{"id":9522,"date":"2013-02-16T23:27:38","date_gmt":"2013-02-16T21:27:38","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/egophobia.ro\/?p=9522"},"modified":"2013-02-19T10:30:02","modified_gmt":"2013-02-19T08:30:02","slug":"oportunismul-intelectualilor-v","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/egophobia.ro\/?p=9522","title":{"rendered":"Oportunismul Intelectualilor [V]"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: right;\">de Ana Bazac<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p align=justify>\n<b>\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n<p>Iar \u00een stalinism, dac\u0103 majoritatea intelectualilor a fost, din nou, conformist\u0103 \u2013 \u015fi pentru c\u0103 stalinismul a fost un sistem economico-social non-socialist (un izotop al capitalismului) deci bazat pe domina\u0163ie-supunere \u015fi aservirea intelectualilor, dar \u015fi inclusiv datorit\u0103 faptului c\u0103, \u00een \u0163\u0103rile slab dezvoltate unde a avut loc stalinismul, modernizarea \u015fi deci \u015fi constituirea categoriei intelectuale a fost rezultatul acestui sistem \u2013 pu\u0163inii diziden\u0163i au fost \u015fi ei <i>dependen\u0163i de sus\u0163inerea material\u0103 \u015fi politic\u0103 din afar\u0103<\/i><a title=\"\" href=\"#_edn1\">[1]<\/a>. Din aceast\u0103 cauz\u0103, cvasi-totalitatea acestora au fost <i>critici de la dreapta<\/i> ai stalinismului, echival\u00e2ndu-l cu \u201er\u0103ul\u201d, ignor\u00e2nd cu totul aspectele de sistem economico-social (izotop al capitalismului) prin care s-a realizat modernizarea rapid\u0103, inclusiv ridicarea culturii, reduc\u00e2nd astfel stalinismul la regimul politic \u2013 echivalat, la r\u00e2ndul s\u0103u, cu cel fascist \u2013 \u015fi au devenit sus\u0163in\u0103torii \u00eenfoca\u0163i ai \u201erestaura\u0163iei\u201d capitalismului explicit, \u00een care valorile libert\u0103\u0163ii \u015fi democra\u0163iei au \u00eenf\u0103\u0163i\u015farea ambivalent\u0103 care cel pu\u0163in ar trebui s\u0103 pun\u0103 sub semnul \u00eentreb\u0103rii conformismul.<\/p>\n<p>\u00cen Rom\u00e2nia, majoritatea dintre intelectualii anticomuni\u015fti de dup\u0103 1989 au fost \u00eenainte conformi\u015fti chiar p\u00e2n\u0103 la excesul de zel pentru privilegii<a title=\"\" href=\"#_edn2\">[2]<\/a>. Cei foarte pu\u0163ini care doreau s\u0103 fac\u0103 o critic\u0103 de la st\u00e2nga a stalinismului au fost, \u00eenainte, cel pu\u0163in marginaliza\u0163i<a title=\"\" href=\"#_edn3\">[3]<\/a>, dac\u0103 nu redu\u015fi la t\u0103cere, inclusiv prin permisul pentru exilare<a title=\"\" href=\"#_edn4\">[4]<\/a>: nu ideile lor au focalizat slabul dialog teoretic ci cele ale \u201ediziden\u0163ilor\u201d na\u0163ionali\u015fti de tipul Ilie B\u0103descu de ex. Aluziile la cultul personalit\u0103\u0163ii din unele mont\u0103ri ale unor piese de teatru, respingerea rezisten\u0163ei prin critica social\u0103 sau cel pu\u0163in prin dialogul \u015ftiin\u0163ific, metaforele \u015fi ermetismul care erau foarte departe de oamenii de r\u00e2nd nu \u00eendrept\u0103\u0163esc \u00een nici un fel auto-imaginea legitimatoare a intelectualilor non-conformi\u015fti. Astfel \u00eenc\u00e2t imaginea roz\u0103 de \u201erezisten\u0163\u0103 prin cultur\u0103\u201d<a title=\"\" href=\"#_edn5\">[5]<\/a> este, \u00een bun\u0103 m\u0103sur\u0103, un simplu fals. Nu numai pentru c\u0103, dup\u0103 1989 cultura rom\u00e2n\u0103 nu a beneficiat defel de \u201eliteratura de sertar\u201d \u00een care ar fi trebuit s\u0103 se reflecte \u00eentreaga critic\u0103 social\u0103 a timpului din perspectiva intelectualului care este, prin defini\u0163ie nu un <i>laudator tempori acti<\/i> ci un c\u0103ut\u0103tor al adev\u0103rului (inclusiv \u00een sensul antic, asupra c\u0103ruia a insistat Heidegger, de \u03b1\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1), un promotor al drept\u0103\u0163ii \u015fi binelui pentru cel mai mare num\u0103r. Ci \u015fi pentru c\u0103 at\u00e2t \u00eenainte c\u00e2t \u015fi dup\u0103 1989 intelectualii s-au retras \u00een lupta zilnic\u0103 meschin\u0103 pentru recunoa\u015ftere politic\u0103 \u015fi privilegii, \u00een timp ce marile realiz\u0103ri culturale \u2013 \u00een \u015ftiin\u0163\u0103 \u015fi tehnic\u0103, edit\u0103rile, traducerile, educa\u0163ia \u015fi ridicarea nivelului general de cultur\u0103 \u2013 nu au avut loc din perspectiva acelei \u201erezisten\u0163e\u201d ci, dimpotriv\u0103, din perspectiva dragostei de crea\u0163ie cultural\u0103 ce a avut totu\u015fi ni\u015fte cadre generale permisive pentru realizarea acesteia.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>Dup\u0103 1989, comportamentul intelectualilor nu a f\u0103cut excep\u0163ie de la conformismul ce a fost mai puternic \u00een \u0163\u0103ri slab dezvoltate, cu o puternic\u0103 birocra\u0163ie: majoritatea a preluat, cu acela\u015fi entuziasm cu care \u00ee\u015fi ar\u0103tase ata\u015famentul comunist \u00een stalinism, <i>cli\u015feele<\/i> induse de c\u0103tre purt\u0103torii de cuv\u00e2nt neo-liberali.<\/p>\n<p>Astfel, la noi, realiz\u0103rile \u201ede dup\u0103 1948 \u015fi p\u00e2n\u0103 \u00een 1989, \u00een toate domeniile, <i>spre a ajunge la o civiliza\u0163ie dorit\u0103 de puterea politic\u0103<\/i>, s-a sprijinit, din punctul de vedere al personalului mediu \u015fi superior, pe vechea gard\u0103, instruit\u0103 \u00een perioada interbelic\u0103, f\u0103r\u0103 de care nimic sau aproape nimic n-ar fi fost posibil\u2026\u201d<a title=\"\" href=\"#_edn6\">[6]<\/a>. Nici un fel de cercet\u0103ri sociologice concrete<a title=\"\" href=\"#_edn7\">[7]<\/a> \u015fi nici un fel de analize care au relevat faptul c\u0103, din anii 70, intelectualitatea rom\u00e2n\u0103 s-a reprodus, ba chiar \u00een propor\u0163ia cea mai mare \u00een Rom\u00e2nia<a title=\"\" href=\"#_edn8\">[8]<\/a>, nu au fost luate \u00een seam\u0103, important a fost s\u0103 se repete cli\u015feul deprecierii stalinismului.<\/p>\n<p>Sau inducerea ideii c\u0103 to\u0163i \u201eadev\u0103ra\u0163ii intelectuali\u201d s-ar fi opus comunismului \u2013 ca r\u0103spuns la ideea evident\u0103 c\u0103 intelectualii nu au format \u015fi nu formeaz\u0103 un bloc omogen \u2013 despre ceilal\u0163i (dar, desigur, nu despre lideri) nespun\u00e2ndu-se nimic, induc\u00e2ndu-se deci ideea simplist\u0103 a opozi\u0163iei funciare dintre intelectuali \u015fi comunism<a title=\"\" href=\"#_edn9\">[9]<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>Sau, considerarea drept \u201esocietate civil\u0103\u201d exclusiv intelectualii care promoveaz\u0103 punctele de vedere neo-liberale, ca \u015fi \u00eenregimentarea ONG-urilor care au ca obiect de activitate democra\u0163ia exclusiv \u00een r\u00e2ndul celor care sus\u0163in, f\u0103r\u0103 nici o critic\u0103, sistemul politic actual.<\/p>\n<p>Sau, promovarea unor idei critice doar dup\u0103 ce acestea au \u00een urm\u0103 o anumit\u0103 istorie deja \u00een dialogurile intelectuale occidentale.<\/p>\n<p>Sau neglijarea politicoas\u0103, dac\u0103 nu chiar interdic\u0163ia \u2013 formal\u0103 ca \u015fi prin privarea de mijloace materiale pentru cercetare \u2013 a temelor incomode.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>\u00cen capitalismul contemporan, <i>post-modern<\/i>, unii au relevat trecerea de la intelectualii care au pus problema valorilor <i>universale <\/i>(relevate de modernitate \u015fi ra\u0163ionalism) \u2013 intelectualii \u201elegislatori\u201d \u2013 la intelectualii actuali, care au v\u0103zut dificult\u0103\u0163ile puse de problema valorilor universale \u015fi, astfel, au devenit doar \u201einterpre\u0163i\u201d ai fenomenelor, textelor, evenimentelor<a title=\"\" href=\"#_edn10\">[10]<\/a>. Cu alte cuvinte, s-au respins intelectualii care vorbeau pentru al\u0163ii, dar, cel pu\u0163in unii \u015fi un timp au f\u0103cut-o, s-a promovat modelul intelectualului promotor al relativismului \u201emulticultural\u201d<a title=\"\" href=\"#_edn11\">[11]<\/a> \u015fi al prezen\u0163ei \u00een \u201emicropolitic\u0103\u201d (legat\u0103 de spa\u0163ii extreme\/specifice de existen\u0163\u0103 \u015fi de focalizarea asupra drepturilor \u015fi problemelor care exist\u0103 aici \u015fi legate de grupuri oprimate special<a title=\"\" href=\"#_edn12\">[12]<\/a>). Dar direc\u0163ia cea mai important\u0103 a pozi\u0163iei majorit\u0103\u0163ii intelectualilor fa\u0163\u0103 de neo-liberalismul (neo-conservatorismul) actual a fost \u015fi este alinierea lor la acestea, at\u00e2t sub forma explicit\u0103 c\u00e2t \u015fi sub aceea implicit\u0103, a social-democra\u0163iei \u201ecelei de a treia c\u0103i\u201d de ex. De asemenea, conceptul de oportunism a fost \u201ealbit\u201d prin sensul dat \u00een economie, ca desemn\u00e2nd comportamentul ce se ghideaz\u0103 dup\u0103 interesul propriu \u015fi care, astfel, nu poate fi predictibil, datorit\u0103 manipul\u0103rii strategice a informa\u0163iilor \u015fi a reprezent\u0103rii deformate a inten\u0163iilor \u00een jocul economic, \u015fi care este esen\u0163ial \u00een alegerea rela\u0163iilor contractuale. Conceptul a fost astfel contrapus celui de rela\u0163ie de \u00eencredere \u00een economie<a title=\"\" href=\"#_edn13\">[13]<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>#<br \/>\nprimele patru p\u0103r\u021bi ale acestui text poti fi citite <a href=\"http:\/\/egophobia.ro\/?p=9368\">aici<\/a>, <a href=\"http:\/\/egophobia.ro\/?p=7902\">aici<\/a>, <a href=\"http:\/\/egophobia.ro\/?p=8380\">aici<\/a> &#038; <a href=\"http:\/\/egophobia.ro\/?p=9070\">aici<\/a><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>NOTE<\/p>\n<div><br clear=\"all\" \/><\/p>\n<hr align=\"left\" size=\"1\" width=\"33%\" \/>\n<div>\n<p><a title=\"\" href=\"#_ednref1\">[1]<\/a> Vezi Ana Bazac, \u201eAz antiszt\u00e1linista disszidensek \u00e9s a &#8220;vox intelligent(s)iae&#8221;\u201d, <i>Eszm\u00e9let,<\/i> nr. 60, dec. 2003, pp. 68-80.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div>\n<p><a title=\"\" href=\"#_ednref2\">[2]<\/a> Vezi vilele \u201ede crea\u0163ie\u201d pentru scriitori, dar nu pentru ingineri \u015fi cercet\u0103tori \u00een \u201eumanioare\u201d de ex.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div>\n<p><a title=\"\" href=\"#_ednref3\">[3]<\/a> Vezi cazul Radu Florian, nepl\u0103cut pentru \u201ediziden\u0163i\u201d \u015fi \u00eenainte \u015fi dup\u0103 1989. (Ana Bazac, \u201eDe ce nu este la mod\u0103 filosofia umanist\u0103 militant\u0103? Filosofie, politic\u0103 \u015fi umanism\u201d, \u00een vol. <i>Radu Florian \u2013evoc\u0103ri<\/i>, Bucure\u015fti, Tritonic 2005, pp. 71-109, reluat \u00een Ana Bazac, <i>Omul activ \u015fi <\/i>impersonalul \u201ese\u201d<i> (Perspectiv\u0103 de filosofie social\u0103 asupra unor pagini din istoria g\u00e2ndirii rom\u00e2ne\u015fti),<b> <\/b><\/i>Craiova, Aius, 2010, pp. 506-547).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div>\n<p><a title=\"\" href=\"#_ednref4\">[4]<\/a> Vezi N. Tertulian, specialist \u00een Luk\u00e1cs.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div>\n<p><a title=\"\" href=\"#_ednref5\">[5]<\/a> Vezi \u015fi Katherine Verdery, <i>Compromis \u015fi rezisten\u0163\u0103: cultura rom\u00e2n\u0103 sub Ceau\u015fescu<\/i>, Bucure\u015fti, Humanitas 1994.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div>\n<p><a title=\"\" href=\"#_ednref6\">[6]<\/a> Ioan Saizu, <i>Intelectuali rom\u00e2ni implica\u0163i \u00een dezvoltarea civiliza\u0163iei economice<\/i>, Bucure\u015fti, Editura Academiei Rom\u00e2ne, 2003, p. 253.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div>\n<p><a title=\"\" href=\"#_ednref7\">[7]<\/a> Vezi de ex. H. Cazacu (coord.), <i>Structur\u0103 social\u0103, diversificare, diferen\u0163iere, omogenizare<\/i>, Bucure\u015fti, Editura Academiei RSR, 1988.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div>\n<p><a title=\"\" href=\"#_ednref8\">[8]<\/a> Walter D. Connor, Socialism, Politics and Equality: Hierarchy and Change in Eastern Europe and the USSR, N Y, Columbia Press Univ. 1979, citat de Sorin Adam Matei, Boierii min\u0163ii. Intelectualii rom\u00e2ni \u00eentre grupurile de prestigiu \u015fi pia\u0163a liber\u0103 a ideilor, Bucure\u015fti, Compania, 2004, p. 198. Dar vezi \u015fi Pierre Bourdieu et Jean-Claude Passeron, La reproduction. \u00c9l\u00e9ments pour une th\u00e9orie du syst\u00e8me de l\u2019enseignement, Paris, Minuit, 1970, 1989, care au descris reproducerea social\u0103\u00a0 a intelectualilor, exact a\u015fa ca \u00een Evul Mediu descris de Le Goff. Ca \u015fi P. Bourdieu, La Nobl\u00e9sse d\u2019\u00c9tat. Grandes \u00e9coles et esprit de corps, Paris, Minuit, 1989, unde s-a demonstrat foarte slabul acces al copiilor din familii non-intelectuale \u015fi nelegate de pozi\u0163iile birocratice semnificative \u00een \u00eenv\u0103\u0163\u0103m\u00e2ntul superior administrativ \u015fi politic. Or, \u00een stalinism, accesul copiilor din familii non-intelectuale \u00een \u00eenv\u0103\u0163\u0103m\u00e2ntul superior a fost mult mai mare, chiar dup\u0103 anii 70 c\u00e2nd a avut loc procesul masiv de reproducere a categoriilor intelectuale \u015fi birocratice. Chiar proletcult-ismul din primii ani, pe l\u00e2ng\u0103 caracterul s\u0103u d\u0103un\u0103tor, a avut \u015fi func\u0163ia de \u201ediscriminare pozitiv\u0103\u201d temporar\u0103 a copiilor proveni\u0163i din familii bon-intelectuale.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div>\n<p><a title=\"\" href=\"#_ednref9\">[9]<\/a> Cf. Lavinia Betea, <i>Psihologie politic\u0103. Individ, lider, mul\u0163ime \u00een regimul comunist<\/i>, Ia\u015fi, Polirom 2001.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div>\n<p><a title=\"\" href=\"#_ednref10\">[10]<\/a> Zygmunt Bauman, <i>Legislators and Interpreters<\/i>, Cambridge, Polity Press, 1987. Dar \u015fi, mai \u00eenainte, Michel Foucault, care a considerat opinia lui Sartre despre intelectualul angajat drept exagerat\u0103 \u015fi i-a opus intelectualul care intervine de partea celor oprima\u0163i doar indirect, prin crea\u0163ia intelectual\u0103 specific\u0103 \u015fi prin prezen\u0163a \u00een dezbateri specifice, vezi <i>Language, Counter-Memory, Practice<\/i> (D.F. Bouchard ed.), Ithaca, NY, Cornell Univ. Press, Oxford, Blackwell, 1977.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div>\n<p><a title=\"\" href=\"#_ednref11\">[11]<\/a> O form\u0103 de manifestare a acestui spirit relativist este \u015fi asumarea separa\u0163iei dintre un spirit al elitelor \u2013 adic\u0103 \u201enoi\u201d \u2013 \u015fi, pe de alt\u0103 parte, <i>cultura media<\/i> care uniformizeaz\u0103 \u015fi reduce nivelul intelectual al popula\u0163iei: \u201e\u00cen orice caz, industria cultural\u0103 nu \u00eent\u00e2lne\u015fte nici o rezisten\u0163\u0103 c\u00e2nd invadeaz\u0103 cultura\u201d, cf. Alain Finkielkraut, <i>\u00cenfr\u00e2ngerea g\u00e2ndirii<\/i> (1987), Bucure\u015fti, Humanitas, 1992, p. 101.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div>\n<p><a title=\"\" href=\"#_ednref12\">[12]<\/a> Focalizarea pe micropolitic\u0103 \u2013 legat\u0103 de grupuri oprimate sexual sau etnic \u015fi de spa\u0163ii extreme ca universitatea, spitalul, \u00eenchisorile \u2013 a reflectat \u015fi criza teoriei sociale care nu a fost capabil\u0103 s\u0103 asambleze problemele \u201emicro\u201d cu cele structurale. Aceast\u0103 perspectiv\u0103 a fost criticat\u0103 de c\u0103tre, de ex. Kelllner, <i>op. cit<\/i>., dar \u015fi, din 1998\u00a0 de c\u0103tre Zygmunt Bauman: <i>Work, Consumerism and the New Poor,<\/i> Milton Keynes, Open University 1998, <i>In Search of Politics<\/i>, Cambridge, Polity Press 1999, <i>Liquid Modernity<\/i>, Cambridge, Polity Press 2000. Vezi \u015fi Daniel Leighton, <i>Searching for politics in an uncertain world: interview with Zygmunt Bauman<\/i>, in \u201eA Journal of Labour Politics\u201d, vol. 10, No 1, winter 2002, <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">http:\/\/www. renewal.org.uk\/issues\/2002%20Volume%2010\/No%20%\/20-%20winter\/Bauman.htm . <\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div>\n<p><a title=\"\" href=\"#_ednref13\">[13]<\/a> O. E. Williamson, <i>Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications<\/i>, NY, Free Press, 1975, \u015fi acela\u015fi, <i>The Economic Institutions of Capitalism<\/i>, NY, Free Press, 1985.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>de Ana Bazac &nbsp; \u00a0 Iar \u00een stalinism, dac\u0103 majoritatea intelectualilor a fost, din nou, conformist\u0103 \u2013 \u015fi pentru c\u0103 stalinismul a fost un sistem economico-social non-socialist (un izotop al capitalismului) deci bazat pe domina\u0163ie-supunere \u015fi aservirea intelectualilor, dar \u015fi inclusiv datorit\u0103 faptului c\u0103, \u00een \u0163\u0103rile slab dezvoltate unde a avut loc stalinismul, modernizarea \u015fi [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[969,27],"tags":[613,970,1117],"class_list":["post-9522","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-egophobia37","category-filosofie","tag-ana-bazac","tag-egophobia-37","tag-filosofie"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p6DakB-2tA","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/egophobia.ro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9522","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/egophobia.ro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/egophobia.ro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/egophobia.ro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/egophobia.ro\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=9522"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/egophobia.ro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9522\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":10015,"href":"https:\/\/egophobia.ro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9522\/revisions\/10015"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/egophobia.ro\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=9522"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/egophobia.ro\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=9522"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/egophobia.ro\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=9522"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}