Luciano Canfora, the great Italian political philosopher and classicist, has given us an important definition:
“What one calls a dictator is never one who rules alone, (Alleinherrscher), he is at the centre of a system of power and of consensus. To eliminate him does not necessarily imply a breaking of this system, and on the contrary sometimes that indicates its re-enforcement. The fact that some tyrants organise false provocative attempts against them should make us reflect.”
Reflecting on the Egyptian disaster it must first be recognised that the term Revolution was not instigated by the incoherent and howling mass in the public square. The term came directly from foreign media. Now, Napoleon stated that there never had been a Revolution without a change of ownership. This allows us to establish the first clarification of the situation. The mass have been convinced by the media that something has happened which never happened. There has been no transfer and expropriation of wealth in Egypt, hence, no Revolution.
The second clarification allows us to apply Canfora’s view to the Egyptian crisis. The elimination of Mubarak in no way changed the power nexus he upheld.
The third clarification allows us to follow Canfora in noting that the provocative attempt to further destabilise the State is in fact authored by the power system.
Thus Egypt remains as an anachronistic capitalist State, a date-republic in the mode of South America’s banana-republics. However, in South America, its intellectuals and its mass have already recognised that the enemy is not a local ‘national’ dictator.
The Brazilians are the first people to identify the enemy as being neither government, army nor police. They have perceived, and are the first to perceive, what neither Greece nor Spain has perceived, let alone Egypt, that the enslaving power is not what they have been (media) informed. It is beyond the defunct State – in the global system of banking, media, distribution and armaments. In naming the abominable Blatter, Fifa, and football itself, the Brazilians have opened the New Age. They have opened up a new dialogue of freedom and power, answering the challenge of Harold Laski who wrote in 1921:
“A new formula is needed for a state of which the roots have spread beyond the voting audience.”
He re-iterated this matter:
“We live in a new world and a new theory of state is necessary to its adequate operation.”
On the road to a post-capitalist and real-money society the recently unearthed carcass of a dinosaur lies blocking our way, the Muslim Brotherhood. The two opposing masses in the public squares are, equally, the obedient slaves of the ochlocracy (tyrannicide) ensconced in its banking palaces. We must move forward!