When the specialist isn´t
To show off how modest we are, we shall commence today’s El Peiper by underlining yet again one of our predictions: In our first issue, we spoke of the increasing tax pressure as one of the unmistakable signs of the decline of a civilization, that is to say, of what Arnold Toynbee called the Universal State. We have been repeating furthermore that we are now precisely going through one of those phases. We have even signed the death certificate of capitalism.
In Argentina, before March 1, 2021, all lease agreements must be registered before the tax bureau (AFIP), which will make access to decent housing more expensive (assuming that the non-decent accomodations are for now off the government’s radar) to supply to the coffers of a State that needs to spend, for example, on hormonal and surgical sex reassignment. The current State really needs to, because one of the pillars of this new post-capitalist world is, as we said last week, the replacement of the traditional family as a functional child-raising unit. It is neither good nor bad. It is how it is.
What will happen when landlords withdraw from the market? Will this society turn into a world of empty houses and people lying on the doorsteps or, on the contrary, will the government come up with new measures? Lowering the tax burden is not on the menu of orthodox economists who adhere to the kind of orthodox theory leading to politics (of whichever party they may choose). We have also spoken in El Peiper about private property as the origin of all evils. Expropriating buildings so that the State collects the rents directly does not sound very far-fetched, deos it? We once headlined one of our articles “I told you so” and shortly thereafter we saw that the number of predictions and correct conclusions that can be easily reached with the material provided herewith would justify repeating the heading so many times that we opted for other variants.
Last week we also underscored the parallel concept between the immunity of a vaccine and the [class] privileges a society can uphold. And we did it before the “vaccinegate” scandal which led to the resignation of Argentina’s health minister broke out, bringing officials from various jurisdictions and ranks into the eye of the storm, while a similar case was revealed in Peru.
In another note, we have also drawn attention to the fact that societies with heroes look out to the world and trade with it. Sparta had high disregard for individual accomplishments as well as for luxury. The only acceptable life in that Ancient Greek polis was of a communal nature. Not so long ago, Argentina had several top world athletes at disciplines other than football: Fangio, Monzón, Vilas, Reutemann, Sabatini, Ginobili, Del Potro … Maybe one or two names slipped through our minds, but today Paula Pareto makes the sole such case.
And who is the most important footballer in the Argentine local league? We are talking about that player not even the fans of the most staunch rival dared to question. Maradona, Francescoli, Bochini, Houseman, Riquelme, Ortega or even Chilavert. Is there anyone still active other than Tévez? It is true that players earn more money abroad, which is why many starts were not featured on this list — because their contributions to the national scene are scarce or, like Messi, non-existent. In days gone by, the domestic tournament had stars. Even the B (or Second) Division, featured the likes of “El Trinche” Carlovich (a fatal victim of insecurity in 2020 with whom Maradona asked in his early professional years to have a photo taken), who played for the Rosario squad which humiliated the national team in a preparatory match leading to the 1978 World Cup finals. A few days ago Leopoldo Jacinto Luque of that title-winning formation died with a covid-19 positive test. A star was added to the sky, but ironically it was one which cast a darker shadow on this land. “El Morro” García, the scorer that nobody wanted to face, also committed suicide at 31 in the past few days. It is a different society — one where there is no place for these people.
If we were able to link Lycurgus with “Carlitos del Pueblo” (Tévez) it is due to the multi-front education of the Coffee & Comex team: the kind David Epstein described in his book Range, where he explains that those who specialize in something obtain rapid professional success, immediate job placement and quick financial returns. But, as Epstein points out, in the medium and long term their aura fades and the time of generalists arises, people who are trained in different areas of knowledge, who can anticipate problems in a changing context like the current one and make significant contributions to their resolution.
The same formula does not always work, because surroundings and players change and the world is made up of unique and unrepeatable human beings, with some common characteristics (everyone has blood) and also with differentiating features (not everyone has the blood cold enough to kill for money).
We also believe that what is happening worldwide has already been explained with astonishing precision albeit minor details by scholars who published their works many years ago and that by resorting to these texts a better understanding of reality can be reached.
One of the authors we repeatedly cited was Sigmund Freud, creator of psychoanalysis, an activity that was and is for many -like Robert Trivers- sheer unscientific hocus-pocus. Freud himself experienced his own ostracism for this. In light of all that we have seen in El Peiper about our present world supported -among others- on texts by Freud and his successors …, does it matter much whether psychoanalysis is “scientific” or not?
Who said that “… In our country there has long reigned a forbidding fury, an inclination to guardianship, interventions and prohibitions, which, as we all know, has not exactly borne good results …”? It was not a jurist or an economist: it was Doctor Freud, in Lay Analysis (1926). Was he talking about Argentina or Austria, this doctor who in his childhood “… had not felt a particular preference for the position and activity of the doctor; for the rest, I did not feel it later either” (An Autobiographical Study — 1924)? (All Freud quotes translated from Spanish version)
The world of Sars-Cov-2 has been characterized by drastic measures on countries and people. It’s about surviving. Freud saw it so easily: “… On the roads of Italy, the high-tension cables bear this concise and impressive inscription: ‘Chi tocca, muore’ (Whoever touches this dies). This is perfectly enough to regulate the behavior of those passing by regarding the cables. In Germany, the corresponding warnings are superfluous and offensive: ‘Because of the risk of death, it is strictly forbidden to touch high-voltage cables.’ Why the ban? Whoever loves life will impart it to themselves, and whoever wants to eliminate himself by that means, will not ask for permission.” (Lay…)
In the opening El Peiper issue we also predicted the role of natural selection in shaping the new times as we transition from capitalism to the new phase. Why not consult a Freud, who “… Darwin’s doctrine, recent at that time, attracted me powerfully because it promised an extraordinary advance in the understanding of the universe …” (An autobiographical …)?
Epstein emphasizes that specialists are necessary in certain circumstances, but in others, which we can call multifactorial, the generalist is preferable, that is, the person with a broader education in various subjects.
Although not exclusively, the psychoanalyst quite meets that description. Freud already said in Lay… that “… I place the accent on the requirement that no one who has not acquired titles to do so through a certain training can exercise analysis. It seems to me accessory whether that this person is a medical graduate or not” and attributed his medical disciples’ exclusiveness claims to a “class conscience.” He added that “… If one day a psychoanalytic college was to be founded (…) much of what is also learned in the medical school should be taught in it: together with profound psychology [plus] an introduction to biology, a knowledge of sexual life to the maximum extent possible, a familiarization with the clinical aspects of psychiatry [and also] non-medical disciplines (…): history of culture, mythology, psychology of the religion and the science of literature.”
Freud underlined his independence of judgment, founded on a weak faith in authority, and distanced himself from the “young doctor, who, having had to prove so many things to his teachers, has had little opportunity to educate his judgment …”. Doesn’t he seem to be describing the fear-mongering physicians with their apocalyptic messages stemming from the World Health Organization (WHO)?
Also in El Peiper we call this post-capitalist era dominated by a virus and health policies covidianism. We thought it wise to rely on a doctor who, as he himself confessed, preferred to contrast the maxims of his profession with his own experience. That cost him friends and honors. But humanity never advanced much with the push of those who at no time dared to question the way things were being done.
Epstein produced a best-seller. Perhaps the support of the New York Times had something to do with it. We on the other hand believe there is a lot written which deserves to be rediscovered, rather than betting on modern communicational versions of concepts anything but new, whose true contributions — which can indeed be found- are inversely proportional to the marketing thrust on which they rely.
@coffeeandcomex
“The theory is good, but that does not prevent things from being the way they are”
Jean-Martin Charcot
Vol. 15 Coffee & Comex by Marian Coronado 21–2–21
