conventions

Conventions – one of the meanings is the following, taken from an online etymology dictionary I occasionally use:

In the social sense, “general agreement on customs, etc., as embodied in accepted standards or usages,” it is attested by 1747 (in a bad sense, implying artificial behavior and repression of natural conduct, by 1847). Hence “rule or practice based on general conduct” (1790).

Yes, there is a bad sense to it – in a book, I was reading I stumbled upon the phrase of the

Interwar Years

http://peacefultomorrows.org/stories/promoting-peace/

I hesitated: as the book – talking about education and democracy during that period – was not clearly European, British, US-American … , I was wondering what this could mean: interwar years? Of course, the convention refers to the years between WW I and WW II, and this is what showed up when looking up on google, also on wikipedia a special site dedicated to this period. However, digging a bit further, there is on the same conventional site (yes, google and wikipedia managed to become some kind of today’s “convention”) one titled

List of wars 1900 -1944.

Quite a result:

148 incidents, counting wars and conflicts commencing between 1919 and 1938, thus definitely “between” the two world wars, literally interwar years.

A piece of peace, if one wants, and if understands piece as “a little bit”. Easily overlooked when reading too fast, just accepting conventions: The INTERwar years had been years engaged in many wars

Annunci

Wir verurteilen die Ausweitung der verbrecherischen Kriegspolitik von USA, Großbritannien und Frankreich auf dem syrischen Territorium mit Zustimmung der Bundeskanzlerin – Stellungnahme von Mitgliedern des wissenschaftl. Beirats von Attac Deutschland

Stellungnahme von Mitgliedern des wissenschaftl. Beirats von Attac Deutschland; Berlin, 15.04.2018

Wir verurteilen die Ausweitung der verbrecherischen Kriegspolitik von USA, Großbritannien und Frankreich auf dem syrischen Territorium mit Zustimmung der Bundeskanzlerin

 

Die massive Schuldzuweisung der USA und ihrer Verbündeten an die Adresse der syrischen und russischen Präsidenten Assad und Putin nach dem mutmaßlichen Giftgaseinsatz im syrischen Duma sowie die jüngsten Militäreinsätze, verbunden mit der Kriegsdrohung des US-Präsidenten Trump gegen Russland erwecken den Eindruck einer von langer Hand geplanten Inszenierung zur Vorbereitung eines in letzter Konsequenz gegen Russland gerichteten Krieges, der in einen unkontrollierbaren globalen Flächenbrand einzumünden droht.

Wir sind äußerst empört und besorgt über den verantwortungslosen Umgang nicht zuletzt der Bundesregierung angesichts ihrer leichtfertigen Unterstützung der Position der Regierungen in Großbritannien, Frankreich und den USA. Anstatt auf diese mäßigend Einfluss zu nehmen, gießt sie Öl in das Feuer.

Wir erklären: Giftgaseinsätze sind Kriegsverbrechen. Diese müssen vor dem Haager Tribunal mit entsprechenden Konsequenzen verhandelt werden. Jedwede kriegerische Handlungen auf Grund von Mutmaßungen durch einen Staat oder ein Bündnis von Staaten stellen selbst ein Kriegsverbrechen dar. Sie gehören ebenfalls vor das UN-Kriegsverbrecher-Tribunal.

Wir verurteilen die Haltung der deutschen Bundesregierung im aktuellen Konflikt:

– Es ist politisch unverantwortlich, dass die Bundeskanzlerin und der Außenminister sich im Skripal-Fall die Schuldzuweisungen der britischen Regierung gegen Russland zu eigen gemacht haben.

– Es ist ein Skandal, wenn der Vorsitzende des Auswärtigen Ausschusses im Bundestag, Norbert Röttgen, öffentlich und bisher unwidersprochen kundtut, dass „Unschuldsvermutung und rechtstaatliche Verfahren nur für innerstaatliche Strafverfahren“ gelten und die Übertragung rechtsstaatlicher Grundsätze auf internationale Beziehungen wirklich Unsinn“ sei. Herr Röttgen wirft damit sämtliche auf Grund der Nazi-Kriegsverbrechen entwickelten UN-Regeln, -Verfahren und -Institutionen, wie den Haager Gerichtshof und die Menschenrechtkonvention, ja das Völkerrecht insgesamt, über Bord.

– Es ist nicht nachvollziehbar, wenn Frau Merkel sich faktisch hinter Trump, den unberechenbaren US-Präsidenten, stellt und behauptet, „die Evidenz, dass dort Chemiewaffen eingesetzt wurden,” sei “sehr, sehr klar und sehr deutlich”, um dann indirekt Assad und Putin für den angeblichen Giftgaseinsatz in Syrien verantwortlich zu machen. Es ist nicht hinnehmbar, dass sie die Mitwirkung der Bundesrepublik an einem völkerrechtswidrigen Angriffskrieg ankündigt.

– Wir verlangen von der Bundesregierung, sich von der Politik der Regierungen in Großbritannien, Frankreich und den USA, die den Weltfrieden aufs Äußerste bedrohen, klar zu distanzieren und deutsche AWACS-Flugzeuge im Rahmen der US-geführten „Anti-IS-Allianz“ sofort zurückzubeordern.

– Wir fordern die Bundesregierung und das deutsche Parlament eindringlich auf, die Rüstungsausgaben unter keinen Umständen zu erhöhen und darauf hinzuwirken, dass der NATO-Beschluss zu ihrer Erhöhung auf zwei Prozent des Bruttoinlandsprodukts ersatzlos zurückgenommen wird.

V.i.S.d.P.: Prof. Dr. Mohssen Massarrat, Mohssen.Massarrat@uos.de, Tel: 0176-96746309

 

UnterzeichnerInnen:

Prof. Dr. Michael Brie, Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Däubler, Prof. Dr. Peter Herrmann, Prof. Dr. Rudolf Hickel, Dr. Fritz Storim, Prof. Dr. Michael Schneider, Prof. Dr. Mohssen Massarrat, Prof. Dr. Christoph Butterwegge, Prof. Dr. Armin Bernhard, Prof. Dr. Frigga Haug, Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Fritz Haug, Dr. Werner Rügemer, Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Neef, Prof. Dr. Frieder Otto Wolf, Prof. Dr. Stefan Bestmann, Dr. Lydia Krüger, Prof. Dr. Rudolph Bauer, Prof. Dr. Birgit Mahnkopf, apl. Prof. Dr. Nico Paech, Prof. Dr. John Neelsen, Prof. Dr. Ulrich Duchrow, Prof. Dr. Ingrid Lohmann, Dr. Lutz Mez, Prof. Dr. Ulrich Brand, Prof. Dr. Klaus Meschkat, Dr. Thomas Sablowski, Dr. Josef Berghold, Prof. Dr. Jörg Reitzig, Prof. Dr. Norman Paech, Dr. Winfried Wolf, Dr.Heike Knops, Prof. Dr. Isidor Wallimann

Reminder for the Future

It may be questionable to state one day, one event as beginning of a war, though it had been the first of September nineteen-hundred-thirty-nine that the German troops invaded Poland, under false accusations. The date is taken as occasion to post a reminder, unfortunately seeing today again so many reasons in so many countries to be mobilised against moves towards violence and war. Many ways can be imagined, many wise things said – in length and in short slogans and paintings and demands – as already Kaethe Kollwitz’ lithography from 1924,

[1]

demanding ‘Never again War’.

There is one short passage in Zuckmeyer’s The Devils General, which brings it in an impressive way the point – not translating well from the German. It is part of the dispute between SS-group-leader Schmidt-Lausitz and general Harras, the latter shouting against the group-leader:

What did you just say? Fatherland [Vaterland]? You? What do you understand as fatherland? Hä? Just spell it!

V as Volksgerichtshof (People’s Court of Justice)! A as hanging! T as death! E as shooting! R as racial persecution! L as camp! Ausschwitz, Neuengamme, Dachau

You see, this is how fatherland is spelled today in Germany!

the original German version:

“Watt haben Sie da gesagt?” Vaterland?! Sie? Was versteh Sie den darunter?

“Hä? Buchstabieren Sie doch mal”

“V wie Volksgerichtshof! A wie Aufhängen! T wie Tod! E wie Erschießen! R wie Rassenverfolgung! L wie Lager! Ausschwitz, Neuengamme, Dachau

Sehen Sie, so buchstabiert man heute in Deutschland Vaterland!”

[For the short scene from the film see here].

Terms and letters, occasions …, all this may be different – but the underlying patterns never changed!

 

 

 

[1]            Antikriegsplakat von Käthe Kollwitz für den Mitteldeutschen Jugendtag 1924 (Lithographie, 95,2 cm x 72,3 cm; Quelle: DHM) – http://www.zeithistorische-forschungen.de/1-2-2007/id%3D4397; 22/08/17

“Interesting times” we may say …

“Interesting times” we may say …

… and we may say that “probably every generation, every era was in its own terms an interesting time” …

but in any case we, at least not all of us can dance it away:

“Frankly speaking I am a bit afraid”

“Ich weiss nicht, wie es weither geht”

“Ho paura!”

Yes, every generation …

****

It may appear to be about details – and these are forgotten, overlooked details – and they are details by way of being

the concrete … [being] concrete because it is the concentration of many determinations, hence unity of the diverse.

As such they are part of the long history of imperialism, colonialism ….

Today it is for instance visible in the fact that the 6 richest countries of the world host only 9 % of all refugees.

Old colonialism went fro a kind of crusades, violently occupying foreign territory; the new colonialism presenting itself as “humane” by closing borders; like the old fascism, gasifying people in concentration camps, compared with its modern form of gasifying populations as we learn from the FT-Brussels briefing, Duncan Robinson stating on the 20th of July:

A conspiracy that started in a “cosy hotel” in Brussels ended in the EU’s biggest cartel fine, after the European Commission handed five truck makers a €2.9bn bill. Senior managers from Iveco, DAF, Volvo/Renault, Daimler and MAN fixed prices and delayed the introduction of emissions-reducing technology. MAN’s decision to blow the whistle was the best financial decision the German group has made in years: it dodged a €1.2bn bill as a result.

Back to the obvious colonialisation in its new dress. Indeed, as the OXFAM-media briefing contends

This crisis is far too big for any one country to solve alone. To save and protect lives, governments worldwide must act together and responsibly. In a couple of months the United Nations and US President Obama are holding back-to-back summits in New York to address this unprecedented situation. These summits are opportunities for rich countries to commit to offering refuge to far more refugees than almost all have done to date, and for all countries to improve the way people forced to flee are treated, and provide them with a dignified future.

Thinking about this, we surely have to go beyond the sole “distribution of surplus”, moving as close as possible to production. And though Imagining a New Bretton Woods, is still not much more than a Modest Proposal, it may be one of the first steps towards radicalisaiton …

Furthermore, and importantly mind: … the concrete is part of the solidarity against this system of global exploitation – the weak showing their strength by “giving more than they have themselves”

Community Doctors: A look inside Cuba’s medical scholarship program

****

The idea of inner colonialisation is usually seen in close connection with Rosa Luxemburg – it is, in a nutshell, the idea of the permanent and ongoing “primitive” or “original accumulation” as we know it from instance from Smith and Marx.

And we may think about it by recalling the occupation of the Americas by the White Settlers – the harsh reality that stood behind the kitschy and euphemistic images of Winnetou and Old Shatterhand, presented by Karl May – and looking today at their conservative successors – peacefully dumb (sorry for ads – the clip itself is German/English); and aggressively taking over power (sorry for ads – the clip itself is German/English)

****

“Frankly speaking I am a bit afraid”

“Ich weiss nicht, wie es weither geht”

“Ho paura!”

– And there are enough who have good reasons to be afraid – for instance Erdal. Or Thuli Madonsela

And there still is something we, in the jobs of teachers and researchers have to do, resisting the permanent and ongoing inner colonialisation: We cannot take the fear away, but we have to teach about the conditions under which fear develops, searching together for ways to change this reality …

… living trustfulness as matter of accepting the other and supporting confidence – as condition for being active, for resisting

… as matter of Dreaming of a Butterfly becoming possible and true, rising against eagles and vultures …

… this way we may be searching and finding together with others – colleagues and students valuable people, truly acknowledging the value of people.

Morals and Standards

Another time we see the meaning of the words we find in the first volume of The Capital, chapter 31, dealing with the Genesis of the Industrial Capitalist

“Capital is said by a Quarterly Reviewer to fly turbulence and strife, and to be timid, which is very true; but this is very incompletely stating the question. Capital eschews no profit, or very small profit, just as Nature was formerly said to abhor a vacuum. With adequate profit, capital is very bold. A certain 10 per cent. will ensure its employment anywhere; 20 per cent. certain will produce eagerness; 50 per cent., positive audacity; 100 per cent. will make it ready to trample on all human laws; 300 per cent., and there is not a crime at which it will scruple, nor a risk it will not run, even to the chance of its owner being hanged. If turbulence and strife will bring a profit, it will freely encourage both. Smuggling and the slave-trade have amply proved all that is here stated.” (T. J. Dunning, l. c., pp. 35, 36.)

It is not about the genesis though, it also and even more so about maintaining the role of capital in general, paradoxically pushing you to produce and tighten the rope that may one day be seen hanging down the gibbet, when walking up the last stairs. Or is there another way to interpret the following

Saudis Use European Arms for ‘Human Rights Violations’

Is it too cynical to demand that the profits should be at least used to accommodate the refugees?

It is just appalling  to see that, what we sometimes hope to be exaggerations, is brute reality.

War, Modesty and Good Life

Perfection of means and confusion of goals seem—in my opinion—to characterize our age.
(from Einstein, Albert: “The Common Language of Science”, a broadcast for Science, Conference, London, 28 September 1941. Published in Advancement of Science, London, Vol. 2, No. 5. Reprinted in Ideas and Opinions [1954])

As in discussions on Greece the metaphor “from tanks to banks” had been used frequently, it may be of some interest then to look back at another war, where tanks, bombs and furious invasion attacks played a role, an attack on at least two countries: Vietnam and the United States of Northern America itself, undermining any kind of legitimacy, but also and with it its own integrity.

There is one passage in the

Remarks at the University of Kansas made by Robert F. Kennedy on March 18, 1968 

And this is one of the great tasks of leadership for us, as individuals and citizens this year. But even if we act to erase material poverty, there is another greater task, it is to confront the poverty of satisfaction – purpose and dignity – that afflicts us all. Too much and for too long, we seemed to have surrendered personal excellence and community values in the mere accumulation of material things. Our Gross National Product, now, is over $800 billion dollars a year, but that Gross National Product – if we judge the United States of America by that – that Gross National Product counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage. It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for the people who break them. It counts the destruction of the redwood and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic sprawl. It counts napalm and counts nuclear warheads and armored cars for the police to fight the riots in our cities. It counts Whitman’s rifle and Speck’s knife, and the television programs which glorify violence in order to sell toys to our children. Yet the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country, it measures everything in short, except that which makes life worthwhile. And it can tell us everything about America except why we are proud that we are Americans.
If this is true here at home, so it is true elsewhere in world. From the beginning our proudest boast has been the promise of Jefferson, that we, here in this country would be the best hope of mankind. And now, as we look at the war in Vietnam, we wonder if we still hold a decent respect for the opinions of mankind and whether the opinion maintained a descent respect for us or whether like Athens of old, we will forfeit sympathy and support, and ultimately our very security, in the single-minded pursuit of our own goals and our own objectives. I do not want, and I do believe that most Americans do not want, to sell out America’s interest to simply withdraw – to raise the white flag of surrender in Vietnam – that would be unacceptable to us as a people, and unacceptable to us as a country. But I am concerned about the course of action that we are presently following in South Vietnam. I am concerned, I am concerned about the fact that this has been made America’s War. It was said, a number of years ago that this is “their war” “this is the war of the South Vietnamese” that “we can help them, but we can’t win it for them” but over the period of the last three years we have made the war and the struggle in South Vietnam our war, and I think that’s unacceptable.  I don’t accept the idea that this is just a military action, that this is just a military effort, and every time we have had difficulties in South Vietnam and Southeast Asia we have had only one response, we have had only one way to deal with it – month after month – year after year we have dealt with it in only on way and that’s to send more military men and increase our military power and I don’t think that’s what the kind of a struggle that it is in Southeast Asia.

He quotes William Allen White – and White’s remark should be guideline for all, still and especially today when countries of the capitalist core force for the sake of their pure power ambition others to maintain an economic strategy that is unsustainable, unreasonable and serves only one interest: further establishing and maintaining central power — the power of the one percent. We clearly saw another time that all these negotiations had not been about reason and appeals. In the Greek case,

The only weapons they could bring to the negotiating table were reason, logic and European solidarity. But apparently we will live in a Europe were none of those things mean anything.

So what did White say then? Here you are:

“If our colleges and universities do not breed men who riot, who rebel, who attack life with all their youthful vim and vigor, then there is something wrong with our colleges. The more riots that come on college campuses, the better world for tomorrow.”

This may be about riots, literally. But in any case, it definitely means to look for more radical answers to the current challenges – going beyond what we know for decades.
Kennedy’s reference to

mere accumulation of material things

can and to often is read as notion of changing values, asking all of us to change behaviour and move towards the appreciation of non-material values. In this context it is too often referred to modesty, suggested as means against supposed greed. The question, however, is that we have to look at some more fundamental issues which is suggested as five giant tensions:

  • the overproduction of goods and the turn of goods into ‘bads’
  • societal abundance versus inequality of access
  • abundance of knowledge and its misdirection towards skills
  • the individualisation of problems and their emergence as societal threat
  • the complexity of government and the limited scope of governance.

It may be another, hopefully not too modest proposal, not referring to overcoming the crises and their immediate devastating consequences today; but to think today about politics that help to avoid that we just move further from one crisis to another. There is no point to strive for growth where we produce already too much; there is no point in creating material wealth if there is enough that can be distributed; there is no point in creating faster computers and new IT-bases technologies that undermine developing wisdom to properly use it and making use of the results; there is no point in saving individuals to strangulate them afterwards; and their is no point in setting up more and more committees, consultations dcc as long as we do not find a way to legitimate them democratically and do not allow “stakeholders” to act based the money and power they have in form of private resources.
All this is not about greed, it is about combatting the objective laws of an economy that is embedded in a wrong society: a modernity that is plagued by the

Eclipse of Reason 

as Max Horkheimner titled his book from 1947
I presented this outline recently on the Conference of the Annual Conference of the Chinese Social Policy Association (the presentation will soon be online on youtube) and in various papers of which the publication will be announced here. In one or another way it is surely also reflected already in several contributors that are accessible on the researchgate-site.

If we bring things together, we can easily see another interesting point in the remarks by Kennedy, and linked to the devastating war:

we have made the war and the struggle … our war

And this is cum grano salis happening today: the bank-war is not about the interest of the rational functioning of an economy that serves people but it is about an economic system that serves itself, not disembedded, but embedded in a global society that serves the minority living in their gated communities … — an economy of financial markets where money is self-serving instead of being a means that keeps the economy spinning, a society where finally everybody establishes his/her own gated community: asking others to be good, without seeing that this individualist strive is exactly the spade that digs the grave in which we all will end.

Unfortunately those who are ending sooner in the grave are those who still maintain not just the ideas of

reason, logic and … solidarity

but who try to live it in there daily life instead of pompous declarations.