Comparing cultures or, Neener, neener, neener!
Foreign Policy magazine reviews Oriana Fallaci's latest book, La Rabbia e L’Orgoglio (The Anger and the Pride). The reviewer is also Italian, and for some reason, I don't think Marco Belpoliti likes either Oriana or her book (emphasis added):
Fallaci declares that she, too, is a patriot. And while espousing the superiority of her own culture, Fallaci accuses Muslims of fanaticism and, above all, of despising women. She accuses Muslims of attempting to “annihilate our way of living and dying, our way of praying and not praying, our way of eating and drinking, and wearing clothes, and having fun, and finding things out.”
...
The deepest instincts of this book lie in its nationalism, xenophobia, and chauvinism, all of which are major pieces of the political culture of the Italian middle and lower-middle classes, epitomized by the fascist regime of the 1920s, 1930s, and 1940s. This enduring fascism—what Eco called Italy’s “eternal fascism”—is one of the clearest elements of Fallaci’s own cultural makeup and that of her book. But readers should be careful not to judge. Her fascism is not totalitarian in nature. On the contrary, the paradox of Fallaci’s writing is that her fascism presupposes an extreme cult of personal freedom. But regrettably, it is a personal freedom opposed to the freedom of others, including Muslims.For Fallaci, freedom does not mean tolerance of others but superiority of her own culture, religion, and traditions. Italy’s cultural identity, Fallaci writes, “cannot withstand a wave of immigrants made up of people who in one way or another wish to change our way of life. . . . And even if there were a place for such things, I wouldn’t give it over. Because it would be like throwing out Dante, Leonardo, Michaelangelo, Rafael, the Renaissance, the Risorgimento, the freedom we have won . . . [and] the democracy we have created.”
Love the way he says the reader shouldn't judge, right before and after he judges her. So, um, Marco--what's your point? That she's a fascist because she thinks it's wrong for Muslim fanatics to debase women the way that they do? That she's a fascist because she says militant Islam wants to force the rest of the world to change to its way of life or die? Or is she a fascist because she thinks individualism and personal freedom is a good thing? Now that's the weirdest charge of fascism I've ever heard. Personal freedom is fascistic? Uh--how? From the Merriam-Webster online dictionary:
Main Entry: fas·cism
Function: noun
Etymology: Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces
Date: 1921
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control
Belpoliti thinks that by warning of the threat of militant Islam, Fallaci is to be equated with Mussolini. And here is his reasoning, apparently: "For Fallaci, freedom does not mean tolerance of others". Well, probably not. Because that's not the definition of freedom. Tolerance of others is called--well--"tolerance." Freedom means, "the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action". Which is rather the opposite of what Islamofascists believe. But Belpoliti's assertion is a typical EU philosophy. Freedom equals tolerance of others, refusing to acknowledge that any culture is superior to any other--it's the typical Euroweenie mindset.
But his line of thinking got to me, and I came up with a litmus test we can apply when trying to decide whether one culture is superior to another:
What has that culture given the world in the past 50 years? Has it contributed advances in science, technology, medicine, philosophy, art, dance, music, literature? Has it started any wars? Is it now involved in any wars? For what reasons does the culture fight? Does this culture have suffrage? Equality for women? Are there free and fair elections? Is the culture based on the rule of law? (Shari'a and other religious law doesn't count.) Is the concept of a free press basic to this culture? Does this culture oppress minorities that dwell within it?
For all the jokes we make about the various European nations, as far as I know, all of Europe passes the cultural litmus test. Even France. Do any Muslim nations? Hey, we'll give them a bye and take out the free and fair elections and the free press. They still fail.
Well, then. Oriana isn't a fascist. She's just plain right.