Nov 23, 2020

Ritornano gli euromissili nucleari

November 23, 2020 0 Comments
Manlio Dinucci 19/11/2020

Pochi giorni fa, il 6 novembre, la Lockheed Martin (la stessa che produce gli F-35) ha firmato un primo contratto da 340 milioni di dollari con lo US Army per la produzione di missili a medio raggio, anche a testata nucleare, progettati per essere installati in Europa. I missili di tale categoria erano stati proibiti dal Trattato Inf.

Oltre cinque anni fa titolammo sul Manifesto (9 giugno 2015) «Ritornano i missili a Comiso?». Tale ipotesi fu ignorata dall’intero arco politico e liquidata da sedicenti esperti come «allarmistica». L’allarme, purtroppo, era fondato. Pochi giorni fa, il 6 novembre, la Lockheed Martin (la stessa che produce gli F-35) ha firmato un primo contratto da 340 milioni di dollari con lo US Army per la produzione di missili a medio raggio, anche a testata nucleare, progettati per essere installati in Europa. I missili di tale categoria (con base a terra e gittata tra 500 e 5500 km) erano stati proibiti dal Trattato Inf, firmato nel 1987 dai presidenti Gorbaciov e Reagan: esso aveva eliminato i missili balistici nucleari Pershing 2, schierati dagli Stati uniti in Germania Occidentale, e quelli nucleari da crociera Tomahawk, schierati dagli Stati uniti in Italia (a Comiso), Gran Bretagna, Germania Occidentale, Belgio e Olanda, e allo stesso tempo i missili balistici SS-20 schierati dall’Unione Sovietica sul proprio territorio.

Nel 2014, l’amministrazione Obama accusava la Russia, senza alcuna prova, di aver sperimentato un missile da crociera (sigla 9M729) della categoria proibita dal Trattato e, nel 2015, annunciava che «di fronte alla violazione del Trattato Inf da parte della Russia, gli Stati uniti stanno considerando lo spiegamento in Europa di missili con base a terra». Il testimone è quindi passato all’amministrazione Trump, che nel 2019 ha deciso il ritiro degli Stati uniti dal Trattato Inf, accusando la Russia di averlo «deliberatamente violato». Dopo alcuni test missilistici, è stata incaricata la Lockheed Martin di realizzare un missile da crociera derivato dal Tomahawk e uno balistico derivato dallo SM-6 della Raytheon. Secondo il contratto, i due missili saranno operativi nel 2023: quindi pronti tra due anni ad essere installati in Europa.

Va tenuto presente il fattore geografico: mentre un missile balistico nucleare Usa a medio raggio, lanciato dall’Europa, può colpire Mosca dopo pochi minuti, un analogo missile lanciato dalla Russia può colpire le capitali europee, ma non Washington. Rovesciando lo scenario, è come se la Russia schierasse missili nucleari a medio raggio in Messico. Va inoltre tenuto presente che lo SM-6, specifica la Raytheon, svolge la funzione di «tre missili in uno»: antiaerea, anti-missile e di attacco. Il missile nucleare derivato dallo SM-6 potrà quindi essere usato dalle navi e installazioni terrestri dello «scudo» Usa in Europa i cui tubi di lancio, specifica la Lockheed Martin, possono lanciare «missili per tutte le missioni». In una dichiarazione del 26 ottobre 2020, il presidente Putin riafferma la validità del Trattato Inf, definendo un «grave errore«» il ritiro statunitense, e l’impegno della Russia a non schierare missili analoghi finché gli Usa non schiereranno i loro a ridosso del suo territorio.

Propone quindi ai paesi Nato una «reciproca moratoria» e «reciproche misure di verifica», ossia ispezioni nelle reciproche installazioni missilistiche. La proposta russa è stata ignorata dalla Nato. Il suo segretario generale Jens Stoltenberg ha ribadito, il 10 novembre, che «in un mondo così incerto, le armi nucleari continuano a svolgere un ruolo vitale nella preservazione della pace». Nessuna voce si è levata dai governi e parlamenti europei, pur rischiando l’Europa di trovarsi in prima linea in un confronto nucleare analogo o più pericoloso di quello della guerra fredda. Ma questa non à la minaccia del Covid e quindi non se ne parla. L’Unione Europea, di cui 21 dei 27 membri fanno parte della Nato, ha già fatto sentire la sua voce quando, nel 2018, ha bocciato alle Nazioni Unite la risoluzione presentata dalla Russia sulla «Preservazione e osservanza del Trattato Inf», dando luce verde alla installazione di nuovi missili nucleari Usa in Europa.

Cambierà qualcosa una volta che Joe Biden si sarà insediato alla Casa Bianca? Oppure, dopo che il democratico Obama ha aperto il nuovo confronto nucleare con la Russia e il repubblicano Trump lo ha aggravato stracciando il Trattato Inf, il democratico Biden (già vice di Obama) firmerà l’installazione dei nuovi missili nucleari Usa in Europa?

One in Six Children + Lives in Extreme Poverty - Set to Rise During The Current Pandemic

November 23, 2020 2 Comments
WUNRN 22. November 2020

20 October 2020 - An estimated one in six children – or 356 million globally – were living in extreme poverty before the COVID-19 pandemic began, and this is set to worsen significantly, according to a new World Bank Group and UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) analysis released.

© UNICEF/Niklas Halle'n - Children play outside a metal polishing workshop in a slum in Uttar Pradesh, India.

Global Estimate of Children in Monetary Poverty: An Update, notes that sub-Saharan Africa, with its limited social safety nets, accounts for two-thirds of children living in households that struggle to survive on an average of $1.90 a day or less per person – the international measure for extreme poverty, while South Asia accounts for nearly a fifth of these children. 

The analysis shows that the number living in extreme poverty decreased moderately, by 29 million, between 2013 and 2017. However, UNICEF and the World Bank Group warn that any progress made in recent years, has been “slow-paced, unequally distributed, and at risk” due to the economic impact of the pandemic. 

Struggling for survival 

“One in six children living in extreme poverty is one in six children struggling to survive”, said Sanjay Wijesekera, UNICEF Director of Programmes. 

“These numbers alone should shock anyone. And the scale and depth of what we know about the financial hardships brought on by the pandemic, are only set to make matters far worse. Governments urgently need a children’s recovery plan to prevent countless more children and their families from reaching levels of poverty unseen for many, many years.” 

Although children make up around a third of the global population, around half of the extreme poor are children. Furthermore, they are more than twice as likely to be extremely poor as adults. 

The youngest children are the worst off – nearly 20 per cent of all of them below the age of 5 in the developing world, live in extremely poor households, the report highlights. 

“The fact that one in six children were living in extreme poverty and that 50 per cent of the global extreme poor were children, even prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, is of grave concern to us all,” said Carolina Sánchez-Páramo, Global Director of Poverty and Equity for the World Bank. 

“Extreme poverty deprives hundreds of millions of children of the opportunity to reach their potential, in terms of physical and cognitive development, and threatens their ability to get good jobs in adulthood. 

“In the wake of the massive economic disruption caused by the pandemic, it is more crucial than ever that governments support poor households with children now and rebuild their human capital during the recovery.” 

Children lagging behind parents 

Extreme poverty among children has not fallen as much as it has for adults, and a larger share of the global poor were children in 2017, compared with the 2013 figure. 

All regions of the world experienced varying levels of decline in extreme poverty among children, apart from Sub-Saharan Africa, which saw a 64 million increase in the absolute number of children struggling to survive on $1.90 a day, from 170 million in 2013 to 234 million in 2017. 

Conflict makes it worse 

Child poverty is more prevalent in fragile and conflict-affected countries, where more than 40 per cent of children live in extremely poor households, compared to nearly 15 per cent of children in other countries, the analysis says. It also notes that more than 70 per cent of children in extreme poverty live in a household where the head of the house, works in the fields or pastures. 

The ongoing COVID-19 crisis will continue to disproportionately impact children, women and girls, threatening to reverse hard-won gains towards gender equality, the report predicts, which great social protection has a crucial role to play to improve coping mechanisms for the poor and vulnerable in both the immediate COVID-19 response as well as the longer-term recovery. 

World Bank and UNICEF data suggest that most countries have responded to the crisis by expanding social protection programmes, particularly cash transfers, which provide a platform for longer-term investments in human capital. 

In for the long haul 

However, many of the responses are short-term and not adequate to respond to the size and expected long-term nature of the recovery, says the report. 



It is more important than ever for governments to scale up and adjust their social protection systems and programmes to prepare for future shocks, including innovations for financial sustainability; strengthening legal and institutional frameworks; protecting human capital; expanding child and family benefits for the long term; as well as investing in family-friendly policies, such as paid parental leave and quality child care for all.

LATIN AMERICA – INCREASED VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN, SEXUAL VIOLENCE & FEMICIDE DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC & UNDER LOCKDOWN

November 23, 2020 0 Comments
WUNRN 21. November 2020

It’s a pandemic within the pandemic. Across
Latin America, gender-based violence has spiked since COVID-19 broke out.

Women demand justice for Mexico’s many murdered women at a protest against gender violence in Mexico CIty, Aug. 15, 2020. Nadya Murillo / Eyepix Group/Barcroft Media via Getty

Almost 1,200 women disappeared in Peru between March 11 and June 30, the Ministry of Women reported. In Brazil, 143 women in 12 states were murdered in March and April – a 22% increase over the same period in 2019.

Reports of rape, murder and domestic violence are also way up in Mexico. In Guatemala, they’re down significantly – a likely sign that women are too afraid to call the police on the partners they’re locked down with.

The pandemic worsened but did not create this problem: Latin America has long been among the world’s deadliest places to be a woman.

Don’t blame ‘machismo’

I have spent three decades studying gendered violence as well as women’s organizing in Latin America, an increasingly vocal and potent social force.

Though patriarchy is part of the problem, Latin America’s gender violence cannot simply be attributed to “machismo.” Nor is gender inequality particularly extreme there. Education levels among Latin American women and girls have been rising for decades and – unlike the U.S. – many countries have quotas for women to hold political office. Several have elected women presidents.

My research, which often centers on Indigenous communities, traces violence against women in Latin America instead to both the region’s colonial history and to a complex web of social, racial, gender and economic inequalities.

I’ll use Guatemala, a country I know well, as a case study to unravel this thread. But we could engage in a similar exercise with other Latin American countries or the U.S., where violence against women is a pervasive, historically rooted problem, too – and one that disproportionately affects women of color.

In Guatemala, where 600 to 700 women are killed every year, gendered violence has deep roots. Mass rape carried out during massacres was a tool of systematic, generalized terror during the country’s 36-year civil war, when citizens and armed insurgencies rose up against the government. The war, which ended in 1996, killed over 200,000 Guatemalans.

Mass rape has been used as a weapon of war in many conflicts. In Guatemala, government forces targeted Indigenous women. While Guatemala’s Indigenous population is between 44% and 60% Indigenous, based on the census and other demographic data, about 90% of the over 100,000 women raped during the war were Indigenous Mayans.

Testimonies from the war demonstrate that soldiers saw Indigenous women as having little humanity. They knew Mayan women could be raped, killed and mutilated with impunity. This is a legacy of Spanish colonialism. Starting in the 16th century, Indigenous peoples and Afro-descendants across the Americas were enslaved or compelled into forced labor by the Spanish, treated as private property, often brutally.

Some Black and Indigenous women actually tried to fight their ill treatment in court during the colonial period, but they had fewer legal rights than white Spanish conquerors and their descendants. The subjugation and marginalization of Black and Indigenous Latin Americans continues into the present day.

Internalized oppression



In Guatemala, violence against women affects Indigenous women disproportionately, but not exclusively. Conservative Catholic and evangelical moral teachings hold that women should be chaste and obey their husbands, creating the idea that men can control the women with whom they are in a sexual relationship.

In a 2014 survey published by the Latin American Public Opinion Project at Vanderbilt University, Guatemalans were more accepting of gender violence than any other Latin Americans, with 58% of respondents saying suspected infidelity justified physical abuse.

Women as well as men have internalized this view. During my research in Guatemala and Mexico, many women shared stories about how their own mothers, mother-in-law or neighbors told them to “aguantar” – put up with – their husbands’ abuse, saying it was a man’s right to punish bad wives.

The media, police and often even official justice systems reinforce strict constraints on women’s behavior. When women are murdered in Guatemala and Mexico – a daily occurrence – headlines often read, “Man Kills His Wife Because of Jealousy.” In court and online, rape survivors are still accused of “asking for it” if they were assaulted while out without male supervision.

How to protect women

Latin American countries have made many creative, serious efforts to protect women.

Seventeen have passed laws making feminicide – the intentional killing of women or girls because they are female – its own crime separate from homicide, with long mandatory prison sentences to try to deter this. Many countries have also created women-only police stations , produced statistical data on feminicide, improved reporting avenues for gendered violence and funded more women’s shelters.


Guatemala even created special courts where men accused of gender violence – whether feminicide, sexual assault or psychological violence – are tried.

Research I conducted with my colleague, political scientist Erin Beck, finds that these specialized courts have been important in recognizing violence against women as a serious crime, punishing it and providing victims with much-needed legal, social and psychological support. But we also found critical limitations related to insufficient funding, staff burnout and weak investigations.

There is also an enormous linguistic and cultural gap between judicial officials and in many parts of the country the largely Indigenous, non-Spanish-speaking women they serve. Many of these women are so poor and geographically isolated they can’t even make it into court, leaving flight as their only option of escaping violence.

The collective body

All these efforts to protect women – whether in Guatemala, elsewhere in Latin America or the U.S. – are narrow and legalistic. They make feminicide one crime, physical assault a different crime, and rape another – and attempt to indict and punish men for those acts.

But they fail to indict the broader systems that perpetuate these problems, like social, racial, and economic inequalities, family relationships and social mores.

Some Indigenous women’s groups say gendered violence is a collective problem that needs collective solutions.

“When they rape, disappear, jail or assassinate a woman, it is as if all the community, the neighborhood, the community or the family has been raped,” said the Mexican Indigenous activist Marichuy at a rally in Mexico City in 2017.

[Understand new developments in science, health and technology, each week. Subscribe to The Conversation’s science newsletter.]

In Marichuy’s analysis, violence against one Indigenous woman is the result of an entire society that dehumanizes her people. So simply sending the abuser to prison is not sufficient. Gendered violence calls for a punishment that both implicates the community and the offender – and tries to heal them.

Some Mexican Indigenous communities have autonomous police and justice systems, which use discussion and mediation to reach a verdict and emphasize reconciliation over punishment. Sentences of community service – whether construction, digging drainage or other manual labor – serve to both punish and socially reintegrate offenders. Terms range from a few weeks for simple theft to eight years for murder.



Stopping gendered violence in Latin America, the U.S. or anywhere will be a complicated, long-term process. And grand social progress seems unlikely in a pandemic. But when lockdowns end, restorative justice seems like a good way to start helping women and our communities.

Sources:

http://www.wunrn.com/

https://www.equalitynow.org/sexual_violence_against_adolescent_girls_in_bolivia

https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1357449/mexicos-senate-approves-digital-violence-law-to-stem-revenge-porn#ixzz6eNgB2xit

https://www.latinousa.org/2020/09/02/latamwomen/

https://theconversation.com/latin-american-women-are-disappearing-and-dying-under-lockdown-143791

Nov 20, 2020

Conversación con Carmen Blanco y su "Todo de mí"

November 20, 2020 2 Comments


Por: Abby García Valera.

A Carmen Blanco la conozco desde que tenía 17 años, aproximadamente. Los libros, en especial Saramago, crearon una preciosa complicidad entre una adolescente y una señora que esperaba leyendo la salida de su nieta de las clases de música. Una amistad que creció entre sus lecturas de espera y mis esperas para el ensayo con la orquesta. Una amistad que se forjó desde la distancia generacional, desde las conversas y los libros prestados. A Carmen la acompañé en aquella celebración en la Biblioteca Agustín Codazzi de varios de sus poemas publicados en una revista local. Hoy, desde Estambul, la acompaño como editora en la publicación de su primer libro de poesías, gracias a la organización ProMosaik y su filial editorial LAPH.

Acá les comparto la breve conversación con Carmen Blanco sobre temas alrededor de su libro.


 ¿Qué emociones y temas abordan tus poemas?

Generalmente es el amor y el desamor lo que me ha motivado. Sintiendo cómo el amor es esa inmensa respuesta que me provoca el ser tocada por todo aquello que fue mi infancia, la soledad y la rebeldía que sentí casi siempre. Y de verdad que supe de un hogar, mi hogar, fue de la mano de mi esposo, Jogla Martínez y mis hijos. Nunca antes. Es él y mis desencantos, mayoritariamente, lo que me impulsa a escribir, porque siento que, de alguna manera, solo escribiendo puedo expresarlo todo.

 ¿Cuándo comenzaste a interesarte por la poesía y a escribirla?

De verdad que me confieso impulsiva y extremadamente sensible. Un día, no sé cuál ni cuándo, comencé a escribir formando versos, sin guías o ejemplos, escribía y todo lo escondía porque para muchos era una tontería y debía estudiar y no decir tanta "pendejada". No fue un interés por la poesía sino una necesidad para ser yo de alguna manera...


¿Qué influencias literarias ves plasmada en tu pluma poética?

¡Son tantos los que admiro y me han motivado! Pero Oscar Wilde, Gabriel García Márquez, Saint-Exupéry con sus cuentos infantiles y García Márquez con el Amor en los tiempos del cólera. por ejemplo, me marcaron para siempre. Sin pretensiones siento que escribo gracias a ellos.

Algún comentario por la reciente publicación de tu libro.

Por primera vez no encuentro las palabras escritas para revelarte la satisfacción por ver alcanzado ese muy acariciado sueño, que mis poemas sean compartidos en otras latitudes y que tal vez sean motivo de emociones para otras almas que como yo han vivido el amor con placer, con rabia, con la dulzura y la locura de amar y ser amada hasta perder la vida y dejarla en un poema, y eso te lo debo, Abby Emperatriz, mi hacedora de sueños, lo cual demuestra que, ¡nunca es tarde cuando la dicha llega!





Nov 18, 2020

RCEP set to supercharge the New Silk Roads

November 18, 2020 0 Comments
Pepe Escobar 18/11/2020

Ho Chi Minh, in his eternal abode, will be savoring it with a heavenly smirk. Vietnam was the – virtual – host as the 10 Asean nations, plus China, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand, signed the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, or RCEP, on the final day of the 37th Asean Summit.

RCEP, eight years in the making, binds together 30% of the global economy and 2.2 billion people. It’s the first auspicious landmark of the Raging Twenties, which started with an assassination (of Iran’s Gen. Soleimani) followed by a global pandemic and now ominous intimations of a dodgy Great Reset.

RCEP seals East Asia as the undisputed prime hub of geoeconomics. The Asian Century in fact was already in the making way back in the 1990s. Among those Asians as well as Western expats who identified it, in 1997 I published my book 21st: The Asian Century (excerpts here.)

RCEP may force the West to do some homework, and understand that the main story here is not that RCEP “excludes the US” or that it’s “designed by China”. RCEP is an East Asia-wide agreement, initiated by Asean, and debated among equals since 2012, including Japan, which for all practical purposes positions itself as part of the industrialized Global North. It’s the first-ever trade deal that unites Asian powerhouses China, Japan and South Korea.

By now it’s clear, at last in vast swathes of East Asia, that RCEP’s 20 chapters will reduce tariffs across the board; simplify customs, with at least 65% of service sectors fully open, with increased foreign shareholding limits; solidify supply chains by privileging common rules of origin; and codify new e-commerce regulations.

When it comes to the nitty gritty, companies will be saving and be able to export anywhere within the 15-nation spectrum without bothering with extra, separate requirements from each nation. That’s what an integrated market is all about.

When RCEP meets BRI

The same scratched CD will be playing non-stop on how RCEP facilitates China’s “geopolitical ambitions”. That’s not the point. The point is RCEP evolved as a natural companion to China’s role as the main trade partner of virtually every East Asian player.

Which brings us to the key geopolitical and geoeconomic angle: RCEP is a natural companion to the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which as a trade/sustainable development strategy spans not only East Asia but delves deeper into Central and West Asia.

The Global Times analysis is correct: the West has not ceased to distort BRI, without acknowledging how “the initiative they have been slandering is actually so popular in the vast majority of countries along the BRI route.”

RCEP will refocus BRI – whose “implementation” stage, according to the official timetable, starts only in 2021. The low-cost financing and special foreign exchange loans offered by the China Development Bank will become much more selective.

There will be a lot of emphasis on the Health Silk Road – especially across Southeast Asia. Strategic projects will be the priority: they revolve around the development of a network of economic corridors, logistic zones, financial centers, 5G networks, key sea ports and, especially short and mid-term, public health-related high-tech.

The discussions that led to the final RCEP draft were focused on a mechanism of integration that can easily bypass the WTO in case Washington persists on sabotaging it, as was the case during the Trump administration.

The next step could be the constitution of an economic bloc even stronger than the EU – not a far-fetched possibility when we have China, Japan, South Korea and the Asean 10 working together. Geopolitically, the top incentive, beyond an array of imperative financial compromises, would be to solidify something like Make Trade, Not War.

RCEP marks the irredeemable failure of the Obama era TPP, which was the “NATO on trade” arm of the “pivot to Asia” dreamed up at the State Department. Trump squashed TPP in 2017. TPP was not about a “counterbalance” to China’s trade primacy in Asia: it was about a free for all encompassing the 600 multinational companies which were involved in its draft. Japan and Malaysia, especially, saw thought it from the start.

RCEP also inevitably marks the irredeemable failure of the decoupling fallacy, as well as all attempts to drive a wedge between China and its East Asian trade partners. All these Asian players will now privilege trade among themselves. Trade with non-Asian nations will be an afterthought. And every Asean economy will give full priority to China.

Still, American multinationals won’t be isolated, as they will be able to profit from RCEP via their subsidiaries within the 15-nation members.

What about Greater Eurasia?

And then there’s the proverbial Indian mess. The official spin from New Delhi is that RCEP would “affect the livelihoods” of vulnerable Indians. That’s code for an extra invasion of cheap and efficient Chinese products.

India was part of the RCEP negotiations from the start. Pulling out – with a “we may join later” conditional – is once again a spectacular case of stabbing themselves in the back. The fact is the Hindutva fanatics behind Modi-ism bet on the wrong horse: the US-fostered Quad partnership cum Indo-Pacific strategy, which spells out as containment of China and thus preclude closer trade ties.

No “Make in India” will compensate for the geoeconomic, and diplomatic, blunder – which crucially implies India distancing itself from the Asean 10. RCEP solidifies China, not India, as the undisputed engine of East Asian growth amid the re-positioning of supply chains post-Covid.

A very interesting geoeconomic follow-up is what will Russia do. For the moment, Moscow’s priority involves a Sisyphean struggle: manage the turbulent relationship with Germany, Russia’s largest import partner.

But then there’s the Russia-China strategic partnership –which should be enhanced economically. Moscow’s concept of Greater Eurasia involves deeper involvement both East and West, including the expansion of the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU), which, for instance, has free trade deals with Asean nations such as Vietnam.

The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is not a geoeconomics mechanism. But it’s intriguing to see what President Xi Jinping said at his keynote speech at the Council of Heads of State of the SCO last week.

This is Xi’s key quote: “We must firmly support relevant countries in smoothly advancing major domestic political agendas in accordance with law; maintaining political security & social stability, and resolutely oppose external forces interfering in internal affairs of member states under any pretext.”

Apparently this has nothing to do with RCEP. But there are quite a few intersections. No interference of “external forces”. Beijing taking into consideration the Covid-19 vaccine needs of SCO members – and this could be extended to RCEP. The SCO – as well as RCEP – as a multilateral platform for member states to mediate disputes.



All of the above points to the inter-sectionality of BRI, EAEU, SCO, RCEP, BRICS+ and AIIB, which translates as closer Asia – and Eurasia – integration, geoeconomically and geopolitically. While the dogs of dystopia bark, the Asian – and Eurasian – caravan – keeps marching on.

La merce in forma vivente transitoria Dall'olocausto dei visoni alle stragi di migranti

November 18, 2020 0 Comments
Annamaria Rivera 18/11/2020

«Negazionisti» si dice di coloro che negano o minimizzano la pandemia in corso. Ma lo stesso potrebbe dirsi delle numerose persone che, nonostante sia stato scientificamente provato il ruolo decisivo svolto dagli allevamenti intensivi e dai mattatoi industriali rispetto a ciò che viene detto «salto di specie», seguitano a cibarsi di carne; per non dire di coloro che perseverano perfino nell'acquistare e indossare pellicce animali. 

Queste/i ultime/i continueranno a farlo, probabilmente, anche dopo aver appreso dell'olocausto (uso volutamente questo termine) cui sono stati destinati in Danimarca i 17 milioni di visoni presenti negli allevamenti del Paese, uno dei principali esportatori mondiali di pellicce di queste disgraziate creature: assiepate, tra cumuli di escrementi, in spazi angusti per massimizzare il profitto; costrette a vivere in condizioni infernali durante il breve tempo sufficiente a raggiungere la giusta dimensione per essere uccise (perlopiù con l'azoto o il biossido di carbonio) e poi scuoiate; reificate a tal punto che è considerato normale e accettabile sacrificare la vita di ben sessanta di loro per ottenere un solo metro di pelliccia. E in tal modo soddisfare anzitutto l'industria della moda, il profitto e il mercato, ma anche la crudele frivolezza dei/delle consumatori/trici di una tale sinistra merce.

Tutto ciò non riguarda la sola Danimarca. Precedentemente, già agli esordi di giugno, il governo olandese aveva ordinato l'abbattimento di migliaia di visoni in nove allevamenti-mattatoi destinati alla «produzione di pellicce» Lo stesso era accaduto in Spagna, in particolare in Aragona, e anche l'Irlanda ne progetta l'abbattimento di massa. Inoltre, casi di Covid-19 tra questi mustelidi si sono verificati pure in Italia, Svezia e negli Stati Uniti: qui sono stati già uccisi almeno 15mila visoni. 

Certo, le ragioni della propensione a cibarsi di «carne» e perfino a indossare le spoglie di taluni animali vanno ricercate in primo luogo sul versante del mercato e degli interessi dell’industria zootecnica, alimentare e della moda. Ma va considerato anche il versante soggettivo nonché quelli dell'ideologia, del costume, della cultura. I maltrattamenti, le torture, gli avvelenamenti, le mutilazioni che vengono inflitti agli animali da allevamento non sono percepiti come tali: sarebbe come chiedere a chi produce e a chi consuma una qualsiasi merce di commuoversi per la sua sorte.

Come già scriveva Voltaire nella voce « Sensation» del Dictionnaire philosophique, pubblicato dapprima in forma anonima nel lontano 1764, «se mille animali muoiono sotto i vostri occhi, voi non vi preoccupate affatto di sapere che fine farà la loro facoltà di sentire (...): voi considerate quegli animali come macchine della natura, nate per morire e far posto ad altre».

Ben più tardi, nel 1999, Florence Burgat (1999: 48) avrebbe scritto, a proposito dei corpi animali, che essi sono ormai trattati, percepiti, pensati «come una materia la cui forma vivente è transitoria».

Le condizioni di vita mostruose, il pessimo contesto igienico, di conseguenza lo stress cronico inflitto a questi come ad altri animali «da allevamento», per non dire della somministrazione abituale di dosi abnormi di antibiotici, ne indeboliscono gravemente il sistema immunitario. E' dunque assai probabile che i mustelidi che hanno contratto il Covid-19 siano stati contagiati da operai e/o allevatori positivi al virus.

Ho prima usato, volutamente, il lemma olocausto a proposito dello sterminio riservato ai visoni, in particolare in Danimarca. Come scrivo da molti anni, v'è una certa continuità concettuale ed empirica fra la de-animalizzazione degli animali, nel contesto della produzione industriale serializzata, massificata, automatizzata, e la de-umanizzazione degli umani che fu compiuta, in modo altrettanto seriale e massificato, dalla macchina dello sterminio nazista.

Non per caso abshlachten («macellare») era il verbo adoperato dagli esecutori nazisti per nominare le stragi dei prigionieri nei lager, programmate e attuate secondo una rigorosa logica industriale. Se v'è una differenza, è che oggi, al contrario, si ricorre a un apparente eufemismo, assai rivelatore: l'allevare e il macellare in massa gli animali da reddito si dice «produrre della carne o della pelliccia» (Rivera 2000, p. 60).

In realtà, l’ideologia della centralità e della superiorità della specie umana su tutte le altre, che finisce per negare ai non-umani la qualità di soggetti di vita senziente, emotiva e cognitiva, è il modello o la matrice dello stesso razzismo nonché del sessismo. La dialettica negativa proposta da Theodor W. Adorno (1979/1951), secondo il quale il sé dell’umano si produce per mezzo dell’attiva negazione dell’altro-da-sé, in primo luogo del non-umano, riguarda anche il rapporto tra uomini e donne nonché tra noi e gli altri: per meglio dire, gli alterizzati e le alterizzate (Rivera, 2010, p.12).

Non solo: il fatto di percepire, considerare e trattare gli animali al pari di cose o merci – di oggetti inerti, dominabili, sfruttabili, manipolabili, sterminabili – può essere considerato come il modello generale di tutti i processi di discriminazione, dominazione, reificazione che investono il mondo degli umani e del sociale. La «bestialità» attribuita a coloro che sono in posizione dominata o subalterna diviene così la garanzia dell’umanità di coloro che sono o soltanto si reputano in posizione dominante.

Tutto ciò è rappresentato esemplarmente dalle stragi di persone migranti che si consumano in particolare nel Mediterraneo, la rotta più migranticida dell'intero pianeta, resa sempre più tale anche per causa della «guerra» condotta dalle istituzioni contro le Ong dedite alle operazioni di salvataggio in mare. Basta dire che dall'inizio di quest'anno sono almeno 900 coloro che hanno perso la vita nel tentativo di raggiungere le coste europee. Per non dire dei tanti e delle tante – ben 11.000 – che sono state riportate/i con la forza in Libia, nei cui lager subiranno trattamenti non molto dissimili da quelli inflitti agli animali da allevamento.

Né servirà a mutare le infami politiche italiane ed europee il sussulto di coscienza di persone comuni, giornalisti/e, intellettuali suscitato dalla tragica vicenda di Joseph, un bimbo di appena sei mesi, originario della Guinea, che era a bordo di una nave rovesciatasi al largo della Libia. Nonostante gli operatori della Ong Open Arms fossero riusciti a sottrarlo alle acque, egli morirà l'11 novembre scorso a causa dello scandaloso ritardo dei soccorsi "ufficiali".

Che un evento così tragico e struggente come quello del piccolo Joseph non riuscirà a scalfire la fortezza-Europa ce lo insegna la vicenda di Ālān Kurdî, un bimbo di tre anni, figlio di rifugiati curdo-siriani che tentavano, nel 2015, di raggiungere il nostro continente. La foto, assai simbolica, del suo cadavere riverso sulla spiaggia di Bodrum, in Turchia, fece il giro del mondo ed emozionò un gran numero di persone. Ciò nonostante, nulla mutò sul piano delle politiche istituzionali relative ad accoglienza, immigrazione e asilo, né servì, quella foto, a incrinare il sistema-razzismo.

Analogamente, le terribili immagini di migliaia di cadaveri di visoni ammassati hanno fatto il giro del mondo, provocando pietas, sdegno e rabbia. Ma questi sentimenti saranno presto superati se non interverrà la consapevolezza politica della centralità della lotta contro lo specismo, matrice del razzismo e del sessismo, e sempre più ispirato dalla logica cinica del massimo profitto.

Riferimenti bibliografici

Adorno T.W, 1979 (1951), Minima moralia. Meditazioni della vita offesa, Einaudi, Torino.

Burgat F., 1999, « La logique de la légitimation de la violence: animalité vs humanité», in: F.

Héritier (s.l.d.), De la violence II, Ed. Odile Jacob, Paris, pp. 45-62.

Rivera A., 2000, «Una relazione ambigua. Umani e animali fra ragione simbolica e ragione strumentale», in A. Rivera (a cura di), Homo sapiens e mucca pazza. Antropologia del rapporto con il mondo animale, pp. 11-71.

Rivera A., La Bella, la Bestia e l'Umano. Sessismo e razzismo, senza escludere lo specismo, Ediesse, Roma.

Primeras reacciones en el Estado español a la nueva situación creada en el Sahara occidental por la ruptura del alto el fuego

November 18, 2020 0 Comments
Autores varios 17/11/2020

He aquí algunos enlaces a noticias y tomas de posiciones en el Estado español ante la nueva situación creadael Sahara occidental por la ruptura del alto el fuego acordado en 1991, por parte de Marruecos, el pasado viernes 13 de noviembre.

Alfonso Lafarga, Contramutis:


Cristina Rodríguez, Diputada de Compromís en las Corts Valencianes:

Haddamin Moulud Said /ECS:


UH Noticias, Palma de Mallorca:

COPE, Canarias:

La Asociación por la Solidaridad del Pueblo Saharaui creen que la implicación del Gobierno de España tiene que ser mucho más activa

Levante, València:


Yolanda Sobero, RTVE:

Rioja2:


Miguel Muñoz, cuartopoder: