Newsletter TDF 1.2002

Dear Co-Planetarians,

Here's to you new number of Technologies of Frontier. It is a short number, although it is issued many months after the preceding number. What happened? The events of the last nine months have blasted any velleity of regular frequency, even quarterly.

Besides, the spring is rich of "space" events. Some are in the immediate future: for instance the Futuristic Workshop ASI, where our Dr. Marco C. Bernasconi participates as a speaker with a contribution on the developments of the Space Economy during the 21st century. We will obviously give news of it, out of the regular frequency; and the same we will do about the workshop at ESTEC on the Inflatable technologies, that will be held in the month of May.

I do confess that I remained - how can I say? - ideologically dizzy for months, after September 11th 2001. Also today I wonder if it is of some utilities to write the year, next to that date, as if someone could have doubts.

But finally I succeeded to stop the whirlwind of the conflicting thoughts and to find again the thread of a reflection of ours, first of all humanist, that, though rendering to Caesar that which is Caesar's, puts again at the first place the human life and development priority. It is not easy, in the din of the falling skyscrapers and bombs.

Even later, many events have followed one another, and each one require comments from a humanist point of view. I cannot finish to formulate a political thought, that the reality immediately races more ahead (or backer, or it perhaps gets restless in foolish ways). Finally, since we are not professional journalists nor politicians, and willing to avoid to shoot gust judgments without the necessary reflection, we decided to put online the already prepared materials, and not to let us engulf by the most recent events. Therefore I limit myself, for now, to few considerations.

For instance: President Bush had caught me in positive, conducting the Afghanistan war indeed against the terrorists and the taleban regime, in a well different way wrt the disastrous bombardment, made by President Clinton two years ago on Kosovo. But recently Mr.. Bush has declared that Sharon is a man of peace! How can he say that the exterminator of Shabra and Shatila - and today of Jenin - is a man of peace, sincerely engaged against terrorism? Behind such a statement I guess a political wish well different wrt the one that -- riding the indisputable popular consent followed to September 11th -- he made us believe: to pursue the guilty ones and to free the innocent ones. Instead of seeking the guilty ones (Israeli, Palestinians, Arabs, Europeans, Americans) of the actual situation, now he returns to define whole populations guilty, and "pacific" who flattens the houses with children, women, olds inside. 

Other recent news, that causes deep shame to me: U.N. abdicated the investigation on the facts of Jenin, after the refusal of Sharon and the consequent veto by Colin Powell. Another position completely opposite to the international justice, that recommends to seek the guilty ones and to protect the innocent ones. A lot of innocent people (we won't even know how many) have lost the life in an atrocious way. Subsequently, the desperate hate spring was further loaded, in that unfortunate region.
In these days came the news of the recovery, in Canada, of a Nazi criminal. These recoveries are generally owed to the tenacity of the organizations of the Hebrews survived to the extermination fields. It is comforting to know that there is someone, in the world, that doesn't forget the horrors, and is able to pursue the guilty ones even after 60 years. Why donít we take example from that tenacity? Why we don't decidedly act to assure to the justice all the persons responsible of massacres against innocent people? In this group are certainly included (as it regards the middle-oriental area) Sharon, the chiefs of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and others. Of course, it would mean to put Sharon on the same level of a Milosevitch, but what does really differentiate those two, if not ideology? Well, until when certain crimes will be judged admissible, because made by "ideologically pleasant" people, we won't be able to really speak of justice, and the terrorism will be fed, and not defeated. 

In this number we deeply dug in the ideological-religious convictions of the monotheist societies and, in spite of who sees millennia of discard between the Christian-Jewish world and the Islamic one, we found again worrisome common ideological roots. Asking why both the Islamic societies and the" advanced" ones they keep on holding the infanticide as a legitimate mean of struggle, we reread, with a good dose of bewilderment, the sacred writings (common to Christians, Hebrews and Moslems)... please see the articles: "But the culture of infanticide belongs to the monotheist world","The integrisme lives here." And, as far as the struggle against terrorism is concerned, "Liberty is a powerful weapon or a modern one?".

You also find, in this number, an article on the social conflict, fired again in Italy, about the article 18: "Article 18, a forgery problem".

But we are already pursued by the Italian press freedom case, and we would be tried to further delay the new number issue in order to comment even such event. But, then, I am afraid we would no more issue the new number. I limit myself to few comments or provocative questions, for now (welcome anyone who will answer): who, in Italy, does have indeed title to speak of press liberty, or also about liberty tout-court? We live an absurd season, in which who practices the liberty of opinion and press is accused to make a criminal use of the information means. Just in the days when the famous list of proscription has been pronounced against Santoro, Biagi and Luttazzi, a news circulates (timidly, and no national daily TV news mentioned it!) about the" negotiation" (50 million of European) that Paolo Berlusconi, brother of President Silvio Berlusconi, has deal, in order to avoid the jail!

Well, welcome to a movement for the freedom of the press, and for the liberty of judgment of the justices! But pay attention to put, at the head of such a movement, still the same ones that already gave proof of their extreme ideological poverty! We don't forget, in fact, how the same TG3 treated Nanni Moretti, when his by now famous statement was not yet famous. We saw Moretti moving his mouth in silence (hateful practice of the Italian journalism, both of right and left, that don't let us directly listen to the words of the people, always covered by the comment of the journalist!). According to the tg3 speaker, Moretti had expressed a bland criticism to the top of the Ulivo, inviting them to mostly listen to the voice of the base! Few hours later we learned that Moretti accused the Ulivo top of complete ineptitude, inviting them to resign themselves, anything but bland criticism! No political man, in Italy, is able to take example from Lionel Jospin. No: they are all well attached to their chairs, to encumber the rooms of the political direction with their total incapability, killing on born whoever manifests a new idea, or trying to engulf him.

I can't delay to complete this letter a couple of days, that immediately the French people go to vote and they resoundingly decree the obsolescence of the socialist party, giving to the racist Le Pen the place of challenger of Chirac at the second turn! The usual choir of scholar opinion-maker wants us to believe, as always, that the guilt is of the bad Trotskyists, that "dispersed the votes"; and that the guilt is of the election system... but was it not the 2 turns majority system a proper system for the very auspicious bipolarity? The only thing that we would like to finally listen them to admit is not said, because all they have the terror of it: that the "guilt" is of the extreme weakness of the political proposals; that the people and their rights, their needs, their liberty, don't have the place that they should have, in the political programs; that nobody proposes a true development program, able to face the awful challenges of this historical epoch; that all the politicians scrape a living, aiming to the mere maintenance of the status quo. This is why people break the comfortable toy of bipolarity (among two political nothingness) and... it ends up paying attention to who cries stronger, giving the impression to have some answers.

I have the impression that the politics, in the old continent, was going to jump back of about fifty years, despite of the sunset of the industrial age: the old social classes are on the way of dissolution, but not so the meanness and the arrogance of the thieves, of the mafia members, and of the coercive collectivists, both of right and left. Any attempt of overcoming the ideological ghosts of right and left, to aim finally high, will be therefore chased back again and postponed to who knows when. Then we will have to return to side, in defense of liberty against tyranny. If they go back to the proscription lists, to the institution of "above of the law" people castes, and to intolerable racist subcultures, what else could we do?

In the today online number you can also found a small service on the culture of the safety, still unfortunately the Cinderella, at the dawns of the electronic age. My invitation is to reflect on the following contradiction: the entertainment and sport superstars have multimillionaires annual incomes, but our life doesn't depend on such people. Our life depends rather from the ethics of badly paid designers, that, in the most part of cases, don't even have a budget to design according to safety and reliability requirements. And I invite you to a further reflection on the following theme: the free market has to be also wild? If we leave the market to develop according to the natural model of the strength's primacy wrt ethics, let's not surprise then if the airplanes fall and the tunnels burn... In spite of the many powerful contrary tides, I keep on thinking that liberty is a conquest of ethics and engineering, and that it is not a fruit of simple "removal of obstacles". The topic of the safety and reliability of the systems is an excellent illustrative cornerstone of such a paradigm.

Reassuming, the index of TDF 1.2002 is the following: I wait for you numerous, as always, on , and I invite you, despite everything, to:

Aim high!

Adriano Autino


[010.AA - TDF.1/2002 - 01.05.2002]