Following are extracts translated/paraphrased from the following Greek texts (without consultation of the original German text (if applicable)):
Κονδύλης, Παναγιώτης: Το Αόρατο Χρονολόγιο της Σκέψης. Απαντήσεις σε 28 ερωτήματα ("ACS"). Νεφέλη, Αθήνα, 1998;
Κονδύλης, Παναγιώτης: Από τον 20ο στον 21ο Αιώνα ("20/21"). Θεμέλιο, Αθήνα, 1998.
"Never, I believe, have certain basic tenets of the Marxist observation of history been so pertinent and true as in the just underway current phase of planetary history, that namely the level and character of the relationship between man as natural being and the rest of nature significantly influences the manner of composition and structure of human society; that human relations, which crystallise in social composition, are comprehended and consolidated or modified on the part of acting subjects through ideologies, i.e. they are echoed in a "false consciousness", which simultaneously satisfies ethical-normative and polemical needs;..."(Communism and the Twentieth Century)
"Only on the base of secured material reproduction of a highly technicised society can knowledge become an essential factor and motive force of such reproduction; interest in such knowledge necessarily decreases once it appears that the absolutely necessary material base is in danger."
"Globalisation of production and the economy will accenuate the problem of distribution from two points of view. On the inside of rising economic powers it [globalisation] sets in motion processes, which very quickly can multiply rather than satisfy expectations for relative gains - and as is well known, a half-full person is more aggressive than someone half-dead owing to hunger. Even the limited satisfaction of such expectations creates in any event, since behind such satisfaction stand enormous human masses, significant wealth, such that the relative share of developed countries in global wealth is continually reduced. The result is that the distribution struggle is transferred to the inside of the wealthy countries, which are compelled to tighten their belts (at least the belts of a broad range of ordinary people) so that they can remain competitive.
Whoever imagines that this simply constitutes a short-term or medium-term readjustment, which will certainly succeed as long as we demonstrate some patience and skill - whoever imagines this, of course, has not comprehended the extent of the transformation which is being brought about on a global scale. The industrially developed "West" continues to see the process of globalisation from the fearless and illusory viewpoint of that section of the planet which still has command of above three quarters of global wealth and global energy. And we must add that what is decisive here is the American observation of things, which indeed, despite the ideological confessions of faith as regards the automatic nature of the economy, is based from the outset on the military and diplomatic precedence of the United States. Whoever excels (for the time being) by so much, has the natural tendency to see globalisation first of all as the expansion of his own field of action and cannot or does not wish to put in his mind the long-term consequences of the turning of the tide. Nevertheless, into the self-conviction of the "West" there has already infiltrated the first doubt, but also the first chill, especially in Europe, where it is being brought all the more intensely to awareness that the deeper cause of the permanent crisis is the intensity of global competition and the continuous reduction of the specific european weight in the global economy. The doubts and the chills will be exacerbated under the pressure of imported and endogenous demographic and ecological factors. Then borders, which globalisation in the meanwhile has brought down, will be erected again owing to the worsening of the distribution struggles, notwithstanding that we do not know precisely by whom and where such borders will be erected this time.
This worsening should be expected all the more because the second presupposition of the perception which we referred to at the beginning, that the equalisation of the conditions and goals of life will blunt cοnflicts, is simply incorrect [the first presupposition mentioned earlier, and not translated here, is the belief in the primacy of the "innately peaceful" economy over politics, when in terms of social action and reality such a separation of "good" economics from "bad" power-politics cannot and does not exist except as the ideology of certain power-seeking subjects]. The commonality of goals [leading to peace, as the second presupposition] gives birth to friendship between two sides when a goal is to be achieved against a third party; however, it sows enmity when the achievement of the common goal by one side either renders impossible or renders valueless the achievement of the goal by the other side. Friendship, thereby, does not arise from the common goal per se, but from the agreement of two sides as to which place each side will have in pursuit of the common goal and what benefits each will extract from the achievement of the goal. If on this critical point no agreement is reached, then the conflict will worsen precisely because the goal is common - for the same reason a butcher does not make an enemy of the grocer on the other side of the street but of the butcher next to him. Commonality of goal means struggle for the same resources, the same markets, the same spaces, and the same prizes. And if the commonality of goals is extended to goals of consumption, then an Indian and a Chinese will have to consume as much energy and as many other raw materials as a North American. What will be the consequences for the planet?
The equalisation of conditions and goals of life because of globalisation is considered in another sense as the precursor of peaceful developments. It is said that the psycho-intellectual consequences of this equalisation will contribute to the weakening of national cultures and consequently of the conflicts which are due to national and cultural reasons. Whether the universal equalisation of the way of life of people will necessarily shape a united world civilisation, we do not need to examine it here. At any rate, this global civilisation would constitute a guarantee for peace only if in the past all bloody conflicts had ocurred between nationally and culturally different collective subjects. However, history has also known numerous civil wars, and they often were the worst. So the only thing that economic and cultural globalisation can guarantee is the conversion of all wars into civil wars.
Whoever expects world peace from the attenuation or the dissolution of nation-states per se forgets that wars are a phenomenon much older than nation-states. He forgets that the nation-state by no means constitutes the only possible sovereign political subject, and consequently, the abolition of the nation-state does not automatically entail the abolition of the notion of the sovereign state and of sovereign rights. And, finally, he forgets that much worse than each conflict between organised political units can be the direct struggle of man against man under conditions of global anomie."
(«ΙΙΙ. Η Παγκόσμια Οικονομία, η Παγκόσμια Δημοκρατία, και ο Παγκόσμιος Αγώνας Κατανομής. 1.Παγκοσμιοποίηση: πολιτική, οικονομία και κατανομή», Από τον 20ο στον 21ο Αιώνα, σσ.71-74 βάσει του γερμανικού πρωτοτύπου: «Globalisierung, Politik, Verteilung», Tages-Anzeiger (Ζυρίχη), 29-11-1996.)
"...Because, on the one hand, we know of extreme conflict which arises on common civilisational ground (e.g. civil wars), but on the other hand, the discomfort which one feels when foreign values relativise one's own values, is converted into a sense of existential threat and enmity only when one civilisational community comprehends this relitivisation as symbolic praxis which sooner or later will be followed by tangible actions against tangible goods. No community lives only off values, and that is why no community would want to die in a war for the sake of values without specific existential reference.... If the same Western Powers, which in 1919 rejected the demand of Japan and denied setting in stone the equality of races in the Treaty of Versailles, in the year 1998 officially bend over backwards to understand foreign civilisations, that does not definitely constitute progress in understanding. However, it constitutes an indication of the dramatic change in the world correlation of forces."
(«ΙΙΙ. Η Παγκόσμια Οικονομία, η Παγκόσμια Δημοκρατία, και ο Παγκόσμιος Αγώνας Κατανομής. 4.Σύγκρουση των πολιτισμών ή συγκρούσεις ερήμην του πολιτισμού;», Από τον 20ο στον 21ο Αιώνα, σσ.87-88,92 βάσει του γερμανικού πρωτοτύπου: «Der Traum vom Weltstaat», Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 25-01-1997.)
Make a Free Website with Yola.
