Commemorating Aldo Moro

The African contribution to the edification of the modern world

Elements for an anthropology of the heroes of modern democracy.

by Harris Memel-Fotê


This article on the subject of "Religions and democracy, yesterday and today. A comparison between Africa and Europe, thinking of Aldo Moro", was first presented at the memorial ceremony in Rome on May 14, 2002 marking the XXIV anniversary of the death of Aldo Moro. In it Harris Memel-Fotê uses the anthropological-cultural category of the "hero" with great depth and imagination. Many great names fall under this category - among them there are a number of Africans - who contributed to the rise of democracy at the international level over the last century.

Introduction

Malcolm X Source: www.globalcircle.net

In analogy with our heroes of antiquity - the mythical or legendary heroes of Greece, Rome, Germany, India, China or Africa - we define as heroes those historic persons who distinguish themselves from common mortals by at least three essential aspects. First, their genius enabled them to obtain, either through conquest or negotiation, useful resources for their people or even for humanity as a whole. Secondly, for that very reason, their opponents imposed radical punishment on them, including death. Thirdly, the extreme suffering and tragic death these persons suffered were not in vain, because they represented their contribution or participation to the progress of their peoples and humanity as a whole.

This concept of heroism thus encompasses the heroes of national liberation, heroes of decolonisation or of independence, and the heroes of democracy.

We will be able to demonstrate these arguments concerning the heroes of democracy, by using three assumptions, one of which is of historical nature, one of theoretical nature and the third of methodological nature.

I. ASSUMPTIONS

A. The historical assumption may be formulated in these terms:
democratic values have been inspired by monotheistic religions.

Modern democracy opposes itself to ancient democracies, as the latter are based on biological criteria (sex, age, race, etc.) or socio-biological criteria (birth, ethnicity, etc.). In contrast to ancient democracies, which are closed democracies, modern democracy has an open character and includes all social groups, which had been excluded in the past. Modern democracy not only represents a political or social system, but also a range of universal values, such as life, freedom, equality, brotherhood, justice, etc.

Steven Bantu Biko Source: Beta4africa.com

We often forget that these universal values are descended from monotheisms, such as Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity, and Islam. Whether we consider the Bible, the Bhagavad-Gita or the Qur'an, the unique and creator God made all humans into brothers, as Mahatma Gandhi stated. In the liberal Europe, the religious revolution called (Protestant) Reformation obtained freedom for groups and individuals, particularly the freedom of conscience, together with the independence of Christian churches and nations. Thus, the principle of neutrality, or secularity of the national State, was founded. The rule of law, the State of human rights make up a State without State religion. Each time a secular State fails its mission and becomes more corrupt or regressive, it is either due to the "confusion" of its head of State or religious leader (as was the case for example in Africa in the Umma of Muslim President Ahmed Sékou Touré towards the end of his life), or due to the invention of a new religion of which the head of State would become the pontiff (as was the case in Africa with Christianity, where Catholic President Felix Houphouet-Boigny made of peace a second religion).

B. The theoretical assumption relates to notions of the culture of conquest and the culture of negotiation.

Within all historical societies, we can find these two aspects of social mentality and practice amongst people, but in each case the aspects will be subject to a specific hierarchy. The culture which encompasses these aspects of social life (ideologies, institutions and practices) exists in two major forms: constituted culture, also sometimes called tradition, and constituting culture, meaning the activities of production, reproduction and maintenance. Conquest and negotiation share the ambiguous nature of this concept.

On the one hand, the concept of conquest implies four factors: belligerent hostility in the context of conflict; antagonism between partners; use of violence as a means or as an objective in itself; the complete destruction, or at least the absolute instrumentalisation, of the Other (he who has been conquered), whether the Other identifies himself as a class, people, race, State, a nature or an environment. To the culture of conquest matches a society of the organic type.

Thus, within this culture, in addition to secular regimes of conquest (such as the Republics during their development), we can identify religious regimes of conquest (for ex. the Christian regime of the Portuguese during the 17th century in South America, or the Muslim regimes of the Peuhl under Ousmane Dan Fodio and of the Toucouleurs under El Hadj Omar in the 19th century in West Africa).

Indira Gandhi Source: UCLA

On the other hand, the concept of negotiation entails different conditions and structures than those of conquest. They include a space for peace; partners who do not consider themselves as enemies who should be destroyed through war, but as opponents with whom to cooperate within a political and human order of mutual exchange; and a flexible time period, not limited to the rush of battle or the rigorous duration of industry. As is the case for conquest regimes, we can distinguish secular from religious regimes of negotiation.

Whereas the culture of conquest dominated ancient societies and was exacerbated in Africa by colonisation and Leninist revolution mythology, since 1990 the culture of negotiation is dominating contemporary societies of Africa, because of the damages caused by Nazi and Fascist counter revolutions. Contemporary African societies have opted for democracy and are gradually introducing societies of the contractual type. This is why the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) has excluded from its annual meetings, participation by military heads of State who gained power following a coup d'Etat.

C. The methodological assumption: the investigation of different transitions and related heroes or heroic figures in both totalitarian and democratic societies.

C1. A transition dominated by Judaism: this is Israel, of which Isaac Rabin is a hero.

C2. A transition dominated by Christianity: the United States of America of which Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King et Malcolm X are amongst the heroes; Italy of which President Aldo Moro, judge Falcone and vice-president of the High Court Vittorio Bachelet are heroes; South Africa of which Nelson Mandela and Steve Biko are heroes; and Nigeria of which Prime Minister Tafawa Balewa and writer Ken Saro-Wiwa are heroes.

C3. A transition dominated by Islam: Algeria of which Mohamed Boudiaf is one of the heroes.

C4. A transition dominated by Hinduism: post-colonial India of which Indira Gandhi is a heroine.

C5. A transition dominated by Buddhism: modern Burma of which Aung San Suu Kyi is a heroine.

II. THE ACHIEVEMENTS OF HEROES OR THEIR FIGURES

Historians describe the actions of heroes in terms of achievements. Heroes do not only distinguish themselves by their nature, but also by their methods and means. Some have possibly gained success through the use of force or violence, whereas others, such as Abraham Lincoln, have succeeded by their intelligence or their generosity. For some, the goal was political: for ex. peace for the Israeli Prime Minister, justice for Ken Saro-Wiwa, Malcolm X, and Martin Luther King, freedom and unity for Indira Gandhi and Mohamed Boudiaf, and freedom, peace and unity for Abraham Lincoln et Nelson Mandela.

III. PUNISHMENTS IMPOSED ON HEROES IN COMBAT

At least different three types of punishment have been imposed on the heroes before-mentioned.

Isaac Rabin Source: Qué Pasa www.quepasa.cl

The least cruel punishment, house arrest, was imposed on the female political leader of the National League for Democracy. Aung San Suu Kyi was imposed this punishment twice: the first time from 1988 to 1995, and a second time, in spite of being awarded international rewards (such as the Nobel Peace Prize and the Human Rights Prize in 1991), from October 30th, 2000, to April 30th, 2002.

The second type of punishment is imprisonment, a long and humiliating punishment, a sort of internal exile. Nelson Mandela became famous due to his imprisonment on Robert Island in South Africa.

The third type of punishment, which will need to be studied further, is the punishment imposed on militant heroes such as Martin Luther King and Malcolm X, Prime Minister heroes such as Tafawa Balewa, Indira Gandhi and Isaac Rabin, and Head of State heroes such as Abraham Lincoln and Ahmed Boudiaf. This punishment, death by execution, brought them fame and immortality.

Such a fate was also reserved for Aldo Moro, president of the Italian Christian Democrat Party. His death took on an extreme form following a now well-known sequence: he was kidnapped after the five members of his bodyguard were killed; he was subjected to lengthy moral torture, and was shot and abandoned.

IV. IN SPITE OF THEIR EXTREME SUFFERING AND TRAGIC DEATH, THOSE WHO DIED GAINED POLITICAL AND HUMAN VICTORY

Certainly, house arrest, imprisonment and death brought defeat to those defeated, such as Aung San Suu Kyi, Nelson Mandela, Aldo Moro and others like them.

However, when Suu Kyi, already ideologically triumphant because of the international rewards she had won, was released from house arrest, she was able to open for her people the road of political salvation. Ms. Kyi achieved this because since she had been able to resist for such a long time, had been an example to all through sacrifice and had obtained immortality while still alive.

Similarly, when Nelson Mandela, after having spent 27 years in prison, was released, he led his entire people, friends and opponents not only to freedom, but also to unity. This victory was materialised externally through the (Nobel) prize he received jointly with his former adversary, President DeClerk, and internally through his election to the President's office and to the democracy of a new multi-racial, multi-ethnic and multi-denominational State of which he takes the lead.

As far as heroes who were killed are concerned, their physical defeat has been transformed over time into a political and human victory, of which the everlasting commemoration of Aldo Moro's disappearance is a perfect example.

Conclusion

Nelson Mandela Source: Cape Field School, South Africa

Aldo Moro is first of all a figure of Italian democratic heroism. In fact, against the antidemocratic heroism, which produced and maintained well-known types of totalitarian societies (such as theocracies, aristocracies and monarchies), after the Second World War the Italian people opposed democratic heroism. The judicial and public execution of "Duce" Benito Mussolini was a first step in this direction, enabling a transition from Fascism to democratic renewal. Extending the unity of the anti-Fascist Resistance Committee, the Committee of National Italian Liberation and the unity of the General Confederation of Italian Trade Unions, was another step. The latest step was the promotion of recreation of a multitude of political parties, such as the Italian Communist Party (PCI) on the left and the Christian Democrat Party (DC) on the right.

Aldo Moro, the Catholic Christian, distinguished himself amongst this popular movement and competition between political parties. He became a national personality in the cultural domain as national president of the FUCI, author and philosopher on the subject of the law, and in the political domain by being elected to constituent assembly, to Parliament and speaker of a strategic sub-commission of socio-cultural affairs.

Being a humanist and man of dialogue, Aldo Moro inspired the principles of democratic renewal. Being a democrat, he understood through the concept of "grid-locked" democracy that the necessity to rally communists and socialists into the Italian governance system was becoming urgent.

And it was this effort to negotiate a rally which displeased the Red Brigades.

Secondly, Aldo Moro is a figure of European democratic heroism. Following the Second World War, Italian Fascism and German Nazism are types of totalitarian societies in Europe which tried to destroy democratic and socialist regimes. Political groups of democratic Europe opposed those totalitarian societies, using similar organisational structures: the Resistance Committees and the National Liberation Committees.

Being a heir of this struggle, Aldo Moro drew from two large cultural sources in Europe: the philosophy of the right of the human person, of which the Frenchman Jacques Maritain was one of the theorist between the two World Wars, and the philosophy of social culture developed mainly in Germany and Italy.

When the Italian head of government started his new rallying policy, he found himself not only opposed by the Red Brigades from Italy, but also by the Brigades from Germany.

Thirdly, Aldo Moro is a figure of universal democratic heroism. This is because the Second World War, which implicated people from all continents, people from all races, free people and colonised people, generated a general and universal desire for national independence, individual independence and democracy.

This is why the concepts applied by Aldo Moro to analyse politics and ethics are universal concepts, such as the individual, equality, freedom, dignity and citizenship. In his last letter to his wife, Mr. Moro expresses the belief that politics and ethics cannot be dissociated from aesthetics.

One understands why this Christian Democrat, head of party and government, worked towards integrating communists and socialist into the Italian governance movement. Thus, the defeat of his death does not diminish the fairness of his politics. On the contrary, his death confirms it. It represents a political and human victory, not only for Aldo Moro himself, but for all the heroes of democracy in Italy, Europe and the world.

HARRIS MEMEL FOTÊ

Harris Memel-Fotê, the cultural anthropologist, was born in 1930 at Mopoyem (Dabou), Ivory Coast. He went to school in his own country and then completed his education in France. He is a Professor emeritus at the University of Abidjan, but was also the Directeur d'Etudes Associé, Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales (Paris) and Associé at the Collège de France, Chaire internationale in 1995-96. He has held various positions in the Ivory Coast and abroad, among which Head of the Ethno-Sociology Department at the University of Abidjan. He has also been on many different UNESCO-supported committees. Memel Fotê is a member of the Académie Universelle des Cultures. He is a representative and vice-president of the Ivory Coast's National Assembly as well as the founder of the movement that bears his name. He has published many works which deal with the following matters: the concept of culture, political systems, democracy, the structure of thought, developmental processes, religious trends, globalization, education, gender, aesthetics, literature, the theatre, medicine and health, the environment, the relationship between ethnic groups and the nation, the history of slavery. In 1991 he was asked to chair the annual Marc Bloch Conference for the EHESS (Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales) in Paris. Recently, Harris Memel Fotê planned and started the Academy for Science, Culture and the Arts of Africa and the African Diaspora (ASCAD), greatly supported by the Ivory Coast government.