For those not taking drugs, one who takes drugs is a "different." And as such is generally destitute of humanity, both through the racist hatred that always attract me to the "other" and through any understanding or compassion. In relations with the "different" intolerance or tolerance are the same thing. It must be said however that while the intolerant believe that the diversity explanations and therefore did not deserve only hate, we often ask the tolerant, more or less honestly, what are the reasons for this diversity.
Now both I and my player we are "tolerant" is to have some doubts about this? So the question I ask is: "Why those" other "who are drug addicts take drugs?" There is undoubtedly an explanation regarding the individual, namely psychology. If I speak and analyze - without either sentimentality or moralizing or complicity - a single addict, I experienced a real life to be taken into consideration: with her childhood, her parents, her woes, and so on. So what little knowledge in psychoanalytic any intellectual capacity is sufficient to draw any diagnosis: the diagnosis which is eternally the same, however: death wish. This "fine"
individual - often even aware - sheds light backward and below, on the whole individuality analyzed, which is so deeply made consistent: as one of its own. The "diversity" is always inaccessible. But if the relationship with the individual drugs do not have, you know, markets, and unrelated - and the excess of a concrete "case" human being, is as elusive than ever in history - as opposed to the relationship with the mass of drug addicts, or rather, with the drugs, can be made speakable, rationalized, historicized.
"As for my personal, and very little experience, what I seem to know about the drug problem is the following fact: the drug is always a substitute. It is precisely a substitute for culture. That so What is certain is too linear, too simple and generic. But realizing the complications come when you examine things closely. At an average level - on "many" - the drug is to fill a void caused by the fact
death wish and that is therefore a lack of culture.
to love the culture we need strong vitality. Because the culture - in the specific sense, or rather class - a possession: and nothing requires a more intense crazy energy and the desire to possess. Who has not even a small dose of this energy, giving up. And because, in general, because of his injury and its sensitivity is an individual, for the specific culture, the elite, which opens here this cultural void around him the rest he desperately wanted (to die) : he fills that void with substitute drugs. The effect of the drug, then mimics the rational knowledge through experience, so to speak, but aberrant in some way homologous to it. Even at a higher level occurs something like this: there are writers and artists who take drugs. Why are they doing? Also, I think, to fill a void, but this time it is not simply a lack of culture, but of necessity and a lack of imagination. The drug in this case is to replace despair with grace, style with fashion. Do not pronounce an opinion. I say one thing. There are times when the greatest artists are just desperate Mannerist.
The reader will have noticed that so far I have spoken of the drugs in the same way where I could talk about ten or twenty years ago, not to say a century ago.
that I spoke to a group of individuals who, for their good reasons, they wanted to get lost, do the "great refusal," giving up big consolation and usufruct of the current values \u200b\u200bof a culture and the lure possession of that objective as it is case specific and individual. In fact, I spoke of the specific culture of the elite: Class.
But the word "culture" does not indicate only the specific culture, elite class: this indicates also, and above all (according to the scientific use that make ethnologists, anthropologists, sociologists best) knowledge and how to be a country as a whole, ie the historical quality of the people with the infinite set of rules, often unwritten, and often even unconscious, that determine its vision of reality and regulate its behavior.
Now, there are historical periods when there is no room for drugs, or rather, this space in another in the cultural vacuum that is not "within" individuals, who have decided to move forward with this gap and to accelerate their demise with the substitute drug culture. One of the historical periods in which there was little space for the drug was for example the historical period that we have recently and, apparently, so happily, passed: it was indeed a period of repression clerical-fascist (the vent 'Democrat and thirty years of fascism). In fact, this period (I speak of Italy: they are, still, in my shame, Italian and dialectologist) persisted in the dominated class - that is practically in a country that had done no revolution - in which the class was numerically dominant oligarchy (The Vatican, the great industries of the north and little else) - and the middle classes were nothing more than a plebeian masses slightly higher economic level - was continuing, say, the whole Italian people paleoindustrial farmer and a culture - or rather , a set of particular cultures - in which the values \u200b\u200band models were rock solid, and the "tradition" exclusive. "Repress" the people, by the clerical-fascist powers that have followed, was to make sense of official (and therefore stupid, insane) to the real values \u200b\u200bof that tradition popular with the police force and impose it.
In such a situation the phenomenon of drug history could not be a strictly middle-class phenomenon: the drug that could only be the surrogate of a specific culture, elite class. The people had nothing to do. His "culture" was not in question either in crisis: it was as it had for centuries, if not thousands of years (every folk tradition is actually transnational). It 's true that even today, if I go to Piazza Navona and meeting a junkie with air that passes dangling boring and vaguely left, I hear him in the character of unhappiness and rejection philistine: I curse and the mysterious circumstances which compelled him single, to smoke hashish instead of reading a book. However the meeting in Piazza Navona, although ritual so to speak, is not typical. E 'infinitely more typical encounter a drug addict in a bar in Piazza del Cinquecento or Quarticciolo. What I mean by that? I mean that the drug has radically changed character than it was ten or twenty years ago. And 'now that is a phenomenon that affects the mass and therefore includes all social classes (even if its "model" is petty bourgeois, and is perhaps one provided by the dispute).
... So we now live in a time when the "space" (or "empty") for the drug is greatly increased. And why? Because culture in the anthropological sense, "total" in Italy was destroyed. So its values \u200b\u200band its traditional models (use this word here in the best sense) or are more or start to not count any more.
For example, the two values \u200b\u200b"God" and "family" values \u200b\u200bthat are two idiots and insane when they speak in the name of a priest or morality (even in uniform), but are two values \u200b\u200bper se, when in their name establishes a popular life-even below the level of what we call history - today no longer matter: in their name can no longer speak to any young man, let alone a young drug addict. The fall of the prestigious "unrelated" to all the values \u200b\u200bof an entire culture, could only produce a kind of "mutation" anthropological, and could not cause a crisis "total". All social classes are involved, and the loss of values concern for everyone, although most affected are young people of the poorer classes: just because they lived a "culture" far more secure and absolutely one experienced by the young of the dominant classes
. I see that drive (July 20, 1975) they tend to "limit" the phenomenon of drugs, with concern at the bottom sdrammatizzante, or blaming, according to a classic too, the company. In fact, the drug phenomenon is a phenomenon in the phenomenon, and this is the second larger phenomenon that matters: that is, indeed, a truly great historical tragedy. This is, I insist, the loss of the values \u200b\u200bof an entire culture that values, however, were not replaced by new ones
culture (unless you have to "adapt", as would be tragically correct to consider a "culture" of consumerism.
The big problem is not compensated for the loss of values \u200b\u200b- which includes the extremist phenomenon of mass of the drug - therefore applies to all young people of our country (except for now, as I have said before, those who have made the only choice cultural elements as possible: young people enrolled in the Italian Communist Party). The young Italians together constitute a perhaps now unbridgeable social evil: are either unhappy or criminal (or criminaloidi) or extremist or
conformists: and all to an extent unknown until now. Because drug addicts are placed so say the forefront of this irrevocable determination of young people to live a void and a loss, and get in position to be inaccessible, that is no longer accepted in the name of anything to talk to them (unless it is subcultural topics) - for this reason, I say, I'm not soft on young people who take drugs. In fact I tend to have for them a priori and strong dislike. On the one hand there is the presumption in their blackmail commit an act under which they mythologized-cultural, the other is my personal dislike to accept the flight, renunciation, non-availability. And 'why when Pannella made his act of "disobedience" for the decriminalization of soft drugs, I immediately came to mind at least ten other reasons that make such an act of disobedience naturally
bypassing the left panel. Sooner or later I will say those reasons. But meanwhile, I must say that I understand, however, that the fight for the decriminalization of drugs (for me, even the heaviest) is a central act and not a marginal fight for real tolerance. Why? My colleagues say almost all intellectuals are convinced that Italy, somehow, has improved. In fact, Italy is a horrible place: just a few days to go abroad and then return. I had the measure of the abyss into which the Italians are struggling, like worms, even coming back from Barcelona (city anxiety, however, that gives a breathtaking: the past is unbearable). And I speak mainly of young Italy. So if there is someone who, realizing unconsciously, perhaps, and perhaps through sub-cultural mythologizing of that,
wants to die, how can a company who offers him a tragic and disgusting spectacle, unable to do so?
Source: Corriere della Sera, July 24, 1975 Now both I and my player we are "tolerant" is to have some doubts about this? So the question I ask is: "Why those" other "who are drug addicts take drugs?" There is undoubtedly an explanation regarding the individual, namely psychology. If I speak and analyze - without either sentimentality or moralizing or complicity - a single addict, I experienced a real life to be taken into consideration: with her childhood, her parents, her woes, and so on. So what little knowledge in psychoanalytic any intellectual capacity is sufficient to draw any diagnosis: the diagnosis which is eternally the same, however: death wish. This "fine"
individual - often even aware - sheds light backward and below, on the whole individuality analyzed, which is so deeply made consistent: as one of its own. The "diversity" is always inaccessible. But if the relationship with the individual drugs do not have, you know, markets, and unrelated - and the excess of a concrete "case" human being, is as elusive than ever in history - as opposed to the relationship with the mass of drug addicts, or rather, with the drugs, can be made speakable, rationalized, historicized.
"As for my personal, and very little experience, what I seem to know about the drug problem is the following fact: the drug is always a substitute. It is precisely a substitute for culture. That so What is certain is too linear, too simple and generic. But realizing the complications come when you examine things closely. At an average level - on "many" - the drug is to fill a void caused by the fact
death wish and that is therefore a lack of culture.
to love the culture we need strong vitality. Because the culture - in the specific sense, or rather class - a possession: and nothing requires a more intense crazy energy and the desire to possess. Who has not even a small dose of this energy, giving up. And because, in general, because of his injury and its sensitivity is an individual, for the specific culture, the elite, which opens here this cultural void around him the rest he desperately wanted (to die) : he fills that void with substitute drugs. The effect of the drug, then mimics the rational knowledge through experience, so to speak, but aberrant in some way homologous to it. Even at a higher level occurs something like this: there are writers and artists who take drugs. Why are they doing? Also, I think, to fill a void, but this time it is not simply a lack of culture, but of necessity and a lack of imagination. The drug in this case is to replace despair with grace, style with fashion. Do not pronounce an opinion. I say one thing. There are times when the greatest artists are just desperate Mannerist.
The reader will have noticed that so far I have spoken of the drugs in the same way where I could talk about ten or twenty years ago, not to say a century ago.
that I spoke to a group of individuals who, for their good reasons, they wanted to get lost, do the "great refusal," giving up big consolation and usufruct of the current values \u200b\u200bof a culture and the lure possession of that objective as it is case specific and individual. In fact, I spoke of the specific culture of the elite: Class.
But the word "culture" does not indicate only the specific culture, elite class: this indicates also, and above all (according to the scientific use that make ethnologists, anthropologists, sociologists best) knowledge and how to be a country as a whole, ie the historical quality of the people with the infinite set of rules, often unwritten, and often even unconscious, that determine its vision of reality and regulate its behavior.
Now, there are historical periods when there is no room for drugs, or rather, this space in another in the cultural vacuum that is not "within" individuals, who have decided to move forward with this gap and to accelerate their demise with the substitute drug culture. One of the historical periods in which there was little space for the drug was for example the historical period that we have recently and, apparently, so happily, passed: it was indeed a period of repression clerical-fascist (the vent 'Democrat and thirty years of fascism). In fact, this period (I speak of Italy: they are, still, in my shame, Italian and dialectologist) persisted in the dominated class - that is practically in a country that had done no revolution - in which the class was numerically dominant oligarchy (The Vatican, the great industries of the north and little else) - and the middle classes were nothing more than a plebeian masses slightly higher economic level - was continuing, say, the whole Italian people paleoindustrial farmer and a culture - or rather , a set of particular cultures - in which the values \u200b\u200band models were rock solid, and the "tradition" exclusive. "Repress" the people, by the clerical-fascist powers that have followed, was to make sense of official (and therefore stupid, insane) to the real values \u200b\u200bof that tradition popular with the police force and impose it.
In such a situation the phenomenon of drug history could not be a strictly middle-class phenomenon: the drug that could only be the surrogate of a specific culture, elite class. The people had nothing to do. His "culture" was not in question either in crisis: it was as it had for centuries, if not thousands of years (every folk tradition is actually transnational). It 's true that even today, if I go to Piazza Navona and meeting a junkie with air that passes dangling boring and vaguely left, I hear him in the character of unhappiness and rejection philistine: I curse and the mysterious circumstances which compelled him single, to smoke hashish instead of reading a book. However the meeting in Piazza Navona, although ritual so to speak, is not typical. E 'infinitely more typical encounter a drug addict in a bar in Piazza del Cinquecento or Quarticciolo. What I mean by that? I mean that the drug has radically changed character than it was ten or twenty years ago. And 'now that is a phenomenon that affects the mass and therefore includes all social classes (even if its "model" is petty bourgeois, and is perhaps one provided by the dispute).
... So we now live in a time when the "space" (or "empty") for the drug is greatly increased. And why? Because culture in the anthropological sense, "total" in Italy was destroyed. So its values \u200b\u200band its traditional models (use this word here in the best sense) or are more or start to not count any more.
For example, the two values \u200b\u200b"God" and "family" values \u200b\u200bthat are two idiots and insane when they speak in the name of a priest or morality (even in uniform), but are two values \u200b\u200bper se, when in their name establishes a popular life-even below the level of what we call history - today no longer matter: in their name can no longer speak to any young man, let alone a young drug addict. The fall of the prestigious "unrelated" to all the values \u200b\u200bof an entire culture, could only produce a kind of "mutation" anthropological, and could not cause a crisis "total". All social classes are involved, and the loss of values concern for everyone, although most affected are young people of the poorer classes: just because they lived a "culture" far more secure and absolutely one experienced by the young of the dominant classes
. I see that drive (July 20, 1975) they tend to "limit" the phenomenon of drugs, with concern at the bottom sdrammatizzante, or blaming, according to a classic too, the company. In fact, the drug phenomenon is a phenomenon in the phenomenon, and this is the second larger phenomenon that matters: that is, indeed, a truly great historical tragedy. This is, I insist, the loss of the values \u200b\u200bof an entire culture that values, however, were not replaced by new ones
culture (unless you have to "adapt", as would be tragically correct to consider a "culture" of consumerism.
The big problem is not compensated for the loss of values \u200b\u200b- which includes the extremist phenomenon of mass of the drug - therefore applies to all young people of our country (except for now, as I have said before, those who have made the only choice cultural elements as possible: young people enrolled in the Italian Communist Party). The young Italians together constitute a perhaps now unbridgeable social evil: are either unhappy or criminal (or criminaloidi) or extremist or
conformists: and all to an extent unknown until now. Because drug addicts are placed so say the forefront of this irrevocable determination of young people to live a void and a loss, and get in position to be inaccessible, that is no longer accepted in the name of anything to talk to them (unless it is subcultural topics) - for this reason, I say, I'm not soft on young people who take drugs. In fact I tend to have for them a priori and strong dislike. On the one hand there is the presumption in their blackmail commit an act under which they mythologized-cultural, the other is my personal dislike to accept the flight, renunciation, non-availability. And 'why when Pannella made his act of "disobedience" for the decriminalization of soft drugs, I immediately came to mind at least ten other reasons that make such an act of disobedience naturally
bypassing the left panel. Sooner or later I will say those reasons. But meanwhile, I must say that I understand, however, that the fight for the decriminalization of drugs (for me, even the heaviest) is a central act and not a marginal fight for real tolerance. Why? My colleagues say almost all intellectuals are convinced that Italy, somehow, has improved. In fact, Italy is a horrible place: just a few days to go abroad and then return. I had the measure of the abyss into which the Italians are struggling, like worms, even coming back from Barcelona (city anxiety, however, that gives a breathtaking: the past is unbearable). And I speak mainly of young Italy. So if there is someone who, realizing unconsciously, perhaps, and perhaps through sub-cultural mythologizing of that,
wants to die, how can a company who offers him a tragic and disgusting spectacle, unable to do so?
(published by: Psychonaut)
0 comments:
Post a Comment