons'
By SUBCOMANDANTE
MARCOS *
The purpose of
this text is to fuel the debate between right and leftwing intellectuals. It
does not attempt to explain the relation of either with governments or changes
in society.
I. Pay-per-view
global domination
The world is not
square, or so we learn at school, but on the brink of the third millennium it is
not round either. I do not know which geometrical figure best represents the
world in its present state but, in an era of digital communication, we could see
it as a gigantic screen - one of those screens you can program to display
several pictures at the same time, one inside the other. In our global world the
pictures come from all over the planet - but some are missing. Not because there
is not enough room on the screen but because someone up there selected these
pictures rather than others.
What do the
pictures show? On the American continent, we see a paramilitary group occupying
the Autonomous National University of Mexico (Unam); but the men in grey
uniforms are not there to study. Another frame shows an armoured column
thundering through a native community in Chiapas. Beside this, we see United
States police using violence to arrest a youth in a city that could be Seattle
or Washington. The pictures in Europe are just as grey.
II. A memorable
omission
Intellectuals
have been part of society since the dawn of humanity. Their work is analytical
and critical. They look at social facts and analyse the evidence, for and
against, looking for anything ambiguous, that is neither one thing nor the
other, revealing anything that is not obvious - sometimes even the opposite of
what seems obvious.
These
professional critics act as a sort of impertinent consciousness for society.
They are non-conformists, disagreeing with everything - social and political
forces, the state, government, media, arts, religion and so on. Activists will
just say "we've had enough", but sceptical intellectuals will cautiously murmur
"too much" or "not enough". Intellectuals criticise immobility, demand change
and progress. They are, nevertheless, part of a society, which is the scene of
endless confrontation and is split between those who use power to maintain the
status quo and those who fight for change.
Intellectuals
must choose between their function as intellectuals and the role that activists
offer them. It is also here that we see the split between progressive and
reactionary intellectuals. They all continue their work of critical analysis,
but whereas the more progressive persist in criticising immobility, permanence,
hegemony and homogeneity, the reactionaries focus their attacks on change,
movement, rebellion and diversity. So in fact, reactionary intellectuals
"forget" their true function and give up critical thought. Their memory shrinks,
excluding past and future to focus only on the immediate and present. No further
discussion is possible.
III.
Intellectual pragmatism
Many leading
rightwing intellectuals start life as progressives. But they soon attract the
attention of the powerful, who deploy innumerable stratagems to buy or destroy
them. Progressive intellectuals are "born" in the midst of a process of
seduction and persecution. Some resist; others, convinced that the global
economy is inevitable, look in their box of tricks and find reasons to
legitimate the existing power structure. They are awarded with a comfortable
armchair, on the right hand of the prince they once denounced.
They can find
any number of excuses for this supposedly "inevitable" outcome: it is the end of
history; money is everywhere and all-powerful; the police have taken the place
of politics; the present is the only possible future; there is a rational
explanation for social inequality; there are even "good reasons" for the
unbridled exploitation of human beings and natural resources, racism,
intolerance and war.
In an era marked
by two new paradigms - communication and the market - rightwing intellectuals
have realised that being "modern" means obeying one rule: "Adapt or go under".
They are not required to be original, just to think like everyone else, taking
their cue from international bodies like the World Bank, the International
Monetary Fund or the World Trade Organisation.
Far from
indulging in original, critical thought, rightwing intellectuals become
remarkably pragmatic, echoing the advertising slogans that flood the world's
markets. In exchange for a place in the sun and the support of certain media and
governments, they cast off their critical imagination and any form of
self-criticism and espouse the new, free market creed.
IV. Blind
seers
The problem is
not why the global economy is inevitable, but why almost everyone agrees that it
is. Just as the economy is becoming increasingly global, so is culture and
information. How are we to prevent vast media and communications companies like
CNN or News Corporation, Microsoft or AT&T, from spinning their worldwide
web? In today's world economy the major corporations are essentially media
enterprises, holding up a huge mirror to show us what society should be, not
what it is. To paraphrase Régis Debray, what is visible is real and consequently
true (1). That, by the way, is one of the tenets of rightwing dogma. Debray also
explains that the centre of gravity of news has shifted from the written word to
visual effects, from recorded to live broadcasts, from signs to pictures.
To retain their
legitimacy, today's rightwing intellectuals must fulfil their role in a visual
era, opting for what is immediate and direct, switching from signs to images,
from thought to TV commentary.
V. Future
past
In Mexico,
leftwing intellectuals are very influential. Their crime is that they get in the
way. Well, one of their crimes, because they also support the Zapatistas in
their struggle: "The Zapatista uprising heralds the start of a new era in which
native movements will emerge as players in the fight against the neoliberal
global economy" (2). But we are neither unique nor perfect. Just look at the
natives of Ecuador and Chile, and the demonstrations in Seattle, Washington,
Prague - and those that will follow. We are just one of the pictures that deform
the giant screen of the world economy.
The prince has
consequently issued orders: "Attack them! I shall supply the army and media. You
come up with the ideas". So rightwing intellectuals spend their time insulting
their leftwing counterparts, and because of the Zapatista movement's
international impact, they are now busy rewriting our story to suit the demands
of the prince.
VI. Neoliberal
fascists
In one of his
books Umberto Eco provides some pointers as to why fascism is still latent (3).
He starts by warning us that fascism is a diffuse form of totalitarianism, then
defines its characteristics: refusal of the advance of knowledge, disregard of
rational principles, distrust of culture, fear of difference, racism, individual
or social frustration, xenophobia, aristocratic elitism, machismo, individual
sacrifice for the benefit of the cause, televised populism and use of Newspeak
with its limited words and rudimentary syntax.
These are the
values that rightwing intellectuals defend. Take another look at the giant
screen. All that grey is a response to disorder, reflected in demands for law
and order from all around us. But is Europe once more the prey of fascism? We
may well see skinheads, with their swastikas, on the screen, but the commentator
is quick to reassure us that they are only minority groups, already under
control. But it may also take other, more sinister forms (see the articles by
Christian Semler and Brigitte Pätzold in this issue).
After the fall
of the Berlin wall both sides of the political spectrum in Europe rushed to
occupy the centre. This was all too obvious with the traditional left, but it
was also the case with the far right (4). It went out of its way to acquire a
new image, well removed from its violent, authoritarian past, enthusiastically
espousing neoliberal dogma.
VII. Sceptically
hopeful
The task of
progressive thinkers - to remain sceptically hopeful - is not an easy one. They
have understood how things work and, noblesse oblige, they must reveal what they
know, dissect it, denounce it and pass it on to others. But to do this, they
must also confront neoliberal dogma, backed by the media, banks, major
corporations, army and police.
What is more, we
live in a visual age - and so, to their considerable disadvantage, progressive
thinkers must fight the power of the image with nothing but words. But their
scepticism will get them out of that trap, and if they are equally sceptical in
their critical analysis, they will be able to see through the virtual beauty to
the real misery it conceals. So perhaps there is reason to hope.
There is a story
that when Michelangelo sculpted his statue of David, he had to work on a
"second-hand" piece of marble that already had holes in it. It is a mark of his
talent that he was able to create a figure that took account of these
limitations. The world we want to transform has already been worked on by
history and is largely hollow. We must nevertheless be inventive enough to
change it and build a new world.
Take care and do
not forget that ideas are also weapons.
* Leader of the
Zapatista National Liberation Army, Chiapas, Mexico (excerpted from "La droite
intellectuelle et le fascisme libéral" which appeared Le Monde diplomatique in
French in August 2000; the full version of this text is available on our
internet site in French, as is a longer version in Spanish)
Notes:
1. Croire, voir,
faire, Odile Jacob, Paris, 1999.
2. Yvon Le Bot,
"Los indígenas contra el neoliberalismo", La Jornada, 6 March 2000.
3. Umberto Eco,
Cinque scritti morali, Bompiani, Milan, 1997.
4. See Emiliano
Fruta, "La nueva derecha europea", and Hernán R. Moheno, "Más allá de la vieja
izquierda y la nueva derecha", in Urbi et Orbi, Itam, Mexico, April 2000.
Translated by
Harry Forster
ALL RIGHTS
RESERVED © 1997-2000 Le Monde diplomatique
| eGroups Sponsor |
|