The Suicidal Is Doing Just Fine, Thank You – Folha de S. Paulo, July 8, 1973
by Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira
The information recently published by Rio de Janeiro’s Tribuna da Imprensa made a painful impression across wide circles of our country. The Vatican delegate to the International Labor Organization, Monsignor Silvio Luoni, praised the Chinese model of development as an example of “development that respects the cultural values of this great people.” The ecclesiastical dignitary added that “even taking into account the limits of knowledge and making all kinds of reservations about China’s ideology and political system, the human and community values of past centuries have not been forgotten,” so that in communist China “analyses, methods, and achievements respect the essence of this heritage, despite the excesses of a sometimes overflowing revolutionary enthusiasm” (sic).
Paul VI would be justified in calling this statement an act of self-destruction by the Church.
In fact, despite the prelate’s “all kinds of reservations,” he suggests that authentic communism, such as the Chinese variety, is compatible with the Chinese people’s admirable traditional heritage. This amounts to presenting communism with a false and propagandistic image.
* * *
We are in the century of all aberrations. The House of Lords’ specific raison d’être is to intervene in the drafting of English laws to safeguard the traditions of Christian civilization.
The House of Commons recently opposed the National Health Service’s free distribution of contraceptives. For its part, the government wanted to require a prescription for contraceptives.
However, in a devastating move, the House of Lords approved, by an impressive majority of 107 to 58, the distribution of contraceptives free of charge and without conditions.
This was self-destruction by the House of Lords, turned against its own purpose.
In light of these aberrations, we cannot fail to note the indifference with which almost the entire world’s press, radio, and television—and, as a result, public opinion, manipulated at will by these “media outlets”—received three shocking news stories last week.
In Argentina, terrorists kidnapped a 10-year-old child being taken to school by his grandmother. The incident has all the characteristics that arouse compassion: the child’s innocence, with nothing to do with the problems that motivate terror; the psychological and nervous trauma the shock may cause the child for the rest of his life; the shock suffered by the unfortunate grandmother, with the danger of serious heart or vascular complications; the unspeakable distress of the poor parents and the whole family, etc. It seems impossible that it could get any worse.
Yet it did. Terrorists also kidnapped a baby in Argentina! Here, given the child’s organic weakness at this stage, cruelty is compounded by cruelty; it is horror upon horror.
Finally, terrorists in Colombia attempted to kidnap a respectable 83-year-old bishop. There are no adjectives to describe this act: the offense to episcopal dignity, the respect due to an octogenarian’s gray hair, and the serious impact of this nervous shock on his health compel us to condemn this crime with the utmost severity.
Nevertheless, these three events did not evoke a thousandth of the emotion caused by the death of pro-Communist gunmen in Portuguese overseas provinces or by another pro-communist setting fire to his own clothes in some Saigon suburb for his own amusement.
Self-destruction of the non-communist world, where there is a greater propensity to mourn the adversary’s anguish or blood than one’s own tragedies.
* * *
According to the New York Times correspondent in Moscow, in an article published by that newspaper on June 17, the agreement for Occidental Petroleum’s exploration of Russian gas had to be signed without American technicians being allowed to conduct on-site research to assess the reserves Russia had negotiated. On the other hand, American banks are making huge loans to Russia without any knowledge of Russia’s gold and foreign currency reserves.
Transposed to the private sphere, this situation would seem absurd. What private company would be willing to negotiate under such conditions? What sanctions would it impose on a representative who signed a contract under those terms?
What do you call deals so contrary to the public interest?
Tragedy… self-destruction!
* * *
Some readers will say that today’s comments are objective yet too gloomy. They will argue that, to brighten a Sunday morning, I should at least also report some auspicious facts. Not only the cons, but also the pros.
As for me, I fear that reporting auspicious facts alongside others likely to cause indignation or terrible apprehension would imply that, in some way, the auspicious ones compensate for the others.
Now, that would be untrue. To imagine that something—no matter how “positive” it may be—could compensate for the tragedy of the West’s self-destruction would be as unrealistic as describing the situation of a man who begins to stab himself in the chest as follows: a) a negative fact: he has cut the skin on his chest; b) another negative fact: he’s determined to continue until the knife reaches his heart and stops it from beating; c) but there is also a big positive side, namely that his whole body is still functioning perfectly well, for now.
Conclusion: The suicidal man is doing just fine, thank you.
