Current ideological foundation of the imperialistic State: “democracy, ‘Constitution’ and rule of law” (XXIII)
EUSKAL HERRIA AND THE KINGDOM OF NABARRE, OR THE BASQUE PEOPLE AND ITS STATE, AGAINST FRENCH-SPANISH IMPERIALISM
XXIII – Current ideological foundation of the imperialistic State: “democracy, ‘Constitution’ and rule of law”
Iñaki Aginaga and Felipe Campo
Unable to elucidate “the great mystery of positive law” and the State for what they are, namely: a social order of monopolistic violence (whether it be legitimate or criminal), the ideology of the French-Spanish Jacobin, imperialistic and totalitarian social order or régime does now avail itself of the issues traditionally considered “Left-wing”, in order to camouflage through them its true nature against the Peoples whom it is subjugating under its military occupation. Consequently, and so as to justify its own imperialistic régime, it does refer itself to a “democratic order” that purportedly would be originally founded in “free elections, the Constitution, the citizens’ vote, the universal suffrage, the will of the majority, the rules of the game” etc. But such a “thing” is founded on absurdity and has never existed nor will ever exist: neither here nor anywhere, if it’s not as an ideological resource to hide behind a petitio principii (begging the question) the real base of the imperialistic political régime.
Begging the question is an old ideological trick that has always given excellent results against the human groups politically incapacitated and ideologically and culturally ruined; yet, the purported reality that corresponds to the super-hypostatic majority and minority sociological creatures generated by this sophism is logically null. Indeed, the purported “universal” suffrage is a derivative, secondary and belated technique or procedure of a political régime already previously constituted, and therefore in no way can it found or legitimize such a régime except in a retro-activated and logically absurd way.
Nobody who is in his right mind can believe that the political power: both the imperialistic one established on our Country or any other, is founded on the will of the majority (or minority), or that it arises from the “universal” (or selective) suffrage. An illustrious Friar said that “not even God can make a triangle that does not have three sides.” God cannot do that two and two make five, and – in the same way – not even God can make a political régime originally founded on vote and elections, since votes and elections do already imply a PREVIOUS State and political régime, prior to those “votes and elections”. Which is absurd in pure formal logic cannot have nor will have existence; which allows us to spare any other sociological research in this regard. However, this trick serves effectively to the mental confusion that imperialism and fascism do need to maintain their domination.
Once again: violence, States, armies, spoliation and repression exist already BEFORE the “elections” etc. It is not the “elections” etc. that do found the political power, whether it be democratic or not; it is the political power – whatever its nature may be – that founds, produces, determines, conditions, regulates and decides the “elections” etc., and it cannot be otherwise. As to the genuine democratic political power and its institutions, it is freedom and fundamental human rights that precede and constitute the democratic institutions and decisions, which do not exist but by virtue of those rights and freedom.
The ideologists of imperialism and fascism invoke “the moral and juridical norms, the Constitution and the rule of law”, which have been established by that imperialistic and fascist régime through the crimes of its unlawful aggression against the subjugated Peoples. They do therefore conceal the fact that those rules they are talking about are criminal and illegitimate; and that they have done them – so that the rest of us have to suffer them – by previously denying and destroying the legitimate norms, Constitutions and Institutions, and the preceding States and laws, that is: the own ones of the Peoples and States that the imperialism has occupied and colonized through criminal Violence, War of aggression and Terrorism. This is how they have acquired and retained the power that allows them to judge on good and evil, and to impose on others “the moral and juridical norms” that suit them, and what they call “the rule of law”, which really is the law of their (ruling) Empire
“The form of expression according to which they are not humans who do govern but norms and laws” is a misleading way to solve the problems. “A norm is never set by itself (this is a fantastic way of talking) [...] as if it was fallen from the sky.” It is not the laws that do rule but those who make and impose them: the humans make the law. They are not the right and the positive law that do govern the policy: it is the humans-made policy that, by means of violence and war, establishes the positive law and its legal norm.
These: the positive right and and its normative objetification in the form of laws, are mere reflections of a certain political order, that is: of a social order of monopolistic violence, as explained in the preceding Chapter IX – Imperialism, fascism and ideology. As is evident, such violence can be a legitimate one, when it is exercised in defence of fundamental human rights; in which case we are dealing with a legitimate and democratic law and political order. Or, otherwise, it will be criminal, when it is exercised in violation both of fundamental human rights and above all of the Self-Determination or Independence of Peoples, as well as of the independence and integrity of their States legitimately constituted on the basis of respect for the Peoples’ Freedom or Self-Determination; in which case we are faced with an illegitimate, criminal, imperialistic and fascist law and political order, such as the Spanish and French ones: militarily and criminally imposed on the Basque People and its State, the Kingdom of Nabarre.
It is not the law that does found the political power and the State; it is the political power of the State: imposed by the dominant Classes-Peoples and by their military-political instruments through violence, that founds the juridical norm and its positive political order that it calls “law”: “the (State) rule of law” that, justified a posteriori by an ideology to its service, determines the behaviour of those who are its subjects. There aren’t any other juridical norms but those constituted by violence; and under an imperialistic régimen, it is the policy of the dominators that by means of criminal war and violence makes the law (“might is right”), the juridical norm, and its ideology. It is not the “elections” or the “constitutional pact” etc. that are the origin and foundation of a régime of domination and colonization, such as the French-Spanish régime that subjugates the Basque People and its State, but the criminal Violence, the war of aggression, the permanent military occupation, the annexation and the Terror of war and State maintained for centuries.
The imperialistic and fascist propaganda invokes without respite the “(State) rule of law”, up to the point that this common and misleading doctrine of political “justification” and mystification accompanies or displaces any other in the official speeches. Thus, the real objective of the fascist concept of “(State) rule of law” is to hide the true foundation of its political power. In short, the origin and the nature of that “rule of law”: whose cardinal and ordinal norms – as its active and conceptive ideologists claim – precede, inform, shape and legitimize the “democratic State”, do significantly refer to the most common, diverse, versatile, aequivocal, problematic, controversial, awkward and super-ideologicaldoctrine of justification of modern times.
“This thesis fills an ideological function of such an extraordinary importance, that it is impossible to over-estimate it.” “Insofar a metaphysical-religious legitimation loses its effectiveness, this theory of ‘the rule of law’ becomes necessarily the sole possible justification of the State.” “It does not so much aim to capture the essence of the State but, to a much greater degree, to reinforce its authority.” Therefore its criticism: “this dissolution of the dualism State-Law, based on an analysis of methodological critique, means at a time the radical and absolute annihilation of one of the most effective ideologies of legitimacy”.
In reality, according to the version chosen by the “experts”, the “rule of law” can be adapted to any State or to none, justify everything or not justify anything at all; and it is resolved in the pure (reversible) pleonasm, in the begging of principle and the vicious circle, or else it is integrated – either openly or covertly – in any variant of metaphysical fundamentalism. Imperialism and fascism offer, in any case, the best conditions of usefulness, necessity and possibility for the large-scale exploitation of that ideological construct. It presents, in fact, the considerable advantage that the populations which that “justification” is addressed to, have not the slightest idea – neither right nor wrong – about what so abstruse and impressive words can mean. Which does, without further ado, avoid eventual reticence and unhealthy questions about it; and increases the perplexed, astonished and reverent admiration of the masses for the leaders who at all hours handle them – the words and the masses – without apparent effort.
In its official definition: sadly current in the new hegemonic order, “the rule of law” is not a constituent but constituted, formalist and administrativist principle. But a formal principle cannot justify or legitimize or found anything. “The law that we have given us all” is, indeed, the law that they – Spaniards and _French – have imposed for to make the others – we the Basque People – to suffer. The imperialistic and fascist rule of law is not a constituent factor but constituted by imperialism itself.
Under an imperialistic and fascist régime of military occupation, the monopolies of propaganda: inseparable from the effective policy of criminal Violence and Oppression of the monopolies of Violence, try at the same time to hide the reality and to prevent, blame and condemn all Resistance, making the subjugated Peoples believe that the Violence of the real policy does not exist, or that it serves values of justice, peace, love and good feelings which transcend the violence itself. Yet, without a strategic Resistance against the fascist imperialism the democratic opposition and the human rights disappear; because fascist legality, on the one hand, and democratic opposition and human rights, on the other, are contradictory terms. Meanwhile, the Resistance – in deeds or even in words – has to face up the State monopolistic Repression, Violence and Terror, which steals, excludes, persecutes, gags, imprisons, tortures and kills those who dare to resist to its dictations.
The monopolies of propaganda do incessantly repeat that all this is made “within the Constitution, the strictest legality and the rule of law”; but the petition of principle tries to hide that the Constitution, the juridical norms, the Law, the right and the State that they speak about are those that they have made themselves by means of war of aggression and organized and continued crime: in our case against the fundamental human rights of the Basque People and its State, the Kingdom of Nabarre.
Once it has been constituted, every State enacts a posteriori its own laws that legitimize it retroactively and by begging the question, and therefore every State is a “rule of law” State, with its own laws and judges applying them: from the Fascist and National Socialist State to the Soviet State, self-protected – like everyone else – by its own Penal Code and most particularly by its Article 58:
“Who among us has not experienced its all-encompassing embrace? In all truth there is no step, thought, action or lack of action under the heavens which could not be punished by the heavy hand of Article 58.” (A. Solzhenitsyn.)
And all “Constitution” has been itself constituted: the real and primary constitution founds the formal and secondary “Constitution”. The real objective of the totalitarian concept of “rule of law” is to hide the true foundation of its law and its political power, founded on criminal Violence.
What the imperialistic and fascist propaganda calls “democratic State/rule of law” is, in reality, the political régime founded by war of aggression, permanent military occupation, Terrorism, and violation of International Law and of all fundamental human rights. The “rule of law” that they proclaim is actually the law of their (imperialistic) rule: the Law of their Empire; it is “the law” that they have previously made and imposed through criminal Violence. For the ideologists of the fascism in power, the policy, right and democracy do begin and end when they want to, on the basis and according to the rules and laws established by them through war of aggression, military occupation and Terror.
Founding the freedom or the human rights in the “rule of law”, the universal suffrage or the non-violence is not only a totalitarian fiction; it is also a formal nonsense that only makes sense as an ideological weapon of the imperialistic and fascist propaganda. These resources and the like: which the ideologists of imperialism produce at their convenience (and that they affirm or deny on a case-by-case basis as things are going), confirm the incapability of the dominant ideology to give a rationally and democratically homologable/presentable theoretical foundation to its established criminal political power. The only thing these ideologists can do is hide the social and historical reality of Violence and Oppression that corresponds to that power, under the shadow cast by the monopolies of violence and propaganda, and by means of political and ideological terror, penal code, brainwashing, ideological intoxication of masses, censorship and self-censorship, and absence of information and criticism; all this along with the invaluable collaboration and complicity of the indigenous Renegades and Traitors of the Pnv-Eta bureaucracy and its satellites, who reinforce the French-Spanish fascist régime by calling all this “democracy”.
The dichotomy – widely supported and disseminated by the agents of the indigenous collaborationism with the imperialistic régime – between the ideas of “policy” and those of “law”, and the opportunistic “denunciation” that these agents make of the “political” ideas and objectives of the government on shift: aimed at getting their substitution by the concepts and ends of what they call “juridical right” (and that for these agents is the desirable thing), seek to produce the discredit of “the policy” and do therefore “obtain” the corresponding apologia of the Spanish or French imperialistic positive law and its normative manifestation in the form of “laws and the formal or secondary‘Constitution’”; all of which does remain, as they say, outside from policy. However, and as it is evident, while there can be policy without positive law (fortunately for us, since otherwise it would not be possiblefor us to carry out an anti-imperialistic National Resistance: “normally” illegal under the imperialistic “law” but still possible), instead there can never be law without policy. Law is not only policy – whether democratic or despotic – but also policy exercised in a monopolistic way. (The alternatives to law are anarchy– not in the sense of utopian anarchism – or war.)
As noted above, law is a political order imposed by means of the monopoly of violence, whether this one be a licit one (that of a truly democratic political order: founded on the respect for fundamental human rights and not merely on “respect for the law”, as the ideological agents – either bought or lunatic – of imperialism and fascism claim), or a criminal one, wielded in violation of those fundamental rights, which corresponds to an imperialistic and totalitarian political order. Law is the determination of the condition and behaviour of the subjects through the monopoly of violence; that is: it is the policy exercised in a monopolistic way. All attempt of establishing an opposition between the imperialistic “law” and the imperialistic policy is a theoretical nonsense, a reactionary illusion of immediate and disastrous practical consequences for the subjugated Peoples.
An auxiliary, equivocal and narrow sense of “policy” – disseminated by the imperialistic ideology in its service – does confine it solely to the action of the Executive organs, presents the Legislative and Judiciary branches as “apolitical”, and reduces the question of the imperialism, the fascism and the democracy to a mere matter of “State (internal) separation of powers”. Yet, an eventual “separation of powers” within the imperialistic State does not solve any of those issues. The separation of powers has as a condition of birth and applicability the contradiction of forces in the social struggles; and the imperialism is class struggle at an international level, and oppression and exploitation of Peoples and States under/by other Peoples and States.
Therefore, within an imperialistic régime, its “separation of powers” is in fact “the unitarian functional network of the totalitarian – and imperialistic – power”. Under those conditions, the Legislative, Executive or Judiciary bodies of the imperialistic régime do spontaneously and fully coincide on the treatment to be applied to the democratic forces of the occupied Peoples; and in this respect, the differences and contradictions between its internal bodies are a reactionary fable and an apologia of the fascist régime of occupation. The judges of an imperialistic régime do not need anybody’s lessons or pressures to participate in the suppression of Peoples’ Freedom and of fundamental human rights in general, which are being violated by the imperialistic régime they serve. Within an imperialistic régime, any attempt to oppose “the political power to the judiciary power” is a theoretical and practical absurdity that entails dire consequences.
When “the abertzale left-wing casts doubts on the impartiality of the judges” and denounces “the lack of juridical base” for the fascist repression; or when the moderates and radicals Pnv-Eta and its satellites “denounce the political pressure that the Government exerts on the judges”: thus altering – as it seems – the supposed inclination of these ones to defend international democratic justice (which those agents take for granted and in which they encourage them to persevere), they all are presenting the Spanish and French Nationalist and Fascist judges as if they were in opposition to the Executive Power, and as they were jealous defenders of the human rights in general and of the Peoples’ freedom in particular; all of which cannot be further from the truth or embellish more the reality.
The imperialistic power is the imperialistic power, and it would remain being so with “juridical base” or without it, with “internal separation of powers” or without it, and with “independent” judges or without them. The demand for “internal separation of powers” of the imperialism: raised by “the Basque moderates and the radicals” Pnv-Eta as a supposed democratic guarantee, shows their “incapability” – real or from bad-faith – to understand the imperialistic policy as an international issue consisting in the domination and destruction of subjugated Peoples and their States at the hands of other Peoples and their imperialistic aggressor States, and that is not therefore reducible “to the interests of a particular ideology, to centralism, to Jacobinism, or to the lack of internal separation of powers” of the occupying State; to which they do nevertheless endeavour to reduce it.
All of it is the abandonment of the concepts, principles and fundamentals of the national freedom and democracy, to replace them with the internal and formal assumptions of the totalitarian and imperialistic régime, taken as a democratic one, within which these agents continue placing and understanding all political reality, including the international right of self-determination or independence inherent in all subjugated Peoples.
It was in 1710, after having lost the Ukrainian forces the battle of Poltava (in their efforts to gain the independence from the Tsarist Russian Empire), when Pylyp Orlyk: anticipating in 38 years “The Spirit of the Laws” of Montesquieu and in 77 the “Constitution of the USA”, established in his Constitution for Ukraine (“Pacts and Constitutions of Rights and Freedoms of the Zaporizhian Host”, sometimes called “Constitution of Bendery” after the name of the town where it was proclaimed) the separation of powers between the Legislative, Executive and Judiciary branches for the first time. And in its very Preamble, after having exposed the efforts of the Moscovian power “to limit and nullify the rights and freedoms” of the Ucrainin People by all available means, and having therefore justified the policy – followed by Ivan Mazepa and himself – of opposition to the imperialistic Tsardom of Moscovia and of alliance with Charles XII of Sweden “as logical and inevitable, mandated by the need to free the homeland”, this author established from the outset as a priority objective of the Constitution the independence of the new State, naturally affirmed vis à vis Moscovia. He had well understood that, in those days and always, it is the international policy, the international law, and the international separation of powers, which constitute the sole political and juridical guarantee that a subjugated People can oppose against imperialism.
Instead, sunken in their delirium, the “Basque” indigenous leaders of the Pnv-Eta bureaucracy and its satellites, local auxiliary agents of the French-Spanish imperialism and tireless defenders of the great swindel against our People (namely: the denial and abandonment of the Basque People’s international right of self-determination or independence, and its replacement by a false “autonomy” granted as just another Spanish region, and by an illusory “internal separation of powers” within the French-Spanish imperialistic régime of military occupation that they have accepted as democratic and their own); such agents, we say, do – simultaneously or in succession – “protest” against the “bad” executive powers who impose upon the good Legislators and good Judges, whether it is not the case that are the bad Judges who impose upon the good Legislators and good Governments, or the bad Legislators who keep prisoners the good Governments and good Judges.
Such “Basque” leaders – auxiliaries of imperialism – do hide the reality of the unity of power that constitutes the imperialistic-totalitarian State, whose Legislative, Executive, Administrative and Judicial agents do enjoy: individually and collectively, all the motivation and all the xenophobic charge that it can be asked or expect from them. Those agents do not need anyone’s imposition to persecute – jointly or separately – everything that resembles a democratic opposition and everything that represents or reminds them of the Peoples that the Spaniards and the French keep subjugated; which is what they have always done in all the years and all the centuries of conquest, domination and repression that until present make up their infamous history, which they are so proud of.
“You Uranians: severe and brown like the ancient Spaniards (who so well knew how to burn at the bonfires), you remain silent.” (Yevgeny Zamyatin; ‘We’, 1921.)
It is a constantly verified finding the fact that, compared with the usually qualified as “political” officers, the purportedly “apolitical” organs and members of the modern State: up to the last civilian or military official, are generally more – and not less – addict to simplistic, radical, intransigent and extreme repressive “administrative” decisions and actions.
(Sabino Arana Goiri himself had a thorough experience of this modus operandi as a result of the telegram that he aimed to send to President Theodore Roosevelt, on 1902 May the 24th, congratulating him on the USA support for the Independence of Cuba. The official who should have transmitted the telegram – whose fare he had surely charged in advance – did directly handed it to the “civil” Governor of Biscay without sending it. This one re-sent it to the penal Court of Bilbao in order to initiate the arrest warrant of its author. And on May the 30thSabino Arana had to appear before the judge; who – after having obtained the recognition of his having been the author of the cable text – ordered his immediate imprisonment without bail that same day, for “a crime of attacks on the integrity of the Spanish Nation”. It seems that no protests have occurred because of this aggression to the freedom of opinion and communication, theoretically protected moreover under the secrecy of a private correspondence.)
The real and true separation of powers, strategically relevant, is the international opposition that is posed against the imperialistic and fascist power: with unique political and juridical personality, by the subjugated, occupied and colonized Peoples; but the “Basque” collaborationists and accomplices of French-Spanish imperialism prefer to ignore it and divert the attention towards imaginary internal conflicts of the occupying States, rather than develop the Consciousness and Resistance of our People against the invaders.
The official “juridical” foundations of the régime do incessantly invoke the formal Constitution. But that juridical-constitutional formalist fundamentalism, and the “legal” sources themselves, either keep the most cautious reserve on this issue, or resort to the more confused, diffuse, mythological or para-logical references about “the great mystery of law”: about that “mysterious” political power that precedes and founds the real and primary constitution that in turn constitutes the formal and secondary “Constitution”, since they would have to reveal the role of “the cannons, a very important part of the Constitution”, according to Lasalle. The grotesque formulation of the Preambles and premises of the significantly abundant historical Constitutions of the modern French-Spanish imperialism is not only attributable to intellectual and formal deficiencies of conception, elaboration or drafting but, above all, to the objective conditions and purposes of concealment/mystification of reality, to which the parents of these brainchild had to submit.
The French-Spanish “modern” colonialism aims thus to legitimize the benefits of the invasion, conquest and occupation of States and Nations without ever facing up to the drawbacks of having to recognize its methods. It established its domination through war of aggression and Peoples’ subjugation, and through theoretical and practical denial of their inherent right of free disposition: first of human rights and prior condition of them all; and it has always been maintained by criminal Violence and monopolist Terrorism. But, at the same time, it seeks the stability, peace and legitimacy that are only provided by freedom and democracy, not by war and Peoples’ subjugation. It seeks not only to be feared but also admired, recognized and estimated. It expects the free adherence of its victims to the régime that excludes them from the community of free persons. It expects that its crimes will be excused, forgiven, approved, hidden, ignored and forgotten.
The apologists for the French-Spanish imperialistic régime of military occupation on the Basque People and its State claim its democratic characteristic and legitimacy. After centuries of wars of aggression and occupations, the Government thus constructed and maintained has finally organized the incontrovertible base of the new “democracy”. But democracy is the power of the People and it is based on the effectiveness of fundamental human rights. Where there is no popular power and the human rights are denied, there is no democracy but imperialism and fascism. There are no free People and will where the basic conditions for their constitution, formation and expression have been destroyed; and where the fundamental human rights and, first of all, the right of free disposition of Peoples, the first of human rights and precondition of them all, are denied. There is no place for democracy without freedom; and there cannot be place for freedom where it is violated the fundamental freedom of the Peoples and all the human freedoms that it conditions.
The agents of French-Spanish imperialism claim “the due respect to the régime that we all have given each other”. The unheard-of shamelessness of the ideologists of the imperialism intends so to overlook the centuries of crfiminal Violence, the wars of aggression, the crimes, and the oppression and violation of all human rights, which have brought us the régime that they have mounted for us to endure. No doubt, the ambition of imperialistic Nationalism knows no bounds. The victory turns it insatiable. It’s not enough for it to have been imposed by the overwhelming victory of its weapons. It needs and aims, in addition, to be respected, loved and admired as if it were non-violent and democratic.
The metropolitan Colonists, the indigenous Renegades, and the various local Agents of imperialism, oppose their own imperialistic Nationalism: which they qualify as “non-nationalism, civil coexistence, republican values and integration”, to the “democratic” and to the “non-democratic nationalism” of the others. Therefore they claim to be opponents and victims of the “nationalism”. But the imperialistic Nationalism is the aggressive and expansive, “exaggerated and intrinsically perverse” (Encyclical ‘Caritate Christi Compulsi’) form of Nationalism of the criminal Nations, since it is carried out at the expense of the national freedom of the others. Its victims are the subjugated Peoples, upon which the imperialistic Nationalism is imposed by means of war of aggression, military occupation, repression, terrorism and torture.
If the defence of national freedom is “nationalism”, then all the Peoples of the World are nationalists in that sense and one can hardly see how they could be anything else, when it is a fact that no one tolerates foreign domination. Whereas the aspiration to impose one’s own Nation on others’ is instead Nationalism to the highest degree, it is imperialistic Nationalism: the utmost degree of crime of the international order, constituted by crimes of war, against peace and against humanity, which necessarily result from permanent aggression against the Peoples and from the violation of their inherent right of self-determination: first of human rights and prior condition of them all.
In these circumstances, the “political opposition through democratic means respecting the institutions” established by imperialism is the same thing as the previous acceptance and recognition of the de facto criminal power, and the permanent participation in its imperialistic and fascist system of domination. Because the “institutions” they speak about are really constituted through criminal Violence: principle and source of the institutions, through violation of all fundamental human rights and, in the first place, of the right of free disposition that assists all Peoples; and through war of aggression against the integrity and independence of States fully and long established and recognized by the International Law. They have been imposed and maintained through wars of aggression, terrorism and permanent military occupation, monopoly of criminal Violence, summary executions, jail, exclusion, deportation and transfer of populations, domination of the economic and ideological structures, and persecution and imposition of Languages and Cultures. And they result from the power and serve the power of the aggressor nations and social groups, which are the ones who hold, impose and enjoy all the powers and “rights” derive from their imperialism; powers and “rights” that those aggressor nations and social groups exercise at the expense of those whom they have denied all their fundamental human rights.
The “Basque radical” collaborationists have finally arrived to pose the opposition “by strictly democratic means through dialogue and negotiation, in the absence of any violence”, that’s to say: through the recognition and respect of the French-Spanish imperialistic and fascist régime of military occupation and of its monopoly of criminal Violence. The armed struggle that they previously advocated is now not a means but an obstacle, since “the resolution of the Basque conflict is in the ‘definitive truce’, the peace and the dialogue”. That is: the imperialism and fascism do not exist. Here everybody is good, all the options are legitimate and respectable, no one is 100% right, and the dialogue and unilateral non-violence in favour of imperialism offer the solution to all problems and govern our daily lives; only occasionally disturbed by the theoretical or practical criticism of those who reject the monopolies of criminal Violence and mass indoctrination in the hands of the fascist régime, and denounce the real foundations and nature of the French-Spanish imperialistic and fascist régime of military occupation.
Thus they come to the apologia – the more dangerous insofar as it is devious and insidious – of the French-Spanish imperialistic régime of military occupation: a moderate and benign form, as they say, of national oppression, of “assimilation without extermination”, “infinitely less serious and desperate” than that going on in other places, with which “it would be ridiculous and cartoonish to even compare our mere nothing”. After eight centuries of wars, aggressions, dismemberments and occupations, terroristbombing of masses, racial, linguistic and cultural persecution, exile, prison, pillage, repression and executions, we may ask ourselves what else will the “Basque radicals” need to homologate the French-Spanish imperialism on our Country as a “comparable” form of Violence and national oppression.
That search of “differential criteria and scales” in terms of imperialism reveals already, as it has often happened, the reactionary nature of such an undertaking, at the service of the fascist ideological sabotage against the criticism of imperialism. It pursues the establishment of categories of “more oppressed and less oppressed” Peoples, which can reduce or hide the nature and scope of the colonial occupation in this Country; the ideological sweetening of the reality of the French-Spanish imperialism against the Basque People; and the reduction of the criminal responsibility of those who practice and justify it. It promotes the division of the objectives, procedures and forces of the national liberation struggle. And it allows to circumvent, postpone, delay and forget the inexcusable immediate task of making effective the right of self-determination of all Peoples against the imperialistic Nationalism, plague and shame of mankind.
Comentarios
Publicar un comentario