Anti-Americanism Gramsci Style
I recently threw myself into the lion’s den by going to a conference entitled, “What is Anti-Americanism?” at the Gramsci Foundation in Turin, Italy. For those of you who have never heard of Gramsci, he was an Italian political theorist and the founder of the Italian Communist Party in 1921. Not exactly the place for an American to seek comfort and consolation.
One of the women on the panel introduced herself as a feminist, a pacifist, and an anti-globalist. There’s an Italian saying the states that as far as misfortunes go, there are never two, without a third. The same must go for imbecilities. She said that it was embarrassing for her to speak at a conference with such a title, because she doesn’t condone the use of this adjective to describe the United States. She called it an abuse of power, a question of arrogance, a lack of respect for the Canadians, the Mexicans, the Columbians, the Venezuelans, and all the other inhabitants of the American continent.
Then, she said, with an air of great generosity, that she didn’t have anything against American citizens, but she was against the American government. On the contrary, she had read a recent article by Noam Chomsky that she found “comforting” and representative of the better part of the American population.
After the intervention of several other speakers, the public was invited to intervene. Although I am much more at ease with pen and paper in hand rather than with a microphone, on this occasion I couldn’t resist.
I informed this woman that I had developed a certain awareness of this sensitivity of others to our “inappropriate” appropriation of the adjective “American.” However, whenever hearing my accent someone asks me if I am English and I answer that I am from the United States, they are the ones who exclaim, “Oh, so you’re an American!”
I asked her how she thought we should call ourselves. The other inhabitants of the continent have an adjective with which they can describe themselves: Chileans, Brazilians, Costa Ricans. “How are we supposed to call ourselves?” I asked her. Unitians? Statistians?” Unitedstatistians? Are we going to climb the walls inventing yet another neologism to satisfy those who worship the religion of political correctness? Quite frankly, after the events of September 11th, I can’t be bothered with walking on eggs in concern for the sensitivity of others. What’s more, our country is called the United States of America. This “America” is part of the very name of our country. If the others wanted to be called Americans, they could have put the word American into the name of their country as well. The Canadians, for example, could have called their country the Canadian Provinces of America. But they didn’t. That’s their problem. Basta. I’m an American and I don’t care to apologize for the fact.
I explained to this woman that it was a mistake for her to like Americans, if in doing so she thought they were like her precious Chomsky, since Chomsky doesn’t represent my country nor its citizens. I imagine that there are very few Americans who even know who Chomsky is. And if they knew his ideas, they would consider him a candidate, along with Gore Vidal, for a trial for high treason with the minimum sentence: withdrawal of American citizenship.
I also mentioned that, on the other hand, since my country is a democratic one, its government does represent its citizens. At this point, someone in the audience opposed what I was saying, stating that I could not consider my country democratic since only 20% of its citizens go to vote. I let this person know that, in the first place, his figures were wrong, and in the second place, so was his reasoning. For Americans, voting is a right, not an obligation. We hope that our citizens will be inspired by a civic sense of duty in recognition of the privilege they enjoy. However, we don’t impose the duty with sanctions that will compromise people’s careers in the public sector, as they do in Italy. Nor have we ever done what the Soviets did, where everyone voted, but there was only one party and one candidate!
I’m sure this must sound like a visit to Mars to American readers. The Berlin Wall may have come down, but there are still living relics walking the earth, wreaking the havoc of the old faithful faith. With all of the ex, post, refound, never denied, and still Communists about, who stick the word “democrat” in the new names for their old parties, but who are anything but democratic, Berlusconi has his hands full trying to maintain the will of the people who voted for him. Remember that the next time you read some precooked prejudiced nonsense about the Italian Prime Minister as you may have done last week in Newsweek and The Economist: two desecrating defamatory accounts of the Italian leader expressed in terms beyond any sense of decency, even if what they wrote were true, which it isn’t. I sometimes wonder if they live in Italy, if they speak Italian, if they even bother to seek out an alternative vision. One gets the impression that all they do is revamp the articles of their left-leaning Italian journalist comrades who must wine and dine them senseless on Frascati, fettuccine, and falsehoods.
I don’t know what promises may have been made to the two by-liners who signed the piece in Newsweek, but the last Rome correspondent of The Economist who raged a campaign of disgrace against Silvio Berlusconi wound up with a deputy seat in the ranks of the opposition of the Italian parliament!
January 2002
Return to home page Return to list
Editors interested in subscribing to this syndicated column may request information by sending an e-mail to: giogia@giogia.com