Beppe Grillo's Blog

The intimidatory adverb

I will not be intimidated!
(1:34)

It was Piercamillo Davigo who said it years ago. In Italy a prohibition always needs to be reinforced to be taken seriously. The simple, “smoking is forbidden” is ignored, it’s almost a kind invitation. What’s needed is the intimidatory adverb: “it’s absolutely forbidden to smoke” to attract attention. The utility bills that come into our homes have become threats the violent language of which, even a hardened criminal would take care not to use: “To be paid undelayably before …” “Forced execution … “. In the Equitalia letter the intimidation is even shown clearly, and explicitly: @This notification has the value of an INTIMIDATION to fulfil the obligation ….”.
Threats are followed by actions that have the objective of crushing every resistance by the person who does not fulfil the obligations. If you don’t pay the water bill or the electricity? They confiscate the house from you! You don’t want to pay the last penny of the unpaid licence fee for Minzolini’s TV and feel that you are cuckolded over and over again? You will have your car taken from you. The framework is the same as the “pizzo” {mafia extortion}. If you don’t pay everything straight away, they slash your tyres. The intimidatory language accompanied by disproportionate sanctions is the only possible relationship between the State and the citizens. The more a State is weak, the louder you have to shout. The mafia, in as much as it is credible, does not make threats, but simple requests. At least it safeguards the niceties.
The Italian however is accustomed to everything. He would even survive a nuclear holocaust accompanied by a tsunami and the simultaneous eruption of Vesuvius, Etna and Stromboli. Thus he does not let himself be intimidated. If he has to, he pays, but only if he has his back to the wall. Otherwise he throws it in the bin. Not even a letter with a sequence of outrageous adverbs like undelayably, anastatically, obligatorily, contentiously and cannibalescally, would alarm him. He is used to it and he doesn’t care.
The Italian is naturally symmetrical. The more the prohibition is intimidatory, the more he does the opposite. A sign saying “Absolute prohibition on tipping” placed in a meadow is the best way of creating a tip out of nothing. A sign saying “It is forbidden for anyone to collect porcini mushrooms on this property” will set off a mass of mushroom collectors never seen at your house. The symmetry of the Italian can however be exploited with the contrary intimidation. Signs saying “Smoking is obligatory in this room” or “It’s obligatory to make your dogs shit on the pavement” would produce the opposite effect: no one would ever smoke again and the dogs would all become constipated.

Berluscoma 2010 (DVD)
The sunset of the Second Republic as told by Marco Travaglio
Buy your copy today.

Comments

I know, Travaglio and Grillo repeatedly wrote that PD and PDL are two peas in a pod. Only an L makes PD and PDL distinguishable. I tended not to agree with them. I thought it was their cynicism talking. But yesterday I realized that my tendency was only wishful thinking. After I read D'Alema and Fassino's comments on the FIAT workers' issues, I thought I had misread. No way! I thought. They sided against the workers? I re-read their comments. Yup, D'Alema and Fassino had sided with the Marchionne-Bonanni-Sacconi gang. PD and PDL? Two peas in a pod. More or less like Republicans and Democrats in the United States.

So, what's going on? There is political, social, cultural and economic harmonization process going on and part of this process is to make unions as irrelevant as they are in North America. Gelmini's reform of universities and education in general also takes part of this harmonization with the American education system. In the meantime, Italian TV viewers are getting culturally brainwashed by American soap-operas, reality shows, game shows, movies and Italian being Anglosized.

And where does D'Alema and Fassino and the rest of the PD fit into all of the above? They align and merge with the neo-conservative idealogy championing democracy and capitalism, the idealogy that pushed the U.S. invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan dragging into war most of the European countries. The democracy envisioned, if at all possible, is the two-party system. Thus the PD has abandoned all pretensions of being a "leftist" party. Taking sides with the bosses signalled the intention to be part of of this harmonization process. Metaphorically, the PD has given itself the role that Malcom X called "the house negro."

Here is how Malcolm X describes "house negro": "....back during slavery. There was two kinds of slaves. There was the house Negro and the field Negro. The house negroes lived in the house with master, they dressed pretty good, they ate good...They lived in the attic or basement, but still they lived near the master... they loved the master's house more than the master did. The house negro, if the master said , "We got a good house here," the house Negro would say, Yeah, we got a good house here." whenever the master said "we" he said "we"...

...and if you came to the house Negro and said, "Let's run away, let's escape, let's separate," Man, you crazy. what you mean, separate? Where is there a better house than this? where can I wear better clothes than this? Where can I eat better food than this?" That was that house Negro. In those days he was called a "house nigger." And that's what we call him today, because we've still got some house niggers running around here." Like, one might say, like D'Alema and Fassino.

Posted by: Louis Pacella | January 1, 2011 02:41 AM