Contribution” of the “official Basque political class” to the unilateral overcoming of violence (9)

Violence and Terrorism.- Their ideological mystification at the service of Imperialism

9 – “Contribution” of the “official Basque political class” to the unilateral overcoming of violence

Iñaki Aginaga and Felipe Campo

When the homo – more or less sapiens – asserted his right of free disposition for to part from his furry fellows of route and fatigues, the human society continued resolving its disputes by brute force until today, as they had done up to then and continued doing afterwards all living creatures on the planet Earth. All animals have always striven to achieve, maintain or increase the territorial reserves and other vital conditions that ensure for them the survival and expansion, away from or at the expense of the others. In this regard, nothing separates us from our “inferior” ancestor and brethren; apart from – naturally – an almost unlimited aggressiveness, and a cruelty, an armament and a capacity of destruction out of all possible comparison with those ones.

Within the framework of the occupation and terrorism of war: first and real constitutional act of the current political régime, the famous address of José María Areilza: “we will chasethe Basque nationalists through the mountains as if – they were – wild beasts”, can be considered an antecedent of the harangues of Juan José Ibarretxe. According to this “first leader” of the tri-provincial “Basque autonomous community-Bac” (which the liquidationist bureaucracy Pnv-Eta and the Spanish fascist régime call “Euskadi”), “Policy and violence are incompatible. We must resolve the political problems by exclusively political ways, by the respect of human rights and above all the right to life, first of human rights, so that we may live like persons, and not like animals. Those who deny the right to think freely are not humans, they are vermin”. (His own proposals allow to establish that his ideas in ethology issues have the same level than those ones that he professes in the field of policy and violence; which allows him to comply, at the satisfaction of his fascist godfathers, with the ideological mission that they have assigned to him.)

“The human is neither angel nor beast, and misfortune wants that the one who wants to play the angel finishes just playing the beast.” (B. Pascal) Vermin and heartless fiends are everywhere and of all kinds: of nails, teeth, scales, horns and hooves, and of uniform and above all of neck-tie or mitre, which are the worst ones; but Ibarretxetries to hide the violent struggle between groups of the same species and, above all, the violent essence of policy, and – a fortiori – of imperialism and fascism. As it can be seen, he replaces the human struggles with a struggle between non-violent “persons” (which for him are exclusively the human ones), and violent vermin. And he also opposes the way of life of animals to that of “persons”; not to that of “human persons”, which in his view would be redundant. All of which implies: that the humans are not animals; that the animals are not persons; and that all the humans are so.

“If it is argued that animals are not persons, I must reply by saying that personality begins where, of two individuals, each one plays in the life of the other a part that cannot easily be played by any other member of the species.” Which cannot occur “In the huge communities of social insects [...], often comprising millions, [...]. Communities of this typepossess too many individual animals for these to know each other personally”. (K. Lorenz; ‘On Aggression’.)

In fact, the animal process of personalization has been reversed and replaced among humans by the civilized process of depersonalization. If only are human persons those ones who have “abandoned violence as a means of solving the political problems”, then no society has reached nor will ever reach such stage in the hominization process, and we humans effectively continue and will still continue being vermin.

However, zoology has always been inspiration for the mythology, theology, sociology and poetics of the coexistence and conflicts between humans. The positive analogies: fables, parables, symbols, allegories, mythologies, sacrifices and theologies, do exalt the virtue, power and example of the animals. The phase of cultural transition, of the totem and the taboo, makes of the eagle, the falcon, the condor, the woodcock, the beaver, the wolf, the bear, the turtle, the deer, the lion, the winged serpent, the kangaroo or the whale, the most important members of the tribal community, organization and identity. The sperm whale and Jonah, the lion and Androcles and the brother wolf of Gubbio and Francis of Assisi, have nourished the ambivalence of zoophilia and zoophobia in the imagery of Western culture.

The sexual zoophilia has an important part in the erotic instincts, culture and customs of all communities, which the same severity of moral and legal repression does not deny but does show, since it is only harshly prohibited which is intensely desired. The sacrifices and consumption of animals have rendered great services, alternative with plant, human and divine sacrifices, with which humans expect to escape the consequences of their sins. In Christian theology and liturgy, the Son of God is at the same time the good shepherd who gives his life for his sheep, and the Lamb of God whose sacrifice takes away the sins of the world, whose ingestion conveys life and virtues, as it is expressed in the bloody Eucharistic agape. But, on the other hand, since childhood, the zoophobia: “one of the most frequent neurotic troubles at this age, and perhaps the early form of any condition of this genre”, has its origin “in the conditions of the Oedipus complex”. These phobias “are always revealed to the analysis as the displacement on an animal of the fear felt towards one or another of the parents”.

The rejection of bestiality, the eagerness to absolutely distinguish the humans from the animals are as banal as revealing resources. As a result, the political adversaries have always been described as “zoophile, sub-human, beasts with human figure and devoid of reason, stupid sheep, authentic asses only able to bray (and work for the others), harmful insects, lice, scorpions, vampires, vermin or pests, wise bears, mad dogs, foxes and jackals, stinking hyenas and scavengers, vultures, wild beasts thirsty of blood, bugs, nasty reptiles, poisonous snakes, lewd vipers, viscous rats” etc.

They are – effectively and significantly – the rats: the species of reference in the collective intra-specific fight, which enjoy of the preference and occupy the place of honour in the more nauseating and repulsive ideological bestiary. When José Luis de Vilallonga, in a new access of intra-specific (whether homicidal or raticidal) murderous rage, seeks the supreme insult against those whom he considers to be his Basque nationalist opponents, uses precisely this reference: “he who which bears painted on his face his genetic kinship with sewer rats”. (The genotype of rats and humans is close and misleading enough so as to allow errors and variations in the interpretation and determination: since the time Vilallonga wrote that, the Spanish ideology has brought new approaches in the field of genetic kinship; and the current official rehabilitation of the phrenology carried out by the “doctor” Garcia Andrade, opens unlimited prospects to the zoological typology.)

As for the assumption that all humans are persons, affirming that Areilza, Bush, Fraga, Franco, Mola, Moléres, Vilallonga and others are human beings does not present any difficulty for the traditional theology, zoology and anthropology; even though its certainty turns out to be much less credible for us than that offered by the theory of the evolution of species. Much unpleasant and difficult a task though it may be for some to accept this, it will perhaps relieve their scruples to remember that humans are notoriously different from other animals by their special skills for climbing up the zoological ladder of stupidity and evil. In short, the ones and the others: imperialists and resistants, fascists and democrats, murderers and murdered persons, all belong to the same species. Either they are human beings or they are rats, but they are all of them. His personal and racial differences do not put Vilallonga in a shelter or separate him from the specific identity of the rats opposite.

Logically, tautologically and zoologically, a human Nationalism can only be opposed to another. And to the nationalism of a rat there can only be opposed the Nationalism of another Rat: no matter whether they be positioned, respectively, either against the wall, or – as Vilallonga did – in the firing squad. Whether it’s about humans or humanoid, all we descend from ape; although, considering the “non-violent pacifist”, sanctimonious and hypocritical Aborigines of the Pnv bureaucracy that surround us, it could be thought that these ones come from a degenerate branch of the bonobo, whereas Vilallonga and his band come from the chimpanzee.

The animals had at their disposal a planet that offered them great possibilities and wide spaces that made impossible, limited, rare or superfluous the conflict and even the extra and intra-specific contact; but the planetary dimension of current human societies and their individuality overflow the solidarity and conflict of the horde and the social insects. For the human species, the Earth is a closed, limited and occupied world; which makes unavoidable the intra-specific contact and conflict between Nations and States. It is the “cage of wild beasts” or the islet of rats. Humans are destroying the last natural places, which they replace by camps, territories, reserves and protectorates of “cohabitation and coexistence”, that’s to say: of oppression, concentration and extermination for humans, animals and plants, in whose mounting they are teachers.

Anyway, this stage of the evolution of Humankind by violence and within violence is going to be finally overcome, if we give credit to the official statements and pacts of the Pnv-Eta group. It considers that the human species has reached a moment of history in which is effectively abandoning violence, at least the intra-specific violence. The local ideologists do not confine themselves to proposing and advocating the abandonment of violence: they affirm that this objective has been already reached or is in the process of being reached in the present reality. Not only in the territory that they administer, where “there is no more violence than that of the Eta”, but also in the rest of the planet:

“The current events show that the world is understanding that we do not live in a time where problems are solved by violence. In the world which we live in the problems are resolved without violence, by political means, understanding, persuasion, dialogue and negotiation.” (“Lehendakari” – president – Ibarretxe.)

According to a subsequent statement: “[...] the last armed confrontation in Europe has been outpaced”. As a consequence, we are on the way to achieve “a righteous and lasting peace [that is: submission] in this region” [as they designated our Country]; since “our society was already fully non-violent after the previous definitive cessation of all its armed activities” [of the Eta group]. This was – as they all said – “the only violence in this region”, etc. (Declaration of the panel of “international lawyers, facilitators and experts” gathered in Kanbo, Laburdi, on the self-dissolution of the Eta, May 4, 2018.)

In the light of “the current events” in Iraq, Chechnya, Afghanistan, Palestine, Syria, Ukraine etc., the naive reader or listener – not “initiated” or insufficiently conditioned – may think that these people are not quite right in their head, wonder from what (specialized mental) institution they have managed to escape, and consider the reasons why the (political) institutions have provided them with sufficient means so that they can communicate their apparent permanent delirium to a more or less considerable part of their helpless listeners. Unfortunately, these people have not escaped from nowhere, and their detention would not be good for nothing. Their being at large is not the problem; but their intending to be ideological and political guides of this People, this can only be explained by the situation of mental alienation into which the French-Spanish imperialism and fascism have plunged this militarily occupied Country, and by the intellectual and moral degradation of its local agents and spokespersons.

If Ibarretxe, by himself or with the help of his instigators and collaborators, has really the solution through the dialogue, in freedom and without violence for the political conflicts in general, is without a doubt the greatest genius that the humankind has produced. His propositions do already imply, announce and prepare for the imminent end of political history, the State and law, constituted by violence as a specific means. Humanity enters fully in the dreamed land of integral Anarchism. The Bascongade contribution to the new meta-juridical and meta-political international order appears in all its scope and originality.

We can only rejoice, and lament that so brilliant contribution has come so late. If, from the prehistoric beginning of the human conflicts until today, the advocates or perpetrators of violence (more or less scientific researchers, critics, architects, designers, prophets, visionaries, revolutionaries and prospectivists of strategies, worlds and utopias) could have listened to Ibarretxe, as at all hours the suffered inhabitants of the occupied Basque territories do listen to him; and if they had had access to those thesis of non-violence (which the modern audio-visual techniques of ideological intoxication of masses do forcibly make available to all patients in the “Basque autonomous Community” and neighbouring territories, History would have been very different and humanity would have spared the countless sufferings that have flooded its uncertain becoming.

Not all Ibarretxe’s predecessors at the helm of civilization were hopelessly obtuse, given their epoch and present company excepted, of course. But none of them was able to rise to the moral, intellectual and social height needed so as to keep in public or in private a similar discourse to that of the current bascongade theorists, moralists, politicians and jurists. Nobody, ever, had gone so far in a programme for the eradication of violence as a current and immediate task of the suffering Humanity.

Now then, a politician – or meta-politician – of the stature of Ibarretxe cannot undoubtedly ignore that today’s world is ordered by Violence and Terror in the States and among the States. His parsimony can surprise, in he who is depositary of a message and a mission of an imponderable significance for humankind. The same day that the first dignitary of the local administration announced again his good news with an address at the Kursaal of the Gipuzkoan capital-town, the newly appointed President Bush gave the (detonating) keynote by launching once again the US American bombers on Baghdad, and it was just the beginning. Had it been done everything humanly possible in order that the thinking of Ibarretxe and all the bascongade “political class” about life as a supreme value, rejection of all violence coming from where it can come, and dialogue as the only way to resolve the political conflicts, would come to the knowledge of the new boss of the USA? Did the USA Government and Armed Forces have knowledge that “no cause, righteous though it may be, is worth a single drop of blood”, and that “violence does not solve anything, only brings more violence”? (Any tele-addicted around here in the occupied Basque Territories is more than sick and tired of hearing it; but naturally not everybody has monopolies of propaganda of a comparable reach to its service, as Ibarretxe does.)

The comforting presence of many eminent and pro-eminent representatives of the Bascongade policy, economy and culture, who – without fear of making themselves suspected or convicted of characterized mental weakness or something worse – occupied the cubist coastal amphitheatre in which the new world order was being prepared after that address, should not lead us into the error of ignoring the limited scope of such operations. For want of a better thing, the rostrum of the United Nations should have been the minimum desirable – albeit insufficient – instrument for such a transcendental message.

If President Wilson – at the head of the already first economic, political and military Power in the world – needed fourteen points to return to Europe in ruins a shadow of hope and hope, Ibarretxe – at the head of the Bac – has had enough with three to indicate the definitive solution to the problems of peace and violence in the “autonomous community”, pointing out (while he’s at it) the guidelines for the universal perpetual peace:

“Our democratic proposal is based on these three points: 1/ rejection of all violence to achieve political ends; 2/ dialogue as the only way to solve political disputes; and 3/ respect for the freely expressed will of the Basque People.”

(President Wilson’s fourteen points had to be clarified and developed with “four complementary points and five extra points”, and the three points of Ibarretxe have already been replaced by ten; but this does not affect the basis of his “solution”, which consists in the denial of the problem. Namely: French-Spanish Nationalist Imperialism over the Basque People and its State, and its fundamental base of criminal Violence and Terrorism as a means to impose itself; 2/ its contempt for any real “dialogue”, inescapably based on the recognition – and not the denial, which is what there is – of any national otherness of the Basque People; and 3/ the violation of all “freely expressed will” and of the fundamental human rights of the Basque People, and above all of its inherent and imprescriptible right of self-determination or independence.) As it’s evident, the simple wilfulness and ignorance of the reality do not lead to its transformation but tend to perpetuate it.

The urbi et orbiexplanation of what he himself does not understand, has occupied the numerous leisure and trans-continental displacements of the “lehendakari” at the taxpayer’s expense, which allow him to carry his solitary negotiations. Meanwhile the terrorist Violence of the French-Spanish fascist-imperialistic repression is being deployed in the occupied Territories of the Country of the Basques; and the bombs fall every time with greater intensity over our globalized world.

“Blessed are the Meeks...” According to Gandhi, who had the necessary experience to know what he was talking about, non-violence is too dangerous a weapon – naturally for the oppressed – to be applied if certain conditions are not met. A morality of non-violence – therefore opposed to its political contrary, which is founded on violence – is also perfectly possible in idea, without contradiction. It is also a normative – positive and effective – factor of behaviour; even though its practice has never gone beyond other limits than those of the individual threshold, the socially marginalized or sectarian areas, the approximate reduction, and the adaptive commitments.

“The Sermon on the Mount – I understand by this the absolute ethic of the Gospel – is a much more serious matter than those who nowadays gladly quote its commandments believe. This ethic is no joking matter. What has been said of causality in science, also applies to this ethic: it is not a cab, which one can have stopped in order to get on or off at one’s pleasure. It is all or nothing: this is precisely its meaning, to act otherwise is to trivialize it.” (Max Weber; ‘Politics as a vocation’, 1919.)

So, Ibarretxe is not necessarily wrong, provided that he does not present his “rejection of all violence to achieve political ends” as a political proposal. An elementary prudence prevents us, however, from advancing risky conclusions. The great politicians do necessarily have secret or incommunicable areas in their strategic projects, in both of which is not possible for us, common human, to penetrate. Clausewitz said that it would be presumption and nonsense, for the theorists of war, to contrast their own rational and discursive criticism with the decisions of military geniuses such as Frederick the Great or Napoleon Bonaparte.

That is why, perhaps, behind Ibarretxe’s parsimony lie dazzling intuitions and a carefully calculated plan that, on the basis of the liquidation of the conflict in the Bascongade provinces, do “little by little” progress towards the solution of the problem on a worldwide scale; without which any peace would be even more illusory than the socialism in a single – although Big – Country. In this way, the global structure of violence would collapse according to the renowned dominos technique. The realistic-possibilistic-minimalist “strategy of step by step and little by little” has an important tradition in his own party, the Pnv. Thanks to it we are where we are and have reached to where we have arrived, while in Europe many Countries have become independent since the creation of that party.

It is difficult to know whether Ibarretxe hears voices or has visions as a source of inspiration. In the end what matters is the result. After all, the Mahdi’s visions – ordering him to pray in the mosques of Khartoum, Cairo, Mecca, Baghdad and Constantinople – led him to defeat or keep in check the best army in the world. Not to mention the celestial voices of Joan of Arc, a non-pacifist saint like Saint Louis: King of the Franks and executioner of the Albigensians. Both of them not excommunicated but canonized by the Catholic Church; which, otherwise (taking into account its multi-centennial doctrine and practice), would have had to excommunicate itself by incitement, blessing, complicity, authorship or co-authorship of some of the biggest massacres or wars of conquest, pillage and extermination that Humanity has suffered.

But Popes and other officiants were always too busy excommunicating Navarrese and other irreducible adversaries of the Holy See and its Favourite Daughters, Spain and France; and handing over their State to those criminal occupiers whom the See did bless, as to entertain with trifles or with so dangerous tasks of self-criticism. On the other hand, the more or less non-violent heretics had already been excommunicated centuries earlier. Communicants and excommunicants did use without any restriction of as many violent means that they could bring into play; which cannot do without contradicting himself the seraphic dignitary of the Bac, Ibarretxe.

What strange bi-ocular, neuroplegic or psycho-sensorial disease prevents the false apostles of non-violence to discover the presence of armed forces when they’ve them in front of themselves? By what prodigious effort of collective auto– or hetero-suggestion, or by what fatal kind of hallucinatory delirium, the official and armed repressive bodies, constituted by violence and for violence, appear to them under the form of teachers of pacifist philosophy or devoted, sacrificed and misunderstood preachers of non-violence? The agents and supporters of the French-Spanish imperialistic Nationalism are not theoreticians or educators disabled by (others’) violence for “thinking or freely exercising” their teaching ministry; nor are they voluntary workers who “oppose culture, persuasion, dialogue and respect for everybody’s freedom in the face of brute force”. They are officers of repression, propaganda and psychological warfare; beneficiaries of the mass-media monopoly; and agents who impose their material and “cultural” domination by means of the monopolies of criminal Violence and propaganda that constitute the imperialistic and fascist régime.

If Ibarretxe and his colleagues have the manifest possibility to inflict their daily ration of nonsense on hundreds of thousands of taxpayers, it is because the established French-Spanish régime of criminal Violence: which they describe as “democratic and non-violent”, has an interest at the moment in providing them with such a possibility. And if they can do this by speaking all alone: which is the only way they can speak, it’s because their embarrassed patients cannot speak either alone nor accompanied.

Although his illustrious teachers, predecessors and fellows of political Party and tendency had already shown – and still continue to show – his same path, nevertheless the conviction, optimism, self-satisfaction, emphasis and vehemence with which that first “Basque” dignitary of the Spanish local Administration maintains such positions is a unique and unprecedented show. It’s also difficult to know whether all this is a consequence of the high idea that the holder has formed about the post that has been bestowed on him, and about the exceptional qualities that are supposed to be rigged to it. His exercising the mission of guide, ideologist, educator and saviour of his ignorant and underdeveloped administered subjects, and of a backslidden and helpless humanity, is perhaps the least that he believes he can do so as to justify dignities and emoluments.

In any case, it is not easy to know – for those of us who are not his disciples, friends or collaborators – if Ibarretxe considers himself the new Moses in route to the land of a peaceful bliss, the prophet who prepares the ways of the Lord, or the reincarnation of Jesus Christ. What it’s clear is that the Sermon on the Mount is not a political speech: “My Kingdom is not of this world”. The purported principle of non-violence attributed to its author – as well as to Buddha or Gandhi – has its limits in the history and the texts deliberately distorted by the fascist propaganda.

Making of Ibarretxe a paragon and standard-bearer of non-violence is making fun of the whole world; and is distorting and wronging unscrupulously the conscience and the work of the sincere defenders of non-violence. The morals and practice of non-violence are a much more serious, difficult and demanding thing than what believe or want to make believe the charlatanism, the pieces of nonsense, the pedantic rhetoric and the propaganda of hatred and oppression that nowadays are being served to us disguised under those false labels, and that are spread among us by the monopolies of mass-dissemination in the service of the effective monopolies of criminal Violence.

The authentic morals and practice of non-violence have never been a servile and hypocritical instrument of despotism, nor springboard to fame, power, wealth and honours. They have nothing to do with the phoneys, opportunists, exhibitionists and the other ideological agents of imperialism and fascism, who take advantage and benefit from the pseudo-pacifist exhibitionism. Quite on the contrary, authentic non-violence consists of a doctrine that, if consistent and sincere, does only find its reward in the sublime spheres of “the moral of the conviction”, which Weber spoke about, or in the equally non-political transcendence of eternal glory.

In the face of these phoneys’ shamelessness and obscenity, the sincere persons who have put in practice one-way non-violence have been swallowed up by the natural selection and the history, crushed without mercy by those who are stronger, smarter and more determined than themselves. The sincere supporters of non-violence have always known, by their own and hard experience, how the powers of this world behave when faced against the weak and the defenceless, either voluntary or forced, people. In general they have paid it with persecution, ruin, prison and their life the consequent implementation of their views:

“[...] ‘A time comes when silence is betrayal.’ [...] The truth of these words is beyond doubt, but the mission to which they call us is a most difficult one. Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, men do not easily assume the task of opposing their Government’s policy, especially in time of war. [...]

“Some of us, who have already begun to break the silence of the night, have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony, but we must speak.[...]

“Over the past two years, as I have moved to break the betrayal of my own silences and to speak from the burnings of my own heart,[...] many persons have questioned me about the wisdom of my path.[...]Why are you joining the voices of dissent? Peace and civil rights don’t mix, they say. Aren’t you hurting the cause of your people, they ask?[...] Indeed, their questions suggest that they do not know the world in which they live. [...]

“My third reason moves to an even deeper level of awareness, for it grows out of my experience in the ghettoes of the North over the last three years – especially the last three summers. As I have walked among the desperate, rejected and angry young men, I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems. I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through non-violent action. But they asked – and rightly so – what about Vietnam? They asked if our own nation wasn’t using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today: my own Government.” Etc. (From: “Beyond Vietnam: A time to Break Silence”. Address delivered by Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., in New York on 1967, April the 4th.)

Just one year after having said these words, exactly in that same day, he was murdered.

The legal and official pacifists and non-violents that we are suffering in our Basque Country do know what they are playing with, and take good care not to oppose – either theoretically or practically – to “all violence coming from where it may come”. Indeed, they know very well the limits that are not to be overstepped – and that in fact they never overstep – in their “denunciation of all violence”, so as to preserve the advantages of all kinds that they obtain by being at the service of the criminal Violence of the régime of military occupation. They never incur excessive risks, because their doctrine of “non-violence” is the doctrine of the established power of criminal Violence, which they exert and support and which covers their backs. They show this way that they are not as stupid nor are as crazy as they seem to be or want to make appear.

They do comfortably verify that, after the prior recognition of the monopoly of criminal Violence and the acceptance of all the crimes of the French-Spanish régime of military occupation established over our Country, and starting from the subservience to all its “laws” and to all the postulates of the French-Spanish imperialistic Nationalism, next that régime that they present as “democratic and non-violent” does magnanimously grants all freedoms, all coexistence, all pluralism, all dialogue, all negotiation and all rights that one may want; in particular, the right to condemn the violence of the others and “the right to think freely and differently”. That is: to “think” as the French and Spanish national-imperialists want to, who are much freer, much more equal and much more different than the others.

Their campaigns “to eradicate violence from this Country and to restore to it the free disposition of its destiny” do conceal and serve the French-Spanish fascist régime of military occupation, which in nothing affects, according to them, either the violence or the freedom of anyone. Those campaigns do above all hide that the “institutions” of that régime have neither been established nor have anything to do with persuasion; and that their objective is to close by means of criminal Violence all the ways for dialogue and negotiation.

Giving lessons of non-violence as they do: on the side and under the shelter of the armed forces of the imperialistic and fascist régime that subjugates our People and State, is the height of institutional nerve. Whoever “rejects violence coming from where it may come”, without first denouncing the fascist monopolies of criminal Violence against the subjugated People, is an imbecile or a phony; and in both cases, an agent – conscious or unconscious – of imperialism. All this uninterrupted official discourse is an unworthy trickery, one more resource of the established monopolies of propaganda, and a supplementary mockery to the People which endures them.

Behind the “plan of three points to solve the Basque conflict” of the “lehendakari” Ibarretxe is hidden the most shameless defence of the Spanish imperialistic régime and its totalitarian monopoly of criminal Violence, which were established by centuries of wars of aggression, crimes, repression and Terrorism on the Basque People. To present them as non-violent, to propose dialogue with those who do not have the slightest intention of dialogue with anyone nor understands any other reason or powers than those of cannons, and to talk of democracy and of a freely expressed will in the conditions of oppression under the established régime of criminal Violence, is to disguise the fundamental political reality of the French-Spanish totalitarian Nationalism; is to hide the true nature of the imperialistic régime in the occupied Territories of the Basque People and State, and, above all, of the monopoly of criminal Violence on which it is founded. It is none other the real content of the pretentious verbiage, full of misunderstandings, vacuities, falsehoods, contradictions and absurdities that, wrapped up to the cloying in shoddy good feelings, occupies a privileged place in the great media of ideological intoxication of the masses that pour themselves every day on our Country.

If Ibarretxe and his alike, as those who support and use them, want to sincerely take position “against all violence coming from where it can come” and cease to make fun of their helpless administrated subjects and taxpayers, they must – necessarily and for a start – abandon the functions that they exercise in the service of the Spanish State: an organization created and preserved by means of criminal Violence and inseparable from it; abandon the “direction”, participation or cooperation in the auxiliary services of intoxication, corruption and repression of the local Spanish Administration, imposed by that Violence and for that Violence; renounce to all remuneration charged to the funds and budgets of the Spanish State, obtained by that Violence and for that Violence; and reject all “juridical” protection of their life, person, property and interests, since such effective protection is, in the end, Violence. They must also give up their continuous and resounding “electoral triumphs”, since the political elections under the imperialism are founded by Violence and pursued by Violence.

However, those who “condemn all violence, righteous though its cause may be, and do not accept any results that comes from it”, do recognize, serve and make profitable without scruples of conscience the French-Spanish imperialistic régime, established and maintained by centuries of wars of aggression, crimes, terrorism, occupation, plunder, persecution, repression, tyranny and régimes of force. What they do actually condemn are the “illegal”, marginal and supplementary forms of “violence of opposition or of State”; but do hide the political monopolies of criminal Violence, and do actively participate in the repressive, administrative, economic and ideological apparatus that depends on them. The ruling classes are well aware that they could not remain being so, if they themselves believed what their ideologists invent so as to make the others believe it.

Violence, hatred, cruelty, revenge are distinctive human features of bloodthirsty beasts such as Franco, Mola and their successors; features now involved in the narrow-minded imperialism and the universal terrorism of Bush and his cronies. Only the goody-goody and subservient complicity of the ‘burukide’(Pnv-ist leaders) and collaborators can pretend to keep still the optimism of their stupefied followers about the world that surrounds them, and they work hard at it: “The world is coming to understand that the conflicts cannot be solved by violence but by conciliation and dialogue”,theyproclaim against allsanity,inaworldunfortunatelydominatedbyImperialism.

In the real world, having an ideology like that to respond to the French-Spanish imperialistic, fascist and genocidal challenge, any subdued Country would be lost. But the ideological interest of that Pnv liquidationist bureaucracy; its need to hide the fact that the French-Spanish imperialistic and fascist régime of military occupation against the Basque People and State is constituted by criminal violence, imprescriptible crimes, war aggression and occupation; and the possibility – which the monopoly of propaganda assures them – to speak without opposition, can give a comprehensive explanation of such an attitude.

If those purportedly “Basque” politicians and ideologists were really concerned about human dignity and values (which they in such a way do lower to the level of their propaganda), they would begin by highlighting the war of aggression and the oppression of Peoples under Imperialism and Fascism; first of all against their own People. A Fascism that they do, on the contrary, exalt, practice or conceal, by combating the vulgar or scientific knowledge that explains and puts in evidence such procedures.

(From: ‘Violence and Terrorism.- Their ideological mystification at the service of Imperialism’.)