But what are we losing?
Some reflections on the direction of the protests against the Green Pass and the claims they express.
On the unavailability of bodies.
We are now heading towards an apparent end of the declared health emergency, where what will end or change will perhaps be the language used to describe it or some details: let’s think about the replacement of some minor executors of the program, such as Fabiano Speranza. Instead, what will remain standing will be the entire material and ideological infrastructure that we have seen only partially deployed over the past two years. Many restrictions will also fall away in their material form, but in fact the real purpose has been achieved.
The boys and girls will be allowed to take off their masks and cross the smiles of their friends, but this will remain in the folder ready for an order from the teacher to return to unify the faces and make the smiles disappear again. The global experiment has yielded its results with a climate of fear now introjected into most that will be difficult to shake off. One can be sure that its next evolution will not be long in coming.
Remaining here in Italy, with regard to the many restrictions before the introduction of the green card, we saw not only a great acceptance, but also an interpretation that often aggravated the restrictions themselves, this in particular in public facilities, hospitals, schools…
Restrictions, when they were not understood or when they were considered unclear, were called, using Wu Ming’s words, irrational, unjust, hypocritical, and criminal. But this expression of the techno-scientific power verb, are we sure it can be called chaotic or even irrational? There are very precise purposes in maintaining and experimenting with viruses like Anthrax or with genetically recombined viruses creating all the premises for a bacteriological war or to justify a total control on peoples. And in these programs there are also respectable democratic states, prestigious universities and renowned public research centers.
The current situation has been described, in particular by the radical left and by quite a few anarchists, as a bad governmental management of the pandemic. Limiting oneself to denouncing the fact that over the years public health has been destroyed, hived off and privatized piece by piece, especially here in the North, where we no longer have hospitals, but real companies that operate with this mindset, has its importance, but is completely insufficient to understand the current times of the declared pandemic and the transformations taking place. In order to understand the present, it is not possible to refer to an inadequate political and cultural background when not deliberately dishonest. And the proof of this is the silence on what this declared pandemic represents – not so much if it started from Wuhan or Fort Dick, this does not matter anymore – on gene serums and on the wider transhumanist project in which these events must be placed.
For those who have always mistrusted the work of the State and its techno-sanitary apparatus, it is not possible to begin to believe them the moment there seems to be a risk to one’s life, starting from reasons created by the system itself not as an error in its path, but precisely as a road taken. Perhaps certain self-styled protesters in the end were not even convinced of what they were saying. Always pointing the finger at capitalism and tracing contradictions was nothing more than their alibi to motivate their ignorance and lack of criticism towards techno-scientific development. What the left doesn’t understand it defines as right-wing and when the considerations are uncomfortable and touch nodal aspects that need attention, it helps itself with the dictionary of power and speaks of conspiracy. When the issues are shared, but it is evident their distance in space and time from having been present, they invent a right-wing that would take possession of empty spaces and, not only that, would steal theses produced by them, otherwise of course they would be in the front line as the good intellectuals they are.
Here we are at a nodal point of the question to understand these times of loss of meaning and, consequently, to be able to think and then build paths of resistance: we need tools of critical analysis that are able to give a thread and a precise trace to these processes. Certainly very few, leftists in primis, over the years have produced reflections on techno-scientific developments, even when these have begun to converge, revealing the true project: like a weapon, a synthesis of pieces made for half the world, but at the end, when assembled, it is clear what has been created and what consequences it may have without leaving any doubts. This has happened with biotechnology where coalitions of environmentalist associations, Greens and peasant realities active in self-production have not said anything about genetically modified humans authorized with more speed than a Monsanto corn, when everything has been going in this direction for years.
The anti-specialists, who have always criticized vivisection on other animals, have had nothing to say about the medicalization that has become a model of existence, where people have voluntarily entered the centers to become guinea pigs for pharmaceuticals. Even in the lowest sectors, desperately hunting for a stage where there were no more except for pandemic terror, they raised the alarm about the risk of Covid contagion from minks to humans. Appeal that has been accepted by the national authorities closing the farms, gassing the animals present and creating a very dangerous precedent that at any time could extend to other animals, if not the entire wildlife.
The left, on the other hand, when they weren’t busy promoting the ZAN bill or other rainbow campaigns funded by the state more than health care during the declared pandemic, kept quiet, hiding their inaction behind a sense of collective responsibility.
With the introduction of the mandatory Green Pass apparently something began to stir in the left and among anarchists. The latter, fearful of putting one foot outside their safe areas, began to criticize the Green Passport, but only as a control tool isolated from context: like denouncing atomic weapons, but not nuclear policy. And, of course, once again as a tool to be able to criticize the state and about the need to undo it. But nothing more.
The Wu Ming collective, which takes care to clarify in its interviews that they are all inoculated, writes about the Green Pass and how this would deresponsibilize the master and encourage scapegoating. Once again, reality is analyzed with dusty analysis, dictated by the urgency of not being left out, lest one be told, “but where were you?” As long as the mantra was “everything will be fine” they could get away with staying at home respecting the rules more than the rules themselves, but now they have to go out with their FFP2 at a distance of at least three meters from each other ready to hunt down the conspirators and the flaws of a deadly system that they have always supported. They still haven’t realized that for almost two years at Mirafiori they have been producing masks and the reality around them has irreparably changed. Once again we are in the field of capitalist mismanagement of a problem that is evaluated as power itself describes it. In a dishonest way, they know they cannot compete with the megamachine of propaganda and they align themselves with its dictates and discourses. The difference for them lies in how this issue has been and is being addressed. They always specify that they are inoculated to differentiate themselves, but from whom? From the conspirators of course, from those who do not believe in true science and have not been touched by the true anti-capitalist conscience of which they are the only depositaries. An anti-capitalism à la Shoshana Zuboff: strict rules to defend privacy from Google, but a total openness towards a state tracking, that obviously to be really effective needs once again the Big Tech.
But in these times of declared pandemic, not to deal with genetic serum, motivating him that he is not an expert to do so, means to chew the language of the various virological stars that also read poorly the scripts that pass them their pharmaceutical clients. At the time of the Chernobyl disaster, did we declare ourselves incompetent to express ourselves on the effects of radioactivity? When the Farmoplant plant exploded in Massa Carrara, did we wait for the Ministry technicians to arrive to understand what had happened, or was it not known that it was a matter of time? And in Seveso, how long could the perfume factory that manufactured Agent Orange remain a secret while children were born with very serious problems?
In the course of this declared pandemic, events have become clearer and those who could have made known and denounced what was happening, such as health professionals, did not do so, except in rare exceptions. In schools, teachers preferred to gag children and adolescents by poisoning them with disproportionate amounts of toxic Amuchina rather than take a stand. The real heroes, if we want to remain in the language of propaganda, are those who have lost their jobs disgusted by what they saw and what they should have done. No one says this, even though these days entering a hospital uninoculated can mean being refused treatment, even if you may have a serious clinical picture.
Pasolini was the first to perceive the processes of homologation and neutralization of differences put in place by 1968, which represented the beginning of an anthropological mutation. That unlimited desire has been transformed into consumption, everything has become a commodity and has been made available, thus affirming the profoundly transhumanist principle of the absence of limits. These words of his fit perfectly today: “I prophesy the time when the new power will use your libertarian words to create a new homologated power, to create a new inquisition, to create a new conformism. And its clerics will be leftist clerics”.
Everything that is claimed by almost all of the left as freedom, self-determination and rights reinforces the technocrats’ foundation of assaulting life in all its manifestations and dimensions. The state of affairs will always be accepted by the left because the price is to stay out of the game. Hence their characteristic optimism ready to level out any conflict and their partial, cautious and whispered criticism limiting themselves to certain aspects of the processes underway where they are certain to show their commitment and at the same time confirm social pacification. Their aim is not to fight against this state of affairs, but to ensure their own survival and a space within the restructuring of the system and the great resetting that is taking place.
Lately, the issue of the compulsory Green Pass has given the opportunity to the partisans born on April 25th to come forward and enter the debate by pointing out the serious mistakes that the state would have committed and concentrating in the tight criticism to those who for them are the conspirators, which is not difficult for them seeing the naivety of many squares. Those who arrived at the last minute are actually doing a good service for the State that, unlike in the past months, has no interest in connoting the squares in any way: it is more useful an indistinct novax, depoliticized, a bit conspiratorial, often out of his mind and not a militant with a path of opposition. In this way, a dangerous person is sponsored and cleared through customs, not for being subversive, but for being irrational with unscientific convictions.
The rational militant who brings scientific theses instead is the one who likes almost the totality of the left and environmentalists like the movements born and inspired by the young girl of Davos convinced that “real science will save us”. So the techno-sciences, as they can save the climate, will be able to intervene on the pandemic emergencies of today and tomorrow. For this reason they continue to call for freedom of choice in vaccination with the banning of patents. That it is instead the state to dispense gene serums available to all and everyone with transparency and labeling guarantee: that graphene is produced in an environmentally sustainable way and that the cell lines of aborted fetuses come from women entrepreneurs of their bodies well paid.
The new biomedical mRNA paradigm is considered as a detail, an irrelevant technical aspect among other aspects, it is not considered the whole of the new paradigm that is taking shape and that places biotechnology at the center: it has finally become the Science of Life as a whole.
The left blows dishonestly in this direction and unfortunately also many anarchist militants, albeit with a different spirit, are still confused about what to do especially on where to direct energy and commitment when the times do not allow more confusion, indecision and waiting.
In the past, among the opponents of GMOs, it would never have been heard to claim a Freedom of Choice for GMOs because they rejected the vision of the world they represented, placing themselves clearly against any genetic modification. In the demonstrations, people were shouting “GMOs must not pass”, “No to GMOs and to the world that produces them”.
Today these same contexts, even the most radical ones, claim a Freedom of choice for these mRNA nanotechnological gene inserts, real platforms for cellular redesign and, in fact, this claim clears them, spreads them and makes possible the idea of being able to insert a gene serum in your body.
We consider a position against freedom of choice fundamental, because upstream, we reject what these serums represent: the transition to a new mRNA paradigm with gene therapies at a preventive level for any kind of pathology or presumed to be such, brain implants, remote medicine, nanomedicine, and because we place them in the broader project and vision of a transhumanist world that wants to dispose of living processes and bodies all no longer only as a reservoir of raw material, but to resignify them, neutralize them and penetrate into them, transforming them irreparably. The aim is to transform the human being and the whole living being in that artificial, cybernetic and engineered world that will be redefined and thus perceived as natural and as the only possible and imaginable world. The purpose of transhumanism is an end that moves further and further, an imaginary that leads the human being to conceive of himself as an eternally incomplete organism.
Claiming a freedom of choice also makes people lose the ability to recognize what is an attack on the bodies, losing even more the ability to defend their bodies, their children and future generations.
We have to dismantle the rhetoric of freedom of choice: if, for example, a woman chooses freely – and then we should consider if it was really a choice made in freedom and not out of necessity and blackmail – to become a slave, would this make slavery a good and just thing? With this reasoning many feminists are continuing to stand against prostitution, but this same reasoning is not then extended to these gene serums. The silence of feminism is also a deafening silence.
In a flyer for March 8 by feminist women “against the Green Pass and compulsory vaccination”1 we read that “Covid vaccination done voluntarily is a pleasure and a source of serenity, compulsory vaccination is a violence, on our bodies and on our choices. […] There are various reasons, social, intimate, scientific, medical, personal and political, for which several of us have chosen not to vaccinate and others have. We believe both these decisions are legitimate and to be defended, because they are the result of a personal assessment of themselves based on deep issues”. Words that stand for “the self-determination of the body”, when in fact they are legitimizing and supporting what is an attack on the bodies without wanting to recognize claiming a self-determination now emptied of all meaning and significance. Those women who have lost a child through miscarriage after inoculation and those who will have infertility problems will not be so serene.
There cannot be a critique of the existing that focuses on the unavailability and inviolability of the living without understanding this attack on bodies.
At the time, those who did not want to understand the centrality of the developments of techno sciences and those who did not want to oppose their advance, rejected our analysis as futuristic, apocalyptic, dystopian. Today everything is evident. There are no more excuses. In fact, for calculations and opportunism, there are those who always want to stay behind. In the meantime, the first law paving the way for genetically modified human beings has been passed in Chile: a law that “Prohibits discrimination in employment against mutations or alterations in genetic material or genetic testing”2, for any workers who may have “mutations or alterations in their genome”: transgenic human beings. Will these new claims to rights be taken up by the rainbow left unions?
New tools are needed to understand the present and its transformations, so as not to be unprepared when the Green Pass is passed and the protests begin to fade because there will be a risk of not understanding how this has been transformed.
We will not have an April 25 of restrictions and “all free” even if language to that effect is used we will have to completely overthrow this new militant infection that will denounce the obvious aspects of this techno-medical power while allowing the worst to pass.
We have always warned against false opponents. Today, more than ever, it is essential to recognize the false critics or those who, with a partial criticism are in fact functional to the great resetting underway. And no criticism of what exists is possible if one places oneself within its own horizon of meaning and values.
5G network, graphene, microchip: all issues considered by conspiracists, even going so far as to deny the existence of Chinese Social Credit as stated by the Wu Ming collective on their blog Giap3. It is easier to criticize the mismanagement of a declared pandemic and the profits of multinationals, without going to unhinge the framework of the dominant narrative and without unhinging the transhuman vision that underlies these gene serums. In the extreme, after “PMA4 for all” we come to “Vaccines for all”, perhaps fair trade and zero-mileage.
The cautious criticisms that are fine with everyone, even the supporters of all this implantation, should make us reflect either on the honesty of such criticisms or on whether we really consider them as such. Criticism that goes to the root, without accommodation, sharp, thorny, uncomfortable, unpopular is needed.
As our French friends at Pièces et Main d’Oeuvre write: “One cannot be an ‘ecologist,’ a defender of free living beings, without being anti-industrial. One cannot be anti-industrial without fighting against all artificial production of children. Whoever speaks of radicalism and defense of the living without referring explicitly to nature, without understanding what can be subversive in the birth and rejection of the machine-child, has an abortion in his mouth.”5 So today one cannot be an ecologist against the machine world if one does not oppose what these serums are and represent, and the package is one: genetic engineering, nanotechnology, synthetic biology, artificial intelligence, artificial reproduction, genetic editing, gender ideology. These are part of the same process that cannot be separated.
The circle is tightening on all lives, but those who still know how to recognize and feel true freedom from surrogate freedom have the task to give a wake up call by starting to unmask the impostors who arrive when the square is already full of angry people and who try to divert the anger with insubstantial fights. We should not be afraid to tell it like it is, maybe in those confused squares there is more understanding for what is happening because for more than two years they have been rejecting the medical-security system and do not recognize themselves in stale political visions that should necessarily lead to the right or to the left, when the possibilities can be many, but many more.
Everything runs fast, you can not always lag behind for fear of not having broad consensus or for fear of creating fractures: the price at stake is too high.
Resistenze al nanomondo,
Marzo 2022, Bergamo
www.resistenzealnanomondo.org
Translated with automatic translator
1 https://nogreenpasstrieste.files.wordpress.com/2022/03/volantino-donne-contro-il-green-pass-e-lobbligo-vaccinale-trieste.pdf
2 LEY 21422 PROHÍBE LA DISCRIMINACIÓN LABORAL FRENTE A MUTACIONES O ALTERACIONES DE MATERIAL GENÉTICO O EXÁMENES GENÉTICOS, https://www.bcn.cl/leychile/navegar?idNorma=1172623
3 Commento di Wu Ming 1 del 17/12/2021, h.12.41, in https://www.wumingfoundation.com/giap/2021/11/strange-days-no-green-pass-trieste-3/#comment-47164
4 MAP: Medically assisted procreation
5 Pièces et main d’oeuvre, Alertez les bébés ! Objections aux progrès de l’eugénisme et de l’artificialisation de l’espèce humaine, Service compris, décembre 2020, https://www.piecesetmaindoeuvre.com/spip.php?rubrique8
We thank Cristiana Pivetti for the drawings: http://www.cristianapivetti.org/