The usual strategy to defend Spain's La Leyenda Negra is to expose lies, exaggerations and historical misrepresentations on which is mounted Legend said. From a historiographical point of view this is an essential task.
However, as the Black Legend emerged in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries to attack ideologically "English Catholic Empire", another way to defend Spain could be by reclaiming the idea of \u200b\u200b'Empire' as historical and philosophical elements crucial to understanding world history.
Here we encounter a major stumbling block, because nowadays the term 'empire' or 'imperialism' are so completely discredited (and especially among those say the "left" and / or "progressive") can hardly extol the idea of \u200b\u200b'Empire' and the role of Spain as "Universal Empire" without automatically being labeled fascists or the like.
However, from a materialistic point of view, and no matter who despite the importance of the idea of \u200b\u200b'Empire' is such that the only meaning to be given to the 'Universal History' is' History Universal Empires. " Stay
this firmly ingrained in our heads:
Universal History = History of Empires Universal
Hence the importance that Spain may have had in the so called "Universal History" is derived, more or less, the condition may have had of "Universal Empire."
This view, held by Gustavo Bueno in "Spain against Europe" (Chapter III, "The Idea of \u200b\u200bEmpire as a philosophical category and as Idea"), is the attempt to present a simplified below.
The concept of "Universal History" and "History of Humanity" in which a "Human Race" since the beginning of history, unfolds (or evolved) until the present, is a purely metaphysical. And just as metaphysics is whether mankind is considered from a theological point of view as if it is seen from a zoological point of view.
From a theological point of view of Universal History is presented as being referred to us by God. The deployment of Man (created by God) begin with the sin of Adam, Jesus Christ and continue to end with the Last Judgement. It is evident that the materialist and atheist who maintain this is unacceptable here.
From the zoological point of view Universal History would simply "evolution of the human species." The deployment would leave about prehistoric primates along an evolutionary process would have resulted in the "historical man." However, this reduction zoo is also unacceptable because it is impossible to deduce the "historic man" from those prehistoric primates. If this deduction is done now so easily is just because the zoo so falls into a sort of "vicious circle" in which he is assuming the "historical man" (you know that has taken place from such primates) . This request principle of the "historical man" in order to get there is what the philosophical materialism calls "anthropological diallel."
Therefore, world history is not the metaphysical deployment of Mankind from its origins to the present:
≠ Universal History History of Mankind
And is that the Human Race is given from the outset as a homogenous block that is progressing globally throughout world history. What do exist are scattered human groups and faced each other in their attempt to project plans and programs (ortogramas) to everyone else. Is what is called philosophical materialism deployment of "ortogramas imperialists."
Universal History is that certain human societies to display their "ortogramas imperialists" to spread among the other groups of people their way of life (customs, language, religion, institutions, etc.).. It is in this imperialist attempt to encompass the rest of the humans in the same ortograma when is the "Human Race", the "humanity."
The human race is built along the historical process in which societies and cultures constantly fighting each other to get to become "universal empires" and well controlled (and build) the human race.
The human race is not a given reality from the beginning of history. Mankind (humanity) is an idea resulting from the confrontation of diverse societies and cultures over a historical process. The "Universal History", from coordinates materialistic and not metaphysical, is the "Universal History of Empires", defined in terms of a 'Human Race' is not given in advance but it is what it is built. The
Mankind is not because the principle of universal history but at the end of the Universal History of Empires:
Universal History of Empires Mankind →
In words of Gustavo Bueno:
"No one can speak of a" Universal History "and" History of Mankind "which is given as a premise from the beginning. Does it follow from this that the world history can only be understood as a metaphysical project meaningless? No, because the project of a Universal History as a philosophical project can be recovered History of a universal empire, if these empires were defined according to the Human Race can not be given prior to its constitution. Put another way, the Universal History can not be conceived, without more, as the history of mankind, even as the history of human societies or polities (states), because these "stories" would remain in fact, Anthropology and Ethnology. Universal history is the history of universal empire and all that is not history of empires is nothing particular history, ie, Anthropology and Ethnology. From this perspective, world history could stop being perhaps a metaphysical project to become a practical project-positive. Because world history will be the "exposure of the deployment of Mankind from its origin to the present" ("History of Humanity"), to become the "exhibition of projects by some companies, positive (political, religious ) to form the Human Race ", that is, to begin to be Universal History of Empires."
"(...) The Universal History necessarily take the form of exposure of the incessant conflict between the various empires that Universal dispute the actual definition, real (control, therefore) of Mankind. " (Spain compared to Europe, pg. 209-210).
Therefore, we see that far from being a contemptible idea, as commonly thought, the idea of \u200b\u200bEmpire is essential for someone with a minimum of seriousness, wish to consider the idea of \u200b\u200bMankind or Humanity.
And, from a materialistic point of view, the importance it can have the Idea of \u200b\u200bMankind (for Humanity) lies in its relationship with the Idea of \u200b\u200bEmpire, as 
is over deployment of the Idea of \u200b\u200bEmpire when it appears, to In turn, the Idea of \u200b\u200bMankind. And here lies our claim to the Idea of \u200b\u200bEmpire, far from those idealistic conceptions in which many, while they pay lip service to the idea of \u200b\u200bhumanity, abhor the idea of \u200b\u200bempire.
In "Spain against Europe Gustavo Bueno identifies five political meanings of the term" empire. " Specifically, the third meaning, the so-called diapolítico Empire "is what corresponds to what historians (and the general opinion) commonly understood by Empire in its political sense. That is, an organized state system so that one of them is in hegemonic politically above all others, who serve as vassals, tax or subordinates of the "imperial state."
One of the limiting situations diapolítico Empire (lower limit) is the so-called "predator or colonial empire." The case of 'empires capitalists "of the late nineteenth century referred to Lenin in" Imperialism the Highest Stage of Capitalism. " And this is the concept of empire has in mind, we assume that, from the left, demonstrating against the Empire and imperialism. However, it must be said (in our defense of the Idea of \u200b\u200bEmpire) that "predatory empires" Empires are not strictly political sense because in them the hegemonic state is limited to exploit and plunder the resources of the States without a search under the retention of these States and the generation of new ones. There is no political relationship at the same level among the states that make up the Empire. Predatory Empires, in any case, would Empires in degree zero.
The English Empire, like the Roman Empire, Empire was not a predator but a "Empire Generator '
" An empire is generated when, for structure, and without prejudice to the inescapable operations colonial exploitation, determines the social development, economic, cultural and political colonized societies, making possible its transformation into a full policy. "
"(...) The Roman Empire or the English Empire would be the main examples of empires emerged: through their individual acts of violence, extortion and even slavery, through which these universal empires developed, it is true that the Roman Empire ended up granting citizenship to almost all towns of his dominions, and the English Empire, which always considered his subjects as free men, caused the precise conditions for the transformation of their Viceroyalties constitutional republics or provinces' (Spain compared to Europe, pg. 465-466).
Throughout world history would have been happening empires from east to west (following the course of the Sun): Assyrians, Medes, Greeks and Romans, so that in this sequence, the English Empire would have been Universal Empire last possible because he would have come to the west end and would have bypassed the entire Earth.
"What must be to Spain? For two, four, ten centuries, what has it done for Europe? "asked insidiously Frenchman Nicolas Masson Morvilliers in the eighteenth century to respond in entirely negative terms for Spain. Well, we can proudly say that Spain, as a promoter of a Universal Empire (the largest of all really possible until then) has contributed greatly to the formation of humanity and therefore must appear in uppercase words in History Universal. Other European nations like France, have tried but have been unable to develop a viable imperial ortograma. While English and Dutch as much as they got were harmful predatory empires. Interestingly, French, English and Dutch were the great propagators of our Black Legend.
0 comments:
Post a Comment