We are going through a difficult time, we went from pandemic to war in Ukraine then Palestine and a black wave is moving across Europe. But these European sovereignists, who hate immigrants and don’t give a damn about the environment, are against the war in Ukraine while democratic Europe is for it. Master father Trump, who parades handcuffed immigrants and wants to do the Gaza Riviera, is the one who is making peace in Ukraine possible while Democrat Biden was taking us one step closer to World War III. The Meloni government freed a very dangerous human trafficker, torturer and rapist of children who had been arrested in Italy, and the opposition rose up in indignation, forgetting that the agreements with Libya were initially made by Minniti (Democratic Party) and that in the years she has been in government she has never cancelled the Bossi/Fini law on immigration. Again the PD did not hesitate for a moment to give its support to sending arms to Ukraine.
It is very difficult to navigate and the worrying thing is that the Left, the one that is inclusive, anti-war and was supposed to be open to diversity, has disappeared. It is not, as I hear, a matter of being able to get together and overcome the historical quarrelsomeness that dwells in the Left parties. What is missing is new thinking that can make people imagine a different society, a different world.
I am a psychologist, I know little about politics and even less about geopolitics, and I can be accused of psychological reductionism, but I wonder: but isn’t it the case that we should start again from the fundamentals, and since societies are made up of people, we want to ask ourselves what idea do we have of the human being? Is it possible to do politics without dealing with human reality? But what idea do these politicians have of the human being?
As far as the Right is concerned, the answer is simple: human beings, the children of Cain, have a deep evil dimension that needs to be kept in check, the famous animal instincts, and therefore they need to be educated or punished because they need to learn how to live civilly. In other words, there is a need for an authority, a strict father to keep everything under control. But if we asked the same question to Leftists I would have a hard time imagining the answer. Frankly, I didn’t understand. In fact maybe I understood, they have the same thought however they are a little softer on the methods to be used, a less strict father, to contain this inescapable original badness. They, too, are constantly coming up with issues on the education of children instead of trying to meet their real needs.
But won’t it be time to reject in toto the idea of this animalistic aggressive nature of human beings and start asking why certain human beings BECOME violent? And will it not also be time to clearly say, but perhaps more than say, to be convinced deep down, that human beings are born equal all over the “globe”? Perhaps starting from here would lead us to think about politics in a completely different way. Kids in schools quietly make relationships with those of different nationalities, they don’t give a damn whether their little friend is Congolese or Italian. And no one has ever taught them that, we want to ask why?
This continuing idea of education, which assumes that sexuality or affectivity must be taught and thus learned, may perhaps be helpful in certain extreme cases but it would be crucial to understand that these are dimensions that arise spontaneously in human beings. But what is the point of teaching a little boy that he must respect the little girl and the immigrant? Rather, let us ask ourselves why sometimes or often the opposite happens, what is jammed in the growth of certain kids so that rather than educating we should ask ourselves what it is that has made them sick and consequently think of a policy that knows how to prevent the loss of these human dimensions.
Try to think of the young immigrant who comes to our country with the hope of finding a better world and finds himself herded into a lager, where no one wants him, where everyone considers him an intruder and treats him like a beast. How does he not get sick and become violent after for the umpteenth time his hope, that thread of hope that has so painstakingly survived so many vicissitudes, has been dashed? And then the asshole comes along and says: I told you these are violent! But look you made him this way! Can we be clear and sharp about these things?
Parallel to this thought shared with the Right, for which there is a need to educate, teach and in some ways control even if perhaps in a softer way, there is another thought, this one from the opposite direction, specific and identity-driven from the Left, which stems perhaps from the correct need to challenge an idea of so-called heterosexuality that is actually violence, as we are told by the constant feminicides that occur daily. And feminicides are just the tip of the iceberg of so many sick relationships. Now that women are beginning to regain a certainty of self, an autonomy of their own, it emerges clearly what has been hiding in the male/female relationship. If this is the male identity, it is clear that it must be rejected. But rejection cannot be annihilation. Instead, for the Left, sexual identities must disappear to make way for a fluid gender membership that can change every day. If a little boy doesn’t feel he is a boy, perhaps because somehow he doesn’t want to accept that violence he has seen too many times in his father, I don’t think we help him by saying: don’t worry Carlo, from tomorrow you will be called Carla and the problem is solved. We need more serious research on these things otherwise we risk doing damage.
One cannot confuse sacrosanct civil rights with sanity in the name of a generic freedom that would lead to happiness-I have many doubts that this is the case. Freedom is a concept that pertains to civil rights, not to Medicine, to medicine of the mind in this case.
So dear leftist politicians you must start asking yourselves what idea you have of the human being, clear your minds, research and study. Get an idea of the physiology and pathology of the human mind and then ask yourselves what kind of society you want to make people well. But to do all this you must find the strength, courage and wisdom to know how to reject the existing, starting with yourselves.
You complain that the Right speaks to people’s bellies, but if you cannot speak to people’s bellies what you say will never come. Some people say it’s a communication problem but I wouldn’t call it that at all or at least I would ask what are the causes. I think one of the problems is not having the ideas to be able to formulate a radically alternative political proposal instead of always chasing after the Right. Politics is not just about daily chastising the things the rulers do, which is too easy. It is much more than that!
But the other problem, connected to the first, is that you do not speak with YOUR belly, but with rationality that is split from your belly. Let me try to put it brutally like this: you do not get the desire towards the different, you do not get the desire to make love to it, but you tolerate and accept it because your correctness, your reasoning tells you that it is right even though perhaps your belly tells you otherwise. Put still another way, it seems that you are not so deeply convinced of what you are saying either; after all, you don’t believe it either. You are just more in control. And in fact you stutter and fail to make radically different proposals.
Meloni says things that I don’t agree with at all, but you feel that they come out of her belly and so they come. But you are as convinced as she is that the belly of human beings, so yours too, is naturally bad and ugly. So nothing will ever pass, you feel like taking communication courses! You have not understood why so many people no longer vote for you or go to vote, you have not understood why they label you as radical chic. You have to propose a vision of society with which to awaken the other belly of the people that you have been asleep for too long.
Marco Michelini
Leave a Reply