Reds! Official Fanfiction Thread (Part Two)
- Thread starter Miss Teri
- Start date
Let me share a little anecdote about my own personal political awakening. This is all happening in 1983.'
I come from a conservative household. I was questioning a lot of it but in a rather repressed and doublethinkful way, and considered myself a moderate conservative when I got out of high school. I went from there to CalTech, which has a pretty conservative student body as American mainstream colleges go. Mind, I then got picked into the hippie house. (Caltech basically has mandatory frats, seven Student Houses a la Hogwarts that comprise almost all the campus run student housing for undergrads. So it was then anyway, I have no idea what happened after the late '80s. Had been that way since the 1930s. Also a salient point, very few women undergrads, "the ratio" as we so anxiously tracked it was around 6 to one. It had been men only until the early '70s.) An issue to be voted on by the student body in my first student election was a proposal to revise the charter of the student government to remove all sexist language--to replace references to "he" or "him" regarding officers and voters and so forth with suitably neutral language to avoid any appearance of reserving agency to male students only. At the time it never occurred to me that this initiative might have been in response to some specific incident I didn't know about, but just now it occurs to me it possibly was; that no one referenced such a case might have been due to a gag order of some kind. I should also note that Caltech officials affirmed to us in the student body that our student government, in certain aspects anyway such as the Board of Control which judged questions such as whether a student should be expelled or otherwise disciplined for misbehavior, had unusual authority--so I am talking about some real power here, not just a junior workshop in developing leadership skills or resume polishing or some such.
Now as a "moderate" I had taken some pride in being on a "reasonable" side in the general cultural revolution around issues such as the recent admission of people of races other than "white" and women taking generally equal positions along side white men. I was all for it, I wanted to see a color and sex blind meritocracy to live in as shown in exemplary science fiction scenarios. I did not want to be a pig. But for some goofy reason I listened to such conservatives as Edwin Newman, former speech writer for Richard Nixon, who had an acerbic attitude toward revisionism such as this initiative, seeking to purge sexist language. I felt, or anyway mindlessly parroted, that social progress was irreversible and that modern American society understood that racial distinctions were obsolete and wrong and that it was effectively universally understood women could vote, hold office, and participate across the board equally with men, and that we should not make a big political fuss over going through all the books and purging historic language just to nail this down. We should let things be and focus on current issues, not be hung up over language that had been understood to be expanded to cover everyone equally. In English, the male pronoun just naturally referred to all people when used generically. What sort of messing with my head agenda was this and where would it end? I actually wasn't worried where it would end very much (there were no separate women's bathrooms in my House for instance, we all shared the same facilities, and this did not seem like a problem for me--if a woman claimed it was a problem for her I would listen to that respectfully even then I think but I don't recall that complaint being made. Whatever that means!) I was just parroting the smirking Edwin Newman frankly.
So I was arguing the matter in my most-lefty-of-Caltech House with some women. It was sort of epic actually but I won't bore everyone with every fun detail. Women were claiming that the system as it was was in fact causing suffering (which seemed hyperbolic to me, but again-what if some had been barred, if not in my House than in some other, not by democratic vote but by some guy in authority pointing to the written language of the by-laws and saying "it says 'him,' you're a girl, you can't have this office!" What if one of these women I was talking to had themselves faced this exclusion, or knew some older upperclasswoman they were friends with who had personally had that door slammed in their face, yea even in the Carter and Reagan years? That would be suffering indeed, but I discounted it not imagining the possibilty). "Some judge could someday rule that the language means what it says," one pointed out. This was some years before Reagan nominated Robert Bork, and Sandra Day O'Connor was either already or soon to be the first woman on SCOTUS on Reagan's nomination, but around this time also he nominated Antonin Scalia and would soon elevate Rehnquist to Chief Justice. Despite O'Connor's new position, I little realized standing there then how possible such a scenario could be. She could after all be outvoted--and might conceivably be conservative enough to disempower her own gender and conceivably even herself in the face of some very strong political backlash reaffirming gender separation (and God knows what about "race"). My assumption was that no reasonable judge in America would ever take such a position, never again in the course of historical time. I wasn't the history student then I am today to be sure!
Very well, then, I said. I can't believe that would ever happen, but just in case I'm wrong about that, why not simply adopt a single simple stipulation in the bylaws that affirms that all use of masculine pronoun and other language that might imply jobs reserved for men only actually is to be read as opening all positions to people of either sex (this was a less enlightened time than today to be sure, we didn't discuss the need to broaden that further!), tack that on as an integral part of the rules, and go on from there, problem solved. I went away resolved to vote for the damn initiative since these women seemed to honestly feel it was important to them though I thought it was silly.
Then I thought a little more. How much simpler still if the whole United States government affirmed that same thing, broadly applying to all American law, Federal and State. It would be an Amendment to the Constitution of course. An amendment affirming that in all matters of Rights, women and men would be Equal in the eyes of US law. It would in fact be an Equal Rights Amendment!
The same ERA that my political mentors on the right opposed as the shrill shrieking of harpies, and had just shot down by blocking ratification in a few key states until the deadline ran out, just the year before. The same ERA the political cartoonists featured in my Florida Panhandle hometown papers had mocked as the handiwork of fat bull-dyke Women's Libber extremists, that Phyllis Schafley (I was no fan of hers, but she was an ally of what I took to be "my side" politically, no question) hysterically denounced as paving the way for unisex bathrooms and women getting drafted into the Army.
The same ERA "reasonable moderates" as I took Newman to be smirked at just the same as they smirked at revising the petty language of all the laws piecemeal, as a dubious and sweeping expansion of Federal power oppressing the freedom of people to do as they pleased.
I realized that a person who opposed both approaches to secure women's rights legally, despising alike petty revision and the passage of one clear and simple solid doorstop of a supreme law, might not actually be on the side of woman making real advances, and might not have any regrets about some conservative judge pointing to the text of a law and saying "this means 'men only.'" I still felt that we had come too far to go back, but I completely (well, far more than before anyway) understood the position of the women who spoke for the revision of our campus rules. Perhaps they had attempted my simple solution, a year or two before; perhaps it was the defeat of the ERA that put this initiative into motion. They had cause, and since I thought they were right to aspire for position the same as any man, I had to make it my cause in simple justice.
So there is my story of the war on Political Correctness being launched, or continued and escalated, way back in the 1970s when Newman was writing this swill and poisoning my straightjacketed young mind with a sophistical fan dance that at best was an ill spirited rear action guard against obviously merited and indeed needed change. In fact this rear action guard has been firing away for a very long time and if we cannot talk about it because someone today carries on the fight, then we pretty much can't talk about anything that shapes the issues that drive history. That was history there, a tiny molecule of it, me changing my mind in the face of logic versus sophistry. Now if Newman had been more forthright about reasons why women should not take power along side men, why they should not be scientists or soldiers, police officers or politicians, auto mechanics or CEOs, then that would have been different. Indeed when I say "Newman" I am thinking of my own vague memories of books I probably did not read too carefully in the first place. But Newman in my head was a false friend, a liar wearing a mask. I reject the possibility there are arguments to justify sexism or racism that would have any traction with me, or that they could be founded in justice based on honest facts for anyone. They could be founded in cynical self interest, or in irrational fear, or manacled onto basically reasonable minds by recourse to gross falsification--falsification people of the best will and character would see the cracks in and investigate until the rotten structure crumbles in front of their eyes, dissolving in an acid sea of contradictions. Unless they made a moral choice to go with it for one of the above reasons of self-interest, fear, or possibly misplaced loyalty.
If we can't discuss concrete cases like this, political and moral philosophy becomes a groundless game of mutual gainsaying. But without such standpoints, however we may term them, we have really nothing to say at all.
Therefore to say "the political has no place in AH discussion" is to say AH has no content at all. It is all about gaming out what we think would happen if, and that has no basis without some kind of notion of how the world works, what the underlying rules are.
I therefore take the current restrictions on this board against political argumentation as referring to current events, narrowly defined, and I protest those too as the wrong solution to problems that are best solved by insisting on civility in all cases. Pragmatically we might require some Band Aid rules since people melt down easily in certain contexts, such as current politics. But that Band Aid needs to have limited bounds or we can't talk sense about much of anything. The accusation of "political correctness" as some kind of cancer of the republic goes back generations, it is part of how mainstream politics in this OTL nation of ours works, and putting a gag rule on it, and still more extrapolating to avoid allusion to any category of event that might seem to correspond to anything currently a hot topic in current politics, means we might as well shut up shop and go home.
I should clarify, I have no issue with discussing political issues, necessarily (I mean, this is a very political timeline). I (and others) just had an issue with the way Bookmark framed his attempt for discussion.
List of Political Parties of the Socialist Republic of Italy (By Mr.E)
List of Political Parties of the Socialist Republic of Italy
Communist Party of Italy(Partito Comunista d'Italia)
Founded:1922
Ideology: Multi-tendency Left-communism (Gramscian, Bordigist,Luxembourgist, Berlinguer thought, etc.)
Political position: Left (Italy, International)
International Affiliation: Communist International
Official Color: Red
Youth Wing: Communist Youth League
Party Newspaper: L'Unita
Party of Government?: Yes
Animal symbol of the Party:Raven
Capital Punishment: Historically supported it in cases of treason or high crime, currently abides by the abolition amendment approved by the Socialist backed government
Civil Defence: Supports the current militia system, modeled on the American system
Cultural Stance: Culturally liberal, largely supports minorities, LGBTQ+, and relatively libertine mores,
Defense: Supports a well maintained, well-armed military, though generally opposes "excessive" defense costs
Drug Policy: Supports decriminalization and rehabilitation
Economy: Centrally planned economy
Education: Architect of North Italy's government supported education system
Environment: Backburner issue historically, increased focus and support for regulation and alternative energy
Foreign Aid: Supports left-wing groups internationally, and other communist nations; controversially, Communist dominated governments had financially backed left wing guerrilla groups in the South
Foreign Alliances: Strongly pro-Comintern, and pro-Eurasian Union
Illegal trade: Crackdown on illegal smuggling of goods across the border, focus on the illegal antiques trade.
Immigration: Well-maintained immigration system, with checks and examinations; supports an open border for defectors from the South.
Law Enforcement: Slowly transition away from Soviet inspired bureaucratic police with American style volunteers, though more funding to combat the continued threat of fascist terrorism
Monarchy: If reunification happens, monarchy will be dismantled
Reunification/West Italy: Unification of Italy under a communist system; Rome to be reunified and capital of the unified nation; Continued state of tension with South Italy, maintaining troops in Piedmount
Social Benefits: Compensation for all forms of work; supports welfare
Trade: Supports trade with other Comintern nations; opposes trade with capitalists, especially the South.
Vatican: Vatican sovereignty respected if reunification occurs;
Socialist Party of Italy (Partito Socialista Italiano)
Founded:1892
Ideology: Democratic Socialism, Revolutionary Socialism,
Political position: Center-Left (Italy), Left-wing (International)
International Affiliation: Socialist International
Official Color: Pink
Youth Wing: Socialist Youth Federation
Party Newspaper: Avanti!
Party of Government?: No, opposition, in coalition with CDU
Animal symbol of the Party: Eagle
Capital Punishment: Strongly opposed,spearheaded its eventual abolition
Civil Defence: While supporting militas, advocates deemphasizing them
Cultural Stance: Culturally moderate, somewhat supports minorities, women's, and LGBTQ+ movements, but not as vigorously as other parties
Defense: Supports reducing defense spending
Drug Policy: Supports decriminalization and rehabilitation, with softer drugs being legalized
Economy: More decentralized economy, with some power given to local soviets and cooperatives
Education: Government provided education
Environment: General support, though backburner issue
Foreign Aid: Supports other Comintern nations as well as developing nations of any ideology; opposes the funding of left wing groups in capitalist countries
Foreign Alliances: pro-Comintern, and pro-Eurasian Union, though advocates more independence from both
Illegal Trade: Supports Crackdown, backburner issue
Immigration: Supports an open border, advocates "reducing bureaucracy"
Law Enforcement: Supports maintaining a mostly traditional police force, with token involvement from volunteers and draftees
Monarchy: Advocates general dismantlement when reunification occurs
Reunification: Unification of Italy under a socialist system, current capital of Venice maintained, advocates a detente with the South
Social Benefits: Historically supported compensation for more traditional modes of work; recently has begun to embrace other forms of work
Trade: Trade (with stipulations) from other nations, capitalist or communist; has historically opened trade with the South.
Vatican: "The issue of Vatican Sovereignty will be addressed when reunification becomes a possibility"
Christian Democracy- RSI (Democrazia Cristiana-
Repubblica Socialista Italiana)
Founded:1948 (as a branch of Italian Christian Democracy)
Ideology: Christian Democracy, Christian Socialism
Political position: Left (Italy), Centre-Left (International)
International Affiliation: Religious Socialist International
Official Color: Blue
Youth Wing: Christian Democracy Youth Movement
Party Newspaper:Il Popolo
Party of Government?: No, coalition with Socialist
Animal symbol of the Party
ove
Capital Punishment: Strongly opposed, supports abolition consensus
Civil Defence: Status Quo, though supports demilitarization
Cultural Stance: Culturally conservative, somewhat supportive of the women's and minority movements, but lukewarm on LGBTQ+ rights
Defense: Opposes high defense spending,
Drug Policy: Supports rehabilitation and low sentences for drug users
Economy: Supports a market socialist system, regulated by the government and run by cooperatives
Education: Government supported education system, with support for religious institution
Environment: Strongly environmentalist, supports efforts towards alternative energy and combating climate change, as well as wildlife conservation
Foreign Aid: Supports aid for all nations, capitalist or communist, strongly opposes the funding of the left wing groups in capitalist countries
Foreign Alliances: Advocates de-emphasizing their memberships in Comintern, though continues to support membership in the Eurasian Union
Immigration: Open Border
Illegal Trade: Backburner issue
Law Enforcement: Status Quo
Monarchy: Referendum on monarch when reunification happens
Reunification: Referendum on which system to follow if Reunification occurs; Rome to be reunified and capital of the unified nation; Detente with the South
Social Benefits: Focuses on Christian charity along with compensation and
Trade: Free Trade
Vatican: largest advocate for reconciliation with the Vatican
Green-Syndicalist Union (Unione Verde-Sindacale)
Founded:1912 (as the Unione Sindacale Italiana), 1968 (as the Ecology Party of Italy), 1988 (merged)
Ideology: Anarcho-Syndicalist, Green Socialism,
Political position: Far-Left (Italy), Ultra-Left (International)
International Affiliation: Green International/IWW
Official Color: Green and Black
Youth Wing: Green Youth
Party Newspaper: Il Lavoratore
Party of Government?: No, Left opposition
Animal symbol of the Party: Seagull
Capital Punishment: Supports Abolition
Civil Defence: Supports locally controlled militias
Cultural Stance: Culturally libertine, strongly backs a complete revamping of society
Defense: Strongly opposes defense spending of any kind
Drug Policy: Legalization
Economy: Economic democracy, with all power given to local councils and workers of industry
Education: Locally supported education system
Environment: Environmentalist as its main focus, supports the integration of green living and environmental protection into all facets of life
Foreign Aid: Supports aid for communist nations and left-wing groups in capitalist nations; opposes any aid for capitalist nations without insurance for workers
Foreign Alliances: Supports continued Comintern and Eurasian Union membership
Illegal Trade: Support easing penalties to dissuade it
Immigration: Open Border
Law Enforcement: Complete volunteer force
Monarchy: Monarchy dismantled if reunification happens, "The King to be hung"
Reunification: Syndicalist system if reunification occurs; Status Quo on South Italy relations
Social Benefits: Compensation for all work and welfare for all peoples, to ensure all are taken care of
Trade: Trade only with consideration of environmental and workers condition; de facto pro-Communist trade.
Vatican: Sovereignty denied, officially dismantled
Republican Socialist Party (Partito Socialista Repubblicano )
Founded:1950 (Split from the Socialist Party)
Ideology: Left/Right Social Democracy, Mutualism,
Political position: Center-left (Italy), Center (International)
International Affiliation: The World Center
Official Color: Gold
Youth Wing: Republican Students
Party Newspaper: Il Compromesso
Party of Government?: No, Right opposition
Animal symbol of the Partyeer
Capital Punishment: Supports it in cases of treason or high crimes , repeal Abolition Amendment
Civil Defence: Status quo
Cultural Stance: Culturally moderate, though on the more liberal side more often than not
Defense: Status Quo
Drug Policy: Legalization of soft drugs, rehabilitation focus for others
Economy: Market socialist system, with cooperatives the major focus
Education: Partially privatized, cooperative education system
Environment: Historically opposed; now lukewarm, token nods
Foreign Aid: Opposed to all forms
Foreign Alliances: Independence from bloc politics
Illegal Trade: End the war on it, as it only has increased trade
Immigration: Well-maintained border
Law Enforcement: Status quo
Monarchy: Status Quo
Reunification: Social Market system if reunification occurs; Rome and Venice as dual capitals of sorts;
Social Benefits: Compensation only for certain types of work, supports welfare, though advocates a lesser emphasis on it
Trade: Autarky
Vatican: Back burner issue
Italian Revolutionary Transhumanist Party (
Partito Rivoluzionario Italiano Transumanista
Founded:2008
Ideology: Marxist-Transhumanist;
Political position: Ultraleft (Italy, International)
International Affiliation: Futurist International
Official Color: Purple
Youth Wing: None (students participate in Party
Party Newspaper: Progresso
Party of Government?: No, Left opposition
Animal symbol of the Party: Ant
Capital Punishment: Supports Abolition Amendment
Civil Defence: Gradually replace the current militia system with a large computerized defense system with drones and robots
Cultural Stance: Culturally revolutionary, seeking to destroy and rebuild society according to a heavily libertine, scientifically minded basis
Defense: Minimize and automate defense, with drones and machines to replace humans
Drug Policy: Legalization, with neurotherapy and genetic modification as rehabilitation tools
Economy: Computerized centrally planned system, with democratic planning and full calculations for distribution
Education: Education heavily skewered for sciences
Environment: Strongly environmentalist, supports the use of microwave and solar satellites as sources of energy
Foreign Aid: Strongly supports aid as a way of
Foreign Alliances: Follows Futurist World State Consensus
Illegal Trade: Supports crackdown
Immigration: Open Border
Law Enforcement: Same as Civil Defense
Monarchy: Completely dismantled.
Reunification: Italy unified as a state in the World State; new capital built.
Social Benefits: Supports benefits as a means for people to accumulate technology
Trade: Trade with an eye for new technology
Vatican: Will wither when the World State comes as a relic of the Old World
Communist Party of Italy(Partito Comunista d'Italia)
Founded:1922
Ideology: Multi-tendency Left-communism (Gramscian, Bordigist,Luxembourgist, Berlinguer thought, etc.)
Political position: Left (Italy, International)
International Affiliation: Communist International
Official Color: Red
Youth Wing: Communist Youth League
Party Newspaper: L'Unita
Party of Government?: Yes
Animal symbol of the Party:Raven
Capital Punishment: Historically supported it in cases of treason or high crime, currently abides by the abolition amendment approved by the Socialist backed government
Civil Defence: Supports the current militia system, modeled on the American system
Cultural Stance: Culturally liberal, largely supports minorities, LGBTQ+, and relatively libertine mores,
Defense: Supports a well maintained, well-armed military, though generally opposes "excessive" defense costs
Drug Policy: Supports decriminalization and rehabilitation
Economy: Centrally planned economy
Education: Architect of North Italy's government supported education system
Environment: Backburner issue historically, increased focus and support for regulation and alternative energy
Foreign Aid: Supports left-wing groups internationally, and other communist nations; controversially, Communist dominated governments had financially backed left wing guerrilla groups in the South
Foreign Alliances: Strongly pro-Comintern, and pro-Eurasian Union
Illegal trade: Crackdown on illegal smuggling of goods across the border, focus on the illegal antiques trade.
Immigration: Well-maintained immigration system, with checks and examinations; supports an open border for defectors from the South.
Law Enforcement: Slowly transition away from Soviet inspired bureaucratic police with American style volunteers, though more funding to combat the continued threat of fascist terrorism
Monarchy: If reunification happens, monarchy will be dismantled
Reunification/West Italy: Unification of Italy under a communist system; Rome to be reunified and capital of the unified nation; Continued state of tension with South Italy, maintaining troops in Piedmount
Social Benefits: Compensation for all forms of work; supports welfare
Trade: Supports trade with other Comintern nations; opposes trade with capitalists, especially the South.
Vatican: Vatican sovereignty respected if reunification occurs;
Socialist Party of Italy (Partito Socialista Italiano)
Founded:1892
Ideology: Democratic Socialism, Revolutionary Socialism,
Political position: Center-Left (Italy), Left-wing (International)
International Affiliation: Socialist International
Official Color: Pink
Youth Wing: Socialist Youth Federation
Party Newspaper: Avanti!
Party of Government?: No, opposition, in coalition with CDU
Animal symbol of the Party: Eagle
Capital Punishment: Strongly opposed,spearheaded its eventual abolition
Civil Defence: While supporting militas, advocates deemphasizing them
Cultural Stance: Culturally moderate, somewhat supports minorities, women's, and LGBTQ+ movements, but not as vigorously as other parties
Defense: Supports reducing defense spending
Drug Policy: Supports decriminalization and rehabilitation, with softer drugs being legalized
Economy: More decentralized economy, with some power given to local soviets and cooperatives
Education: Government provided education
Environment: General support, though backburner issue
Foreign Aid: Supports other Comintern nations as well as developing nations of any ideology; opposes the funding of left wing groups in capitalist countries
Foreign Alliances: pro-Comintern, and pro-Eurasian Union, though advocates more independence from both
Illegal Trade: Supports Crackdown, backburner issue
Immigration: Supports an open border, advocates "reducing bureaucracy"
Law Enforcement: Supports maintaining a mostly traditional police force, with token involvement from volunteers and draftees
Monarchy: Advocates general dismantlement when reunification occurs
Reunification: Unification of Italy under a socialist system, current capital of Venice maintained, advocates a detente with the South
Social Benefits: Historically supported compensation for more traditional modes of work; recently has begun to embrace other forms of work
Trade: Trade (with stipulations) from other nations, capitalist or communist; has historically opened trade with the South.
Vatican: "The issue of Vatican Sovereignty will be addressed when reunification becomes a possibility"
Christian Democracy- RSI (Democrazia Cristiana-
Repubblica Socialista Italiana)
Founded:1948 (as a branch of Italian Christian Democracy)
Ideology: Christian Democracy, Christian Socialism
Political position: Left (Italy), Centre-Left (International)
International Affiliation: Religious Socialist International
Official Color: Blue
Youth Wing: Christian Democracy Youth Movement
Party Newspaper:Il Popolo
Party of Government?: No, coalition with Socialist
Animal symbol of the Party
oveCapital Punishment: Strongly opposed, supports abolition consensus
Civil Defence: Status Quo, though supports demilitarization
Cultural Stance: Culturally conservative, somewhat supportive of the women's and minority movements, but lukewarm on LGBTQ+ rights
Defense: Opposes high defense spending,
Drug Policy: Supports rehabilitation and low sentences for drug users
Economy: Supports a market socialist system, regulated by the government and run by cooperatives
Education: Government supported education system, with support for religious institution
Environment: Strongly environmentalist, supports efforts towards alternative energy and combating climate change, as well as wildlife conservation
Foreign Aid: Supports aid for all nations, capitalist or communist, strongly opposes the funding of the left wing groups in capitalist countries
Foreign Alliances: Advocates de-emphasizing their memberships in Comintern, though continues to support membership in the Eurasian Union
Immigration: Open Border
Illegal Trade: Backburner issue
Law Enforcement: Status Quo
Monarchy: Referendum on monarch when reunification happens
Reunification: Referendum on which system to follow if Reunification occurs; Rome to be reunified and capital of the unified nation; Detente with the South
Social Benefits: Focuses on Christian charity along with compensation and
Trade: Free Trade
Vatican: largest advocate for reconciliation with the Vatican
Green-Syndicalist Union (Unione Verde-Sindacale)
Founded:1912 (as the Unione Sindacale Italiana), 1968 (as the Ecology Party of Italy), 1988 (merged)
Ideology: Anarcho-Syndicalist, Green Socialism,
Political position: Far-Left (Italy), Ultra-Left (International)
International Affiliation: Green International/IWW
Official Color: Green and Black
Youth Wing: Green Youth
Party Newspaper: Il Lavoratore
Party of Government?: No, Left opposition
Animal symbol of the Party: Seagull
Capital Punishment: Supports Abolition
Civil Defence: Supports locally controlled militias
Cultural Stance: Culturally libertine, strongly backs a complete revamping of society
Defense: Strongly opposes defense spending of any kind
Drug Policy: Legalization
Economy: Economic democracy, with all power given to local councils and workers of industry
Education: Locally supported education system
Environment: Environmentalist as its main focus, supports the integration of green living and environmental protection into all facets of life
Foreign Aid: Supports aid for communist nations and left-wing groups in capitalist nations; opposes any aid for capitalist nations without insurance for workers
Foreign Alliances: Supports continued Comintern and Eurasian Union membership
Illegal Trade: Support easing penalties to dissuade it
Immigration: Open Border
Law Enforcement: Complete volunteer force
Monarchy: Monarchy dismantled if reunification happens, "The King to be hung"
Reunification: Syndicalist system if reunification occurs; Status Quo on South Italy relations
Social Benefits: Compensation for all work and welfare for all peoples, to ensure all are taken care of
Trade: Trade only with consideration of environmental and workers condition; de facto pro-Communist trade.
Vatican: Sovereignty denied, officially dismantled
Republican Socialist Party (Partito Socialista Repubblicano )
Founded:1950 (Split from the Socialist Party)
Ideology: Left/Right Social Democracy, Mutualism,
Political position: Center-left (Italy), Center (International)
International Affiliation: The World Center
Official Color: Gold
Youth Wing: Republican Students
Party Newspaper: Il Compromesso
Party of Government?: No, Right opposition
Animal symbol of the Party
eerCapital Punishment: Supports it in cases of treason or high crimes , repeal Abolition Amendment
Civil Defence: Status quo
Cultural Stance: Culturally moderate, though on the more liberal side more often than not
Defense: Status Quo
Drug Policy: Legalization of soft drugs, rehabilitation focus for others
Economy: Market socialist system, with cooperatives the major focus
Education: Partially privatized, cooperative education system
Environment: Historically opposed; now lukewarm, token nods
Foreign Aid: Opposed to all forms
Foreign Alliances: Independence from bloc politics
Illegal Trade: End the war on it, as it only has increased trade
Immigration: Well-maintained border
Law Enforcement: Status quo
Monarchy: Status Quo
Reunification: Social Market system if reunification occurs; Rome and Venice as dual capitals of sorts;
Social Benefits: Compensation only for certain types of work, supports welfare, though advocates a lesser emphasis on it
Trade: Autarky
Vatican: Back burner issue
Italian Revolutionary Transhumanist Party (
Partito Rivoluzionario Italiano Transumanista
Founded:2008
Ideology: Marxist-Transhumanist;
Political position: Ultraleft (Italy, International)
International Affiliation: Futurist International
Official Color: Purple
Youth Wing: None (students participate in Party
Party Newspaper: Progresso
Party of Government?: No, Left opposition
Animal symbol of the Party: Ant
Capital Punishment: Supports Abolition Amendment
Civil Defence: Gradually replace the current militia system with a large computerized defense system with drones and robots
Cultural Stance: Culturally revolutionary, seeking to destroy and rebuild society according to a heavily libertine, scientifically minded basis
Defense: Minimize and automate defense, with drones and machines to replace humans
Drug Policy: Legalization, with neurotherapy and genetic modification as rehabilitation tools
Economy: Computerized centrally planned system, with democratic planning and full calculations for distribution
Education: Education heavily skewered for sciences
Environment: Strongly environmentalist, supports the use of microwave and solar satellites as sources of energy
Foreign Aid: Strongly supports aid as a way of
Foreign Alliances: Follows Futurist World State Consensus
Illegal Trade: Supports crackdown
Immigration: Open Border
Law Enforcement: Same as Civil Defense
Monarchy: Completely dismantled.
Reunification: Italy unified as a state in the World State; new capital built.
Social Benefits: Supports benefits as a means for people to accumulate technology
Trade: Trade with an eye for new technology
Vatican: Will wither when the World State comes as a relic of the Old World
It must be the same - the Communist Party that was able to maintain unity!
Dorothy Baker:Madam and Premier (By Bookmark1995)
Bookmark1995
Banned
To make up for my previous remarks, here is a contribution exploring a very colorful character who I think would gain a lot of attention in UASR, and become a grand figure of the Second Cultural Revolution.
Book Review.uasr
Dorothy Baker: The Ill-Fated Madam And Politician Who Re-Defined American Sex Work
March 10, 2009
The Soviet Elections of November 1972 in Montana would send shock waves across the nation when Dorothy Josephine Baker, a madam and brothel manager, would become the first sex worker in American history to serve as a Premier- and later tragedy when Baker would succumb to complications from diabetes just 6 months later.
The election was seen as not just a symbol that the cultural gap between big cities and rural areas had narrowed considerably, but that sex workers could be seen as consummate professionals.
In her new book, Miranda James talks about the life of this Montana madam, and how she would inspire generations of sex workers to become community leaders.
James explores not only the life of Baker, but the political and social background of Montana.
----
James dissects the pre-Revolutionary history of Montana, and its own struggles with both progressive politics and puritanical reaction.
Montana, at the turn of the century (1890s-1910s) was in many ways, surprisingly humanist. It was one of the first states to grant women the right to vote, and elected the first woman to Congress, the infamous pacifist Jeannette Rankin. Women had gained many responsibilities denied to them back East, like property and divorce rights.
But even the state was not immune to severe reaction. Brutal mining interests suppressed worker's rights in the period of the First World War. And the puritanical authorities suppressed the old Wild West brothels in the name of "purity".
Baker was born in 1916. Her hometown of Great Falls was the perfect foundation for someone who would overturn cultural norms. As a major industrial hub in the Mountain West, Great Falls would become a center of conflict in the American Civil War, which would mark the young Dorothy.
"Baker witnessed her parents battling the capitalist thugs," wrote James,"this would inspire her to rebel against cultural norms."
Baker, inspired by what she witnessed, attempted to join the Amazon brigades, however her obesity, which inspired the somewhat pejorative "Big Dorothy," prevented her being sent overseas.
Instead, she spent the war as a clerical worker at Anaconda Copper (the managers deemed her physically unfit to work in a mine). Being forced into the ennui of office work-while giving her managerial and organizational experience-as the plains of Europe burned would inspire in her personal rebellion.
By 1948, Baker was living in Helena, working at the local bank, when she learned about a position that would satisfy her need for excitement that had built up. An add in the paper for a place called "Ida's Rooms".
In the early postwar years, professional sex work remain confined to the centers of the Revolution. In those days, bourgeois morality still pervaded. So sex work, where it existed, remained hidden under euphemisms like "special boarding" or "special message."
Baker worked as a manager for Ida Levy, who like many Madam's of the Midwest, worked under a cloak of decency. Baker's organizational skills impressed Baker, and in 1955, Baker would take over the business calling it Baker's Rooms.
"But Baker was not someone who would seek to hide in the shadows," wrote James.
As the Second Cultural Revolution made waves across the US, other people were beginning new rebellions against society. Baker herself was posed to do that, and in 1958, she officially renamed her business Dorothy's House of Love.
What allowed Baker to be able to challenge accepted norms. Middle America, they often believed that sex work was a tool of big city Revolutionary elites, out of touch with the common worker, with beauty that was unattainable. Baker's weight lead to bullying as many accused her of living a "bourgeois lifestyle."
Baker, to the surprise of many Helenans, proved the opposite. The plump woman proved to have a tremendous folksy charm that was absent in places like Metropolis or Pittsburgh. She quickly proved to be an excellent community leader, organization fundraisers for veteran groups [1]. By 1959, her lobbying forced the Helena Soviet to recognize sex work as a real employment.
By 1964, Baker achieved her calling, as became the Chairwoman of the "National Red Garter's Union," making her the national advocate for sex work nationwide. Her charm and professionalism allowed her reach the areas that previous leaders of the Red Garter's could not, due to their urban backgrounds making them seem unrelatable. She even earned the respect of Harry Truman, who called her a "tough old bird."
In 1972, she had finally reached the pinnacle of her success by becoming Montana's Premier. Despite her too early death, Baker had made her legacy by bringing sex work out the shadows with her charm, kindness, and political advocacy. She would set the mode for future sex workers.
[1] OTL, Baker was a beloved community leader, which was why the authorities tolerated her business.
Book Review.uasr
Dorothy Baker: The Ill-Fated Madam And Politician Who Re-Defined American Sex Work
March 10, 2009
The Soviet Elections of November 1972 in Montana would send shock waves across the nation when Dorothy Josephine Baker, a madam and brothel manager, would become the first sex worker in American history to serve as a Premier- and later tragedy when Baker would succumb to complications from diabetes just 6 months later.
The election was seen as not just a symbol that the cultural gap between big cities and rural areas had narrowed considerably, but that sex workers could be seen as consummate professionals.
In her new book, Miranda James talks about the life of this Montana madam, and how she would inspire generations of sex workers to become community leaders.
James explores not only the life of Baker, but the political and social background of Montana.
----
James dissects the pre-Revolutionary history of Montana, and its own struggles with both progressive politics and puritanical reaction.
Montana, at the turn of the century (1890s-1910s) was in many ways, surprisingly humanist. It was one of the first states to grant women the right to vote, and elected the first woman to Congress, the infamous pacifist Jeannette Rankin. Women had gained many responsibilities denied to them back East, like property and divorce rights.
But even the state was not immune to severe reaction. Brutal mining interests suppressed worker's rights in the period of the First World War. And the puritanical authorities suppressed the old Wild West brothels in the name of "purity".
Baker was born in 1916. Her hometown of Great Falls was the perfect foundation for someone who would overturn cultural norms. As a major industrial hub in the Mountain West, Great Falls would become a center of conflict in the American Civil War, which would mark the young Dorothy.
"Baker witnessed her parents battling the capitalist thugs," wrote James,"this would inspire her to rebel against cultural norms."
Baker, inspired by what she witnessed, attempted to join the Amazon brigades, however her obesity, which inspired the somewhat pejorative "Big Dorothy," prevented her being sent overseas.
Instead, she spent the war as a clerical worker at Anaconda Copper (the managers deemed her physically unfit to work in a mine). Being forced into the ennui of office work-while giving her managerial and organizational experience-as the plains of Europe burned would inspire in her personal rebellion.
By 1948, Baker was living in Helena, working at the local bank, when she learned about a position that would satisfy her need for excitement that had built up. An add in the paper for a place called "Ida's Rooms".
In the early postwar years, professional sex work remain confined to the centers of the Revolution. In those days, bourgeois morality still pervaded. So sex work, where it existed, remained hidden under euphemisms like "special boarding" or "special message."
Baker worked as a manager for Ida Levy, who like many Madam's of the Midwest, worked under a cloak of decency. Baker's organizational skills impressed Baker, and in 1955, Baker would take over the business calling it Baker's Rooms.
"But Baker was not someone who would seek to hide in the shadows," wrote James.
As the Second Cultural Revolution made waves across the US, other people were beginning new rebellions against society. Baker herself was posed to do that, and in 1958, she officially renamed her business Dorothy's House of Love.
What allowed Baker to be able to challenge accepted norms. Middle America, they often believed that sex work was a tool of big city Revolutionary elites, out of touch with the common worker, with beauty that was unattainable. Baker's weight lead to bullying as many accused her of living a "bourgeois lifestyle."
Baker, to the surprise of many Helenans, proved the opposite. The plump woman proved to have a tremendous folksy charm that was absent in places like Metropolis or Pittsburgh. She quickly proved to be an excellent community leader, organization fundraisers for veteran groups [1]. By 1959, her lobbying forced the Helena Soviet to recognize sex work as a real employment.
By 1964, Baker achieved her calling, as became the Chairwoman of the "National Red Garter's Union," making her the national advocate for sex work nationwide. Her charm and professionalism allowed her reach the areas that previous leaders of the Red Garter's could not, due to their urban backgrounds making them seem unrelatable. She even earned the respect of Harry Truman, who called her a "tough old bird."
In 1972, she had finally reached the pinnacle of her success by becoming Montana's Premier. Despite her too early death, Baker had made her legacy by bringing sex work out the shadows with her charm, kindness, and political advocacy. She would set the mode for future sex workers.
[1] OTL, Baker was a beloved community leader, which was why the authorities tolerated her business.
Was The Dawn of Civilization Really a Good Thing? (By Bookmark1995)
Bookmark1995
Banned
One of the most fascinating debates that has sprung as a result of anthropology is whether or not the rise of agriculture may have been terrible for human beings, and that life as a hunter-gatherer may have been better
then in a sedentary society. I wonder how the Reds explore this debate:
Historymagazine.uasr
Was The Dawn of Civilization Really a Good Thing? The Anarcho-Primitivists Say "No". For Others, It Is More Complicated
May 10, 2015
Isaac Hertz
Unless you are somebody who slept entirely through their world history course, you know about how humanity rose from life of hunting and gathering, to a life of farming and sedentary lifestyle through the development of agriculture. The common view of this transition is that it was "progress" as humanity became more advanced, and less primitive.
One group, however, has come disagree with that notion-and that group may have nutritional science and anthropology behind him.
Anarcho-Primitivism: Living on the Fringes and Loving It
Here in Yosemite National Park, people come from around the world to see and explore natural beauty. But like in many remote areas, there are a few hardy souls who attempt to live off the land:
Meet Aaron Polinski, a self-proclaimed anarcho-primitivist, who is swayed by a more troubling view of history: that the rise of agriculture and nation states was a disaster for humanity.
Polinski takes me to his residence, near the base of Middle Cathedral Rock. He lives in a small hut, built with chopped down trees (built with permission from Park Authorities). He prepares a dinner over a campfire he built. He cooks hunted squirrel, chipmunks, and roots and berries. I politely refuse, in favor of the hamburgers and hot dogs I brought, which he treats with the same revulsion I treated his dinner of game and meals.
"All that food is unnatural, full of antibiotics and sugars," he complains.
Polinski came from Chicago, and spent his early twenties in a local bank. He left about five years ago, bored with what he felt was an unfulfilling life, and reeling from a painful divorce.
"My life was balancing ledgers and eating hamburgers," he says with some disdain. "I was just a small cog."
One day, he read a newspaper article about the life of hunter-gatherers, which taught him about the benefits of life that he was surprised about.
"I was always taught the cavemen were savages," Polinksi said. "But then I read about the lives the enjoyed, and they seemed swell."
A More Varied Diet And Lifestyle
Since cavemen, of course, didn't have writing, such claims are based of off the observations of anthropologists. And what they found is surprising.
"Cavemen were on average 172 cm tall," says Shannon Bridges, an anthropologist at University of California-Berkeley. "While the average agrarian worker was 160 cm tall."
Bridges, who has worked uncovering the earliest human settlements in the Fertile Crescent, observed that the switch to agriculture brought about a reduction in many diets.
"Remember, that the rise of agriculture was due to the cultivation of a certain grain," Bridges said. "In the Crescent, it was wheat. And the early farmers, this wheat became their only food source, which is not nutritionally sound. But hunter-gatherers enjoyed a more diverse diet of proteins and fibers, because hunting and foraging allowed them to enjoy more kinds of foods."
Dr. Aaron Li, also of UCLA, recently published an article on Polinski's change in lifestyle, and discovered that his health improved dramatically after switching to a hunter-gatherer lifestyle.
"Comrade Polinski has enjoyed a remarkable turnaround in health. Lower blood pressure and lower cholesterol then when he left Chicago," Dr. Li writes.
Hunter-gatherers never had the sugars, salts, processed chemicals, or saturated fats, which are common enemies of good health. But the hunter-gather lifestyle also encouraged more physical activity, as hunting and collecting food required a lot of movement.
Polinski, as a typical office employee, had a very sedentary lifestyle. Sitting at a desk for hours on end, eating cheap but high energy fast-food, and rarely exercising. He suffered from many bouts of hypertension, high cholesterol, and even acne. But the stress of office work also compounded his blood pressure problems, and drove him to eat more sugar, creating a vicious style.
Polinski looks like an Olympic athlete, not like the typically obese office worker he shows me in the picture.
"After three months of this life, I never felt better," Polinski says.
Disease and Drudgery
Of course, is not just the lifestyle that may make the hunter-gatherer lifestyle better, but simply the consequences of settled agricultural societies.
As stated, hunter-gatherers were much healthier then early farmers. Many farmers often spent hours doing back-breaking labor, to transform more of their environment to meet their needs. But living with a large group of people in a closed setting also carried a risk that hunter-gatherers rarely faced: disease.
Epidemics often ravaged civilizations, from the Black Plague to the Spanish Flu. Hunter-gatherers often failed to be stricken by disease because they were always on the go with a traveling band of people.
Hierarchy, Patriarchy, and Conflict
But there are two unfortunate legacies of the rise of states: hierarchy and patriarchy.
Hunter-gatherer societies were said to be egalitarian, and gender neutral, and the people within a hunter-gatherer social orders all worked toward feeding each other. Women were valued in the gathering of roots, and were not required to have so many children.
But with agriculture, came social hierarchy.
The rise of agriculture coincides with the rise of land claims. This is followed by the creation of a band of people who will defend land claims for the owner. This, as we now, is army. Those who own the land will control the surplus food supply, and thus gain access to resources that the non-owners don't have, which he can use to raise an army. And with his army, he can get even more land to grow. But in order to work the land, you need to obtain laborers, which you can get with your army by invading a weaker nation, and thus more land.
Agriculture thus came with the less than admirable qualities of society, like oligarchy, armies, slavery, and conquest. All of the early civilizations had some form of forced labor, to generate surpluses for owners, who would trade them for luxury goods generated through the specialization of labor.
So, a troubling conclusion is that the exploitation of people had been around since the concept of civilization began, well before the rise of feudalism or industrialization.
Patriarchy is another unfortunate consequence of the transition to agriculture.
As stated, women may have been considered equals in hunter-gatherer societies. But the rise of agriculture engendered a system of patriarchy. Men were often suited to the roles of warfare and violence. And the need for laborers meant woman were forced into giving birth to many children, to provide a population of laborers. Treating women like cattle and wombs is a product of civilization in general, and not just a medieval Middle Age practice.
Environmental Disaster
Polinski, since his return to hunting-and gathering, talks about how little he pollutes with his semi-nomadic lifestyle.
"My flat was full of wrappers," he said with a smile, "and I shit like crazy. I've almost never used a plastic anything anymore, and I only crap in a river that will wash the waste away."
Environmental degradation often went hand in hand with agriculture. Archaeology uncovers that the creation of farming led to environmental degradation, due to the demands of farming, the destruction of species not useful for consumption, and the straining of resources like water and soil.
Modern Society And the Ills of Civilization
The rise of industrialization, while it brought technological advancement, discovery, and a growth of productively, did in fact lead to many of the problems that were described.
The capitalists of 19th century England often gloated about their "progress", but the English proletariat rarely enjoyed their progress, but extremely polluted, overcrowded cities and very dangerous jobs. Irish sedentary laborers suffered horrific exploitation and famine as a result of their being confined to potato farms.
These so-called Enlightened European states, to feed their capitalist hunger for wealth and fancy goods, set up very exploitative colonial regime. In the Belgian Congo, this so-called progress lead to deaths of millions of Congolese laborers to satiate the commercial greed of King Leopold, aka Evil Skinny Santa Claus.
America, in its own capitalist driven progress, also developed a class of businessman that subverted the very democratic institutions they claim to cherish, and sought to create colonial empires wherever they could. They through American lives and wealth into a war for so-called progress, just to maintain ties to other colonial empires, and later decided to trade democracy for dictatorship.
American socialist tradition was born from these affronts, but these affronts, it appears, are as old as civilization.
And, of course, there was the most destructive and evil force to ever appear on the planet: Nazism.
While the horrors of Nazi Germany are often vilified as "pure evil," it is important to understand the justifications of the Nazis were pretty the justifications all agricultural societies have used: that Germany society required enormous resources to defend its power, and it needed to take them from "inferior barbarians." In the Nazis mind, it was the Slavic peoples who controlled the rich agricultural and industrial lands of Poland and the Western Soviet Union. Their horrific violence was no different from what many empires and civilizations had done to gain access to resources.
The British and French imperialists, while claiming to represent reason, also imposed crushing demands on their own empires.
Even the UASR and USSR, supposedly egalitarian nations, were not above such imperial games and hierarchical attitudes.
Soviet Russia, in the Soviet Revolutionary War of 1918, would enforce quotas on peasants to feed Red Army soldiers, causing famine and violence. Comrade Stalin's demands for Ukrainians' wheat to fuel his industrial policies were so great, that the standard of living when down in the mid 1930s.
Red America also imposed similar demands on Central American nations, which wreaked havoc in nations like El Salvador, and the Red American government bullied and strong-armed governments like Liberia and Iran, even if the aims were benevolent.
Even as the average Soviet and American Civilian endured rationing during the conflict, this did not often hit Soviet and American managers and elites, who still enjoyed decent meals.
Even today, there exists a gap between a Soviet leader and an average office worker in America. Class division has not been eliminated.
But should We Return to Hunting and Gathering?
Well, no. Civilization may have brought challenges like oppression, but lets not put the nomadic hunter-gatherer on a pedestal.
Most of humanity's evils cannot be blamed on the rise of civilization itself. Hunter-gatherers were themselves beset by conflicts over territories. They also faced their own Malthusian catastrophes. When faced with them, they engaged in genuinely barbaric actions, like infanticide and even cannibalism.
While civilization had brought challenges, it also has brought great things.
And the many reformers and radicals of the 19th and early 20th century believed not in eliminating industrial society, but that its abundance could be made accessible to men and women of all races. And since the 1930s, they have succeeded.
More people enjoy education, in both capitalist and communist nations, then ever. Less and less people are living in poverty then at any other point in human history.
While the office worker does struggle with good health, he or she also has more means to improve his or her own health then a 18th century French peasant.
Conflict too has become less of a problem. More people enjoy freedoms (both political and economics) than at any other point in human history.
Women's rights have also improved too. At least in Red nations, women are no longer treated like baby factories, and can enjoy more economic opportunities then existed only a few centuries ago. Sex has gone from a chore into something that women enjoy. Even birth may one day be painless.
New technologies may ensure that a decent standard of living doesn't have to come at the expense of the environment. Los Angeles has seen smog virtually disappear.
And in socialist nations, the gaps between the average person and a party leader or skilled professional are incredibly narrow.
In conclusion, we must be aware of the real consequences of a shifting way of life, and our rise from hunter-gathering. Only by doing so, can we enhance the benefits of civilization, and lower its downsides.
then in a sedentary society. I wonder how the Reds explore this debate:
Historymagazine.uasr
Was The Dawn of Civilization Really a Good Thing? The Anarcho-Primitivists Say "No". For Others, It Is More Complicated
May 10, 2015
Isaac Hertz
Unless you are somebody who slept entirely through their world history course, you know about how humanity rose from life of hunting and gathering, to a life of farming and sedentary lifestyle through the development of agriculture. The common view of this transition is that it was "progress" as humanity became more advanced, and less primitive.
One group, however, has come disagree with that notion-and that group may have nutritional science and anthropology behind him.
Anarcho-Primitivism: Living on the Fringes and Loving It
Here in Yosemite National Park, people come from around the world to see and explore natural beauty. But like in many remote areas, there are a few hardy souls who attempt to live off the land:
Meet Aaron Polinski, a self-proclaimed anarcho-primitivist, who is swayed by a more troubling view of history: that the rise of agriculture and nation states was a disaster for humanity.
Polinski takes me to his residence, near the base of Middle Cathedral Rock. He lives in a small hut, built with chopped down trees (built with permission from Park Authorities). He prepares a dinner over a campfire he built. He cooks hunted squirrel, chipmunks, and roots and berries. I politely refuse, in favor of the hamburgers and hot dogs I brought, which he treats with the same revulsion I treated his dinner of game and meals.
"All that food is unnatural, full of antibiotics and sugars," he complains.
Polinski came from Chicago, and spent his early twenties in a local bank. He left about five years ago, bored with what he felt was an unfulfilling life, and reeling from a painful divorce.
"My life was balancing ledgers and eating hamburgers," he says with some disdain. "I was just a small cog."
One day, he read a newspaper article about the life of hunter-gatherers, which taught him about the benefits of life that he was surprised about.
"I was always taught the cavemen were savages," Polinksi said. "But then I read about the lives the enjoyed, and they seemed swell."
A More Varied Diet And Lifestyle
Since cavemen, of course, didn't have writing, such claims are based of off the observations of anthropologists. And what they found is surprising.
"Cavemen were on average 172 cm tall," says Shannon Bridges, an anthropologist at University of California-Berkeley. "While the average agrarian worker was 160 cm tall."
Bridges, who has worked uncovering the earliest human settlements in the Fertile Crescent, observed that the switch to agriculture brought about a reduction in many diets.
"Remember, that the rise of agriculture was due to the cultivation of a certain grain," Bridges said. "In the Crescent, it was wheat. And the early farmers, this wheat became their only food source, which is not nutritionally sound. But hunter-gatherers enjoyed a more diverse diet of proteins and fibers, because hunting and foraging allowed them to enjoy more kinds of foods."
Dr. Aaron Li, also of UCLA, recently published an article on Polinski's change in lifestyle, and discovered that his health improved dramatically after switching to a hunter-gatherer lifestyle.
"Comrade Polinski has enjoyed a remarkable turnaround in health. Lower blood pressure and lower cholesterol then when he left Chicago," Dr. Li writes.
Hunter-gatherers never had the sugars, salts, processed chemicals, or saturated fats, which are common enemies of good health. But the hunter-gather lifestyle also encouraged more physical activity, as hunting and collecting food required a lot of movement.
Polinski, as a typical office employee, had a very sedentary lifestyle. Sitting at a desk for hours on end, eating cheap but high energy fast-food, and rarely exercising. He suffered from many bouts of hypertension, high cholesterol, and even acne. But the stress of office work also compounded his blood pressure problems, and drove him to eat more sugar, creating a vicious style.
Polinski looks like an Olympic athlete, not like the typically obese office worker he shows me in the picture.
"After three months of this life, I never felt better," Polinski says.
Disease and Drudgery
Of course, is not just the lifestyle that may make the hunter-gatherer lifestyle better, but simply the consequences of settled agricultural societies.
As stated, hunter-gatherers were much healthier then early farmers. Many farmers often spent hours doing back-breaking labor, to transform more of their environment to meet their needs. But living with a large group of people in a closed setting also carried a risk that hunter-gatherers rarely faced: disease.
Epidemics often ravaged civilizations, from the Black Plague to the Spanish Flu. Hunter-gatherers often failed to be stricken by disease because they were always on the go with a traveling band of people.
Hierarchy, Patriarchy, and Conflict
But there are two unfortunate legacies of the rise of states: hierarchy and patriarchy.
Hunter-gatherer societies were said to be egalitarian, and gender neutral, and the people within a hunter-gatherer social orders all worked toward feeding each other. Women were valued in the gathering of roots, and were not required to have so many children.
But with agriculture, came social hierarchy.
The rise of agriculture coincides with the rise of land claims. This is followed by the creation of a band of people who will defend land claims for the owner. This, as we now, is army. Those who own the land will control the surplus food supply, and thus gain access to resources that the non-owners don't have, which he can use to raise an army. And with his army, he can get even more land to grow. But in order to work the land, you need to obtain laborers, which you can get with your army by invading a weaker nation, and thus more land.
Agriculture thus came with the less than admirable qualities of society, like oligarchy, armies, slavery, and conquest. All of the early civilizations had some form of forced labor, to generate surpluses for owners, who would trade them for luxury goods generated through the specialization of labor.
So, a troubling conclusion is that the exploitation of people had been around since the concept of civilization began, well before the rise of feudalism or industrialization.
Patriarchy is another unfortunate consequence of the transition to agriculture.
As stated, women may have been considered equals in hunter-gatherer societies. But the rise of agriculture engendered a system of patriarchy. Men were often suited to the roles of warfare and violence. And the need for laborers meant woman were forced into giving birth to many children, to provide a population of laborers. Treating women like cattle and wombs is a product of civilization in general, and not just a medieval Middle Age practice.
Environmental Disaster
Polinski, since his return to hunting-and gathering, talks about how little he pollutes with his semi-nomadic lifestyle.
"My flat was full of wrappers," he said with a smile, "and I shit like crazy. I've almost never used a plastic anything anymore, and I only crap in a river that will wash the waste away."
Environmental degradation often went hand in hand with agriculture. Archaeology uncovers that the creation of farming led to environmental degradation, due to the demands of farming, the destruction of species not useful for consumption, and the straining of resources like water and soil.
Modern Society And the Ills of Civilization
The rise of industrialization, while it brought technological advancement, discovery, and a growth of productively, did in fact lead to many of the problems that were described.
The capitalists of 19th century England often gloated about their "progress", but the English proletariat rarely enjoyed their progress, but extremely polluted, overcrowded cities and very dangerous jobs. Irish sedentary laborers suffered horrific exploitation and famine as a result of their being confined to potato farms.
These so-called Enlightened European states, to feed their capitalist hunger for wealth and fancy goods, set up very exploitative colonial regime. In the Belgian Congo, this so-called progress lead to deaths of millions of Congolese laborers to satiate the commercial greed of King Leopold, aka Evil Skinny Santa Claus.
America, in its own capitalist driven progress, also developed a class of businessman that subverted the very democratic institutions they claim to cherish, and sought to create colonial empires wherever they could. They through American lives and wealth into a war for so-called progress, just to maintain ties to other colonial empires, and later decided to trade democracy for dictatorship.
American socialist tradition was born from these affronts, but these affronts, it appears, are as old as civilization.
And, of course, there was the most destructive and evil force to ever appear on the planet: Nazism.
While the horrors of Nazi Germany are often vilified as "pure evil," it is important to understand the justifications of the Nazis were pretty the justifications all agricultural societies have used: that Germany society required enormous resources to defend its power, and it needed to take them from "inferior barbarians." In the Nazis mind, it was the Slavic peoples who controlled the rich agricultural and industrial lands of Poland and the Western Soviet Union. Their horrific violence was no different from what many empires and civilizations had done to gain access to resources.
The British and French imperialists, while claiming to represent reason, also imposed crushing demands on their own empires.
Even the UASR and USSR, supposedly egalitarian nations, were not above such imperial games and hierarchical attitudes.
Soviet Russia, in the Soviet Revolutionary War of 1918, would enforce quotas on peasants to feed Red Army soldiers, causing famine and violence. Comrade Stalin's demands for Ukrainians' wheat to fuel his industrial policies were so great, that the standard of living when down in the mid 1930s.
Red America also imposed similar demands on Central American nations, which wreaked havoc in nations like El Salvador, and the Red American government bullied and strong-armed governments like Liberia and Iran, even if the aims were benevolent.
Even as the average Soviet and American Civilian endured rationing during the conflict, this did not often hit Soviet and American managers and elites, who still enjoyed decent meals.
Even today, there exists a gap between a Soviet leader and an average office worker in America. Class division has not been eliminated.
But should We Return to Hunting and Gathering?
Well, no. Civilization may have brought challenges like oppression, but lets not put the nomadic hunter-gatherer on a pedestal.
Most of humanity's evils cannot be blamed on the rise of civilization itself. Hunter-gatherers were themselves beset by conflicts over territories. They also faced their own Malthusian catastrophes. When faced with them, they engaged in genuinely barbaric actions, like infanticide and even cannibalism.
While civilization had brought challenges, it also has brought great things.
And the many reformers and radicals of the 19th and early 20th century believed not in eliminating industrial society, but that its abundance could be made accessible to men and women of all races. And since the 1930s, they have succeeded.
More people enjoy education, in both capitalist and communist nations, then ever. Less and less people are living in poverty then at any other point in human history.
While the office worker does struggle with good health, he or she also has more means to improve his or her own health then a 18th century French peasant.
Conflict too has become less of a problem. More people enjoy freedoms (both political and economics) than at any other point in human history.
Women's rights have also improved too. At least in Red nations, women are no longer treated like baby factories, and can enjoy more economic opportunities then existed only a few centuries ago. Sex has gone from a chore into something that women enjoy. Even birth may one day be painless.
New technologies may ensure that a decent standard of living doesn't have to come at the expense of the environment. Los Angeles has seen smog virtually disappear.
And in socialist nations, the gaps between the average person and a party leader or skilled professional are incredibly narrow.
In conclusion, we must be aware of the real consequences of a shifting way of life, and our rise from hunter-gathering. Only by doing so, can we enhance the benefits of civilization, and lower its downsides.
Bookmark1995
Banned
The whole Iran thing has made me wonder...
How would Red Americans react if they discovered our reality, and read about Donald Trump becoming President?
I bet they would react the same way Marty McFly did when he discovered Biff married his mom in 1985 A: with shock, horror, and some screaming.
How would Red Americans react if they discovered our reality, and read about Donald Trump becoming President?
I bet they would react the same way Marty McFly did when he discovered Biff married his mom in 1985 A: with shock, horror, and some screaming.
I don't think they'd be that surprised. They would probably see it as a consequence of the degenerative nature of capitalism. If anything they would probably think that Trump is somewhat restrained given that Americans ITTL associate capitalism with fascist genocide and would be military dictatorships.
Bookmark1995
Banned
Well, considering that capitalism in America did try to IMPOSE a dictatorship, that is not an unfair thing to assume.
But in the context of those events, would they initially see Trump as the puppet of the capitalist cabal (similar to the Iron Heel) that would have retained power had MacArthur and his goons succeeded. It would be hard of them to conclude that the poor in America would EVER assume that their best friend was some sleazy quasi-billionaire.
Would they also assume Trump was the period of late capitalism?
The closest term to how we use "Dictatorship" in OTL American english in TTL American English would be "Autocracy."
Distances it from the whole "dictatorship of the proletariat" thing. Semantics and perception matter, no matter what agenda you're try to push.
Why?
Also that Marxists use it in the classical sense of “Class that holds the power”
Ignacio Di Grasso: The Mengele of Movies (By Bookmark1995)
Bookmark1995
Banned
This post was based off a throw away line in the update about South America:
Like with my post about the American Free State, I hope I can make your skin crawl with this one.
History.UASR
Ignacio Di Grasso: The Mengele of Movies
Remembering the Most Evil Man to Ever Hold A Camera
Filmmakers are sometimes known for scandalous lives and antics, both on an off camera. Roman Polanski and his rape charges. John Landis and deadly accidents that took place on set. Pier Pasolini [1] and..you know. But no (mainstream) filmmaker could ever hold a candle to Brazilian filmmaker Ignacio Di Grasso.
The Riefenstahl of Salgado's court, his nickname- O Acouguiero de Celuloide, Portuguese for "The Celluloid Butcher"-was owed to his willingness to commit literal murder to get the genuine reactions we wanted.
"Ignacio Di Grasso is not merely the worst aspects of filmmakers personified ," says Brazilian professor film historian Julio Mendes ,"but cautionary tale of absolute power given to one man."
Even decades after his mysterious demise (or perhaps because of it) Di Grasso's ghost continues to haunt Brazil to this day.
Humble Beginnings
Hernando Luis Igancio Di Grasso was born November 10, 1907 in Sao Paulo. He was the son of a prosperous Italian immigrant and merchant named Antonio Di Grasso, and a Brazilian mother named Juliana.
Antonio and Juliana, both of them very pious people and doting parents, sent him to highly priced Catholic schools. He was an incredibly charming and brilliant student, but even at a young age, he showed signs of psychopathy. He was known to bully students who he saw as an affront to his power. And in one instance, he was accused of attacking his teacher.
"One of the nuns at his school was poisoned," said Mendes, "and he was suspected as the nun was one of few who reprimanded him for his arrogance. But his popularity and his wealthy father's intervention prevented him from being charged, as many boys of privilege were."
This indulgence at a young age added to the young Ignacio's entitlement complex-planting the seeds for the madness of his later life.[2]
Politics and Filmmaking
Di Grasso's father was indeed quick to indulge Igancio's interests. But two in particular were gaining ground: politics and filmmaking.
In 1925, Antonio Di Grasso joined Amigos Da Italia (Friends of Italy), a pro-Mussolini advocacy group. A conservative Italian who lamented Italy's lack of gains from the First World War, he saw Il Duce as a man who would revive Italy's power and greatness. The young Igancio, eager to remain in his father graces, became a staunch organizer for the group. His charisma and charm would serve as a powerful weapon.
"Di Grasso was very much fascinated by power, and his saw politics as a means of obtaining more of it," Mendes said. "He sought both admiration, attention, and authority."
But one other interest, one that would shape his life more, drew him in: movies.
With Brazilian film still in its cradle, Brazilian movie theaters played mostly American films. Di Grasso was captivated by film and its power.
"Di Grasso's favorite film was Birth of a Nation," Mendes said. "He was exhilarated by the action scenes, and moved by the power of film to influence politics and history."
Pulling on his father's wing, Di Grasso received his first film camera in 1929, and eagerly made his own short silent films with it.
"None of his early work remains to this day, as much of it was destroyed," Mendes said. "But it was mostly filming in the streets of Sao Paulo. Simple everyday events."
The Rise of Integralism
The Great Depression, which would reveal the structural difficulties of capitalism, unleashed a torrent of political radicalism across the world. The Old Republic of Brazil was one of the casualties of this conflict, and Getulio Vargas would emerge as the new leader of Brazil. But soon, another admirer of Mussolini would subvert him.
Plinio Salgado, then a popular nationalistic journalist in Sao Paulo (it is assumed Di Grasso has read his work), traveled to Italy, and like Di Grasso, was very much impressed with Mussolini and his power in Italy. He returned, and became a reluctant supporter of the Vargas regime, but he began to develop his urges for power.
Using his fame, Salgado founded the Integralist Party in 1932. The young Ignacio, like many other Italian Brazilians, was excited by the movement and became one of Salgado's followers. Ignacio quickly became a major figure in the Sao Paulo movement, attracting and organizing paramilitaries, and making some of the first propaganda films for the movement, which would impress Salgado.
Salgado, despite open support for Vargas, secretly hungered for power, gathering followers and supporters over the years. Like a crocodile, he waited patiently for the moment to strike.
The 1935 Rio Insurrection would give him the opportunity. As Vargas forces were unable to deal with the powerful, though ill-fated revolt, his militia's brutal success at crushing the revolt, something that Di Grasso participated in.
With Vargas upstaged, Plinio came to power, and Di Grasso would gain the power to achieve his dream of filmmaking-and create the most nightmarish film production ever.
The Beginnings of Madness
Salgado, the petty man that he was, was envious of Hollywood movies, and sought to emulate him. Di Grasso, his propagandist, became his premier filmmaker.
The first movie produced by Di Grasso, Guerra do Direito (The War of Right), dramatized an 1820s conflict between Brazil and Argentina (mostly to discredit the moderate-socialist government that had come to power there). While the film was relatively well produced, Di Grasso began his ruthlessly manipulative tactics to gain authenticity in his 1939 film
"Among the two groups of actors engaging in battle," Mendes said ,"Di Grasso would instigate conflict between the actors. Frame each side for stealing, frame them for adultery."
In the film, the two groups of actors (representing Brazil and Argentina) engage in a brutal fistfight. The fight is scarily real-largely because the fight was something filmed by Di Grasso, after creating conflict between the sides.
Other ruthless tactics employed by Di Grasso were forcing actors to work up to 20 hours, keeping them awake with dangerous drugs, and personally attacking actors to get them into the roles. He also gave roles to woman who fulfilled his sexual desires.
But as the war in South America continued, so did Di Grasso's growing desire for perfect art, and with it, he would create one of the most twisted spectacles put on camera.
Authenticity
As the war continued, and POWs from Red Latin America became common sights in the streets, Di Grasso would develop one of his greatest insights, and would produce one the most frightening films ever made.
"Di Grasso would witness the Green Guards torturing POWs," Mendes said, "and like any man without much conscience, he would not feel a shred of remorse."
Indeed, Di Grasso only gained an even greater epiphany: the best misery that could be put on camera was human misery.
In early 1942, Di Grasso began filming an anti-American film called The Great Battle, or A Grande Batalha. It depicts a fictional battle of American and Argentine soldiers attempting to subjugate and corrupt innocent Brazilians, only to be driven back by the virtuous Green Guard.
Di Grasso, looking for some real authenticity, recruited actual POWs from America and Argentina.
Using a kind charm, he promised these volunteers freedom from the forced labor they were bullied into doing.
"Like a talent agent, he would approach these overworked people with a winning face, and promise them riches," Mendes said.
Indeed he did. Mendes "actors" actually received decent food and medical care-if only because he wanted them to be healthy on camera"
"The actors to him were like be like pigs raised to be slaughtered," Mendes says with some disgust.
Once the actors were taken on stage, they would be told to act like they had just gone onto the battlefield, and given fake guns. The Green Guards, who ended up in the roles, were given real guns. Once filming began, the POWs would run, and then be gunned down mercilessly.
"Once one person was shot dead, others would realize that this was real, and begin panicking," Mendes said with some horror," and Di Grasso would gloriously capture every minute of the terrified reaction and deaths."
The extras who played Brazilian civilians would also be forced to witness this, just so Di Grasso could capture the horror, just to get genuine human emotions. In several instances, Di Grasso would order them shot dead, just to capture the pain and sadness, then claim (in the film) these emotions would be the result.
Like all directors, Di Grasso couldn't get perfection, so multiple takes were taken. Of course, with every take, more lives would be sacrificed.
It is estimated that nearly 90 people perished over the four months of filming.
But it wasn't just these bloody tactics that made Di Grasso so infamous. Exploiting his position, he threatened women with imprisonment and murder if they did not fulfill his sexual appetites.
"He would pick up random women with Green Guards," Mendes said, "and force them to sleep with him, or be sent into military prostitution. If the women did the job, he would 'reward' them-by putting them in his film, where they would be shot."
The film premiered August 29, 1942, and it was celebrated for its "authencity"-until of course, people found out how authentic the deaths and screams in the movie were.
The films made by Di Grasso continued with the same gruesome pattern, with people wounded or killed for the sake of genuine emotions.
"Some say that over 500 people died in the making of his movies," Mendes said with horror. "And countless women raped, and then killed on set."
The End And a Haunting Legacy
On March 20, 1944, the reign of terror in South America came to end with the poisoning of Salgado, and the collapse of the Green Guard.
But one person would vanish from the spotlight-Igancio Di Grasso. He disappeared during the collapse of Integralist Brazil, and has never been found. Some say he escaped into the vast Amazon jungle. Others say he fled to Portuguese Africa. But Mendes has his own theory. Despite many manhunts by Brazilian
"He purposely committed suicide, not because he knew the end was near, but because he wanted to be immortalized. And disappearing for good was a way for him to immortalize himself."
Considering what has happened in Brazil, this appears to be the case. The strict moral codes governing Brazilian film dominated the industry for almost 3 decades, forcing upon them a bourgeois morality that weakened creative freedom. In the Amazon, neo-Integralist mobs produce twisted snuff films in a desire to emulate Di Grasso's cruelty. Many Brazilians have made many exploitation films about murderous film directors.
But Di Grasso remains a cautionary tale of fascism, and its ability to allow humans to indulge in their worst desires.
[1] Pasolini was apparently who liked walking into trouble. ITTL, I can imagine him being very controversial.
[2] This is my take that against the idea that only poor and abused souls can become vicious sociopaths. Entitled people with "normal" backgrounds can also become deranged too.
Like with my post about the American Free State, I hope I can make your skin crawl with this one.
History.UASR
Ignacio Di Grasso: The Mengele of Movies
Remembering the Most Evil Man to Ever Hold A Camera
Filmmakers are sometimes known for scandalous lives and antics, both on an off camera. Roman Polanski and his rape charges. John Landis and deadly accidents that took place on set. Pier Pasolini [1] and..you know. But no (mainstream) filmmaker could ever hold a candle to Brazilian filmmaker Ignacio Di Grasso.
The Riefenstahl of Salgado's court, his nickname- O Acouguiero de Celuloide, Portuguese for "The Celluloid Butcher"-was owed to his willingness to commit literal murder to get the genuine reactions we wanted.
"Ignacio Di Grasso is not merely the worst aspects of filmmakers personified ," says Brazilian professor film historian Julio Mendes ,"but cautionary tale of absolute power given to one man."
Even decades after his mysterious demise (or perhaps because of it) Di Grasso's ghost continues to haunt Brazil to this day.
Humble Beginnings
Hernando Luis Igancio Di Grasso was born November 10, 1907 in Sao Paulo. He was the son of a prosperous Italian immigrant and merchant named Antonio Di Grasso, and a Brazilian mother named Juliana.
Antonio and Juliana, both of them very pious people and doting parents, sent him to highly priced Catholic schools. He was an incredibly charming and brilliant student, but even at a young age, he showed signs of psychopathy. He was known to bully students who he saw as an affront to his power. And in one instance, he was accused of attacking his teacher.
"One of the nuns at his school was poisoned," said Mendes, "and he was suspected as the nun was one of few who reprimanded him for his arrogance. But his popularity and his wealthy father's intervention prevented him from being charged, as many boys of privilege were."
This indulgence at a young age added to the young Ignacio's entitlement complex-planting the seeds for the madness of his later life.[2]
Politics and Filmmaking
Di Grasso's father was indeed quick to indulge Igancio's interests. But two in particular were gaining ground: politics and filmmaking.
In 1925, Antonio Di Grasso joined Amigos Da Italia (Friends of Italy), a pro-Mussolini advocacy group. A conservative Italian who lamented Italy's lack of gains from the First World War, he saw Il Duce as a man who would revive Italy's power and greatness. The young Igancio, eager to remain in his father graces, became a staunch organizer for the group. His charisma and charm would serve as a powerful weapon.
"Di Grasso was very much fascinated by power, and his saw politics as a means of obtaining more of it," Mendes said. "He sought both admiration, attention, and authority."
But one other interest, one that would shape his life more, drew him in: movies.
With Brazilian film still in its cradle, Brazilian movie theaters played mostly American films. Di Grasso was captivated by film and its power.
"Di Grasso's favorite film was Birth of a Nation," Mendes said. "He was exhilarated by the action scenes, and moved by the power of film to influence politics and history."
Pulling on his father's wing, Di Grasso received his first film camera in 1929, and eagerly made his own short silent films with it.
"None of his early work remains to this day, as much of it was destroyed," Mendes said. "But it was mostly filming in the streets of Sao Paulo. Simple everyday events."
The Rise of Integralism
The Great Depression, which would reveal the structural difficulties of capitalism, unleashed a torrent of political radicalism across the world. The Old Republic of Brazil was one of the casualties of this conflict, and Getulio Vargas would emerge as the new leader of Brazil. But soon, another admirer of Mussolini would subvert him.
Plinio Salgado, then a popular nationalistic journalist in Sao Paulo (it is assumed Di Grasso has read his work), traveled to Italy, and like Di Grasso, was very much impressed with Mussolini and his power in Italy. He returned, and became a reluctant supporter of the Vargas regime, but he began to develop his urges for power.
Using his fame, Salgado founded the Integralist Party in 1932. The young Ignacio, like many other Italian Brazilians, was excited by the movement and became one of Salgado's followers. Ignacio quickly became a major figure in the Sao Paulo movement, attracting and organizing paramilitaries, and making some of the first propaganda films for the movement, which would impress Salgado.
Salgado, despite open support for Vargas, secretly hungered for power, gathering followers and supporters over the years. Like a crocodile, he waited patiently for the moment to strike.
The 1935 Rio Insurrection would give him the opportunity. As Vargas forces were unable to deal with the powerful, though ill-fated revolt, his militia's brutal success at crushing the revolt, something that Di Grasso participated in.
With Vargas upstaged, Plinio came to power, and Di Grasso would gain the power to achieve his dream of filmmaking-and create the most nightmarish film production ever.
The Beginnings of Madness
Salgado, the petty man that he was, was envious of Hollywood movies, and sought to emulate him. Di Grasso, his propagandist, became his premier filmmaker.
The first movie produced by Di Grasso, Guerra do Direito (The War of Right), dramatized an 1820s conflict between Brazil and Argentina (mostly to discredit the moderate-socialist government that had come to power there). While the film was relatively well produced, Di Grasso began his ruthlessly manipulative tactics to gain authenticity in his 1939 film
"Among the two groups of actors engaging in battle," Mendes said ,"Di Grasso would instigate conflict between the actors. Frame each side for stealing, frame them for adultery."
In the film, the two groups of actors (representing Brazil and Argentina) engage in a brutal fistfight. The fight is scarily real-largely because the fight was something filmed by Di Grasso, after creating conflict between the sides.
Other ruthless tactics employed by Di Grasso were forcing actors to work up to 20 hours, keeping them awake with dangerous drugs, and personally attacking actors to get them into the roles. He also gave roles to woman who fulfilled his sexual desires.
But as the war in South America continued, so did Di Grasso's growing desire for perfect art, and with it, he would create one of the most twisted spectacles put on camera.
Authenticity
As the war continued, and POWs from Red Latin America became common sights in the streets, Di Grasso would develop one of his greatest insights, and would produce one the most frightening films ever made.
"Di Grasso would witness the Green Guards torturing POWs," Mendes said, "and like any man without much conscience, he would not feel a shred of remorse."
Indeed, Di Grasso only gained an even greater epiphany: the best misery that could be put on camera was human misery.
In early 1942, Di Grasso began filming an anti-American film called The Great Battle, or A Grande Batalha. It depicts a fictional battle of American and Argentine soldiers attempting to subjugate and corrupt innocent Brazilians, only to be driven back by the virtuous Green Guard.
Di Grasso, looking for some real authenticity, recruited actual POWs from America and Argentina.
Using a kind charm, he promised these volunteers freedom from the forced labor they were bullied into doing.
"Like a talent agent, he would approach these overworked people with a winning face, and promise them riches," Mendes said.
Indeed he did. Mendes "actors" actually received decent food and medical care-if only because he wanted them to be healthy on camera"
"The actors to him were like be like pigs raised to be slaughtered," Mendes says with some disgust.
Once the actors were taken on stage, they would be told to act like they had just gone onto the battlefield, and given fake guns. The Green Guards, who ended up in the roles, were given real guns. Once filming began, the POWs would run, and then be gunned down mercilessly.
"Once one person was shot dead, others would realize that this was real, and begin panicking," Mendes said with some horror," and Di Grasso would gloriously capture every minute of the terrified reaction and deaths."
The extras who played Brazilian civilians would also be forced to witness this, just so Di Grasso could capture the horror, just to get genuine human emotions. In several instances, Di Grasso would order them shot dead, just to capture the pain and sadness, then claim (in the film) these emotions would be the result.
Like all directors, Di Grasso couldn't get perfection, so multiple takes were taken. Of course, with every take, more lives would be sacrificed.
It is estimated that nearly 90 people perished over the four months of filming.
But it wasn't just these bloody tactics that made Di Grasso so infamous. Exploiting his position, he threatened women with imprisonment and murder if they did not fulfill his sexual appetites.
"He would pick up random women with Green Guards," Mendes said, "and force them to sleep with him, or be sent into military prostitution. If the women did the job, he would 'reward' them-by putting them in his film, where they would be shot."
The film premiered August 29, 1942, and it was celebrated for its "authencity"-until of course, people found out how authentic the deaths and screams in the movie were.
The films made by Di Grasso continued with the same gruesome pattern, with people wounded or killed for the sake of genuine emotions.
"Some say that over 500 people died in the making of his movies," Mendes said with horror. "And countless women raped, and then killed on set."
The End And a Haunting Legacy
On March 20, 1944, the reign of terror in South America came to end with the poisoning of Salgado, and the collapse of the Green Guard.
But one person would vanish from the spotlight-Igancio Di Grasso. He disappeared during the collapse of Integralist Brazil, and has never been found. Some say he escaped into the vast Amazon jungle. Others say he fled to Portuguese Africa. But Mendes has his own theory. Despite many manhunts by Brazilian
"He purposely committed suicide, not because he knew the end was near, but because he wanted to be immortalized. And disappearing for good was a way for him to immortalize himself."
Considering what has happened in Brazil, this appears to be the case. The strict moral codes governing Brazilian film dominated the industry for almost 3 decades, forcing upon them a bourgeois morality that weakened creative freedom. In the Amazon, neo-Integralist mobs produce twisted snuff films in a desire to emulate Di Grasso's cruelty. Many Brazilians have made many exploitation films about murderous film directors.
But Di Grasso remains a cautionary tale of fascism, and its ability to allow humans to indulge in their worst desires.
[1] Pasolini was apparently who liked walking into trouble. ITTL, I can imagine him being very controversial.
[2] This is my take that against the idea that only poor and abused souls can become vicious sociopaths. Entitled people with "normal" backgrounds can also become deranged too.
Last edited:
Good (although disturbing) update, Bookmark!
Sorry for nitpicking, but I have a few corrections to suggest.
Sorry for nitpicking, but I have a few corrections to suggest.
Considering he is a Portuguese speaker, it would be more likely that he would be called Fernando Luís Inácio Di Grasso. (Hernando and Ignacio are Spanish names)
it should be "O Açougueiro de Celulóide".
it is missing a tilde, it should "São Paulo".
the "of" particle is not capitalized, so it should be "Amigos da Itália".
I think you meant "just so Di Grasso could capture the horror".