Analysis of the
cultural dimensions present in Umberto Eco's article "If you get
a fine, accuse the policeman"
The article examined the article of
Umberto Eco intitled "If you get a fine, accuse the policeman"
and appeared on the news magazine "Espresso" on 16 September 2013.
This article by Umberto Eco is very stimulating in order to understand how Italian society has changed in the last 20 years. The title "If you get a fine, accuse the policeman" is very well found because it makes it clear that if my negative face, in other words my right to be left alone, is hit or sanctioned in a very evident way, as in the case of the fine by the policeman, a form of acknowledgment does not take place in harmony with a dimension of the "individualism" where there is a "conscientious" approach and therefore the transgression of the law generates a feeling of guiltiness. In this case, the people adheres always more within a cultural dimension of "collectivism" with a non-conscientious nature in which this maintenance of harmony understood as a permanent "status quo" must not otherwise be affected. In this context "the fine" is perceived as a transgression by the State intended as a "collective face", which should "be ashamed" in sanctioning a citizen because of the numerous costs incurred permanently by the majority of Italian citizens in negative face because of the bad bureaucracy of the Italian state. In essence, the dimension of "collectivism" has a strong mitigation function to reduce the impact of a "conscientious type" in a context where the citizens are perceived as incompetent. Your individual responsibility signalled by the fact that "you left the car in the third row and blocked traffic" is transferred to the social envy of those who do not join the same "in-group". This kind of reaction represents a sign of adhesion to a society with a high social distance between its components in which social space is perceived as the place of existential inequalities between people and where the avoidance of uncertainty is possible with a form of intolerance towards different ideas in the social space in complete harmony with the idea that our opinions are dictated by our belonging to a specific "in-groups".
This article by Umberto Eco is very stimulating in order to understand how Italian society has changed in the last 20 years. The title "If you get a fine, accuse the policeman" is very well found because it makes it clear that if my negative face, in other words my right to be left alone, is hit or sanctioned in a very evident way, as in the case of the fine by the policeman, a form of acknowledgment does not take place in harmony with a dimension of the "individualism" where there is a "conscientious" approach and therefore the transgression of the law generates a feeling of guiltiness. In this case, the people adheres always more within a cultural dimension of "collectivism" with a non-conscientious nature in which this maintenance of harmony understood as a permanent "status quo" must not otherwise be affected. In this context "the fine" is perceived as a transgression by the State intended as a "collective face", which should "be ashamed" in sanctioning a citizen because of the numerous costs incurred permanently by the majority of Italian citizens in negative face because of the bad bureaucracy of the Italian state. In essence, the dimension of "collectivism" has a strong mitigation function to reduce the impact of a "conscientious type" in a context where the citizens are perceived as incompetent. Your individual responsibility signalled by the fact that "you left the car in the third row and blocked traffic" is transferred to the social envy of those who do not join the same "in-group". This kind of reaction represents a sign of adhesion to a society with a high social distance between its components in which social space is perceived as the place of existential inequalities between people and where the avoidance of uncertainty is possible with a form of intolerance towards different ideas in the social space in complete harmony with the idea that our opinions are dictated by our belonging to a specific "in-groups".
The scholar Umberto Eco
mentions that this situation has now entered in the Italian cultural
landscape for twenty years becoming in that way an adherence to a form of
permanent "short-term temporal orientation" in which there
are universal lines on what is good or bad in situations, creating
"de facto" for the strongest social groups a feeling of
control over their life in harmony with a "satisfied"
cultural dimension. For Eco it is very important to underline the
full adhesion of Italy to this short-term temporal orientation in
which the immobility of a country always equal to itself prevails,
with bad traditions to be maintained and where the most relevant
facts of the country are all occurred in the past. Since 1995,
according to Umberto Eco's analysis, the tendency of the media to
adopt an "ambiguous and allusive" style to protect the
accused and to delegitimize the judges and the facts and at the same time
prevails. In other words, the illustrious politicians accused have pushed the
media towards a total adherence to a cultural dimension of "weak
avoidance of uncertainty" as a way to live at ease in ambiguity
and chaos, showing calm and with little stress in the face of the
need to clarity as a privileged way to adhere to a cultural dimension
of "strong avoidance of uncertainty" by judges and by an
overwhelming majority of the population.
In other words, journalists have tried in every way to enhance the need for positive face of these politicians by paying significant costs to the need to preserve their negative face by the judges. This has created important interactional benefits for politicians who have been able to create a description of the facts suited to their need for their permanent need of positive face at the expense of the judges, that is to say the "collective face" of the country. For Eco "A society in which, always and a priori, not only the accusation, but also the board of judges are systematically delegitimized, it is a society in which something does not work".
In other words, journalists have tried in every way to enhance the need for positive face of these politicians by paying significant costs to the need to preserve their negative face by the judges. This has created important interactional benefits for politicians who have been able to create a description of the facts suited to their need for their permanent need of positive face at the expense of the judges, that is to say the "collective face" of the country. For Eco "A society in which, always and a priori, not only the accusation, but also the board of judges are systematically delegitimized, it is a society in which something does not work".
This thought of Eco can
be translated as the "collective face" of the State and
therefore of the citizens is delegitimized and therefore suffers high
costs in terms of the absence of protection of its negative face by
some "illustrious" politicians (see Berlusconi) who have
pushed to make the whole system functional to this cultural dimension
called "weak avoidance of uncertainty" while justice needs
to function in harmony with a "strong avoidance of uncertainty".
In this Italian society, the belonging of a party in which their
opinions are dictated by their own reference group has been
emphasized and the reality described by the other "out-groups"
is totally irrelevant as occurs within a comunity with considerable
social distance between its social bodies. In essence, the goal is to
throw the process into the public opinion (created by the
media) because it will be the public who will have to decide whether
to dishearten the judge or the accused. This mechanism is possible
because the length of the trial will never allow to produce a real guilty
due to the terms of the prescription after 8 years of trial.
Therefore, justice regarding these crimes related to the political
world has turned into a form of popular jury as a substitute for the
collective face delegated to justice and in particular to the judges.
This popular jury, as a representative of public opinion, becomes the
moral executor of the possibility or not of charging high or reduced
costs in respect of the protection of the negative face of the judges
or enhancement of the positive face of illustrious politicians in
which the fault is a shame to suffer in harmony with the
"collectivism" dimension. In these media processes the
transgression of laws does not lead to feelings of guilt as it would
be within the "individualism" dimension. For this reason,
public opinion becomes a crucial actor to keep on one's side and
therefore the role of the media serves to create a feeling of
belonging to a given "in-group" where a sense of
intolerance towards "out-group" people prevails "in
terms of" collectivism "as well as" satisfied "type
offering a feeling of control over one's life, with the possibility
of listening via" procurement "a freedom of speech in line
with my existential type" in-group ". In
this Italian society, distinguished defendants contest the judges'
right to judge them, that is, politicians join a society with a
strong social distance because they see the legitimacy of the judges
to do their job / duty as a completely irrelevant fact. In other
words, the "collective face" of the nation behind the
judges is irrelevant "de facto" and this is made possible through the
combination of the cultural dimension of "high social distance"
and "collectivism" by that large portion of the population
that doesn't belong in the State. For Eco "If you can prove that
your accuser is an adulterer, he has committed sins, lightness or
crimes - even if it has nothing to do with the process - you have
already won." In short, it is necessary to insinuate that the
judge is a bizarre, unreliable or sick person to make him immediately
unsuitable for his function. This is a mechanism that has already
been operating for twenty years in Italy for illustrious politicians
because the intent is to pay very high costs to the judge's need for
a negative face by showing his weaknesses, namely his humanity in the
broad sense as a element that would make him "incompetent"
to carry out the process. In essence, "illustrious"
politicians use their full adhesion to a "weak avoidance of
uncertainty" dimension with their habit of living in ambiguity
to push the judge, culturally linked to a clear adhesion to a type
dimension "individual" because a "conscientious type"
and a right to privacy are crucial, which are fought by the media
pushing the judge into a dimension of "strong avoidance of
uncertainty" where politicians have little consideration for the
judge in terms of incompetence. This incompetence of the judge is
brandished in defence of a "conscientious we" by a part of
the population who must know that these judges cannot carry out their
work. In this way the "conscientious self" of the judge and
theoretically of the accused enter into conflict and an adhesion to a
collectivism with an (in) -conscious "we" is imposed with
the aim of emphasizing belonging to a given "group" distant
from the world of judges.
This method, used for
20 years, with the use of insinuations tickles the worst instincts of
the average Italian who always feels innocent in the face of
unfathomably paranoid justice. These statements by Umberto Eco can be
translated as the presence of a method used by corrupt politicians to
pollute the country by introducing a short-term temporal orientation
where things are always equal to themselves, with the use of a "weak
avoidance" framework. uncertainty "with the insinuations to
enhance the need for protection of the negative face of the average
Italian who always feels" innocent "in the face of justice.
Ultimately, the citizen does not intend to suffer further costs for
having accepted this cultural context in which the consequences of
this mechanism are important because they lead to the death of the
facts, intended as representatives of a dimension of strong avoidance
of uncertainty with the aid of clarity, through a reversal within the
dimension of "weak avoidance of uncertainty" with the need
to demonstrate the moral unreliability of our accuser as a form of
obtaining ambiguity and chaos. All this has created a widespread
culture of "preventive indulgence" within a country where
it is practically impossible to be "perfect citizens"
except for the price of leaving it to be able to live in a country
where the "facts" have not yet died and buried. This
"preventive indulgence" is a form of social behaviour that
combines a dimension of "strong avoidance of uncertainty"
because I don't want to have problems in general and therefore I am
aware of a "conscientious type of us" in which the
maintenance of harmony as prevalent data for continuing to live with
anxiety and nervousness within a social world fully inserted within
the cultural dimension of "weak avoidance of uncertainty"
in which it is necessary to live together calmly and with little
stress towards the rampant ambiguity in the everyday life of this country.
The article of Umberto Eco can be read on this link:
https://espresso.repubblica.it/opinioni/la-bustina-di-minerva/2013/09/16/news/se-prendi-la-multa-accusa-il-vigile-1.58721
The article of Umberto Eco can be read on this link:
https://espresso.repubblica.it/opinioni/la-bustina-di-minerva/2013/09/16/news/se-prendi-la-multa-accusa-il-vigile-1.58721
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento