Translate

domingo, 25 de junio de 2017

1804 - Georges Cadoudal refuse la grâce de Napoléon ... 1993 Soljenitsyne évoque le soulèvement de la Vendée

Le 25 juin 1804 : exécution de Georges Cadoudal.


Image result for Georges Cadoudal



Georges Cadoudal, le chef de chouannerie, refuse la grâce de Napoléon ; il est guillotiné place de Grève à Paris, après avoir prononcé la devise des insurgés vendéens : "Mourons pour notre Dieu et notre Roi".

Fils de Louis Cadoudal et de Jeanne Le Bayon, Georges naît le jour de l'an 1771 à Kerléano, petit village près d'Auray. Ce fils de meunier pense un moment entrer au séminaire, il fait ses études au Collège de Vannes. Lorsqu'en 1793, Danton et la Convention décrètent la levée en masse, Cadoudal refuse de se soumettre et participe à l'embrasement de la Bretagne royaliste. Il décide alors de rejoindre la Grande Armée Catholique et Royale de Vendée et se place sous les ordres de Stofflet. En 1795, Cadoudal prend le commandement des chouans du Morbihan. Devenant commandant de la Division d'Auray, le Morbihan en compte onze, Cadoudal mène de nombreuses actions qui paralysent les Bleus dans tout l'Ouest du Morbihan. Toute cette partie du département est sous son contrôle. Cadoudal rejette le cessez-le-feu conclu La Mabilais et continue seul le combat.

Furieux et impuissant face à l'échec du débarquement de Quiberon, Cadoudal se replie avec ses hommes. Il reprend tout de même Sarzeau à la fin1795 et Locminé en avril 1796. Hoche le force à accepter la paix. Nommé Commandant de l'Armée Catholique et Royale du Morbihan par le Comte de Provence, le futur Louis XVIII, Georges Cadoudal reprend le combat le 4 septembre 1797.
En février 1799, Cadoudal est invité à Paris par le Premier Consul Bonaparte à signer une paix définitive. L'entrevue est un échec et la guerre reprend. Cadoudal participe à l'attentat de la rue Saint-Nicaise, dit de la Machine infernale. Si Bonaparte en sort sain et sauf, la bombe fait vingt-deux tués. Réfugié en Angleterre, il revient à Paris avec trois autres hommes pour enlever le Premier Consul: Joyaut, Burbant et Gaillard. C'est au cours de cette action qu'il est capturé.et jugé avec dix autres de ses amis. Le 25 juin 1804, il monte à l'échafaud. Voir les chroniques du 1er janvier et du 21 juin.



Texte intégral du discours prononcé par Alexandre Soljenitsyne,  pour l'inauguration de l'Historial de Vendée .
Samedi 25 septembre 1993, aux Lucs-sur-Boulogne

« M. le président du Conseil général de la Vendée, chers Vendéens,

Il y a deux tiers de siècle, l'enfant que j’étais lisait déjà avec admiration dans les livres les récits évoquant le soulèvement de la Vendée, si courageux, si désespéré. Mais jamais je n'aurais pu imaginer, fût-ce en rêve, que, sur mes vieux jours, j'aurais l'honneur inaugurer le monument en l'honneur des héros des victimes de ce soulèvement.

Vingt décennies se sont écoulées depuis : des décennies diverses selon les divers pays. Et non seulement en France, mais aussi ailleurs, le soulèvement vendéen et sa répression sanglante ont reçu des éclairages constamment renouvelés. Car les événements historiques ne sont jamais compris pleinement dans l'incandescence des passions qui les accompagnent, mais à bonne distance, une fois refroidis par le temps.

Longtemps, on a refusé d'entendre et d'accepter ce qui avait été crié par la bouche de ceux qui périssaient, de ceux que l'on brûlait vifs, des paysans d'une contrée laborieuse pour lesquelsla Révolution semblait avoir été faite et que cette même révolution opprima et humilia jusqu'à la dernière extrêmité.

Eh bien oui, ces paysans se révoltèrent contre la Révolution. C’est que toute révolution déchaîne chez les hommes, les instincts de la plus élémentaire barbarie, les forces opaques de l'envie, de la rapacité et de la haine, cela, les contemporains l'avaient trop bien perçu. Ils payèrent un lourd tribut à la psychose générale lorsque fait de se comporter en homme politiquement modéré - ou même seulement de le paraître - passait déjà pour un crime.

C'est le XXe siècle qui a considérablement terni, aux yeux de l'humanité, l'auréole romantique qui entourait la révolution au XVIIIe. De demi¬-siècles en siècles, les hommes ont fini par se convaincre, à partir de leur propre malheur, de que les révolutions détruisent le caractère organique de la société, qu'elles ruinent le cours naturel de la vie, qu'elles annihilent les meilleurs éléments de la population, en donnant libre champ aux pires. Aucune révolution ne peut enrichir un pays, tout juste quelques débrouillards sans scrupules sont causes de mort innombrables, d'une paupérisation étendue et, dans les cas les plus graves, d'une dégradation durable de la population.

Le mot révolution lui-même, du latin revolvere, signifie rouler en arrière, revenir, éprouver à nouveau, rallumer. Dans le meilleur des cas, mettre sens dessus dessous. Bref, une kyrielle de significations peu enviables. De nos jours, si de par le monde on accole au mot révolution l'épithète de «grande», on ne le fait plus qu'avec circonspection et, bien souvent, avec beaucoup d'amertume.
Désormais, nous comprenons toujours mieux que l'effet social que nous désirons si ardemment peut être obtenu par le biais d'un développement évolutif normal, avec infiniment moins de pertes, sans sauvagerie généralisée. II faut savoir améliorer avec patience ce que nous offre chaque aujourd'hui. II serait bien vain d'espérer que la révolution puisse régénérer la nature humaine. C'est ce que votre révolution, et plus particulièrement la nôtre, la révolution russe, avaient tellement espéré.

La Révolution française s'est déroulée au nom d'un slogan intrinsèquement contradictoire et irréalisable : liberté, égalité, fraternité. Mais dans la vie sociale, liberté et égalité tendent à s'exclure mutuellement, sont antagoniques l'une de l'autre! La liberté détruit l'égalité sociale - c'est même là un des rôles de la liberté -, tandis que l'égalité restreint la liberté, car, autrement, on ne saurait y atteindre. Quant à la fraternité, elle n'est pas de leur famille. Ce n'est qu'un aventureux ajout au slogan et ce ne sont pas des dispositions sociales qui peuvent faire la véritable fraternité. Elle est d'ordre spirituel.

Au surplus, à ce slogan ternaire, on ajoutait sur le ton de la menace : « ou la mort», ce qui en détruisait toute la signification. Jamais, à aucun pays, je ne pourrais souhaiter de grande révolution. Si la révolution du XVIIIe siècle n'a pas entraîné la ruine de la France, c'est uniquement parce qu'eut lieu Thermidor.

La révolution russe, elle, n'a pas connu de Thermidor qui ait su l'arrêter. Elle a entraîné notre peuple jusqu'au bout, jusqu'au gouffre, jusqu'à l'abîme de la perdition. Je regrette qu'il n'y ait pas ici d'orateurs qui puissent ajouter ce que l'expérience leur a appris, au fin fond de la Chine, du Cambodge, du Vietnam, nous dire quel prix ils ont payé, eux, pour la révolution. L'expérience de la Révolution française aurait dû suffire pour que nos organisateurs rationalistes du bonheur du peuple en tirent les leçons. Mais non ! En Russie, tout s'est déroulé d'une façon pire encore et à une échelle incomparable.

De nombreux procédés cruels de la Révolution française ont été docilement appliqués sur le corps de la Russie par les communistes léniniens et par les socialistes internationalistes. Seul leur degré d'organisation et leur caractère systématique ont largement dépassé ceux des jacobins. Nous n'avons pas eu de Thermidor, mais - et nous pouvons en être fiers, en notre âme et conscience - nous avons eu notre Vendée. Et même plus d'une. Ce sont les grands soulèvements paysans, en 1920¬-21. J'évoquerai seulement un épisode bien connu : ces foules de paysans, armés de bâtons et de fourches, qui ont marché sur Tanbow, au son des cloches des églises avoisinantes, pour être fauchés par des mitrailleuses. Le soulèvement de Tanbow s'est maintenu pendant onze mois, bien que les communistes, en le réprimant, aient employé des chars d'assaut, des trains blindés, des avions, aient pris en otages les familles des révoltés et aient été à deux doigts d'utiliser des gaz toxiques. Nous avons connu aussi une résistance farouche au bolchévisme chez les Cosaques de l'Oural, du Don, étouffés dans les torrents de sang. Un véritable génocide.

En inaugurant aujourd'hui le mémorial de votre héroïque Vendée, ma vue se dédouble. Je vois en pensée les monuments qui vont être érigés un jour en Russie, témoins de notre résistance russe aux déferlements de la horde communiste. Nous avons traversé ensemble avec vous le XXe siècle. De part en part un siècle de terreur, effroyable couronnement de ce progrès auquel on avait tant rêvé au XVIIIe siècle. Aujourd'hui, je le pense, les Français seront de plus en plus nombreux à mieux comprendre, à mieux estimer, à garder avec fierté dans leur mémoire la résistance et le sacrifice de la Vendée ».
Alexandre SOLJÉNITSYNE

sábado, 24 de junio de 2017

The answer to the healthcare conundrum is not be found in Congress or in the White House, or in any draconian centre of usurped power

Click Here to Support The Imaginative Conservative


We need to find ways in which healthcare provision can serve the common good, ways in which it serves our neighbor, even our weakest and poorest neighbor, as well as serving ourselves. In short, we need a healthcare solution that abides by the principle of solidarity as well as the principle of subsidiarity. The answer to the healthcare conundrum is not be found in Congress or in the White House, or in any draconian centre of usurped power; it is to be found on our own doorstep, in our own homes and in the homes of our neighbors... [MORE]


by Bradley Birzer
C.S. Lewis’ assent and ascent to Christianity would be laborious and always deeply intellectual, guided and influenced by Catholicism even as the Romanists repulsed him. Born into a culturally Protestant Northern Irish family, Lewis carried his family’s anti-Catholic prejudices with him throughout much, if not all of his life... [MORE]

Have the depths of truthlessness been fathomed and found terrifying? Has fake news exposed the wasteland lying beyond our postmodern pastures? It might be too early to say, but the present recoil from fake news might prove that we are not quite ready to abandon the values we once thought so completely debunked. Truth might still stand a chance... [MORE]


by Richard Weaver
Responsible rhetoric is a rhetoric responsible primarily to the truth. It measures the degree of validity in a statement, and it is aware of the sources of controlling that it employs. As such, it is distinct from propaganda, which is the distortion of the truth for selfish purposes. In this connection, I always like to think of Francis Bacon’s statement "Rhetoric no more teaches man to support bad causes than logic teaches them to reason fallaciously..." [MORE]


by Miguel Monjardino
Liberal arts, taught correctly, are essential in a liberal democratic republic. There aren’t that many such republics in the world. The U.S. is the oldest and most successful of them. It’s also one of the most improbable. As for the future, the U.S. will have to make difficult choices, as any country does. A liberal arts education can prepare citizens for life in a republic that cherishes its liberty... [MORE]




Osservatorio Gender - Ultime notizie - Continuano in tutta Italia le parate gay

Header


L'incoerente impegno "etico" di Lush
L'azienda del sapone "a pezzi" Lush è da sempre in prima linea nel dimostrare il proprio impegno a  favore della causa LGBT+. Tale dedizione per i "diritti" omosessuali deriva dal fatto che Lush si posiziona sul mercato come un brand etico che produce cosmetici equosolidali e, rigorosamente, fatti a mano, da qui il suo impegno nella […]
   
Nel 2018 arriva a Trento il "Pride delle Dolomiti"
Dopo Udine, il Gay Pride del Nord Est per il 2018 farà tappa a Trento. Ad annunciarlo è stato il presidente di Arcigay del Trentino Paolo Zanella dichiarando: "E' arrivato il momento, dopo Venezia, Verona, Treviso e Udine, ora tocca a noi".  
   
A proposito del Gay Pride – di Sandro Bordignon
Il 2018 sarà un anno di grande interesse. Si svolgeranno le elezioni provinciali, ci sarà l'adunata degli Alpini e, – sembrerebbe -, avremo il "piacere" di ospitare il Gay Pride nazionale.  
   
Dal 28 giugno al 2 luglio arriva il "Palermo Pride"
Continuano in tutta Italia le parate gay. Sabato 1 luglio sarà la volta dell'ottava edizione "Palermo Pride" che quest'anno avrà come tema "I corpi tra politica, desiderio, diritti e trasformazioni", dove oltre alla tradizionale sfilata sono previste incontri, tavole rotonde e giornate di studio di "normalizzazione" LGBT+.  
   
Caso padre Livio: l'Ordine dei Giornalisti processa la Bibbia
«È stato interessante ascoltare l'intervento introduttivo di Monica Cirinnà. Questa qui, mi sembra un po'  la donna del capitolo diciassettesimo dell'Apocalisse, la Babilonia insomma, che adesso brinda con prosecco alla vittoria (ride). Signora, arriverà anche il funerale, stia tranquilla. Glielo auguro il più lontano possibile, ma arriverà anche quello».  
   
Bologna: avvisaglie di gender diktat?
Martedì 20 giugno, nella città più gay friendly d'Italia, i Cobas (comitati di base della scuola), assieme ad altre 17 associazioni della galassia del Partito Democratico, hanno svolto un presidio davanti all'Ufficio Scolastico Regionale (USR).  
   


VISITA IL NOSTRO SITO WEB: Osservatoriogender.it

We know little of Shakespeare’s political opinions, but there’s much we can learn of them from the recurrent themes of his works


Shakespeare’s Politics

by ROBERT COOPER


From London to Paris to Alexandria, Virginia—to say nothing of Central Park—there is no shortage of drama in politics at the present moment. One cannot help but wonder what the great Bard of Stratford-upon-Avon would make of it—or, more to the point, how he would memorialize it on the stage.

Wondering what he thought, however, is probably the best we can do. While we know much of Shakespeare’s life, we know little of his opinions. Many of his plays are political, to be sure. His feeling for politics was so strong that one political figure in Britain believed his plays must have been written by someone who had personal experience of politics.1 This was the wrong conclusion. A keen feeling for politics runs through Shakespeare’s plays because man is a political animal and Shakespeare’s understanding of men meant he understood politics, too.

The reason we know little of Shakespeare’s politics is that he was a master playwright. He does not lecture. His characters speak, and we can only guess which of them, if any, speak for him. But some themes recur; and some messages in the action of his plays are too powerful to miss.

Such themes are most abundant in the four plays written at the height of Shakespeare’s powers. In Polonius’s classification, they are tragical-comical-historical. They are about the state in moments of stress, and about individual men acting politically.

In these four plays, six themes emerge: 
- the importance of order; 
- the perils of regicide; 
- the qualities of the king; 
- the dangers of ambition; 
- the volatility of crowds; and 
- the risks of ungoverned power.

...............

Read more: www.the-american-interest.com

martes, 20 de junio de 2017

If Moscow is not bluffing, we could be headed for real trouble in Syria.





Is American Childhood Creating an Authoritarian Society?


By Pratik Chougule

Overprotective parenting is a threat to democracy.


Troops Now, Strategy Later?


By Christopher Layne

The U.S. has exhausted its strategic options in Afghanistan.


After the ISIS War, a US-Russia Collision?


By Patrick J. Buchanan

If Moscow is not bluffing, we could be headed for real trouble in Syria.


How a British Minority Government Can Unite Three Kingdoms


By Crawford Gribben

The social values of multiple political cultures in the UK are increasingly incompatible.

lunes, 19 de junio de 2017

A reflection on Solzhenitsyn and what was thought to be the post Marxist world


The World We Think In and the Drama of Existence

by Fr. James V. Schall, S.J.


"This is why we are engaged in a drama of which we are not the source, and we sense the importance of responding rightly to the pull of Being. What is at stake far transcends any immanent good. It is nothing less than the loss of our participation in Being. The soul of man is, as Dostoevsky noted, a battlefield in which God and the devil are contending. Our decisions are of surpassing significance because they carry a dimension that endures beyond the universe itself. This is the drama of existence that is glimpsed by the Greek discovery of Being, but that reaches its full transparence only in Christ." -- David Walsh, The Third Millennium [1]

"Indeed, there is hardly a 'world' or an 'age' at all when we see that each individual exists within an eternal scale of measurement that utterly outweighs any finite calculation." -- David Walsh, The Modern Philosophical Revolution [2]

I.

David Walsh's brilliant new book, The Modern Philosophical Revolution, is the third part of a trilogy of deeply reflective books on the very nature of philosophy and its too often unrecognized and delicate relation to revelation. The first two books were After Ideology: Recovering the Spiritual Foundations[3] and The Growth of the Liberal Soul. [4]

The first book was basically a reflection on Solzhenitsyn and what was thought to be the post Marxist world. It may not be as "post" as at first we thought it was. The book's thesis was simply that the modern intellectual fascination with ideology could only be seen for the aberration it was when someone actually suffered its lies. It was Solzhenitsyn's imprisonment under its total power than made him realize the emptiness of the ideology and its animosity to human life itself.

The second volume on liberalism sought to determine whether there was left any of the initial liberal concern with human dignity that was found in early modernism, itself reminiscent of the great medieval understanding of the scope of human nature. Though modern liberalism has fallen far away from its original concern with what is right everywhere, Walsh found that some glimmer of the tradition was left of a notion of right or rightness. This sense of what is right went back to a standard and not just to a will that could be otherwise. Even though modern liberalism has in most ways become a voluntarism without norms, still its rhetoric reflects a tradition of abiding standards of human good.

Walsh has long been a student of the German philosopher Eric Voegelin. In one sense, though he does not directly address himself to Voegelin in this book, Walsh's trilogy is a completion of and—in some ways—a corrective of Voegelin's project of "order and history." Voegelin's project itself often seemed to drift off into an anti-dogmatic universalism, even though Christian revelation had a key place in Voegelin's thought. With Leo Strauss, Voegelin was largely responsible for re-introducing genuine political philosophy back into academic discourse. Voegelin did think that Christians confused "doctrine" about God with the reality of God. The effort to make true statements of God, however, was never intended to identify God with the statements. But the human being does seek to state what he does know of God without identifying God with the statement.

Walsh's trilogy, I think, is much more obviously sympathetic to the orthodox position. At the same time, Walsh reminds us that we are ourselves within Being. None of us stands outside it in some ideological thought-world. The thinking being already participates in what is. Walsh reminds the reader constantly that he, the reader, is within being as it goes on. He is himself not outside of being, nor is his thought apart from the reality about which it thinks or knows. Knowing is itself a form of being. Walsh does not allow the thinker to assume that he is somehow superior to the being he finds himself already involved in because he already exists. The search for the "ground" of being is in every soul. It arises from within its own experience. It is not apart from what keeps being in being in the first place. If we already are, we do not need to look further for what is.

II.

Walsh is a professor in the Department of Politics at the Catholic University of America. He is an Irishman by birth. Walsh has been a good friend over the years. He is a man whose work I have admired, but it is only with this last work on the "luminosity of existence" that I have fully realized what he has been up to. It proves that we do not always know our friends even when we know them. His project, if I dare use that word, is nothing short of reconfiguring the modern mind towards the existence from which it has, on first glance, so much departed. The mind itself exists in the being that exists. Its activity itself is an activity of being. To know is to be. Indeed in the case of human beings, it is to be more than the bare existence it begins with.

We have long been accustomed to divide intellectual history into classical, medieval, and modern periods, each with its own intelligibility. Modernity was conceived to be a cutting off of all Christian roots within philosophy. And modern philosophy separated itself from existing things. Being was replaced by a consciousness that had, so it thought, no external object. Man replaced God as the object and source of human happiness. This was the "modern project." Man was also the provider of intelligibility to himself and to the cosmos, now conceived to be empty of any internal or transcendent meaning.

Modern man was freed from the legacy of Greek metaphysics and Christian revelation, neither of which had placed man in the position of the cause of things. Walsh has taken another look at modern thought. He has concluded, after much careful and detailed study of the authors, that, in spite of its apparent breaking away from its intellectual past, what modern thought, at its best, was really about is a continued search for the meaning of our existence. This search appeared within the presence of, as he calls it in a happy phrase, the "luminosity of being." This light has its source as a reflection of the divine Being.

Modern thought, both in its socialist and liberal varieties, when translated into the political arena, logically lead to tyranny and totalitarianism. Shrewd modern political ideologues, politicians, and tyrants, most of whom were trained in this very philosophy, thought they were curing the well-known ills of mankind. The first step in this "curing" was to reject virtue and grace and replace them by the universal ideology either forced or elected into political existence. The arena of modern politics has been at bottom eschatological, not political. It was not concerned with man's temporal life but with the ultimate status of his being, a new way to achieve happiness.

Essentially, Walsh argues that this totalitarian turn, whether Marxist or liberal, was an enormous misreading of modern thought, though an understandable one. In one sense, as he traces the lines of argument from Kant on, Walsh considers that these thinkers themselves did not know where their thought led. But they all in the core of their arguments were searching for being, its meaning and reality. Walsh does not much deal with the pre-Kantians in this volume. By beginning with Kant, however, he starts with a philosopher/theologian who recognizes the seriousness of the loss of being and seeks a way to return to it. Kant's noumenon and phenomenon could not be kept separated. Reality had at least to be postulated if it could not be met in any other way.

As I have pointed out before on Ignatius Insight, one of the most important philosophy books of our time was also recently published by Cambridge University Press by a professor at the Catholic University of America. This book was Msgr. Robert Sokolowski's The Phenomenology of the Human Person. Sokolowski's book is simply the best book on what it is to philosophize about reality and its meaning.


Read more: www.ignatiusinsight.com