Syndicate: A reply to Nico Myowna

[Trevor <tebatt@dds.nl>]

On 03-May-99, Andreas Broeckmann wrote:
>[interesting points for the cultural and political constitution of the
>Future State of Balkania; -a]

>To: nettime-l@Desk.nl
>Date: 01 May 1999 20:58:00 +0200
>From: I-AFD_2@anarch.free.de (Nico MYOWNA)

>*A future for Kosova: a closer look at the problem of nationalism*
>by Nico Myowna

Some Remarks by Trevor Batten in reply to Nico Myowna:

Clearly, despite any hidden agendas which may also be active, the main
justification in Kosova is the conflict between nationalism and
trans-nationalism.

How much longer is it acceptable that the leader of any national soverein
state has a free hand in "managing" the people within the territorial borders?

Presumably, the rise of the multi-national companies and trans-national
political bodies are eroding the idea of the nation state, as have the
mass migrations of people for economic or political reasons. So the old
system is dying, but the new is not yet born.

The recent ruling to allow extradition of ex-president Pinochet to Spain, also
suggests that we are in a time of transition away from the national soverein
state. Unfortunately, to admit this in order to discuss the alternatives,
could cause multiple disasters if the discussion starts a power struggle which
encourages nationalists to rush to defend themselves and potential
splinter-groups to support their counter-claims with violence.

Obviously, England too must tread softly -or it will create precedents which
will invite international intervention in Northern Ireland if the problem
cannot be solved internally to international satisfaction.

Unfortunately, the threads which weave the current (global) situation are
complex and subtle, and largely invisible because we have largely forgotten
our own (European) historical roots. I believe we must change that. We must
understand history in order to escape from it. It must not be the exclusive
property of a handful of obscure academics or violent nationalists.

Absurd as it may seem, but I believe the Roman Empire is still, in many
unconcious ways, the driving force within the European mind. Presumably,
without the division within the empire between Rome and Byzantium then
there would be no reason for the "east-west" syndicate today.

On a deeper level, we associate the old empire with a universal unity of
language, culture and law (a law which in many countries is still the
historical basis for current legal codes) which needs to be defended against
the barbarian hoards outside. In other words -it is the Roman Empire which is
still the (unconcious?) role-model for western "Civilisation". Its
reconstruction is a continuing European dream -which has inspired Frederick,
Charlemagne, Napoleon, Hitler and presumably the European Union.

Perhaps we should also be honest -and admit that these high noble ideals of
civilised unification do not need to be twisted too far to become the
ideals of faschism (which was named after the Roman symbol for preserving
order).

The introduction of Christianity as a state religion, presumably as a
political act to preserve the collapsing Roman empire (similar to Gorbachov
introducing "Glasnost" in the Soviet Union?) has presumably created many
interesting but unresolved paradoxes -as has Glasnost!

The fall of Byzantium encouraged the growth of western Humanism (again with
all its paradoxes -within a culture that refuses to believe in paradoxes). So
how can we fully understand the implications of a philosphical movement
-largely initiated by Christian believers which propagated rationalism against
dogma -which has lead to not only the American, French and Russian
revolutions, but is also the ideological basis for lassez faire (liberal)
capitalism?

For those interested in economy, there might also be much of interest in
studying how Spain presumbly financed the (northern) rennaisance (and its own
decline) by plundering South America -and how England got rich by plundering
the Spanish! Perhaps "easy money" should come with a government health
warning!

On the other hand -without a money based economy (as opposed to a, feudal,
land based economy) then presumably there would be no "democracy" either!

The large autocratic european monarchies did not survive too long after
Napoleon -so perhaps we have a strange habit of removing the dictators while
preserving many of their ideas. The issue of ethnic identity would probably
not be such a problem if it had not become such a taboe subject after the war
in 1940-45.

It seems strange that we understand an individual (who has perhaps been
adopted) has a need to discover their "roots", but get a little nervous
when a group of people express similar sentiments.

However, the rise of nationalism seems a strange evolution too. After the
fragmentation of the (western) Roman empire, (western) Europe both
reconsolidated and fragmented through conquest and inheritance. The humanist
ideology of human self-determination presumably lead inevitably to scientific
exploration plus economic trade, political democracy, religious protestantism
and geographic nationalism (in strange mixtures -clearly not as a logical
progression) but as different forms of expressing similar ideals.

Nevertheless, it is an interesting question how a part of something can
convince itself that it is a whole. How could my hand suddenly decide to
become independant?

The printing press, and the printing of national Bibles, seems an important
factor in codifying (national) languages. The printing of books encourages
local literature and the rise of newspapers and other national media (radio
and television) encourage the feeling of unified identity.

Trade systems continue to exploit scientific discovery and force technological
changes which undermine established political structures. 

The economic exploitation of personal communication systems generates much
wealth for communication companies who enlarge their markets beyond a few
trans-national corporations -enabeling them to tap into the vast army of
famillies who have become globally dispersed by the forces of colonialisation
and global capitalism.

Trans-national companies, mass markets and individual global communication
systems question national identities.

Once again, the media are shaping political and economic forces -just as much
as economic and political forces are trying to shape the media!

So do we get our human rights as a irreversable present from god -or do we
need to struggle to define and preserve them, through negotiations with each
other?

Trevor Batten



------Syndicate mailinglist--------------------
 Syndicate network for media culture and media art
 information and archive: http://www.v2.nl/east/
 to unsubscribe, write to <syndicate-request@aec.at>
 in the body of the msg: unsubscribe your@email.adress