Although classified as a Neorealist, Fellini defies this label more so than he confirms it. This is because his best accomplishments stem from the unconventional aspects of his films. Guest post by Lorenzo Vidali.

Rooted in deep philosophical disagreement with Neorealism, Fellini chooses to wander into dreams and fantasy rather than focusing on a concrete, historically based narrative, saying:

I’m a liar, but an honest one [Fellini, Fellini on Fellini, p. 49].

In other words, the literal content of his films is historically false, but they allude to intangible meanings that are in and of themselves true. Thus, he abandons practical realism for a metaphysical one, using unorthodox technique to address spiritual realities instead of socioeconomic conditions. In his book Fellini on Fellini, he writes:

Realism is a bad word. In a certain sense everything is realistic. I see no dividing line between imagination and reality. I see a great deal of reality in imagination. Realism is neither a tight enclosure nor a one-dimensional panorama. A landscape, for instance, has a number of layers, and the deepest, which only poetic language can reveal, is not the least real. What I want to show beyond the outer surface of things is what people call ‘unreal.’ [p. 152]

His work has expanded the genre from simply (according to contemporary French critics) “showing that unjust and perverted social structures threaten to warp and pervert the essential and internal human values,” to detailing the psychological struggle of individuals who strive for human connection in a lonely world [Liehm, Neorealism is like... p. 135].  Nights of Cabiria, therefore, is an expansion of Neorealism’s philosophical reach. It addresses the human condition rather than our social condition:

Our trouble, as modern men, is loneliness, and this begins in the very depths of our being… Only between man and man, I think, can this solitude be broken, only through individual people can a kind of message be passed, making them understand – almost discover – the profound link between one person and the next. [Fellini, Fellini on Fellini, p. 61]

This theme, virtually ubiquitous throughout all his films, has a more specific manifestation in Cabiria (1956), which focuses on the plight of women. That is, it shows them playing an important role in “calling others to spirituality and love” [Fellini, Fellini on Fellini, p. 62]. Using episodic structure, character motifs, open endings, and borrowing from surrealist aesthetics, Fellini delves deeper into psychological realm of the human condition, as Nights of Cabiria displays the emotional struggle of a woman who resiliently strives for love and connection against all odds.

It is important, as a start, to recognize the commonalities between Fellini and Neorealism proper, one of which is the dominance of micro-action over macro-action [Bazin, Cabiria: The Voyage to the End of Neorealism, p. 90]. Just like Bitter Rice (dir. Giuseppe De Santis, 1950) and Sciuscia (dir. Vittorio De Sica, 1947), Cabiria places priority on individual episodes within the story; but unlike the others it lends more emphasis to “phenomenological description of the characters” than to causality [Bazin, "Cabiria: The Voyage to the End of Neorealism," p. 90]. In Sciuscia, for example, we follow the two boys as their unfortunate encounter with the robbers leads to their imprisonment, and eventually, Giuseppe’s death. Under Fellini’s direction, however, Cabiria endures a series of distinct misadventures, which are linked through thematic parallels rather than a causal chain. In the beginning, Giorgio deceives Cabiria, stealing her purse and leaving her to drown. After being saved by a group of boys, her humiliation leads to anger, erasing any gratitude for having been saved.

Indeed, aggression as a concealment for an injured ego remains one of Cabiria’s main character traits, which ties the disjointed episodes together [Murray, Fellini the Artist, p. 100].

When she arrives at her typical “night shift” location, her anger breaks out again, this time against an older prostitute named Matilda. The source of her rage (bitter disappointment) is just as important a motif as the anger itself. In each stage of the film, Cabiria’s expectations are violated, first by Giorgio.

“…the heroine is finally driven to reveal the extent of her hurt: ‘Why did he do it?’ she asks. ‘Why? I gave him everything. Why would he shove me in the river for a mere forty thousand lire? I loved him” [Murray, Fellini the Artist, p. 101].

Next in line to disappoint is a well-known movie star, who after an intense argument with his attractive mistress, summons Cabiria to divert himself for the evening. Intoxicated by her temporary status (by proxy), the protagonist gloats to herself, imagining the jealousy of her rival prostitutes when they discover who she has been with. When they return from the nightclub to the actor’s lavish mansion, we witness a brief moment of connection as they eat and talk about Beethoven’s fifth symphony. Even after receiving an autographed picture as proof of the evening, Cabiria’s desire to gloat is momentarily superseded by a glimmer of hope that her rapport with the actor could grow; but it is immediately quashed when his blonde lover returns. Cabiria must hide in the bathroom, where she spends the night with a puppy as her only consolation: a harsh return to her low and lonely condition.

Anger and disappointment continue to define her experience when she and her companions visit the Madonna to confess their sins in exchange for forgiveness, renewal, and the power to change. At first, her skepticism causes her to brush off the entire ceremony; but hope inevitably lures her in. The surrounding fervor brings the film to its most dramatic point yet, as Cabiria, swept up by her surroundings, weeps for forgiveness and relief along with the other worshippers. Outside the church, disappointment once again leads to anger. Intoxicated with alcohol, and wanting for diving intervention she screams:

We haven’t changed!

These patterns continue and intensify as the story progresses. Under hypnosis she suffers letdown and humiliation, reacting with anger. Her first encounters with Oscar are subdued by cynical distrust, followed by, hope, joy, love, and intense relief, once again to be followed by tragic disappointment when Oscar robs her as Giorgio did. In all instances, Fellini manages to connect episodes using emotional motifs instead of causality [Stubbs, Federico Fellini as Auteur, p. 55]. Therefore, he is able to address the psychology of oppression instead of the social structures responsible. The film depends on an emotional cycle for this to work: cynicism, hope, joy, disappointment, anger. Unlike the beginning, however, the ending is more uplifting, as Cabiria is cheered up by a lively band of young musicians, a testament to her willingness to soldier on and continue her search for happiness.

For a Neorealist film, this ending is atypical and serves a unique function. As stated by Rosselini, Neorealism is a moral position that governs the content and aesthetics of a film to deliver a message [Liehm, Neorealism is like ..., p. 129].

Fellini disagrees: “I never make moral judgments. I’m not qualified to do so. I am not a censor, a priest or a politician” [Fellini, Fellini on Fellini, p. 51].

Consequently, the ending of Nights of Cabiria differs from traditional Neorealist films in a way that reflects this discord. In Sciuscia, Giuseppe dies, illuminating the futility of vengeance. In Bitter Rice, Silvana also dies, showing the ultimate result of betrayal. In Cabiria, the last shot is her smiling. She has no money, no place to go, and the future is uncertain. In the spirit of showing rather than telling, Fellini used this ending to underscore the resilience of Cabiria’s search for love and happiness; but he does not try to state the result of this persistence. He only shows it continues to exist.

It is important to note that Fellini could not have accomplished this without capable talent. If not for the talents of Giulietta Masina, the emotional affect of the film could not have been achieved:

Miss Masina gives a remarkable performance, capturing shades of pain and happiness that are rarely approached on the screen. Her pathos is almost unbearable [Fava, The Films of Federico Fellini, p. 96].

Nonetheless, Fellini does employ strategies independent of actor performance, one of which is defamiliarization.

One goal of conventional Neorealist films is to bring the spectator closer to reality through a disclosure of detail that familiarizes the audience with a particular setting or context [Liehm, Neorealism is like ..., p. 132]. Fellini, on the other hand, employs a kind of “visual decadence” that promotes new, unfamiliar perspectives [Stuffs, Federico Fellini as Auteur, p. 55]. He does this in two ways: one, as mentioned before, is the separation of plot into distinct episodes that could very easily be shuffled to produce the same overall affect. Another, as exemplified by the ending of Cabiria, harkens back to surrealism.

After Cabiria’s final fit of despair in the face of Oscar’s betrayal, she wanders out of the woods onto a lonely road, despondent and overwhelmed. As she walks, a group of young musicians parade down the road past her, whistling and singing cheerfully. In the final shot, Cabiria nearly breaks the fourth wall as she cannot help but absorb the joy of those around her, and she smiles toward the audience. The appearance of the musicians is unwarranted, reminiscent of random apparitions in our dreams. They defy pragmatic realism, but serve a meaningful purpose in highlighting the persistence of Cabiria’s will to happiness.

A peculiar paradox, however, is Fellini’s own opinion on the moral power of avoiding a didactic morality in the ending of his films.

I feel that a film is the more moral if it doesn’t offer the audience the solution found by the character whose story is told. In other words, the man who has just seen a character sorting out his problems, or becoming good when he started off bad, finds himself in a much more comfortable situation… My films, on the contrary give the audience a very exact responsibility. For instance, they must decide what Cabiria’s end is going to be. Her fate is in the hands of each one of us. If the film has moved us, and troubled us, we must immediately begin to have new relationships with our neighbors. This must start the first time we meet our fiends or our wife, since anyone may be Cabiria – that is a victim [Fellini, Fellini on Fellini, p. 150].

In sum, Fellini employs episodic structure, emotional motifs, open endings, and a flamboyant surrealist visual style to touch upon the intangible aspects of the human condition: suffering, longing, love, and striving.

In order to clarify his framing of the female role, however, it is important to briefly illustrate the predominant role of male characters, who themselves chase after something. Giorgio and Oscar clearly pursue money. The wealthy actor, in his boredom and disillusionment, expresses the futility of wealth, which cannot quench his thirst for human connection. He finds a brief moment of solace with Cabiria, but in his own pursuit, he casts her aside in search of what she also is looking for, connection with a lover. In the church, all characters, male and female yearn for redemption and change.

Inevitably, the social aspect of Neorealism comes into play, as it is Cabiria’s low social status that ensures her repeated disappointment, because the men in her life continually cast her aside in search of their own version of fulfillment. Therefore, Nights of Cabiria does examine social structures, but with an emphasis on their psychological effects. In doing so it uses Cabiria as an example of women’s yearning for commitment in a society that breeds a seemingly unshakable restlessness among men, who are rarely content with their relationships, or are blinded by their pursuit of wealth. Nevertheless, the film does not propose change or impose a moral, rather it attempts to show the mental condition of humanity through the struggles of women.

Nights of Cabiria is not a study of one who develops in a certain moral direction – toward either good or evil – but of one who, in spite of constant disillusionment, finds the strength to declare: ‘Yes – I will go on. For it is better to smile than to weep, better to live than to die.’ Far from being merely a picture featuring another ‘whore with a heart of gold,’ Nights of Cabiria has a theme of universal significance [Murray, Fellini the Artist, p. 109].

Although Fellini rejects his Neorealist label, his contribution to the genre has expanded its ideological reach, giving it more power to contend with the dominant ideological machine of Hollywood. Rather than create characters who are defined by the conditions around them, Fellini creates characters who them selves represent a certain social condition [Bondanella, The Break with Neorealism: Fellini, p. 115].

As arguably one of the greatest directors in Cinema, Fellini both challenged and contributed to Neorealism by making a film that addresses many forms of reality, both spiritual and material. He discarded pragmatic realism in the pursuit of a metaphysical realism that penetrated far deeper into the human condition than the most “real” of traditional Neorealist motion pictures.

Confer:

1. Bazin, Andre. “Cabiria: The Voyage to the End of Neorealism,” What is Cinema? Volume II. Berkely: University of California Press, 1971, 90.

2. Bondanella, Peter. “The Break with Neorealism: Fellini,” Italian Cinema: From Neorealism to the Present. Continuum: New York, 1997. 115.

3. Fava, Claudio G. Aldo Vigano. The Films of Federico Fellini. Citadel Press, 1981. 96.

4. Fellini, Federico. Fellini on Fellini. Zurich: Delacorte Press, 1974. 49, 51, 61, 62, 150, 152.

5. Liem, Mira. “Neorealism is like…” in Passion and Defiance” film in Italy from 1942 to the Present. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1984. 129, 132, 135.

6. Murray, Edward. Fellini the Artist. New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing, 1976. 100, 101, 109.

7. Stubbs, John C. Federico Fellini as Auteur. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2006. 55.

There is nothing worse in this world than an enslaved man who naively believes himself free, except, perhaps, trying to explain to that same man his predicament. You can lay truth after truth before his feet. You can qualify your every position with cold hard irrefutable data. You can plead and scream and raise veritable hell, but before he will ever listen, he must first become aware of his own dire circumstances. As long as he views himself as “safe and secure”, as long as he imagines his chains to be wings, he will see no reason to question the validity of the world around him, and he will certainly never invest himself into changing his own deluded destiny.

Unfortunately, there are many such men crawling and scraping about here in what was once a land graced with a self sufficient and independently minded public majority. The great lie that has been perpetuated in this country over the past several decades is that we can defer our responsibilities of vigilance and place our well being and our futures into the hands of others for the sake of “collective efficiency”, or leisure. We have been conditioned to live in a state of constant indifference, a society which prizes compromise over principle and steadfast resolve. Those who refuse to compromise that which is honorable for the sake of ease and comfort are indicted as “extremist” or even criminal. The idea of personal revolution is treated with discomfort, and all we claim to stand for becomes muddled in a fog of inaction and cynicism. As Americans, we have forgotten what it means to earn and protect our own freedoms. We have forgotten that in liberty, there are standards that must be defended.

This, however, does not mean we cannot yet again remember ourselves. The desire for freedom is as inborn and natural as our own heartbeat, as our own breath. It is instinct. It cannot be erased from within, only oppressed from without. The tide has always been against tyranny, always, though we may find that hard to believe. If liberty was not ingrained into our very DNA, humanity would have succumbed to bondage and self destructed long ago. This is not the case. Stretching under the surface of our superficial force-fed mainstream culture are the roots of something real, and honest. Simmering beneath our so called “civilized” veneer, many Americans are finally rediscovering their wild and defiant origins. In the recent past we have been taught to feel ashamed of our rebelliousness. Now, we are learning to hold it quite dear.

For those of us who are awake, and for those who are on the verge of understanding, certain rules come into play that strengthen our stance and shield us from folly. Liberty is not a self perpetuating social condition. It requires guidelines, and effort, and sacrifice. Liberty will not survive without our willingness to maintain it. If you are not ready and willing to fight for your own independence, then you are not truly free.

Let’s examine some of the inherent laws and guidelines of free will and free action that will allow us to not only win back our self determination, but to keep it for generations to come. You want liberty? This is what it takes…

Rule #1: Never Take Anything For Granted

A lot of people today seem to have serious issues with expectation and assumption; what we in the alternative media often refer to as “normalcy bias”. We have grown used to the idea of abundance and relative safety. So much so, that we fail to notice when our abundance and safety begin to disappear. We assume that the condition of the world today will be the condition of the world tomorrow, and for all time. In the U.S., we have even come to expect not only that our prosperity and our freedom are inevitable, but that they will also increase exponentially with each passing generation. This is a relatively new and narrow cultural mindset likely caused by the explosion in industrial growth after WWII which seemed to erase all memory of the Great Depression in our society, leaving us with the belief that surely, our circumstances would never become so desperate again.

Those who are truly independent realize that nations, no matter how affluent, can self destruct at a moment’s notice, especially when they fail to recognize their own weaknesses and confront their own demons. Never suppose that that which is good and just will remain without your own initiative. Never wait for others to fix those problems which you could just as easily solve yourself. Never expect that freedoms won cannot also be easily lost. Always prepare for the worst outcome, and strive for the best outcome.

Rule #2: Educate Yourself

Never become a useful idiot, or a waste of oxygen. Being a part of the herd is nothing to be proud of. Strive for knowledge, and thirst for the truth every moment of every day. Many of the things we deem “important” in modern society are in the grand scheme hollow attempts to fill our lives with distraction, only wasting time until we finally bite the dust filled with regret. Pretending to further the depth of one’s life is not the same as actually doing so. I can’t think of anything more horrifying than becoming a man who rushes around frantically every waking moment, but ultimately accomplishes nothing.

Do not assume that you already have a tangible grasp of the truth, especially if all your knowledge has been handed to you. Instead, research that knowledge for yourself. Put that which you have been taught to the test. Only in this way will you finally learn. Expand your horizons. Learn something useful. Remove unnecessary distractions for at least part of your day and focus on increasing your awareness of the environment you live in. There are very few things in this world more important than this, and self education should take precedence over everything else except your family. “Lack of time” is no excuse for ignorance. Make time! The ignorant are led. The knowledgeable lead themselves.

Rule #3: Don’t Be A Pansy

Liberty is not for the faint of heart. Emotional courage is paramount to freedom, and it can be expressed to incredible effect by even the most unlikely heroes. I’ve seen children with more courage and tenacity than some full grown men.

If one recognizes the gravity of the situation we face as a people, if one understands the considerable danger involved in the fall of a Republic to the depths of fear and autocracy, but still does nothing, that person has not only failed the world, he has also failed himself. “Making waves”, or drawing the ire of “authority”, is the least of our worries. If you have utilized an objective eye, and know you are right in your position, then there is no reason to fear criticism from anyone.

Sociopolitical action, nonconformity, noncompliance, and self defense, are unavoidable aspects of a society that wishes to maintain its freedoms. There is no way around it. If you are not willing to stick your neck out and expose yourself to risk, you remove all chance of possible gain. If you are a self proclaimed activist that refuses to sacrifice, that refuses to struggle, then you have failed before you even began. Talk must lead to balanced action. Never thumb your nose at the devil without being ready to trade punches as well, or all is lost.

Rule #4: Stop Waiting For Others To Tell You What To Do

Independent people not only consider and implement the solutions of others, they also work on their own. Complaints abound lately in the Liberty Movement;

“When is someone going to do something!? What are YOU going to do about our predicament!?”

This is the question of a slave, not a free man. A free man asks, “What am I going to do about this predicament? What is MY solution to the problem?” Therein is the key to liberty; decentralized leadership and movements based on fluidity and spontaneity of action, instead of a great mass of people standing around stiffly waiting for orders on high, or a self styled messiah to engineer their world view. As soon as you place your very initiative under the control of others, you have lost the fight. Always consider the solid strategies of intelligent people, and adopt them if they are useful, but do not remain idle because you are too frightened to exert the effort to solve problems bigger than yourself. Spectators only witness history, they do not make history.

Rule #5: Cast Off What Is Unnecessary, Keep What Is Effective

Yes, I stole this rule from Bruce Lee, but it is just as applicable to social movements and economic stability as it is to the martial arts. Invasive debt creation, for instance, is a tool for subversion, and no people forced to bear the burden of liabilities they can never repay is free. Therefore, exorbitant debt must be avoided, or cast off completely.

In our personal lives, how many useless goods do we accumulate on a daily basis, instead of useful items that we may one day desperately need? How much of our life is spent accumulating garbage in order to keep up with “socially acceptable” levels of consumer behavior? How many of us cling to careers we hate in order to service our needless consumption? The ability to prioritize must become a virtue once again, and, we all need to shut off the cable television…

This rule also applies to governments. If a government no longer fulfills its sworn duties to the people, and no longer serves the purposes to which it was originally intended, then it too must be cast off and replaced with one that does serve the people, or, it must be forced to return to its inherent foundations. Today, this kind of talk is often referred to as “extremism”, or insurgency, no matter how correct it might be, which brings us to our next rule…

Rule #6: Ignore Establishment Labels

Tactical name calling is only effective if we actually care what other people think of us. Labels like “homegrown terrorist”, “extremist”, “doomer”, or “conspiracy theorist”, are designed to shame people into self censorship. That is to say, they pigeonhole movements and their participants into categories of public shame, causing said movements to fear social reprisal. They are also meant to forcefully assign “outsider” or “fringe” status to particular political positions in order to marginalize and weaken the resolve of those who hold them. Never mind that almost every powerful and honorable cultural movement in history once started out as “fringe”.

Early in our lives, we are taught that it is far better to be accepted, and to avoid standing out, even at the expense of our individualism. Unfortunately, many adults never outgrow this childish belief, and thus become vulnerable to tactics as absurd as simple ridicule. At bottom, being slandered by a thieving bureaucracy infested with soulless parasites bent on centralization at the expense of innocent human life is a bit laughable (this goes for you too, SPLC). Globalists, along with their media cronies and their think-tank sock puppets, will say ANYTHING to get what they want. Empty words and false labels cannot stop the truth, or a movement driven by the truth.

Rule #7: Cynicism Is The Path To Defeat

It is good to be critical, but not to the point of nihilism. America’s past is riddled with mistakes, bad judgments, horrible crimes, and downright stupidity; that doesn’t mean that the principles on which this country was founded are any less vital. We hear often from cynics that humanity has become too stupid and complacent to do what is right. However, stupidity and complacency are not inherent qualities. That’s an elitist fantasy with no basis in fact. Stupidity and complacency are learned behaviors, and they can be unlearned. What IS inherent is our ability to choose what path we will take. For adherents of liberty, we need only remind people that they have this choice. We can whine and cry all day long about how nobody pays attention and how there is no hope, or, we can exhaust all options before throwing in the proverbial towel. We don’t need to “like” society the way it is, but we do need to recognize the underlying potential of all people to become something much more than what they currently are (I can’t stand blind ignorance either, but I’m certainly not ready to accept it as a fact of American life). Remember, no fight is over until it is over.

Rule #8: True Authority Is Derived From Respect That Is Earned, Not Bought, Or Taken

A corrupt politician is just a criminal conman in a nice suit. A law enforcement officer who refuses to follow Constitutional Law is just a petty little tyrant in a black uniform. An economist who knowingly skews data to fit his own political bias or to serve the political biases of men above him is just a liar or an inept buffoon with an embossed piece of paper from an expensive university. A lab scientist or doctor who flubs experimentation to support the interests of the corporate world rather than the needs of the public is just a quack in a white coat. All too often, though, we find ourselves taking these cretins seriously all because they talk the talk and wear the costume. They are just people, and if they cannot do their jobs honestly, then they are useless people, who deserve our disdain, not our respect. We should never allow such men to wield positions of authority over us.

Rule #9: Take It Personally

When someone tries to steal from you, hurt you, or enslave you, unless you are some kind of nut, you take it pretty personally, right? Why should it be any different when a government commits the same grievances? Americans should be furious over the destruction of their economy, their currency, their infrastructure, and their Constitutional freedoms! They should be enraged over the endless wars overseas that are bankrupting the nation. They should be bellowing to the rooftops over the cooption of their political system by a slimy brood of corporate bankers. Is this “extremist” behavior? Who cares!? If your anger is not visible then it is not worth a damn. Don’t just get active, get emotional! This is about your life, and the lives of those you love. That’s not to say that we should take out our frustrations randomly and haphazardly, but if we can’t at least make known our anger over the misdeeds of government, then what the hell is the point of calling ourselves free?

Rule #10: You Are The First And Last Line Of Defense

Like it our not, this is our job. We have inherited a country on the verge of disaster, and we are tasked with cleaning it up, otherwise, there will be little left to pass on. We do not get to bask in illusory prosperity for the rest of our days. We do not get to feed off the entitlement program trough until we are fat and contented. We are not going to retain our rights without blood, sweat, and tears. We will not be building magical floating cities in the clouds or skyscrapers on Mars. We will NOT be remembered fondly as members of some fantastical “golden era”.

We have been thrust into the muck and the mire. We are being molded as the lost children of an age better forgotten. We have been slapped in the face with a dilemma so volatile and so incredible it may one day be called the greatest crisis of all time. We have drawn the short straw.

This could be viewed as some terrible doom. It could be held as a star crossed act of ferocious fate. We could fall to our knees and lament with despair, overcome with woe at our unbearable lot. But, this would be in violation of rule #3, and nobody wants to be a sobbing pansy. On the contrary, every “bad luck generation” is only so if they refuse to see the great fortune at their fingertips; if they refuse to seize the moment and conquer the giants of their day. The greater the hardship, the greater the enemy, the greater the heroes. We are faced with possibly the most unrelenting antagonists and the most treacherous obstacles in recent memory, or even distant memory. In the same spark of confrontation, we are also presented with unparalleled opportunity to change the course of the world forever. Whether or not we succeed, is entirely up to us.

You can contact Brandon Smith at: brandon@alt-market.com.

By Shamus Cooke

01 July, 2009 “Information Clearing House” — There should be no doubts about the U.S.’ decisive role behind the now-crumbling military coup in Honduras. As commander and chief of the U.S. armed forces, the blame for this intervention lies solely on President Obama.

The White House, however, would like you to believe that they “attempted to convince the Honduran military not to intervene.”

Rubbish.

When it comes to the Honduran military, the U.S. government needn’t ask permission for anything. The decades long relationship between the two institutions is one of dependence — Honduras’ military has long been financed and trained by the U.S. The New York Times explains:

“The two nations have long had a close military relationship, with an American military task force stationed at a Honduran air base about 50 miles northwest of Tegucigalpa. The unit focuses on training Honduran military forces, counternarcotics operations, search and rescue, and disaster relief missions throughout Central America.” (June 28, 2009)

And from Latin American expert Eva Gollinger:

“The US Military Group in Honduras trains around 300 Honduran soldiers every year, provides more than $500,000 annually to the Honduran Armed Forces and additionally provides $1.4 million for a military education and exchange program for around 300 more Honduran soldiers every year.”

This year U.S. aide to Honduras was $43 million.

It is utterly unimaginable that the Honduran military would act against the wishes of the hemisphere’s military and economic superpower.

In fact, the chief military leader of the Honduran coup — Joint Chief of Staff Romeo Orlando Vasquez Velasquez — lived and was trained at the notorious School of Americas (SOA), a U.S. military base that trains Latin American military officers to act in the best interests of United State’s corporations. It is no coincidence that another coup leader — Air Force head Gen. Luis Javier Prince Suazo — is also an SOA graduate.

When Honduran President Manuel Zelaya realized that Vasquez was acting against him, he was fired — the rest of the military chiefs resigned in protest; and the coup was on.

The highly conservative Honduran Supreme Court then gave the military the “legal” cover it needed to pursue the coup, a fact the U.S. media uses to justify the events.

The reason for the coup lies in President Zelaya’s recent foreign policy shift — away from the United States towards Venezuela and the rest of Latin America. This turn was the result of the United States largely ignoring Honduras, after a long lasting, villainous relationship had ended: the U.S. had, for years, funneled large amounts of cash and arms to the Honduran government to kill the regions political leftists, the high point being the regions turbulent 1980’s.

After Zelaya was elected in 2006 (he still has one year left in his term), he promised to shift Honduras’ politics toward helping the poorer layers. He realized that he could not achieve any of his promises with the scant amount of aide from the U.S. and looked instead to the Latin American trade association, ALBA. Zelaya explained:

“I have been looking for projects from the World Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank, Europe and I have received very moderate offers … that forces us to find other forms of financing like ALBA.” ( Reuters, April 26,2008 )

The U.S. government did not like this move, since it prefers U.S. banks to dominate the economies of Latin American countries. The New York Times confirms:

“…[Washington’s] relations with Mr. Zelaya…had recently turned colder because of the inclusion of Honduras in the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas, or ALBA, a leftist political alliance led by Venezuela.” (June 28, 2009)

Nearly all of the U.S. media’s writing about the Honduran coup is littered with negative references to Hugo Chavez, the “socialist project,” and other buzzwords meant to influence the reader toward acceptance of the coup.

For example:

“…[Zelaya] has the support of labor unions and the poor. But the middle class and the wealthy business community fear he wants to introduce Mr. Chávez’s brand of socialist populism into the country, one of Latin America’s poorest.” (New York Times, June 28, 2009)

Obama himself does nothing to condemn the coup. Yes, he is “deeply concerned” about the events in Honduras, but his vague comments about “dialogue” and respecting “legal procedures” is full of loopholes — big enough for a coup to squeeze through.

If Obama immediately refused to recognize the newly installed coup government in Honduras, while threatening to withdraw U.S. military and financial aide — along with the U.S. ambassador — the coup would dissolve in seconds. Strong actions like these, however, were completely absent.

Eva Gollinger comments:

“I think a clear coup d’etat against a democratic government that also happens to be a major dependent on U.S. economic and political aid should provoke a more firm and concise statement by the US Government.”

Such a statement did come not only from the General Assembly of the United Nations, but from the formerly U.S.-dominated Organization of American States (OAS). Both organizations are refusing to recognize the new coup government in Honduras and are demanding the return of Zelaya. This is a big blow to Washington, who in better times could rely on the OAS and U.N. to turn a blind eye to a U.S.-sponsored coup, such as the one in Haiti in 2004.

Now, however, the OAS has largely broken from the U.S. stranglehold, emboldened by the independent path taken by numerous Latin American countries, though especially Venezuela.

And this is the broader motive for the coup. The U.S. banks and other corporations that once dominated Latin America are being quickly pushed aside, so that governments may use their country’s wealth for social services and real economic development — not foreign for-profit plunder.

The U.S. coup attempt in Honduras is thus a sign of desperation. It was also a huge gamble. Obama had hoped that the U.N. and OAS would let this one slide. It was also hoped that the Honduran people would be intimidated by martial law and a communications blackout. Neither was the case.

Huge protests have defied the military-ordered curfew. Latin American countries have united in defiance of a tyrannical U.S. policy. It is reported that these happenings are causing splits in the Honduran military, while also a general strike was being prepared by the nation’s trade unions.

In consequence, the coup is likely to crumble, and Obama’s first attempt to re-tame Latin America will have failed. The actions of the U.N. and OAS are striking examples of the shrinking international influence of the U.S., meaning that future interventions — both military and economic — are likely to be more direct to restore U.S. hegemony. Obama’s more-subtle attempts to uphold U.S. “influence” in the world will ultimately require blunter, Bush-like tactics.

If the Honduran coup fails, Obama will eloquently discuss how pleased he is that “democracy was restored” — while refusing to admit that he tried to kill it.

______________
Shamus Cooke is a social service worker, trade unionist, and writer for Workers Action (www.workerscompass.org). He can be reached at shamuscook@yahoo.com.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Luminous Compass has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is Luminous Compass endorsed or sponsored by the originator.

]]> http://aldovidali.com/general/washingtons-coup-attempt-in-honduras/feed 0 http://aldovidali.com/general/lessons-from-the-sandbox http://aldovidali.com/general/lessons-from-the-sandbox#comments Wed, 05 Aug 2009 05:47:22 +0000 admin http://aldovidali.com/?p=1623

A burst of voices and laughter heralds recess. Kids bullet out of the classroom to find their favorite spot on the playground. Katie, Allie, and Sam like the sandbox, but so does Gunner and that’s always a problem. Gunner is territorial, piles up the toys on “his side,” tells Katie, Allie, and Sam what to do, and gets aggressive if they don’t play his game. When he starts throwing sand, the others protest but he keeps at it. Eventually they call the teacher. Now imagine the teacher supporting and even encouraging Gunner. Guest post by Viktoria Vidali.

A Simple Analogy

As simple as it is, this analogy explains in part what is happening on the world arena. A few have taken control of what should be shared with everyone. The distorted values of this minority elite are protected by governments, powerful corporations, and to a large degree sanctioned by religion. This minority owns big media that saturates the population 24/7 with the presumptive rightness of its ideologies, like competitiveness (which discourages people from working together and gaining strength to upset the status quo), materialism (which encourages people to work harder so that they can buy more things and also locks in the false connection between self worth and money), and the law of attraction (which abrogates responsibility).

It [the law of attraction] argues that we attract those things in life, whether it is money, relationships or employment, which we focus on. Suddenly, abused and battered wives or children, the unemployed, the depressed and mentally ill, the illiterate, the lonely, those grieving for lost loved ones, those crushed by poverty, the terminally ill, those fighting with addictions, those suffering from trauma, those trapped in menial and poorly paid jobs, those whose homes are in foreclosure or who are filing for bankruptcy because they cannot pay their medical bills, are to blame for their negativity. The ideology justifies the cruelty of unfettered capitalism, shifting the blame from the power elite to those they oppress. And many of us have internalized this pernicious message, which in times of difficulty leads to personal despair, passivity and disillusionment … The message that we can have everything we want if we dig deep enough inside ourselves, if we truly believe we are exceptional, is pumped out daily over the airwaves in advertisements, through the plot and story lines of television programs and films, and bolstered by the sickeningly cheerful and upbeat banter of well-groomed television hosts. This is the twisted ideological lens through which we view the world. ~ Chris Hedges’ Happiness Consultants Won’t Stop a Depression.

As a result, great numbers of people think and act against their own best interests and wonder why they rarely have the freedom and peace of mind to enjoy the fruits of their labor. Even when they “get the whole picture,” they are often so distracted or overworked that they lack the energy and will to bring about fundamental change.

What’s Fair

Since the World Social Forum came upon the supranational stage in Porto Alegre, Brazil, in 2001, alternatives to a failed system that deprives too many of a decent life have been proposed and in places implemented by the swelling ranks of the poor and marginalized and by all those who understand that there is plenty to go around. What exactly is being demanded? The right to honest work, a living wage, food, clean water, a home, a healthy environment, an education, health care, a responsive self-government, and peace.

They’re demanding what’s fair!

Social movements to actualize these human rights are gaining momentum one by one across South America – Venezuela,* Bolivia, Chile, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Brazil, and Paraguay. They are bringing hope of a better life and renewal to their citizens. At the same time the world’s people are largely getting poorer, we see the biggest concentration of wealth and income in the fewest numbers.** Gunner has demanded and received more of the sandbox and governments are saying this is perfectly fine. Go right ahead, Gunner! You deserve it!

A Personal Question

Many of us are only now seeing the immensity of these global problems and how they affect all of us and are asking ourselves:

Can we personally be truly happy knowing that so many are suffering?

While we should be grateful for the gifts we have received, we must learn to give our energy and resources to work for a better world where every person’s rights are respected. How can we do this? The answer is to act, because we each have something valuable to give. By giving, we renew our vital connection to all members of the human family. The kind of action we initiate and sustain in solidarity with others is open to our own creative imaginations.

_______________________

* For more on Venezuela’s participative democracy, VenezuelaAnalysis.com.

** Confer Political Economics Professor Jack Rasmus’ book: The Trillion Dollar Income Shift – Essays on Income Inequality in America. If you liked this, you might also like: From Global Financial Crisis to Global Recession and a Cross Currents radio interview with Dr. Rasmus.

June 1st 2009, by Hugo Chávez Frías

It is amazing how deep our father Bolivar stirred around in the search of the revolutionary essence; just as he said in “the finding of the mysterious unknown of the free man.” In this huge task he put forward his thoughts before those of the great intellectuals and philosophers of the last two centuries. It is truly amazing how his most advanced ideas form a great slope, whose waters empty into that wonderful river called socialism.

This is exactly what happens with the equality issue. Let’s take a tour of two hundred years to confirm it.

Brazilian thinker Theotonio Dos Santos, in his book Concepto de clases sociales (Concept of social classes, printed by El Perro y la Rana editorial), says:

The representation of bourgeois society as a basic group of individuals who can differentiate into groups must be part of bourgeois ideology (…) This representation expresses exactly the essential interest of the bourgeoisie to hide the class nature of its society and postulate its society as offering equal opportunities to all individuals.

Equality of opportunity, true, but increasingly based on the growing inequality of economic and legal power, as well as material privileges that excessively reproduce the inequality of conditions.

One hundred and twenty years ago, Karl Marx said it in the Critique of the Gotha Program, written in 1875:

Paradoxically, what appears as the end of socialism is, precisely, the integral development of unequalness among men, unequalness of their aspirations and capacities, the unequalness of their personalities. But this personal unequalness will no longer mean a difference of economic power or inequality of material rights or privileges. It can only be extended in an atmosphere of material and economic equality.

And our Bolívar, fifty six years before Marx, pointed out with meridian clearness in Angostura, in 1819:

In my opinion, Legislators, the fundamental principle of our system depends immediately and exclusively on equality established and exercised in Venezuela. (…)Nature makes men unequal in terms of their genius, temperament, force, and characters. Laws correct this difference by giving man a place in society so that education, industry, service, virtue may give him a fictitious equality, properly called political and social equality. The bringing together of all classes in a State is an eminently beneficial inspiration, where diversity multiples in proportion to the propagation of the species. By this single step, cruel discord has been torn out by the roots. How much jealousy, rivalry and hatred have been thus avoided!

These are the reasons why, the more we study the history of ideas, the more we deepen and understand the great thinkers of and for humanity, starting from (Jesus) Christ up to Fidel. This is why, every day, with more strength and obligation, our revolution is more Bolivarian than ever!

Christ, as I have said, was a true socialist thinker. And even more important, he was a consistent socialist fighter up to his last song:

Everything is consummated.

From an old encyclopaedia that I carry with me since my days as lieutenant of the Armoured Batallion Bravos de Apure, during those days when a small group of young patriotic officers of the Army (including myself) started to create the first cells of the Bolivarian Movement, I draw out the following passage:

In times of great internal and external severity, in view of the growing misery of the poor people and the greatest concentration of wealth in few hands, the great prophets appeared and urged the revision of this situation. In 765 BC, Amos, the most ancient and probably the greatest of those prophets, appeared and launched on behalf of Jehovah his curse against the rich people: But I will send a fire upon Judah, and it shall devour the palaces of Jerusalem… because they sold the righteous for silver, and the poor for a pair of shoes; that pant after the dust of the earth on the head of the poor, and turn aside the way of the meek, (Amós, 2, 5/7).

Afterwards it reads as follows:

We have found identical tones in Oseas and, especially in Isaiah: ‘Woe unto them that join house to house, that lay field to field, till there be no place, that they may be placed alone in the midst of the earth! (Is., 5, 8 )

And the Jesus arrived to condemn the rich people. Here you have the Sermon of the Mount:

Blessed be ye poor: for yours is the kingdom of God. Blessed are ye that hunger now: for ye shall be filled. Blessed are ye that weep now: for ye shall laugh. Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man’s sake. Rejoice ye in that day, and leap for joy: for, behold, your reward is great in heaven: for in the like manner did their fathers unto the prophets. But woe unto you that are rich! for ye have received your consolation. Woe unto you that are full! for ye shall hunger. Woe unto you that laugh now! for ye shall mourn and weep. (Luke, 6, 20-25).

For you compatriot, man, woman, youth, who read my Sunday lines, the last day of May I tell you: Let he who has eyes see, and he who has ears, hear!

Capitalism proclaims to the four winds the non-existence of classes nor inequality; since there is an alleged equality of opportunity that guarantees all the enjoyment, privileges, and rights to all the persons on earth, when we know that all its perversity is precisely based on breaking every possible balance between legality and justice. In crisis times, even more, when masks fall, disclosing many capitalists as true mafia bosses. An expensive propaganda campaign has been launched by all the media outlets in order to make believe that our Bolivarian Revolution will deprive you of your car, your apartment, warehouse, arepera [1] and everything you own thanks to your effort and work.

But the truth is that, those who proclaim it are the same ones who have literally hoarded vehicles and speculate barefacedly with the sale and rent of real state. If during the last ten years these oligarchs living in our country have dared to attempt against the sacred right of our people to food, education, and health; it is not surprising that they will likewise attempt against Venezuelans’ right to have property. While we struggle for pulling out the cruel conflict, as Bolívar said, the media outlets at the service of the empire and the most corrupted oligarchical sector of the country promote it in order to, precisely, hide their felonies.

This is why I urge people to be on the revolutionary alert and watchfulness, even those compatriots who – even not being part of our Revolution – suffer because of the overflowing perversity of those who boast about being their defenders and representatives. It is up to us to keep working to establish and practice equality, getting it under the following principle: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs,” a Christian principle that sinks its roots in the most distant but alive primitive Christianity.

Time and the passing of history have demonstrated that there is a maturation process of the people; that the current political, organizational, and ideological maturity is not the same as ten years ago. Today, there is a common, popular, and Venezuelan sense that never existed before; as well as an eternal solidarity and a way of organizing and understanding their street, their parish, their barrio, and their history.

Events in the midst of development, as Walter Martinez would say, show that governments must always adapt themselves to the maturity and level of the people they work for. Learning is permanent, and we have had hard but valuable lessons. Venezuela has constructed a history of dignity and struggle, in spite of so many difficulties. And facts have demonstrated the mature degree of this people; the maturity to rule and decide in the name of the people. We are confirming that the creative powers that the great Aquiles Nazoa recognized in us.

It’s time to give substance, strength, and movement to the communal democracy, the democracy communard of Kléber Ramírez. The new phase starts now in Venezuela, developing a strategy focused on “producing food, science, and dignity” and strengthening the dynamism of the participative and socialist democracy.

The time for the community to start its movement towards the full exercise of its power and its political responsibility has come. We have walked far, but there is still path left to walk, let’s go on creating, as Mészaros would say in The Challenge and the Burden of Historical Time:

The creation of a truly equal society demands the radical downfall of the exploitative structural hierarchies that were established during thousands of years.

But the communal model must be ours; it must emerge from popular wisdom, from the clear understanding of their territory; of their connection with their history and country. From everything that causes us to be called Venezuelan people.

We must speed up the structure of the communal councils, the technical tables, increasing their participative power and transforming the community into a reason of state; this is the path; always together with Simón Rodríguez and Bolívar.

“If we do not learn a dynamic lesson from history, there is no reason to suppose that we will find it in another place,” says the great master and Bolivarian August Mijares: it is all about raising people’s consciousness, “the affirmative Venezuelan aspect.”

In history, we have great examples that must be useful as objective references. The Commune of Paris, the experience of the agrarian commune in China; the indigenous Venezuelan, Colombian, Paraguayan communards are all models that offer keys for us to do what we have to; being original, as the socialist Master of America, Simón Rodríguez, who proposed an original Toparquía (small dominion) for our America. But one thing is certain and Lenin said so in a short article called, “In Memory of the Commune”: “The cause of the Commune is the cause of the social revolution; it is the cause of the complete political and economical emancipation of workers; it is the cause of the world proletariat. And in this sense it is immortal.”

Bolivarian and socialist communards: let’s continue clearing up “The Mysterious Unknown…”

With Christ, with Bolívar, with Fidel:
¡We will win!

Hugo Chávez Frías

Note: [1] Arepera: sort of restaurant where you can buy Arepra. The word “arepa” may originate from the language of the Caracas natives (north coast of Venezuela) that means “maize.” An arepa is a bread made of corn originating from the northern Andes in South America, and which has now spread to other areas in Latin America.

By Paul Craig Roberts

What do you suppose it is like to be elected president of the United States only to find that your power is restricted to the service of powerful interest groups?

A president who does a good job for the ruling interest groups is paid off with remunerative corporate directorships, outrageous speaking fees, and a lucrative book contract. If he is young when he assumes office, like Bill Clinton and Obama, it means a long life of luxurious leisure. Fighting the special interests doesn’t pay and doesn’t succeed.

On April 30 the primacy of special over public interests was demonstrated yet again. The Democrats’ bill to prevent 1.7 million mortgage foreclosures and, thus, preserve $300 billion in home equity by permitting homeowners to renegotiate their mortgages, was defeated in the Senate, despite the 60-vote majority of the Democrats. The banksters were able to defeat the bill 51 to 45.

These are the same financial gangsters whose unbridled greed and utter irresponsibility have wiped out half of Americans’ retirement savings, sent the economy into a deep hole, and threatened the US dollar’s reserve currency role. It is difficult to imagine an interest group with a more damaged reputation. Yet, a majority of the people’s representatives voted as the discredited banksters instructed.

Hundreds of billions of public dollars have gone to bail out the banksters, but when some Democrats tried to get the Senate to do a mite for homeowners, the US Senate stuck with the banks. The Senate’s motto is: “Hundreds of billions for the banksters, not a dime for homeowners.”

If Obama was naive about well-intentioned change before the vote, he no longer has this political handicap.

Democratic Majority Whip Dick Durbin acknowledged the voters’ defeat by the discredited banksters. The banks, Durbin said, frankly own the place.

It is not difficult to understand why. Among those who defeated the homeowners bill are senators Jon Tester (Mont), Max Baucus (Mont), Blanche Lincoln (Ark), Ben Nelson (Neb), Many Landrieu (La), Tim Johnson (SD), and Arlan Specter (Pa). According to reports, the banksters have poured a half million dollars into Tester’s campaign funds. Baucus has received $3.5 million; Lincoln $1.3 million; Nelson $1.4 million; Landrieu $2 million; Johnson $2.5 million; Specter $4.5 million.

The same Congress that can’t find a dime for homeowners or health care appropriates hundreds of billions of dollars for the military/security complex. The week after the Senate foreclosed on American homeowners, the Obama ‘change’ administration asked Congress for an additional $61 billion dollars for the neoconservatives’ war in Iraq and $65 billion more for the neoconservatives’ war in Afghanistan. Congress greeted this request with a rousing ‘Yes we can!’

The additional $126 billion comes on top of the $533.7 billion ‘defense’ budget for this year. The $660 billion–probably a low-ball number–is ten times the military spending of China, the second most powerful country in the world.

How is it possible that ‘the world’s only superpower’ is threatened by the likes of Iraq and Afghanistan? How can the US be a superpower if it is threatened by countries that have no military capability other than a guerilla capability to resist invaders?

These wars are a hoax designed to enrich the US armaments industry and to infuse the “security forces” with police powers over American citizenry.

Not a dime to prevent millions of Americans from losing their homes, but hundreds of billions of dollars to murder Muslim women and children and to create millions of refugees, many of whom will either sign up with insurgents or end up as the next wave of immigrants into America.

This is the way the American government works. And it thinks it is a city on the hill, a light unto the world.

Americans elected Obama because he said he would end the gratuitous criminal wars of the Bush brownshirts, wars that have destroyed America’s reputation and financial solvency and serve no public interest. But once in office Obama found that he was ruled by the military/security complex. War is not being ended, merely transferred from the unpopular war in Iraq to the more popular war in Afghanistan. Meanwhile, Obama, in violation of Pakistani sovereignty, continues to attack ìtargetsî in Pakistan. In place of a war in Iraq, the military/security complex now has two wars going in much more difficult circumstances.

Viewing the promotion gravy train that results from decades of warfare, the US officer corps has responded to the “challenge to American security” from the Taliban. “We have to kill them over there before they come over here.” No member of the US government or its numerous well-paid agents has ever explained how the Taliban, which is focused on Afghanistan, could ever get to America. Yet this hyped fear is sufficient for the public to support the continuing enrichment of the military/security complex, while American homes are foreclosed by the banksters who have destroyed the retirement prospects of the US population.

According to Pentagon budget documents, by next year the cost of the war against Afghanistan will exceed the cost of the war against Iraq. According to a Nobel prize-winning economist and a budget expert at Harvard University, the war against Iraq has cost the American taxpayers $3 trillion, that is, $3,000 billion in out-of-pocket and already incurred future costs, such as caring for veterans.

If the Pentagon is correct, then by next year the US government will have squandered $6 trillion dollars on two wars, the only purpose of which is to enrich the munitions manufacturers and the ‘security’ bureaucracy.

The human and social costs are dramatic as well and not only for the Iraqi, Afghan, and Pakistani populations ravaged by American bombs. Dahr Jamail reports that US Army psychiatrists have concluded that by their third deployment, 30 percent of American troops are mental wrecks. Among the costs that reverberate across generations of Americans are elevated rates of suicide, unemployment, divorce, child and spousal abuse, drug and alcohol addiction, homelessness and incarceration.

In the Afghan ‘desert of death’ the Obama administration is constructing a giant military base. Why? What does the internal politics of Afghanistan have to do with the US?

What is this enormous waste of resources that America does not have accomplishing besides enriching the American munitions industry?

China and to some extent India are the rising powers in the world. Russia, the largest country on earth, is armed with a nuclear arsenal as terrifying as the American one. The US dollar’s role as reserve currency, the most important source of American power, is undermined by the budget deficits that result from the munition corporations’ wars and the bankster bailouts.

Why is the US making itself impotent fighting wars that have nothing whatsoever to do with is security, wars that are, in fact, threatening its security?

The answer is that the military/security lobby, the financial gangsters, and AIPAC rule. The American people be damned.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during President Reagan’s first term.  He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal.  He has held numerous academic appointments, including the William E. Simon Chair, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University, and Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University. He was awarded the Legion of Honor by French President Francois Mitterrand. He is the author of Supply-Side Revolution : An Insider’s Account of Policymaking in Washington; Alienation and the Soviet Economy and Meltdown: Inside the Soviet Economy, and is the co-author with Lawrence M. Stratton of The Tyranny of Good Intentions: How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice. Website: paulcraigroberts@yahoo.com.