new icn messageflickr-free-ic3d pan white
View allAll Photos Tagged david+harvey

Lenins Tat

Vor 150 Jahren wurde der russische Revolutionär geboren

(aus www.jungewelt.de/artikel/376892.lenin-150-lenins-tat.html)

 

Lenin hat die russische Revolution nicht gemacht. Aber er war ihr politischer Kopf und ihr bedeutendster Theoretiker. Die Oktoberrevolution, hat Rosa Luxemburg schon im November 1917 angemerkt, bleibt auch dann, wenn die russischen Kommunisten sich – wie sie meinte: aufgrund des Versagens der von »hundsjämmerlichen Feiglingen« beherrschten Arbeiterbewegung in den kapitalistischen Zentren Mittel- und Westeuropas – »natürlich« nicht würden »halten« können, eine »weltgeschichtliche Tat, deren Spur in Äonen nicht untergehen wird«. Sie war auch Lenins Tat. Und dass die Erben der Bolschewiki sich am Ende nicht, wie Luxemburg annahm, nur einige Monate oder Jahre, sondern viele Jahrzehnte »gehalten« und dabei auch dem deutschen Faschismus den Garaus gemacht haben, ist wesentlich auf die vor allem von ihm formulierte und vertretene Politik nach 1917 zurückzuführen. Der als dogmatischer Sektierer diffamierte Lenin hatte dafür keine fertigen Rezepte parat. 1919 unterstrich er, dass seine Partei sich »durchweg« habe »vorwärtstasten« müssen. Nicht nur deshalb hätte an seinem 150. Geburtstag auch die ganz und gar am Boden liegende, politisch nahezu erblindete radikale Linke in Deutschland Anlass, sich mit dem theoretischen und politischen Erbe des russischen Revolutionärs zu befassen. (np)

  

----------------------------------------

  

Die Revolution denken und machen

Viele Analysen Lenins bleiben aktuell, manche waren zeitbedingt. Viele Fragen bei der Überwindung des Kapitalismus können nur durch die Praxis beantwortet werden. Ein Vorschlag, Lenin historisch zu lesen

Von Ingar Solty, aus www.jungewelt.de/beilage/art/376796

 

Lenin, der sich selbst als Verteidiger des Marxschen Werkes gegen den Revisionismus sah, ist als Theoretiker ebenfalls zu historisieren.

Nach der historischen Spaltung der Arbeiterbewegung infolge des Ersten Weltkriegs, der siegreichen Oktoberrevolution 1917 und des Scheiterns der Revolution im Westen (1918–1923) bekämpfte die sozialdemokratisch-reformistische Tradition Lenin grundsätzlich. Aber auch in den kommunistischen Parteien wurde er mit der eurokommunistischen Wende in den 1970er Jahren alsbald mehr oder weniger ad acta gelegt: Lenins »Materialismus und Empiriokritizismus«? Schwer verdaulich und überholt. Lenins Parteitheorie? Autoritär und starr. Lenins Staatstheorie? Idealistisch. Lenins Imperialismustheorie? Falsch, weil der Kapitalismus nicht faulend und notwendig zusammenbrechend sei, sondern – durch »innere Landnahme« wie im New Deal und »Akkumulation durch Enteignung« (David Harvey) – anpassungs- und reformfähig. Mit der Betonung der Monopolisierung und des Kapitalexports sowie der zum Weltkrieg gesteigerten zwischenimperialistischen Konkurrenz mag sie als Beschreibung jenes Zeitalters richtig gewesen sein. Aber mit Blick auf den heutigen globalen Kapitalismus, in dem eine transnationalisierte Bourgeoisie die rivalisierenden nationalen Bourgeoisien abgelöst hat, ist sie nicht mehr adäquat. Statt dessen heute: Richtigkeit von Karl Kautskys These vom Ultraimperialismus, also der gemeinsamen Unterdrückung und Ausbeutung des globalen Südens durch den globalen Norden. Und weiter: Lenins Revolutionstheorie? Für den Westen nicht anwendbar, weil die Hegemonie der kapitalistischen Klasse in der Zivilgesellschaft verankert ist, man darum heute nicht einfach ein Winterpalais stürmen kann, um die Macht zu gewinnen, weshalb Antonio Gramsci als Theoretiker des Scheiterns der Revolution im Westen Lenin als wichtigste politische Theorie im Marxismus abgelöst hat.

 

»Westlicher Marxismus«?

Gegen Lenin wurde die »Linie Luxemburg–Gramsci« (Peter Weiss) hochgehalten, die für eine demokratisch-sozialistische Tradition und einen »westlichen Marxismus« steht, der von den Schrecken der Stalin-Zeit unberührt bleibt. Oft werden Luxemburgs Schrift »Die russische Revolution«, in der sie die Stagnationstendenzen des Staatssozialismus vorwegnahm, und ihr allgemeiner Humanismus angeführt, um sie gegen die Oktoberrevolution zu stellen. Gramsci wiederum wird als Theoretiker der Transformation dem Theoretiker der Revolution Lenin entgegengestellt.

Schaut man jedoch genauer hin, wird es kompliziert: Luxemburg hätte die gewaltsame Revolution, die Karl Liebknecht versuchte, gewollt, wenn sie zu gewinnen gewesen wäre. Sie und Liebknecht waren im Januar 1919 verschiedener Meinung, beide zahlten ihren revolutionären Geist mit dem Leben. Gramsci wiederum gilt als Antipode zu Lenin, war jedoch – wie Perry Anderson und Domenico Losurdo herausgearbeitet haben – ein glühender Verehrer des östlichen Revolutionärs. Es lohnt sich also, genau hinzuschauen und falsche Gegensätze zu vermeiden. Auch Luxemburg und Gramsci eignen sich nicht als Schwiegerelternmarxisten!

Nun sind einige der obigen Einschätzungen zu Lenin, nicht zuletzt die zu seiner Imperialismustheorie, richtig. Dennoch lohnt es, Lenin zu lesen. Nicht nur sind viele der Fragen, die er sich stellte, nach wie vor hochaktuell. Auch die Antworten, die er entwickelte, können uns noch etwas vermitteln. Lenins Werke wie die Bibel exegetisch zu lesen, ist falsch. Lenin nicht zu lesen, ist ein Fehler.

 

Gültige Einschätzungen

Lenin lag in vielem richtig: die Einschätzung, dass eine Politik der nichtkapitalistischen Nischen wie Genossenschaften und Landkommunen kein Weg zur Überwindung des Kapitalismus ist und einen auch nicht vor den größeren Katastrophen wie Krieg oder – heute – Klimakatastrophe schützt, sondern man die Welt eben doch nicht verändert, »ohne die Macht zu übernehmen«? Richtig.

Die Einschätzung, dass Anarchismus und Linksradikalismus ein Phänomen der »Mittelklassen« und des alten und neuen Kleinbürgertums waren und sind und teilweise ein Ausdruck ihrer Deklassierung? Richtig.

Die Einschätzung, dass antikapitalistische Politik von Arbeiterinnen und Arbeitern getragen werden muss, die als ausgebeutete Klasse aufgrund ihrer Klassenlage ein objektives Interesse und mit Hilfe des Streiks auch die objektive Befähigung zum Sozialismus haben? Richtig.

Die Einschätzung, dass antikapitalistische Politik im Interesse der arbeitenden Volksmassen auch nicht rein gewerkschaftlich, also syndikalistisch sein kann, sondern neben diesem »Schild« auch das »Schwert« einer (revolutionären) Partei braucht, da »die Geschichte aller Länder davon zeugt, dass die Arbeiterklasse ausschließlich aus eigener Kraft nur ein tradeunionistisches Bewusstsein hervorzubringen mag; d. h. die Überzeugung von der Notwendigkeit, sich in Verbänden zusammenzuschließen, einen Kampf gegen die Unternehmer zu führen, der Regierung diese oder jene für die Arbeiter notwendigen Gesetze abzutrotzen u. a. m.« (Lenin: Werke, Band 5, Seite 385f.)? Richtig. Die Aufgabe der Partei ist es, eine verbindende Klassenpolitik vorzubereiten, damit sich nicht ständische und enggeführte Berufsgruppeninteressen durchsetzen. Die schon 1917 getroffene Einschätzung, dass die bürgerliche Demokratie die »denkbar beste politische Hülle des Kapitalismus« ist, weil »die Allmacht des ›Reichtums‹« hier »nicht von einzelnen Mängeln des politischen Mechanismus abhängig ist« und auch »kein Wechsel, weder der Personen noch der Institutionen noch der Parteien der bürgerlich-demokratischen Republik, diese Macht erschüttern« kann? Richtig. Gleichwohl ist ebenfalls richtig, dass der Kapitalismus stets auch mit autoritären und faschistischen Staatsformen kompatibel geblieben ist.

Die daraus resultierende Einschätzung, dass der bürgerlich-kapitalistische Staat kein neutrales Werkzeug ist, dessen sich eine sozialistische Bewegung im Interesse der arbeitenden Klassen einfach bedienen könnte, indem sie Wahlmehrheiten gewinnt? Richtig. Der Staat im Kapitalismus ist ein spezifisch kapitalistischer Staat.

Die Einsicht, dass »die starke Beteiligung der Schicht der ›Akademiker‹ an der sozialistischen Bewegung« zwar den Revisionismus, Elektoralismus und andere bürgerliche Denkbewegungen in der Arbeiterbewegung stärkt(e) (Lenin: Werke, Band 5, Seite 366), dass aber – jenseits der anarchosyndikalistischen »Anhänger der ›reinen Arbeiterbewegung‹« (Lenin: Werke, Band 5, Seite 393) – die bürgerliche Intelligenz, die die eigene Klasse verrät und sich – wie Marx und Engels selbst – dem Sozialismus zuwendet, durchaus eine hohe Bedeutung hat, weil (nur sie) die Wissenschaftlichkeit der Politik gewährleistet? Richtig.

Die Einschätzung, dass revolutionäre Politik konkret-situativ handeln und der Revolutionär darum »unbedingt lernen muss, selbst in den reaktionärsten Parlamenten, in den reaktionärsten Gewerkschaften, Genossenschaften, Versicherungskassen und ähnlichen Organisationen legal zu arbeiten« (Lenin: Werke, Band 31, Seite 13), und die revolutionäre Partei nicht generell Wahlen und Parlamente boykottieren kann und darf? Richtig.

Die Einschätzung, dass die Revolution von West nach Ost wandern und sich als ein Bündnis von Arbeiterklasse und Bauern in kapitalistisch unterentwickelten Ländern ereignen würde, wo die Verteilungsspielräume für die Herrschenden geringer sind als im entwickelten Kapitalismus? Richtig.

Die Einschätzung, dass Hegemonie das Bündnis der Arbeiterklasse mit nichtantagonistischen Klassen wie den werktätigen Bauern »gegen die verschwindend kleine Minderheit der modernen Sklavenhalter« (Lenin: Werke, Band 25, Seite 415) meint und nicht das strategische Bündnis mit »fortschrittlichen« Fraktionen der Bourgeoisie? Richtig.

 

Ausnutzung des Staates

Die Einschätzung, dass es sich beim Ersten Weltkrieg mit seinen 17 Millionen Toten um den ersten »räuberischen, imperialistischen Krieg« handelte, in dem die arbeitenden Klassen der Welt nichts zu gewinnen hatten, weshalb auch die »geringsten Zugeständnisse an die ›revolutionäre Vaterlandsverteidigung‹« »unzulässig« seien (Lenin: Werke, Band 24, Seite 3)? Richtig.

Die Kritik an der Burgfriedenspolitik der sozialdemokratischen Parteien? Richtig. Der Burgfrieden leitete keinen parlamentarischen Sozialismus ein, sondern den Verrat an der Revolution; und der Krieg leitete keine Ära der Sozialreform ein, sondern das Massenmorden legte den Grundstein für die zukünftigen Massenmorde und den »weißen Terror« im »Zeitalter der Katastrophen« (Eric Hobsbawm).

Die Einschätzung, dass die bürgerliche »Februarrevolution« in Russland keine soziale und politische Basis habe, weshalb sich eine Chance für eine sozialistische Revolution biete? Richtig.

Die Einschätzung, dass die – während der Revolution von 1905 entstandenen – Räte und ihre Kontrolle über Betriebe und Boden als Verwirklichung des demokratischen Prinzips anzusehen sind, aber nicht die liberale Elitenherrschaft im repräsentativen Parlamentarismus? Richtig.

Die in den Aprilthesen formulierte Einsicht, dass jede erfolgreiche Revolution damit beginnt, die Kontrolle über den Finanzsektor und die industriellen Kommandohöhen zu erlangen und eine Bodenreform durchzuführen? Richtig.

Die Einsicht, dass sich der »Sturz der Herrschaft der ausbeutenden Klasse« nicht »als friedliche Unterordnung der Minderheit unter die sich ihrer Aufgaben bewusst gewordene(n) Mehrheit« vollziehen wird, sondern dass die inländische Bourgeoisie alle ihr zur Verfügung stehenden Machtressourcen einsetzen wird, um ihr Privateigentum an den Produktionsmitteln als Grundlage ihrer gesellschaftlichen Macht nicht zu verlieren, und dass sie dabei – wie schon während der Pariser Kommune und nun auch nach 1917 – die Unterstützung der ausländischen Bourgeoisien, ihrer Staaten und Militärapparate erhalten wird, weshalb sozialistische Revolutionäre »in der Frage der Abschaffung (des Staates) als Ziel (…) mit den Anarchisten keineswegs auseinander« gehen, aber davon ausgehen müssen, »dass zur Erreichung dieses Zieles ein zeitweiliges Ausnutzen der Organe, Mittel und Methoden der Staatsgewalt gegen die Ausbeuter notwendig« sein dürfte (Lenin: Werke, Band 25, Seite 449)? Richtig.

Die Einsicht von Lenins »Neuer Ökonomischer Politik«, dass Russland für die Kollektivierung der Landwirtschaft noch nicht reif war, weshalb man nach den Zerstörungen des Bürgerkriegs zur Sicherung der Versorgung gegen starken Widerstand aus der eigenen Partei zeitweilig wieder auf marktwirtschaftliche Elemente in dieser Situation zurückgreifen müsse? Richtig.

Die Einschätzung, dass der Erfolg der Revolution im unterentwickelten Russland vom Sieg der Revolution im Westen abhängig bleiben würde? Richtig.

Aber wenn Lenin so vieles richtig erkannte, was ist dann so falsch am Leninismus? Nun, Lenin irrte auch, oder er stellte die richtige Frage, aber gab entweder die falsche Antwort, oder die richtige Antwort von einst ist eine falsche Antwort für heute. Zudem stellen sich auch ganz andere, neue Fragen.

 

Konkrete Analysen

Es gilt darum, Lenin und Leninismus zu unterscheiden. Lenins Denken selbst legt diesen Schluss nahe. Für Lenin stand fest: »Konkrete politische Aufgaben muss man in einer konkreten Situation stellen (…). Es gibt keine abstrakte Wahrheit. Die Wahrheit ist immer konkret« (Lenin: Werke, Band 9, Seite 76). Das, was in einem historischen Augenblick richtig erscheint, kann für einen anderen falsch sein. Kautskys Ultraimperialismusthese etwa, veröffentlicht kurz vor dem Ersten Weltkrieg, war falsch; aber dem neuen Imperialismus heute entspricht sie eher als die von Lenin. »Es gibt Kompromisse und Kompromisse« (Lenin: Werke, Band 31, Seite 22), warnte der Theoretiker der Revolution und betonte, dass eine revolutionäre Theorie stets die historisch-materialistische Analyse der konkreten Bedingungen mit dem situationsgebundenen dialektischen Denken verbindet.

Einige konkrete Aspekte des Irrtums und der Widersprüchlichkeit in diesem Kampf können abschließend benannt werden.

 

Erstens: Lenin wollte die Revolution, aber unter Bedingungen bürgerlich-kapitalistischer Entwicklung, bei der die Arbeiterklasse noch die Minderheit bildete. Das Industrieproletariat bildete jedenfalls selbst im Westen niemals die Mehrheit. Dabei wusste Lenin selbst, was die besten Voraussetzungen für den Sozialismus sind. Eine der revolutionärsten Erkenntnisse von Marx und Engels, so Lenin, sei die Einsicht: »Je mehr Proletarier, desto größer ihre Kraft als revolutionäre Klasse, desto näher und realer der Sozialismus« (Lenin: Werke, Band 2, Seite 6). Nach dieser Definition sind die Bedingungen für den Sozialismus heute potentiell besser als zu Lenins Zeiten.

 

Zweitens: Lenin hatte eine Weltrevolution vor Augen, aber er führte am Ende die Revolution in einer Gesellschaft, in der die Bedingungen denkbar schlecht waren. Die »imperialistische Kette« bricht an ihrem »schwächsten Glied«, aber die Betonung liegt hier auf schwach im wortwörtlichen Sinne: Die Anfälligkeit, sich wieder in den kapitalistischen Weltmarkt einzugliedern, um Entwicklungsstufen überspringen zu können, ist groß.

 

Drittens: Lenin wollte keine straff geführte Partei um ihrer selbst willen. Als glühender Anhänger des volksdemokratischen Rätegedankens wollte er den Autoritarismus nicht, sondern dieser wurde aus den Notwendigkeiten der Unterdrückung durch die Ausbeuterklassen geboren.

 

Ungelöste Fragen

Das Leninsche Parteiprinzip setzte sich jedoch auch in den westlichen kommunistischen Parteien durch. Für die Handlungsfähigkeit sind eine disziplinierte Partei und das Prinzip des demokratischen Zentralismus (»Vielfalt in der Diskussion, Einheit in der Aktion«) förderlich. Heutige Linksparteien wie Die Linke sehen sich in der Regel als plurale linke Massenparteien. Man sieht am Beispiel der Coronakrise, wie schwer es ihnen fällt, schnell und geschlossen strategisch zu handeln. Auch erleichtern sie schon unter Nichtkrisenbedingungen die Verselbständigung von Parlamentsfraktionen und sogar innerhalb derer die Verselbständigung der Abgeordneten in kleinunternehmerischen Fürstentümern. Indes: Auch die bewegungsorientierten, parlamentarismuskritischen Linken in den heutigen Linksparteien wollen keinen demokratischen Zentralismus, sondern sehen sich als Repräsentanten verbindender Parteien, die Gewerkschaften, Umwelt- und andere soziale Bewegungen in kohärenten Transformationsprojekten zusammenbringen. Sie gewährleisten so – wenigstens potentiell – breite Beteiligung. Aber wer aus guten Gründen ja zur pluralen Linkspartei mit »Politik als Beruf« sagt und keine Anwärterschaften für Berufsrevolutionäre mehr will, der sagt auch ja zu Karrieristen und ja zur besonderen Ämterorientierung unter Akademikern (im Vergleich zu nichtstudierten Arbeitern) und muss Antworten auf diese Probleme finden.

Die liberalen Demokratien bieten aber zugleich auch mehr Beteiligung, die für den demokratischen Charakter des Sozialismus unerlässlich ist: Die Frage, wie man verhindert, dass sich Avantgardeparteien verselbständigen, wie zentralisierte Kaderstrukturen mit einer breiten Volksdemokratie und Massenpartizipation zu verbinden sind, wie man einmal etablierte autoritäre Strukturen, die in einer Revolution entstehen, wieder zurückfährt, wie Zentralisierung nicht zur Erlahmung des politischen Lebens führt – all das ist ungelöst, und die Formulierung vom »Absterben des Staates« bleibt eine Chiffre hierfür, genauso wie dies stets die Formulierung »Diktatur des Proletariats« war.

 

Wahrscheinlich werden diese Fragen sich nur in der Realgeschichte, nicht aber auf dem Papier lösen lassen; jede neue Revolution oder Transformation wird unter nichtselbstgewählten Bedingungen stattfinden. Dass gerade die Macht der Bourgeoisie und ihre Gewalt von innen und von außen halfen, das menschheitsliebende Antlitz des Sozialismus zu verzerren, ist eine der besonderen Perfidien der Geschichte des Kapitalismus und Imperialismus. Beide zu überwinden aber wird immer auch in Auseinandersetzungen mit dem Werk von Lenin passieren.

  

Lenin.jpg

 

_F2A5669

 

“Quantifying the Effect of Anthropogenic Climate Change on Calcifying Plankton”

 

www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-58501-w?utm_source=fac...

 

*

 

“We join our affiliate, the Tennessee Wildlife Federation in advocating for increased federal funds to stop Asian carp, and invasive species, from entering the Great Lakes.

Asian carp, when introduced to an ecosystem, reproduce rapidly and monopolize resources, crowding out native species.”

natwild.life/ProtectingBiodiversity

www.facebook.com/NationalWildlife/photos/a.10150122178318...

 

*

 

“Pollination: Air pollution renders flower odors unattractive to moths”

 

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/09/200904101806.htm?fb...

 

“"We were surprised, even shocked, that the innate attraction to the odor of tobacco flowers was completely lost in the presence of increased ozone levels," said Knaden, describing what was observed during the experiments.

Tobacco hawkmoths are able to learn

The question remained whether ozone in the air would spoil the appetite of hungry and foraging tobacco hawkmoths, or whether it would prevent insects from finding their food source. Would insects be able to figure out that even polluted flower odors can offer rewards? To answer this question, researchers tested whether tobacco hawkmoths could learn to accept an initially unattractive scent as a food cue if they smelled it while simultaneously being offered a sugar solution reward. The researchers assessed several different ways in which the moth could learn to recognize flowers based on the ozone-altered floral scent. This was critical to relating these experiments to real-world learning. In the real world, a floral scent only becomes ozone-altered as it moves downwind of the flower and mixes with ozone. To see if moths could learn ozone-altered floral scents even when they are decoupled from the sugar reward at the flower, the researchers developed an experiment where the moth had to follow the ozone-altered odor to the flower, but were presented with the original scent at the flower containing the sugar reward.

"While we anticipated that Manduca sexta could learn new floral scents and hoped that they would be able to learn the polluted floral scent of their host flower, we were amazed to see that Manduca sexta could learn the polluted floral blend in a number of different ways, including learning a polluted scent that was decoupled from a sugar reward. This type of learning, which we were surprised to find in Manduca sexta, could be very important in insects' ability to use learning to cope with their rapidly changing environments," says first author Brynn Cook from the University of Virginia. What is especially noteworthy and pertinent about this kind of responsiveness to a changing environment is that it occurs in real time and not over evolutionary timescales.

Learning ability of Manduca sexta is not an all-clear

Although the study shows that tobacco hawkmoths can learn to rely on ozone-altered and initially unattractive plumes to recognize their flowers, air pollution still poses a serious risk to pollination and pollinators. "Learning may be key to insects recognizing their host plants in polluted environments, but one of the major questions remaining from our study is whether pollinators will be able to find their flowers in the first place. Without initially recognizing smells, will pollinators only have visual cues to help them locate host flowers in order to learn the pollution-altered floral scent? Another important aspect to consider is that other pollinators may not have the same facility to learn new smells that Manduca sexta has. Specialist pollinators, for instance, may not have that flexibility in learning. Our study is just a starting point. Field studies are going to be critical to understanding which flowers and insects are most affected by which pollutants, and likely why," says Cook.

Air pollution and climate change have far-reaching consequences for our ecosystem; by no means have all of these been studied and understood. For example, we still know little about the impact of atmospheric changes on the chemical communication between plants and insects. Not only are plant odors altered, but also the sex pheromone female insects use to attract males. Atmospheric changes have the potential to cause alterations in pheromones that could lead to mating failure. Insect mortality has risen dramatically in recent years, and researchers worldwide are searching for the causes. “

 

*

 

Comparison of Trump and Biden on key issues shows they are identical:

www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10219956866044682&set...

 

*

 

The Real Racist s a Democrat – Joe Biden:

www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10220793888390484&set...

 

*

 

“If you support Joe Biden, repeat after me.

“I support Fracking.

I support Big Pharma.

I support TPP

I support illegal drone strikes.

I support the Iraq war.

I support NAFTA.

I support repeal of Glass-Steagal.

I support business as usual.

www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10157580691700205&set...

 

*

 

The making of an already toothless Congress:

“Congress May Be on Its Own”

www.pogo.org/analysis/2020/09/congress-may-be-on-its-own/...

 

*

 

8/29/2020 Joe Biden: “I promise you this. A Biden-Harris Administration will always listen to scientists.”

8/31/2020 Joe Biden: “I am not banning fracking.”

“Top Climate Scientists Call for Fracking Ban”

www.facebook.com/ProgressivesAgainstJoe/photos/a.10617254...

 

*

 

“This week is showing us more than ever - the planet will not wait for us. Nancy Pelosi has had 30 years to act on climate, with little to show for it. It's time for a change”

secure.actblue.com/donate/shahid_blm?fbclid=IwAR1QHvU-2Br...

 

*

 

“Perennial Vegetables Are a Solution in the Fight Against Hunger and Climate Change

A new study shows the nutrition and environmental benefits of more than 600 perennial species—from artichokes to chaya—which address climate mitigation, biodiversity, and nutrition.”

civileats.com/2020/08/19/perennial-vegetables-are-a-solut...

 

*

 

“‘At the Forefront of Climate Change,’ Hoboken, New Jersey, Seeks Damages From ExxonMobil”

insideclimatenews.org/news/02092020/exxonmobil-Hoboken-cl...

 

*

 

Destruction of State Governments is in full swing:

“States plan for cuts as Congress deadlocks on more virus aid”

apnews.com/03049976d6f6fff1897ffa50a664a653?fbclid=IwAR1Q...

 

*

 

Ramping up the ensuing election chaos is in full swing:

“Warning by the fascists tools to defend an impending fascist regime.”

“Oath Keepers”

“The first shot has been fired brother. Civil war is here, right now. We’ll give Trump one last chance to declare this is a Marxist insurrection & suppress it as his duty demands. If he fails to do his duty, we will do ours. “Against all enemies, forgeitn and domestic” Stewart”

www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=675783889700360&set=gm.35...

 

*

 

“Nearly all Black Lives Matter protests are peaceful despite Trump narrative, report finds

In stark contrast to rightwing claims, 93% of demonstrations have involved no serious harm to people or property”

www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/05/nearly-all-black-li...

 

*

 

“it’s no accident that:…

…Racism is perpetuated by people who refuse to learn or acknowledge this reality.”

www.facebook.com/beingliberal.org/photos/a.180479986274/1...

 

*

 

Thousands of Scientists Endorse Study Proclaiming Trump's Border Wall a Disaster for Wildlife weather.com/science/environment/news/2018-07-26-trump-bor...

 

Trump’s Border Wall is the ‘Biggest Threat’ to Southwest Wildlife, Government Emails Reveal earther.gizmodo.com/trump-s-border-wall-is-the-biggest-th...

 

*

 

Give it a rest already! The following is abject bologna!:

“… Mitch McConnell is powerless to bury the House’s bills in his legislative graveryard….

If Democrats fought as Republicans fought for the rich, legislation would not sit idle on McConnell's desk. Don’t believe me? Ask any disgusted political observer in Wisconsin how Republicans got things done to bring the state to its knees. They should be able to give you plenty of ideas.

 

This excuse for Democrats' lack of progress is as hollow as China being responsible for COVID-19 deaths in America.

www.facebook.com/democratscom/photos/a.10151406045100724/...

 

*

 

In service of the Billionaires:

“Trump made our troops stand down and watch our Kurish allies slaughtered and the Russians take our bases. Never forget that.”

 

*

 

Michael Moore:

“The Bide campaign, in an effort to convince Flint voters to stay home on Nov 3 and lose Michigan again, happily announced & embraced the endorsement of former Gov. Rick Synder – the man who poisoned Flint’s water. 10,000 children w/permanent brain damage. Countless dead. Shame!”

www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=10158343569284765&set=gm....

 

*

 

“People worry that 'moderate' Democrats like Joe Biden are the same as Republicans. Our study suggests they may be right”

“Men who refer to themselves as 'moderate' or 'centrist' score basically the same on values and opinions as people who identify themselves as 'conservative'”

www.independent.co.uk/voices/biden-moderate-democrats-rep...

 

*

 

“David Harvey on why Karl Marx's Capital is still the defining guide to understanding — and overcoming — the horrors of capitalism.

 

“Why Marx’s Capital Still Matters”

www.jacobinmag.com/2018/07/karl-marx-capital-david-harvey...

 

*

 

“Scathing Letter By George Washington University Law School Faculty Condemns Attorney General William Barr”

www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2020/06/26/scathing-lette...

 

*

 

“If you’re voting for the Blue Rapist to thwart the Red Rapist congrats. Your cowardly preemptive surrender has ensured our extinction.”

www.facebook.com/kathy.copelandpadden

 

*

 

“If you’re dressed up like a soldier and you’re tear-gassing a mom wearing a bicycle helmet to protect her from your batons, you are not an American soldier or a Patriot. You are the kind of person American soldiers killed to protect us from. Stop it now.”

www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=193193862234739&set=a.101...

 

*

 

“Trump attacked 17-year old Greta Thunberg for fighting to save our burning planet, but defended Kyle Rittenhouse, a 17-year old charged with murdering Black Lives Matters protesters. Tells you all you need to know.” Robert Reich

www.facebook.com/GreenNewDeal/photos/a.310150146299270/66...

 

*

 

“The choice is not between Biden and Trump. The choice is between opposing the racist, warmongering two-party system and surrendering to it.”

www.facebook.com/ProgressivesAgainstJoe/photos/a.10617254...

 

*

 

“Without better climate education in our schools the climate crisis will continue to be a runaway train.”

thehill.com/changing-america/opinion/514431-without-bette...

 

*

 

“To Save a Way of Life, Native Defenders Push to Protect the Arctic Refuge”

e360.yale.edu/features/to-save-a-way-of-life-native-defen...

 

*

 

Democrats know what it takes to secure a sure win against Trump but refuse to act on it out of deference for the Rich that finance their lifestyles:

“How New York City’s Democratic Socialists Swept the Competition”

prospect.org/politics/how-new-york-city-democratic-social...

 

*

 

Biden or Trump will usher in our climate nightmare scenario:

“Climate Accountability Largely Missing from Senate Democrats’ New Climate Report”

www.desmogblog.com/2020/08/28/accountability-lawsuits-sen...

 

*

 

Democrats are actively thwarting the will of the People along with Republicans:

“First we told them we would include them in the debate if they polled at 15%, then we didn’t include them in the polls”

www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=3266058026819564&set=gm.2...

 

*

 

“Journalism’s New Propaganda Tool: Using “Confirmed” to Mean its Opposite”

theintercept.com/2020/09/05/journalisms-new-propaganda-to...

 

*

 

A DANGEROUS SITUATION IS PLAYING OUT:

America is headed to severely debilitating chaos, imposed by Repub-lick-cans and the rich, with the coming 2020 elections.

They are going to make a move for the whole thing. It could be their best and last chance to do so. It's going to be violent and messy. Worst of all it is going to be brought to your front door and perhaps for some inside your very home. Conceivably, “they” could come for you.

Have a plan if you are not white or Christian. Protect yourself. This is not a joke. This is not exaggeration.

These are sick people and you may be attacked. Good luck come November.

 

“What Will You Do if Trump Doesn’t Leave?”

“Playing out the nightmare scenario.”

www.nytimes.com/2020/09/03/opinion/trump-election-2020.ht...

&

“Covid-19 and an atmosphere of distrust pose grave risks to America’s election

New burdens mean the country may not see the sort of clean election result it has come to expect on election night”

www.economist.com/briefing/2020/09/03/covid-19-and-an-atm...

&

“Perspective | The election will likely spark violence – and a constitutional crisis:

www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/09/03/trump-stay-in-o...

&

“We need to start preparing for the November election – now”

www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/04/15/we-need-start-...

&

“Here’s how to prepare for Trump rejecting the election results in November”

www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/07/27/heres-how-prep...

&

“BERNIE SANDERS ON POLITICAL & ELECTORAL REFORM”

feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-political-and-electoral...

&

“EDITORIAL: Start preparing now for election issues”

dailygazette.com/article/2020/06/20/editorial-start-prepa...

&

“Six Ways for Election Officials to Prepare for High Voter Turnout in 2020

www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/six-ways-...

&

 

“Chaos scenarios drive gatekeepers' election prep”

www.axios.com/2020-election-gatekeepers-chaos-scenarios-8...

&

“Where the System May Break

A war-game exercise simulating the 2020 election unmasked some key vulnerabilities.”

www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/how-2020-electi...

 

Book: “When they come for you” by Author David Kirby

 

Battle of Britain Music to enjoy www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFEXitPn1ko

  

Hurricane Mk XIIa 5711 (G-HURI) was built in 1942 by the Canadian Car Foundry as part of their sixth production batch and it joined the Royal Canadian Air Force in 1943.

 

Hurricane Mk XIIa G-HURI is on permanent display in Hangar 3 at the Imperial War Museum, Duxford.

  

_F2A0357

 

Premeditated genocide:

 

“As Trump Pushes U.S. to Reopen, Internal Document Projects 3,000 Coronavirus Deaths a Day by June”

 

"We're seeing an increase in mobility that's leading to an increase in mortality, unfortunately, in the United States." --Prof Ali Mokdad, IHME Health Metrics Sciences, University of Washington Medicine

 

www.ecowatch.com/coronavirus-death-projection-us-document...

 

*

 

“Leading economists find in a new study that a green stimulus of investments in renewable energy & energy efficiency is the best way to recover economically from the Coronavirus pandemic.

 

Massive programmes of green public investment would be the most cost-effective way both to revive virus-hit economies and strike a decisive blow against climate change, top U.S. and British economists said in a study published on Tuesday.”

 

“Green recovery can revive virus-hit economies and tackle climate change, study says”

 

www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-economy-idU...

 

*

 

Conservative Environmental Catastrophe - America:

“Pebble Mine: Going for Broke”

 

www.nrdc.org/experts/joel-reynolds/pebble-mine-going-brok...

 

*

 

Conservative Environmental Catastrophe -Gt Britain:

“HS2: High Court Rejects Bid To Stop Biggest Deforestation Since First World War”

bylinetimes.com/2020/04/04/hs2-high-court-rejects-bid-to-...

&

“HS2 workers accused of destroying birds’ nests and failing to maintain social distancing during coronavirus pandemic

Project’s opponents say alleged loss of nests ‘heartbreaking’ and question why project is going ahead during crisis”

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/hs2-bird-nest-tre...

 

*

 

“Israel’s New Government Is Exploiting Pandemic to Annex 30 Percent of West Bank”

truthout.org/articles/israels-new-government-is-exploitin...

 

*

 

“Reopening Our Economy Right Now Will Result in Mass Death”

jacobinmag.com/2020/5/coronavirus-pandemic-reopen-economy...

 

*

 

Death of Democracy – America:

"Seven States Restrict Mail-In Voting on the Basis of Age. That’s Unconstitutional.

The 26th Amendment takes on newfound importance in the pandemic."

Could it be Trump is intimidating the Postal Service to cajole their cooperation in Election Fraud?

slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/04/26th-amendment-texas-...

 

*

 

“Stupid Things Trump Said: 'I'm Treated Worse Than Lincoln'”

crooksandliars.com/2020/05/stupid-things-trump-said-im-tr...

 

*

 

“Antarctica: Too Big to Melt

A summer of extremes leaves sobering questions about the state of Earth’s largest store of ice, capable of inundating coastlines worldwide as it melts.”

therevelator.org/antarctica-melting/?fbclid=IwAR34UfUT0GT...

 

*

 

Vito Pena: (this post was deleted by facebook. It is anti democratic party and facebook has contracted the Nazi police organization “Brietbart” to police facebook and take down objectionable posts)

“Most of the electorate votes for their perceived lesser evil, including conservatives.”

“If you’re willing to drop every single one of your morals just to get rid of Trump then congratulations, you’ve become what you hate.”

www.facebook.com/search/top/?q=Most%20of%20the%20electora...

 

*

 

Charles Koch (via “Americans For Prosperity”) is running this social media campaign to promote the bankruptcies of Democratic states. Nancy Pelosi is a strident supporter of Charles Koch:

 

"American taxpayers should NOT be on the hook for the recklessness of states like Illinois, New York and California."

“Reject Bailouts!”

Pledge to reject reckless bailouts!

americansforprosperity.ivolunteers.com/ContactOfficials/T...

 

*

 

“'Idiocracy' writer: I never expected my movie 'to become a documentary'”

thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/270642-idiocrac...

 

*

 

“Michigan has the HIGHEST death rate in the US from those getting coronavirus — and yet deranged Trumpers are staging bitter protests over strict stay-at-home orders, data shows, complete with Nazi swastikas, pro-slavery confederate flags, and nooses.”

“Michigan has highest coronavirus fatality rate in US as protests continue”

nypost.com/2020/05/03/michigan-has-the-highest-coronaviru...

 

*

 

“Neoliberalism Is a Political Project”

www.jacobinmag.com/2016/07/david-harvey-neoliberalism-cap...

 

*

 

“Trump believes tax cuts for the ultra-rich, deregulation for the powerful, and wage suppression for everyone else is how you grow an economy.”

It actually results in an overall economy that is much smaller than achievable.

“The coronavirus pandemic has shown that the trickle-down theory of economic growth is a fabrication”

Like all ideology out of Washington, “trickle down” is a bologna excuse the masses are given for our Politicians having to prioritize the rich in order for they themselves to get rich and stay in office

www.businessinsider.com/trickle-down-trumps-economic-poli...

 

*

 

“Paul Krugman: ‘The modern GOP doesn’t want to hear from serious economists – it prefers charlatans and cranks’”

www.alternet.org/2020/05/paul-krugman-the-modern-gop-does...

 

*

 

Higher education use to be a major export of services for America, but conservatives ‘taming the beast’ have changed all that:

“The Anatomy of a Failing University”

www.counterpunch.org/2020/05/04/the-anatomy-of-a-failing-...

 

*

 

“Australian businesses call for climate crisis and virus economic recovery to be tackled together

Innes Willox, chief executive of the Australia Industry Group, says Covid-19 and climate are ‘urgent’ challenges that overlap”

www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/may/05/australian-bu...

 

*

 

Bipartisan effort to steal the resources of another country:

“Venezuelan Military Foils Terrorist Infiltration from Colombia”

www.telesurenglish.net/news/Venezuelan-Military-Foils-Ter...

 

*

 

“Their Ancestors Greeted the Pilgrims, Now the Mashpee Wampanoag Fight for their Land Amid a Pandemic”

indypendent.org/2020/04/their-ancestors-greeted-the-pilgr...

 

*

 

“Deforestation may drive animal-to-human infections

New research suggests that the loss of forest habitat increases contact between humans and nonhuman primates — and therefore the transmission of diseases from animals to humans, as with coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19).”

www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/deforestation-may-drive...

 

*

 

“FBI seizes four pipe bombs from home of Colorado anti-lockdown protester, feds say”

www.mcclatchydc.com/news/coronavirus/article242489446.htm...

 

*

 

“‘We are on the eve of a genocide’: Brazil urged to save Amazon tribes from Covid-19”

www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/03/eve-of-genocide-bra...

 

*

 

“When we overcrowd animals by the thousands in cramped football-field-size sheds to lie beak to beak or snout to snout and there’s stress crippling their immune systems and there’s ammonia from the decomposing waste burning their lungs and there’s a lack of fresh air and sunlight - put all these factors together and you have a perfect-storm environment for the emergence and spread of disease."

“The meat we eat is a pandemic risk, too

“If you actually want to create global pandemics, then build factory farms.””

www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/4/22/21228158/coronavirus...

 

*

 

It is sad that Democrats are willing to do this to the country. The 99% truly has no representation:

“Clinton-era politics refuses to die. Joe Biden is its zombie that staggers on”

“Biden thinks he’s well positioned because after the shock of the Trump years, people want to go back to where we were. Wrong”

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/30/clinton-era...

 

*

 

“Howard Kurtz Admits Fox News Failed to Cover Trump’s Failure To Heed Warnings in January”

crooksandliars.com/2020/05/howard-kurtz-admitts-fox-news-...

 

*

 

“COVID-19 Stimulus Requests: Tracker by Industry”

www.taxpayer.net/budget-appropriations-tax/draft-covid-19...

 

*

 

“Trump-Tied Companies Receive Millions in Small Business Aid”

truthout.org/articles/trump-tied-companies-receive-millio...

 

*

 

"One PPP recipient is the digital film distributor Cinedigm, which landed a $2.2 million small business loan from the Small Business Administration (SBA) on April 15 to “retain employees, maintain payroll, and make lease and utility payments to support business continuity throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.”

Cinedigm may not, however, be eligible for the funds. The company, which took in $43.6 million in revenue over the last 12 months, is majority owned by a subsidiary of the Beijing-based private equity firm Bison Capital Holding Company Limited, which invests in media and health care companies."

“Foreign-Owned Entertainment Company Lands Federal COVID-19 Loan”

www.exposedbycmd.org/2020/05/01/foreign-owned-entertainme...

 

*

 

“$28 million meant for struggling small businesses from the CARES Act went to 3 coal mining companies with ties to Trump officials.

No one deserves a bailout less. We need relief for people, not polluters!”

“Fossil fuel firms linked to Trump get millions in coronavirus small business aid

Revealed: Oil and mining firms – some with ties to Trump officials – taking advantage of funding, review shows”

www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/may/01/fossil-fuel-f...

  

Please check out my new website at www.inspiringimagesltd.com/home.html

  

Photos of the Sacre Couer are 10 a penny but almost all are covered in tourists so here's a rare opportunity to see how it looks without anyone getting in the way!

 

From wikipedia:

 

The Basilica of the Sacred Heart of Paris, commonly known as Sacré-Cœur Basilica (French: Basilique du Sacré-Cœur, pronounced [sakʁe kœʁ]), is a Roman Catholic church and minor basilica, dedicated to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, in Paris, France. A popular landmark, the basilica is located at the summit of the butte Montmartre, the highest point in the city. Sacré-Cœur is a double monument, political and cultural, both a national penance for the supposed excesses of the Second Empire and socialist Paris Commune of 1871 crowning its most rebellious neighborhood, and an embodiment of conservative moral order, publicly dedicated to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, which was an increasingly popular vision of a loving and sympathetic Christ.

 

The Sacré-Cœur Basilica was designed by Paul Abadie. Construction began in 1875 and was finished in 1914. It was consecrated after the end of World War I in 1919.

 

The inspiration for Sacré Cœur's design originated in the wake of the division in French society that arose in the decades following the French Revolution, between devout Catholics and legitimist royalists on one side, and democrats, secularists, socialists and radicals on the other. This schism became particularly pronounced after the Franco-Prussian War and the ensuing uprising of the Paris Commune of 1870-71. Though today the Basilica is asserted to be dedicated in honor of the 58,000 who lost their lives during the war, the decree of the Assemblée nationale, 24 July 1873, responding to a request by the archbishop of Paris by voting its construction, specifies that it is to "expiate the crimes of the Commune". Montmartre had been the site of the Commune's first insurrection, and many dedicated communards were forever entombed in the subterranean galleries of former gypsum mines where they had retreated, by explosives detonated at the entrances by the Army of Versailles. Hostages had been executed on both sides, and the Communards had executed Georges Darboy, Archbishop of Paris, who became a martyr for the resurgent Catholic Church. His successor Guibert, climbing the Butte Montmartre in October 1872, was reported to have had a vision, as clouds dispersed over the panorama: "It is here, it is here where the martyrs are, it is here that the Sacred Heart must reign so that it can beckon all to come".

 

In the moment of inertia following the resignation of the government of Adolphe Thiers, 24 May 1873, François Pie, bishop of Poitiers, expressed the national yearning for spiritual renewal— "the hour of the Church has come"— that would be expressed through the "Government of Moral Order" of the Third Republic, which linked Catholic institutions with secular ones, in "a project of religious and national renewal, the main features of which were the restoration of monarchy and the defense of Rome within a cultural framework of official piety", of which Sacré-Cœur is the chief lasting triumphalist monument.

 

The decree voting its construction as a "matter of public utility", 24 July, followed close on Thiers' resignation. The project was expressed by the Church as a National Vow (Voeu national) and financial support came from parishes throughout France. The dedicatory inscription records the Basilica as the accomplishment of a vow by Alexandre Legentil and Hubert Rohault de Fleury, ratified by Joseph-Hippolyte Guibert, Archbishop of Paris. The project took many years to complete.

 

Construction

 

A law of public utility was passed to seize land at the summit of Montmartre for the construction of the basilica. Architect Paul Abadie designed the basilica after winning a competition over 77 other architects.With delays in assembling the property, the foundation stone was finally laid 16 June 1875. Passionate debates concerning the Basilica were raised in the Conseil Municipal in 1880, where the Basilica was called "an incessant provocation to civil war" and it was debated whether to rescind the law of 1873 granting property rights, an impracticable proposition. The matter reached the Chamber of Deputies in the summer of 1882, in which the Basilica was defended by Archbishop Guibert while Georges Clemenceau argued that it sought to stigmatise the Revolution. The law was rescinded, but the Basilica was saved by a technicality and the bill was not reintroduced in the next session. A further attempt to halt the construction was defeated in 1897, by which time the interior was substantially complete and had been open for services for six years.

 

The overall style of the structure shows a free interpretation of Romano-Byzantine features, an unusual architectural vocabulary at the time, which was a conscious reaction against the neo-Baroque excesses of the Palais Garnier, which was cited in the competition. Many design elements of the basilica symbolise nationalist themes: the portico, with its three arches, is adorned by two equestrian statues of French national saints Joan of Arc (1927) and King Saint Louis IX, both executed in bronze by Hippolyte Lefebvre; and the nineteen-ton Savoyarde bell (one of the world's heaviest), cast in 1895 in Annecy, alludes to the annexation of Savoy in 1860.

 

Abadie died not long after the foundation had been laid, in 1884, and five architects continued with the work: Honoré Daumet (1884–1886), Jean-Charles Laisné (1886–1891), Henri-Pierre-Marie Rauline (1891–1904), Lucien Magne (1904–1916), and Jean-Louis Hulot (1916–1924). The Basilica was not completed until 1914, when war intervened; the basilica was formally dedicated in 1919, after World War I, when its national symbolism had shifted

 

Construction costs, estimated at 7 million French francs and drawn entirely from private donations, were expended before any above-ground visible structure was to be seen. A provisional chapel was consecrated 3 March 1876, and pilgrimage donations quickly became the mainstay of funding. Donations were encouraged by the expedient of permitting donors to "purchase" individual columns or other features as small as a brick It was declared by the National Assembly that the state had the ultimate responsibility for funding.

 

Muted echoes of the Basilica's "tortured history" are still heard, geographer David Harvey has noted. In February 1971 demonstrators pursued by the police took refuge in the Basilica and called upon their radical comrades to join them in occupying a church "built upon the bodies of communards in order to efface that red flag that had for too long floated over Paris" as their leaflets expressed it.

 

The Basilica

 

Sacré-Cœur is built of travertine stone quarried in Château-Landon (Seine-et-Marne), France. This stone constantly exudes calcite, which ensures that the basilica remains white even with weathering and pollution.

 

The basilica complex includes a garden for meditation, with a fountain. The top of the dome is open to tourists and affords a spectacular panoramic view of the city of Paris, which is mostly to the south of the basilica.

 

The use of cameras and video recorders are forbidden inside the Basilica.

 

The organ

 

The basilica is home to a large and very fine pipe organ built by Aristide Cavaillé-Coll for a private home in Biarritz, composed of 109 ranks and 78 speaking stops spread across four 61-note manuals and the 32-note pedalboard (unusual before the start of the 20th century; the standard of the day was 56 and 30), spread across three expressive divisions (also unusual for the time, even in large organs); the organ was ahead of its time, containing multiple expressive divisions and giving the performer considerable advantages over other even larger instruments of the day. It was almost identical (tonal characteristics, layout, and casework) to the instrument in Sheffield's Albert Hall, destroyed by fire in 1934. However, when installed in Paris in 1905 by Cavaillé-Coll's successor and son-in-law, Charles Mutin, it lost its fine case for a much plainer one.

 

Role in Catholicism

 

In response to requests from French bishops, Pope Pius IX promulgated the feast of the Sacred Heart in 1856. The basilica itself was consecrated on 16 October 1919.

 

Since 1885 (before construction had been completed), the Blessed Sacrament (a consecrated host which, according to Church teaching, has become by the consecration of the priest Christ's Body and Blood during Mass) has been continually on display in a monstrance above the high altar. Perpetual adoration of the Blessed Sacrament has continued uninterrupted in the Basilica since 1885. Because of this, tourists and others are asked to dress appropriately when visiting the basilica and to observe silence as much as possible, so as not to disturb persons who have come from around the world to pray in this place of pilgrimage.

 

Access

 

The Basilica is accessible by bus. Buses 30, 31, 80, and 85 can be taken to the bottom of the hill of the Basilica. Line 12 of the metro can be taken to Jules Joffrin station and visitors can then change to the Montmartrobus and disembark at Place du Tertre. Line 2 or 12 of the metro can be taken to Pigalle station where visitors can change to the Montmartrobus and disembark at Norvins.

 

Sacré-Cœur is open from 06:00 to 22:30 every day. The dome is accessible from 09:00 to 19:00 in the summer and 18:00 in the winter

 

The building's origins

The original idea of constructing a church dedicated to the Sacred Heart, with its origins in the aftermath of the French Revolution among ultra-Catholics and legitimist royalists developed more widely in France after the Franco-Prussian War and the ensuing radical Paris Commune of 1870-71. Though today it is asserted to be dedicated in honor of the 58,000 who lost their lives during the war, the decree of the Assemblée nationale, 24 July 1873, responding to a request by the archbishop of Paris by voting its construction, specifies that it is to "expiate the crimes of the communards". Montmartre had been the site of the Commune's first insurrection, and many hard-core communards were forever entombed in the subterranean galleries of former gypsum mines where they had retreated, by explosives detonated at the entrances by the Army of Versailles. Hostages had been executed on both sides, and the Communards had executed Georges Darboy, Archbishop of Paris, who became a martyr for the resurgent Catholic Church. His successor Guibert, climbing the Butte Montmartre in October 1872, was reported to have had a vision, as clouds dispersed over the panorama: "It is here, it is here where the martyrs are, it is here that the Sacred Heart must reign so that it can beckon all to come". Today it is viewed as a tacit acknowledgement of the massacre of the communards by the Versailles army.

In the moment of inertia following the resignation of the government of Adolphe Thiers, 24 May 1873, François Pie, bishop of Poitiers, expressed the national yearning for spiritual renewal— "the hour of the Church has come"— that would be expressed through the "Government of Moral Order" of the Third Republic, which linked Catholic institutions with secular ones, in "a project of religious and national renewal, the main features of which were the restoration of monarchy and the defense of Rome within a cultural framework of official piety", of which Sacré-Coeur is the chief lasting monument.

The decree voting its construction as a "matter of public utility", 24 July, followed close on Thiers' resignation. The project was expressed by the Church as a National Vow (Voeu national) and financial support came from parishes throughout France. The dedicatory inscription records the Basilica as the accomplishment of a vow by Alexandre Legentil and Hubert Rohault de Fleury, ratified by Joseph-Hippolyte Guibert, Archbishop of Paris. The project took many years to complete.

Construction

In 1873 the city council of Paris voted a law of public utility to seize land at the summit of Montmartre for the construction of the basilica. Architect Paul Abadie designed the basilica after winning a competition over 77 other architects. With delays in assembling the property, The foundation stone was finally laid 16 June 1875. Passionate debates concerning the Basilica were raised in the Conseil Municipal in 1880, where the Basilica was called "an incessant provocation to civil war" and it was debated whether to rescind the law of 1873 granting property rights, an impracticable proposition. The matter reached the Chamber of Deputies in the summer of 1882, the Basilica being ably defended by Archbishop Guibert and Georges Clemenceau expressing the view that the Basilica sought to stigmatise the Revolution. The law was rescinded, but the Basilica was saved by a technicality and was not reintroduced in the next session. A further attempt to halt the construct levi is gayion was defeated in 1897, by which time the interior was substantially complete and had been opened

 

The overall style of the structure shows heavy Romano-Byzantine influence, an unusual architectural vocabulary that was a conscious reaction against the neo-Baroque excesses of the Opéra Garnier, which was cited in the competition.Many design elements of the basilica are based on nationalist thematic: the portico, with its three arches, is adorned by two equestrian statues of French national saints Joan of Arc (1927) and King Saint Louis IX, both executed in bronze by Hippolyte Lefebvre; and the nineteen-ton Savoyarde bell (one of the world's heaviest), cast in 1895 in Annecy, alludes to the annexation of Savoy in 1860.

 

Construction costs, entirely from private donations, estimated at 7 million French francs, were expended before any above-ground visible structure was to be seen. A provisional chapel was consecrated 3 March 1876, and pilgrimage donations quickly became the mainstay of funding. Donations were encouraged by the expedient of permitting donors to "purchase" individual columns or other features as small as a brick. It was declared by the National Assembly that the state had the ultimate responsibility for funding. Construction began in 1875 and was completed in 1914, although consecration of the basilica was delayed until after the First World War.

 

Muted echoes of the Basilica's "tortured history" are still heard, modern historian David Harvey has noted. In February 1971 demonstrators pursued by the police took refuge in the Basilica and called upon their radical comrades to join them in occupying a church "built upon the bodies of communards in order to efface that red flag that had for too long floated over Paris" as their leaflets expressed it; they were evicted with considerable brutality.

 

The Basilica

Sacré-Cœur is built of travertine stone quarried in Château-Landon (Seine-et-Marne), France. This stone constantly exudes calcite, which ensures that the basilica remains white even with weathering and pollution.

 

A mosaic in the apse, entitled Christ in Majesty, is among the largest in the world.

 

The basilica complex includes a garden for meditation, with a fountain. The top of the dome is open to tourists and affords a spectacular panoramic view of the city of Paris, which is mostly to the south of the basilica.

 

The organ

The basilica is home to a large (four manuals and pedals, 90 speaking stops) and very fine organ built by Aristide Cavaillé-Coll for a private home in Biarritz. It was almost identical (tonal characteristics, layout and casework) to the instrument in Sheffield's Albert Hall, destroyed by fire in 1934. However, when installed in Paris in 1905 by Cavaillé-Coll's successor and son-in-law, Charles Mutin, it lost its fine case for a much plainer one.

 

Role in Catholicism

In response to requests from French bishops, Pope Pius IX promulgated the feast of the Sacred Heart in 1856. The basilica itself was consecrated on October 16, 1919.

 

Since 1885 (before construction had been completed), the Blessed Sacrament (a consecrated host which has been turned into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ during Mass) has been continually on display in a monstrance above the high altar. Perpetual adoration of the Blessed Sacrament has continued uninterrupted in the Basilica since 1885. Because of this, tourists and others are asked to dress appropriately when visiting the basilica and to observe silence as much as possible, so as not to disturb persons who have come from around the world to pray in this special place.

 

In popular culture

The area before the basilica has featured in many films, notably in 2001 film Amélie (Le fabuleux destin d'Amélie Poulain). The basilica can also be seen in the window in background of the Audrey Hepburn film Sabrina while she is writing home to her father before returning home to America. It also appears in the opening shot of Ronin.

In the anime series Noir, the lead character Mireille Bouquet has a rendez-vous with Remi Breffort, a high profile member of the secret organization Les Soldats, inside the basilica.

 

The basilica is also mentioned in the song Evil and a Heathen by Scottish indie rock band Franz Ferdinand from their 2005 album You Could Have It So Much Better.

It appears famously at the end of C'était un rendez-vous, a short film which subsequently was used by the rock band Snow Patrol for their video "Open Your Eyes".

The music video for "Two Hearts Beat As One", by Irish rock band U2, was shot in the Basilica and around Montmartre.

In Danish singer-songwriter Tina Dico's fourth album release, Count To Ten, the sixth track is titled after and gives reference to the basilica.

Australian pop duo Savage Garden's newest music video for "Truly Madly Deeply" was shot there sometime in 1997.

 

Further reading

Jacques Benoist, Le Sacre-Coeur de Montmartre de 1870 a nos Jours (Paris) 1992. A cultural history from the point-of-view of a former chaplain.

Yvan Crist, "Sacré-Coeur" in Larousse Dictionnaire de Paris (Paris) 1964.

David Harvey. Consciousness and the Urban Experience: Studies in the History and Theory of Capitalist Urbanization. (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press) 1985.

David Harvey."The building of the Basilica of Sacré-Coeur", coda to Paris, Capital of Modernity (2003:311ff) Harvey made use of Hubert Rohault de Fleury. Historique de la Basilique du Sacré Coeur (1903-09), the official history of the building of the Basilica, in four volumes, printed, but not published.

Raymond A. Jonas. “Sacred Tourism and Secular Pilgrimage: Montmartre and the Basilica of Sacré-Coeur”. in Montmartre and the Making of Mass Culture. Gabriel P. Weisberg, editor. (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press) 2001.

 

"Der heutige Neoliberalismus macht als Ideologie nicht nur den Armen und Schwachen weis, sie wären an ihrem Elend selbst schuld. Er schafft es auch, dafür zu sorgen, dass das wahre Ausmaß der gesellschaftlichen Armut kaum je an die Öffentlichkeit dringt. Zur Frage, wie den Menschen der Geist vernebelt wird, um Widerstand gegen diese unmenschliche Ideologie weitestgehend unmöglich zu machen, sprach Jens Wernicke mit dem Wahrnehmungs- und Kognitionsforscher Rainer Mausfeld.

Jens Wernicke: Herr Mausfeld, Sie haben als Wahrnehmungs- und Kognitionsforscher vor Kurzem unerwartet so etwas wie ein wenig Berühmtheit erlangt, als ein Vortrag von Ihnen zur Frage „Warum schweigen die Lämmer?“ auf YouTube plötzlich auf immense Nachfrage stieß. Fast 200.000 Menschen haben ihn inzwischen gesehen und es werden nach wie vor mehr. Wie erklären Sie sich die immense Nachfrage nach ihm?

  

Rainer Mausfeld: Die Resonanz hat mich überrascht. Denn in der Form ist der Vortrag recht trocken und bisweilen auch akademisch. Inhaltlich versuche ich lediglich, einige Fakten aus einer bestimmten Perspektive in eine innere geistige Ordnung zu bringen. Vielleicht wird dies ja als hilfreich empfunden, da in der Flut fragmentierter Informationen, mit der wir gerade im gesellschaftlich-politischen Bereich konfrontiert sind, die Sinnzusammenhänge mehr und mehr verlorengehen und uns dadurch die Möglichkeit zu einer eigenständigen Meinungsbildung erschwert oder gar genommen wird.

  

Jens Wernicke: Wie kam es denn zu diesem Vortrag?

  

Rainer Mausfeld: Der Vortrag, der einige Themen aufgreift, die ich auch in Veranstaltungen des Psychologiestudiums anspreche, war nur für einen kleinen Kreis von Studenten und Freunden gedacht. Thematisch gehört der Vortrag ja nicht zu meinem Arbeitsbereich, der Wahrnehmungs- und Kognitionsforschung. Die Gemeinsamkeiten meines Arbeitsbereichs und des gesellschaftspolitischen Themas des Vortrags liegen denn auch weniger auf einer inhaltlichen als auf einer denkmethodologischen Ebene. Denn in der Grundlagenforschung wie im Bereich des Gesellschaftlich-Politischen können wir uns nur dann ein Stück Autonomie gegenüber dem jeweiligen Zeitgeist bewahren, wenn wir bei jedem Thema zunächst fragen, aus welchem ideengeschichtlichen und historisch-gesellschaftlichen Hintergrund es sich entwickelt hat und welche stillschweigenden Prämissen und welche verborgenen Vorurteile bereits in der Formulierung eines Themas oder einer Frage enthalten sind.

  

Zu einem solchen “Hinterfragen“ sind wir alle von Natur aus befähigt, man muss sich nur entschließen, von dieser Befähigung auch Gebrauch zu machen – das war ja gerade die Leitidee der Aufklärung. Das ist oft mühsam und bedarf der Übung, doch empfinden wir häufig ein Gefühl der Befriedigung, wenn wir den Sinnzusammenhang der Dinge besser verstehen.

  

Jens Wernicke: Und Übung braucht übrigens auch wieder Zeit, wodurch verständlich wird, warum es bezüglich der Fähigkeiten, Lügen und Manipulationen zu durchschauen, große gesellschaftliche Disparitäten gibt…

  

Rainer Mausfeld: Genau. Gerade in dieser Hinsicht haben Wissenschaftler eine besondere gesellschaftliche Verpflichtung. Sie sind geübt in der Beschaffung von Informationen und im Umgang mit Informationen. Sie verstehen zumeist, ihr Wissen in Rede und Schrift zu vermitteln. Und sie sind, oder sollten eigentlich, schon aus beruflichem Ethos der Wahrheit verpflichtet sein. Daraus ergibt sich eine gesellschaftliche Verantwortung, sich nicht zu scheuen, sich nötigenfalls auch mit der Macht und den ihr dienenden Ideologien anzulegen.

  

Die Realität sieht leider anders aus. Das liegt natürlich auch, nicht nur an den Universitäten, an den Karrieremechanismen. Verständlicherweise stoßen gerade im gesellschaftspolitischen Bereich ein Aussprechen der Wahrheit und die Konsequenzen unserer natürlichen Neugierde und Freude an Autonomie nicht bei allen auf Begeisterung. Wenn wir nämlich die Dinge besser verstehen, könnte es ja passieren, dass wir beginnen, Fragen zu stellen, die den Status des jeweiligen Establishments gefährden könnten.

  

Daher hat in jeder Gesellschaft und in jedem Bereich einer Gesellschaft das Establishment ein Interesse daran, dass Ausbildungsinstitutionen und Medien die Möglichkeiten eines Erkennens von Sinnzusammenhängen in geeigneten Grenzen halten. Fragmentierung – ob durch bildungsbürgerliches Wissen, durch eine PISA-orientierte Schulausbildung, durch ein “kompetenzorientiertes“ Studium oder durch Medien – ist also in diesem Sinne keineswegs Zufall, sondern ein beabsichtigter Prozess, eine Art Herrschaftsinstrument.

  

Jens Wernicke: Hat die Bologna-Reform an den Hochschulen dieses Problem womöglich noch weiter verschärft? Ich hatte vor einigen Jahren einmal auf den NachDenkSeiten argumentiert, die aktuellen Reformen seien wohl selbst als Herrschaftsinstrument beziehungsweise Etablierung neuer Herrschaftsmechanismen im Bildungsbereich zu verstehen…

  

Rainer Mausfeld: Ja, das hat sie, und zwar in einem Umfang und mit einer Systematik, wie wohl kein anderes Ereignis in der Geschichte der Bildung und Ausbildung. Im Gefolge der neoliberalen “Revolution von oben“ wurde auch das gesamte Bildungssystem ökonomischen Kategorien unterworfen. Die Aufgabe der Universität besteht nun in der marktkonformen Produktion von “Humankapital“.

  

Dazu korrespondierend besteht die Aufgabe der Studierenden darin, ihre “Fremdverwertbarkeitskompetenz“ zu optimieren, um so flexibel auf dem Arbeitsmarkt verwertbar zu sein. Die Verinnerlichung einer solchen Haltung und die Unterwerfung unter sie werden dann als “Selbstverwirklichung“ bezeichnet. Eine solche Pervertierung der Idee einer Entfaltung eigener Neigungen und Fähigkeiten führt zwangsläufig zu geistiger und psychischer Fragmentierung der Studierenden und auch zu großen Zukunftsängsten. Beides beeinträchtigt aus naheliegenden Gründen die Möglichkeit und die Bereitschaft, Dinge zu hinterfragen und führt zu Entpolitisierung, ja, politischer Lethargie…

  

Jens Wernicke: Das Gefühl von politischer Ohnmacht, oft verbunden mit latenter Verzweiflung oder gar Wut, scheint allerdings nicht nur unter Studierenden weit verbreitet zu sein, sondern aktuell geradezu zu grassieren; in fast jedem Milieu…

  

Rainer Mausfeld: Ja, und das ist auch kein Wunder. Denn das Ausbildungssystem ist nur ein Aspekt der sehr viel weitreichenderen und tiefergehenden aktuellen Indoktrinationssysteme. Da diese im Wortsinne inhuman sind, also Zielen dienen, die der Natur unseres Geistes und somit der Natur des Menschen zuwiderlaufen, gehen sie fast zwangsläufig mit gewaltigen psychischen Folgekosten einher.

  

Diese Indoktrinationssysteme könnte man als neoliberale Indoktrinationssysteme bezeichnen. Der Neoliberalismus zielt ja gerade darauf, Konsumenten zu produzieren, die in einer sozial atomisierten Gesellschaft nur noch als Konsumenten eine soziale Identität finden. Im pervertierten Freiheitsbegriff des Neoliberalismus bezieht sich die “Freiheit“ einer Person darauf, dass sie sich den Kräften des “freien Marktes“ zu unterwerfen hat, also von allen gesellschaftlichen und sozialen Banden “befreit“ und somit sozial und gesellschaftlich entwurzelt ist. Scheitert sie auf dem “Markt“, so darf sie dafür nicht gesellschaftliche Verhältnisse verantwortlich machen, sondern muss dies ihrem individuellen Versagen zuschreiben. Eine solche Haltung kann sie jedoch nur um den Preis psychischer Deformationen, insbesondere sozialer Ängste und Depressionen, einnehmen.

  

Durch entsprechende Indoktrinationssysteme kann man Menschen auch ohne Knebel zum Schweigen und zum Verstummen bringen, sie ihrer “gesunden“ Gegenwehr gegen krankmachende Verhältnisse weitestgehend berauben.

  

Ein Wandgemälde des mexikanischen Künstlers Diego Rivera zeigt Fabrikarbeiter am Fließband

Mehr lesen:30 Stunden sind genug! Warum es sinnvoll ist, die Arbeitszeit zu verkürzen

Jens Wernicke: Wie es der gute Bert Brecht einmal sagte: „Es gibt viele Arten zu töten. Man kann einem ein Messer in den Bauch stechen, einem das Brot entziehen, einen von einer Krankheit nicht heilen, einen in eine schlechte Wohnung stecken, einen durch Arbeit zu Tode schinden, einen zum Suizid treiben, einen in den Krieg führen usw. Nur weniges davon ist in unserem Staat verboten“…

  

Rainer Mausfeld: Nicht nur das. Man kann einen Menschen auch auf verschiedene Arten beeinflussen, ängstigen, manipulieren, verschrecken und dazu bringen, sich Einflüssen zu unterwerfen, die seinen vitalen Interessen diametral entgegenstehen. Nur, dass das eben nicht folgenlos bleibt.

  

Es wurde ja schon früher aufgezeigt, dass der Kapitalismus ein besonders hohes Maß psychischer Störungen mit sich bringt. Für die Gegenwart haben Richard Wilkinson und Kate Pickett dies in ihrem Buch „Gleichheit ist Glück“ noch einmal akribisch anhand einer Fülle quantitativer Daten aufgezeigt.

  

Gesellschaftlich verursachte Störungen wendet der Neoliberalismus nun aber perverserweise gegen das Individuum selbst, das nun dem Zwang unterworfen wird, sich durch geeignete Maßnahmen selbst besser fremdverwertbar zu “gestalten“. Das gilt für jede Art von Verhalten, das unverträglich mit der gewünschten Rolle eines Konsumenten ist.

  

Daher finden wir mit wachsendem Einfluss neoliberalen Denkens auch eine zunehmende Tendenz zu Disziplinierungsinstrumenten, etwa eine Tendenz zum “therapeutischen Staat“ und auch ein Anwachsen einer privaten Gefängnisindustrie. Unter allen Nationen weltweit sitzt in den USA der höchste prozentuale Anteil der Bevölkerung im Gefängnis. Die US-Bevölkerung macht 4,4 Prozent der Weltbevölkerung aus, stellt jedoch 22 Prozent aller Gefangenen weltweit.

  

Da der Neoliberalismus nur in dem Maße wirkmächtig sein kann, wie es ihm gelingt, Menschen ihren eigenen Interessen und ihren sozialen Zugehörigkeiten zu entfremden, benötigt er geeignete Disziplinierungsinstrumente, um die psychischen und sozialen Folgen dieser Entfremdung unter Kontrolle zu halten.

  

Jens Wernicke: Lassen Sie uns kurz zu den Kategorien Ihrer und unserer Kritik sprechen. Was genau verstehen Sie denn eigentlich unter „Neoliberalismus“? Was meint, was beschreibt das für Sie?

  

Rainer Mausfeld: Neoliberales Denken entstammt vielen und sehr heterogenen Quellen. Als eine einheitliche ökonomisch-gesellschaftliche Konzeption gibt es “den“ Neoliberalismus nicht. Es gibt jedoch den politisch organisierten und wirkmächtigen Neoliberalismus, also den real existierenden Neoliberalismus.

  

Dessen ideologische Konzeption lässt sich relativ leicht als das charakterisieren, was von den Eliten in den Medien – unterstützt durch propagandistische Think Tanks wie die Bertelsmann-Stiftung, die Initiative Neue Soziale Marktwirtschaft, das Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft und andere – und durch die wirtschaftswissenschaftlichen Fakultäten verbreitet wird. Die Codewörter hierfür sind hinreichend bekannt; typische Beispiele für den neoliberalen “Neusprech“ sind: „Liberalisierung“, „Reformen weiter treiben“, „Bürokratie abbauen“ oder „Austerität“.

  

Dieser Ideologie sucht man einen wissenschaftlichen Anstrich zu geben durch geeignete „ökonomische Theorien“, wie sie in den Seminarräumen wirtschaftswissenschaftlicher Fakultäten dargeboten werden. Diese Theorien beruhen aber auf theoretischen Absurditäten, auf Gebilden einer letztlich durch Umverteilungsbedürfnisse getriebenen intellektuellen Phantasie. Nämlich der Phantasie eines sich rational selbstregulierenden, “freien Marktes“, auf dem das Fiktionswesen Homo oeconomicus agiert – also der rationale und nutzenmaximierende Mensch, der über Kenntnisse aller denkbaren Entscheidungsoptionen verfügt und zugleich alle Konsequenzen seines Handelns überschauen kann.

  

Da die fundamentale Unangemessenheit einer solchen Konzeption des menschlichen Geistes für jeden, dessen Blick nicht ideologisch getrübt ist, sofort erkennbar ist, deklariert man diese Konzeption als ein idealisiertes mathematisches Modell, das dann den Vorteil hat, alle offenkundigen Diskrepanzen zur Realität mit der Geschmeidigkeit scholastischer Denkgebäude durch geeignete Zusatzannahmen in sich aufnehmen zu können.

  

Als ökonomische Theorie weist der Neoliberalismus so viele interne Widersprüche und Inkonsistenzen auf, dass er längst daran hätte zugrunde gehen müssen – er ist eine Art intellektueller Pathologie. Das wurde von ökonomischen Experten wieder und wieder aufgezeigt. Jüngst haben Philip Mirowski – in seinem Buch „Untote leben länger: Warum der Neoliberalismus nach der Krise noch stärker ist“ – und Wendy Brown – in „Die schleichende Revolution: Wie der Neoliberalismus die Demokratie zerstört“ dies noch einmal rekapituliert und aus unterschiedlichen Perspektiven aufbereitet. Aber auch hier wird wohl der Effekt wieder nahe bei Null liegen, denn der Neoliberalismus ist völlig immun gegen Argumente, ihm genügt es, dass er politisch wirkmächtig ist.

  

Mehr lesen:The Empire Files - Abby Martin interviewt Noam Chomsky

Jens Wernicke: Da hat die Wissenschaft, zumindest in diesem Bereich, ja offenbar die Rolle übernommen, die früher von der Kirche ausgeübt wurde: Wissenschaft als Religionsersatz. Im Dienste der jeweils materiell herrschenden Macht und deren ideologischer Legitimation… Können Sie für die genannten Widersprüche denn bitte ein konkretes Beispiel ausführen? Was meinen Sie genau?

  

Rainer Mausfeld: Nun, der fundamentale Widerspruch, zumindest im real existierenden Neoliberalismus, ist der zwischen dem in der neoliberalen Rhetorik so vielbesungenen “freien Markt“ und der Tatsache, dass der Neoliberalismus vor nichts eine größere Angst hat als vor einem wirklich freien Markt. Der “freie Markt“ ist nur für die ökonomisch Schwachen, ob Personen oder Staaten, gedacht, während die ökonomisch Starken, insbesondere Großkonzerne, durch staatliche Interventionen vor ebendiesen Kräften zu schützen sind. Der Neoliberalismus benötigt also für seine eigentlichen Ziele, nämlich die einer Umverteilung und beständigen Akkumulation, ganz wesentlich den starken Staat, der die “Marktfreiheit“ in seinem Sinne reguliert.

  

Ein Beispiel mit gravierenden Folgen sind die Agrarsubventionen. Die USA und die EU subventionieren ihre Landwirtschaft mit etwa 1 Milliarde Dollar pro Tag. Würden die reichen Länder diese Eingriffe in den „freien Markt“ abbauen, könnten die Entwicklungsländer ihre Agrarexporte um mehr als 20 Prozent und das Einkommen der ländlichen Bevölkerung um etwa 60 Milliarden Dollar pro Jahr erhöhen – ein Betrag, der größer ist als die gesamte Entwicklungshilfe der EU. Hinzu kommen Einfuhrbeschränkungen und andere Hürden, durch die die EU und die USA ihre Märkte gegen Importe aus Entwicklungsländern abschotten. Zugleich wird armen Nationen das Recht genommen, ihre Wirtschaft selbst zu gestalten. Die armen Länder müssen sich der „Marktdisziplin“ unterwerfen und ihre Märkte für transnationale Konzerne öffnen, für die sie dann ein Reservoir billiger Arbeitskräfte und Rohmaterialien werden, die reichen Länder betreiben Protektionismus. So sieht die Realität des „freien Marktes“ aus.

  

In der Tradition neoliberalen Denkens gibt es jedoch auch Varianten, die die Idee des freien Marktes wirklich ernst nehmen und jede Art staatlicher Intervention ablehnen, etwa Murray Rothbard oder in dessen Gefolge Walter Block und Hans-Hermann Hoppe. Diesen neoliberalen Denkern zufolge stellen auch Kinder nur eine Form von Eigentum dar und dürften somit auf dem freien Markt verkauft werden; zudem dürfe der Staat Eltern beispielsweise keine rechtliche Verpflichtung auferlegen, ihr Kind mit Nahrung zu versorgen.

  

Diese Denksysteme mögen – sieht man einmal von der Beliebigkeit und Absurdität ihrer Prämissen ab – als intellektuelle Übungsaufgabe eine gewisse innere Konsistenz aufweisen. Sie sind insofern lehrreich, als sie die Idee eines durch keine moralischen “Hemmnisse“ begrenzten, radikal freien Marktes zu ihrer logischen, zutiefst inhumanen Konsequenz führen. Nicht einmal die Reichen würden in einer solchen Dystopie einer Gesellschaft leben wollen.

  

Kurz: Der real existierende Neoliberalismus ist eigentlich seit je intellektuell bankrott. Dennoch ist er – als eine Art “Hausphilosophie“ der Reichen und Großkonzerne – politisch äußerst wirkungsmächtig.

  

Es gibt Neoliberalismus-Kritiker, wie Jamie Peck, die der Auffassung sind, dass der Neoliberalismus sein Gehirn schon lange verloren hat und sich nur seine Glieder noch reflexartig und zunehmend erratisch über den Globus bewegen. Zwangsläufig müsse er dabei immer autokratischere Züge annehmen.

  

Es gibt ja mittlerweile in dem globalen neoliberalen Feldexperiment reiche Erfahrungsdaten, die zeigen, dass der Neoliberalismus nicht nur die von ihm deklarierten Ziele – wie etwa Wachstum zu erzeugen oder den allgemeinen Wohlstand zu erhöhen – verfehlt. Besonders in der sogenannten Dritten Welt, und zunehmend auch in Europa, sind seine Folgen offenkundig. Jean Ziegler, der ehemalige UN-Sonderberichterstatter für das Recht auf Nahrung, stellt dazu fest: „Der deutsche Faschismus brauchte sechs Kriegsjahre, um 56 Millionen Menschen umzubringen – die neoliberale Wirtschaftsordnung schafft das locker in gut einem Jahr.“

  

Der Neoliberalismus erzeugt weltweit ein Desaster nach dem anderen. Aus jedem Desaster kommt er jedoch – in scheinbar paradoxer Weise – gestärkt hervor und wird sogleich wieder als “Therapie“ empfohlen. Offensichtlich nährt der Neoliberalismus nicht nur Krisen, sondern er nährt sich geradezu von Krisen und schlägt dabei noch aus seinen inneren Widersprüchen und Inkonsistenzen Kapital. Das wirft interessante Fragen nach seinen eigentlichen Zielen auf.

  

Jens Wernicke: Da muss ich an David Harvey denken, dessen wunderbare „Kleine Geschichte des Neoliberalismus“ folgender Klappentext ziert: „Längst kritisieren auch bekannte Wirtschaftswissenschaftler wie Joseph Stiglitz, ehemaliger Chefökonom der Weltbank, die ‚Auswüchse‘ des Neoliberalismus und beklagen die wachsende soziale Ungleichheit als dessen unerwünschtes Nebenprodukt. Falsch, sagt David Harvey: Weshalb kommt diesen Leuten denn ‚nie der Gedanke, dass die soziale Ungleichheit womöglich von Anfang an der Zweck der ganzen Übung war‘? Die neoliberale Wende, so Harvey, wurde in den 70er-Jahren zu dem alleinigen Zweck eingeleitet, die Klassenmacht einer gesellschaftlichen Elite wiederherzustellen, die befürchtete, dass ihre Privilegien nachhaltig beschnitten werden könnten“…

  

Rainer Mausfeld: Das ist genau der entscheidende Punkt. Nur wenn wir uns das klarmachen, können wir die politische Wirksamkeit dieser intellektuell bankrotten Ideologie verstehen. Tatsächlich zielt der Neoliberalismus gar nicht auf “freie Märkte“. Er zielt vielmehr auf eine radikale Umverteilung, und zwar von unten nach oben, von der öffentlichen in die private Hand und von Süd nach Nord.

  

Yanis Varoufakis. Quelle: RT Going Underground

Mehr lesen:RT Exklusiv: Yanis Varoufakis im Interview - "Systemmedien werden versuchen, euch zu zerfleischen"

Um das zu erreichen, muss er die ökonomisch Schwachen, seien es Individuen oder Staaten, ohne jeden Schutz den Kräften des “Marktes“ überlassen und zugleich dafür sorgen, dass den ökonomisch Starken durch einen starken Staat geeignete Rahmenbedingungen für eine Kapitalvermehrung bereitgestellt werden. Der Neoliberalismus, der immer bereit ist, staatliche Interventionen in die Wirtschaft, als sozialistisch geißeln, ist in Wahrheit eine Art Neoliberalsozialismus, ein Sozialismus für die Reichen nämlich, die er durch staatliche Regelungen vor den Marktkräften zu schützen sucht.

  

Er ist eine Revolution der Reichen gegen die Armen. Da die Armen aber die Mehrheit bilden, ist natürlich besonders in Demokratien eine solche Revolution mit Risiken behaftet. Es hilft daher außerordentlich, wenn man die Bevölkerung atomisiert, alle sozialen Bewegungen fragmentiert und partikularisiert und zugleich als Nutznießer der Umverteilung ein neues Klassenbewusstsein entwickelt.

  

Genau dies ist in den vergangenen Jahren sehr erfolgreich geschehen. Warren Buffets diesbezügliche Bemerkung von 2006 – „Es herrscht Klassenkrieg, richtig, aber es ist meine Klasse, die Klasse der Reichen, die Krieg führt, und wir gewinnen” – ist dabei nur in der Offenheit, nicht jedoch in der Sache als Ausrutscher zu verstehen. Das Kampflied in diesem Klassenkampf ist die Mär von den Segnungen eines “freien Marktes“, zu dessen Entfaltung alle staatlichen Interventionen abzubauen seien. Der Neoliberalismus würde natürlich bestreiten, dass er ein Krieg der Reichen gegen die Armen ist; und mit Recht könnte er dabei darauf verweisen, dass er ja schließlich ganz unparteiisch Reichtum und Armut gleichermaßen fördert.

  

Global kontrollieren die 500 größten Konzerne mittlerweile mehr als 50 Prozent des Weltbruttosozialprodukts. Die 85 reichsten Personen der Welt besitzen, wie Oxfam jüngst mitteilte, mehr als die ärmsten 50 Prozent der Weltpopulation zusammen, also als die ärmsten 3,6 Milliarden Menschen auf dieser Welt. Und bald werden die reichsten ein Prozent mehr als die Hälfte des Gesamtreichtums der Welt besitzen. Auch dies ist, so die neoliberale Mär, ein von niemandem absichtlich herbeigeführter, also auch von niemandem zu verantwortender Effekt der rationalen Naturgesetzlichkeiten des “freien Marktes“.

  

Wer dies kritisiert, bezeugt damit nur sein völliges Unverständnis dessen, was Naturgesetzlichkeiten sind. Denn auch zu denen gibt es ja keine Alternative. Der Neoliberalismus ist – nach dem europäischen Kolonialismus – das größte globale Umverteilungsprojekt der Geschichte. Da ist kaum überraschend, dass es beträchtlicher Indoktrinations- und Disziplinierungsanstrengungen bedarf, um die Bevölkerung gegen ihre tatsächlichen Erfahrungen und gegen ihre eigenen Interessen dazu zu bringen, dieses Kampflied hinzunehmen und sogar darin einzustimmen.

  

Jens Wernicke: Bitte führen Sie das doch ein wenig aus. Von welchen „Indoktrinationsmechanismen“ reden wir hier? Was meinen Sie damit?

  

Rainer Mausfeld: Nun, in einer Demokratie ist es wichtig, dass das eigentliche Ziel einer Umverteilung von unten nach oben für die Bevölkerung durch eine geeignete Indoktrination verdeckt und unsichtbar gemacht wird. Das ist hier nicht anders als etwa bei hegemonialen und imperialen Interessen, die für die Bevölkerung durch eine Rhetorik von “humanitärer Intervention“ oder “Demokratieförderung“ verdeckt werden.

  

In Demokratien wäre der Neoliberalismus politisch nicht überlebensfähig, wenn es ihm nicht gelänge, die Köpfe zu erobern und die öffentliche Meinung in seinem Sinne zu formen und zu kontrollieren. Dies kann nur auf der Basis von Indoktrinationssystemen geschehen, die psychologisch äußerst ausgefeilt sind und alle Bereiche unseres Lebens durchziehen.

  

Die Grundlagen für solche Indoktrinationssysteme werden seit je durch bereitwillige Intellektuelle bereitgestellt, die eher den Interessen der Mächtigen verpflichtet sind als der Wahrheit und die dafür in geeigneter Weise gefördert und belohnt werden. Stiftungen, “Denkfarmen“ oder “Think Tanks“ und NGO’s kommt dabei eine kaum zu überschätzende Bedeutung zu. Stiftungen und durch sie geförderte NGO’s haben im Neoliberalismus eine ganz zentrale Bedeutung, weil wirtschaftliche Eliten steuerbegünstigt privaten Reichtum in politische Macht umwandeln können, die sie dann mit dem Anstrich der Gemeinnützigkeit und Philanthropie veredeln.

  

Jens Wernicke: Wie läuft das ab, welche konkreten „Mechanismen“ gibt es da? Wie manipuliert man uns genau?

  

Mehr lesen:Wirtschaftssystem für das 1 Prozent - Neue Studie von Oxfam belegt: Die Welt wird immer ungerechter

Rainer Mausfeld: Es ist tatsächlich sehr schwer, sich von der Breite und von der Tiefe dieser Indoktrinationssysteme überhaupt eine Vorstellung zu bilden. Die Indoktrinationssysteme, die der Neoliberalismus entwickelt hat, sind die ausgefeiltesten und wirkungsmächtigsten, mit denen je eine politische Ideologie verbreitet wurde. Sie sind inzwischen so tief in allen Bereichen des gesellschaftlichen und auch privaten Lebens verankert, dass sie uns kaum noch auffallen. Sie stellen ganze Lebensformen und Weltsichten dar, wie sie im Wesentlichen durch US-amerikanische Eliten geprägt wurden und nicht zuletzt durch die Kultur- und Unterhaltungsindustrie als Selbstverständlichkeiten vermittelt werden. Die klassische Propaganda der ersten Hälfte des 20. Jahrhunderts, die bereits sehr wirkmächtig war, wirkt gegen diese neoliberalen Indoktrinationssysteme schlicht und geradezu naiv.

  

Dabei nutzt der Neoliberalismus das ganze Arsenal von Methoden und Strategien, die im Bereich gesellschaftlicher Manipulationstechniken bereits im klassischen Kapitalismus entwickelt worden sind. Also etwa die Möglichkeit, Fehlidentifikationen zu erzeugen, Konsumismus, Meinungsmanipulation durch Medien etc. Doch sind all diese Techniken enorm verfeinert worden und sind zumeist kaum noch als Indoktrinationstechniken erkennbar. Sie sind tief in allen Mechanismen der Herstellung von öffentlicher Meinung verankert – nicht nur in Politik, Medien oder politischen Stiftungen, sondern bis in den Erziehungs- und Kulturbereich. Gute Indoktrination, das war schon den Pionieren der Propaganda klar, darf nicht als solche erkennbar sein und muss geradezu als Selbstverständlichkeit oder Ausdruck des gesunden Menschenverstandes erscheinen.

  

„Was weiß ich schon von mir, wenn ich nicht weiß, dass das Bild, das ich von mir selbst habe, zum größten Teil ein künstliches Produkt ist und dass die meisten Menschen – ich schließe mich nicht aus – lügen, ohne es zu wissen? Was weiß ich, solange ich nicht weiß, dass ‚Verteidigung‘ Krieg bedeutet, ‚Pflicht‘ Unterwerfung, ‚Tugend‘ Gehorsam und ‚Sünde‘ Ungehorsam? Was weiß ich, solange ich nicht weiß, dass die Vorstellung, dass Eltern ihre Kinder instinktiv lieben, ein Mythos ist? Dass Ruhm nur selten auf bewundernswerte menschliche Qualitäten und häufig nicht auf echte Leistungen gründet? Dass die Geschichtsschreibung verzerrt ist, weil sie von den Siegern geschrieben wird? Dass betonte Bescheidenheit nicht unbedingt ein Beweis für fehlende Eitelkeit ist? Dass Liebe das Gegenteil von heftiger Sehnsucht und Gier ist? Was weiß ich schon von mir, wenn ich nicht weiß, dass jeder versucht, schlechte Absichten und Handlungen zu rationalisieren, um sie edel und wohltätig erscheinen zu lassen? Dass das Streben nach Macht bedeutet, Wahrheit, Gerechtigkeit und Liebe mit Füßen zu treten? Dass die heutige Industrie-Gesellschaft vom Prinzip der Selbstsucht, des Habens und des Konsumierens bestimmt ist und nicht von den Prinzipien der Liebe und Achtung vor dem Leben, die sie predigt? Wenn ich nicht fähig bin, die unbewussten Aspekte der Gesellschaft, in der ich lebe, zu analysieren, kann ich nicht wissen, wer ich bin, weil ich nicht weiß, in welcher Hinsicht ich nicht ich bin.“

Erich Fromm

  

„Es ist hohe Zeit, nicht nur von den großen Kriegen zu sprechen, sondern auch von dem kleinen Krieg, der den Alltag verwüstet und der keinen Waffenstillstand kennt: von dem Krieg im Frieden, seinen Waffen, Folterinstrumenten und Verbrechen, der uns langsam dazu bringt, Gewalt und Grausamkeit als Normalzustand zu akzeptieren. Krankenhäuser, Gefängnisse, Irrenhäuser, Fabriken und Schulen sind die bevorzugten Orte, an denen dieser Krieg geführt wird, wo seine lautlosen Massaker stattfinden, seine Strategien sich fortpflanzen – im Namen der Ordnung. Das große Schlachtfeld ist der gesellschaftliche Alltag. Was heißt das? Krankenhäuser und Pharmazeutika-Betriebe sind Quellen der Zerstörung.“

Franco Basaglia

  

„Die wissenschaftliche Funktion des Soziologen besteht (…) darin, die Gesellschaft in Frage zu stellen und sie dadurch zu zwingen, sich selbst zu verraten. Diejenigen aber, die im Namen des Ideals der ethischen Neutralität (…) darauf verzichten, der Gesellschaft jene Fragen zu stellen, die sie in Frage stellen könnten, verraten die Wissenschaft: (…) Die Behauptung, der Soziologe könne seine Einstellung zur Gesellschaft frei wählen, verschweigt, dass die Sozialwissenschaften nur solange in der Illusion der Neutralität leben können, wie sie nicht wahrhaben wollen, dass ihre Enthüllungen oder ihr Verschweigen immer jemandem dienen: entweder den Nutznießern oder den Opfern der Sozialordnung.“

Pierre Bourdieu

  

„Die Intellektuellen dienen der herrschenden Klasse als ‚Angestellte‘. Sie sind für die Vielzahl subalterner Aufgaben der gesellschaftlichen Hegemonie und der politischen Regierung zuständig, das heißt 1. für die ‚spontane‘ Zustimmung der großen Masse der Bevölkerung zum gesellschaftlichen Leben der herrschenden Hauptgruppe, eine Zustimmung, die sich ‚historisch‘ aus dem Prestige (…) ableitet, das der herrschenden Gruppe aufgrund ihrer Position und Funktion im Produktionsbereich zufällt; und 2. für den staatlichen Zwangsapparat, der ‚gesetzlich‘ die Disziplinierung der Gruppen sicherstellt, die aktiv oder passiv ‚die Zustimmung verweigern‘ – dieser Apparat ist aber für die gesamte Gesellschaft geschaffen, in Voraussicht von Herrschafts- und Führungskrisen, in denen die ‚spontane‘ Zustimmung nachlässt.“

Antonio Gramsci

  

„Nur wenn wir uns entschließen, uns unseres Verstandes zu bedienen und unsere induzierte moralische Apathie überwinden, und nicht mehr bereit sind, die Illusion der Informiertheit, die Illusion der Demokratie, die Illusion der Freiheit, uns mit diesen Illusionen zufrieden zu geben, haben wir eine Chance, diesen Manipulationstechniken zu entgehen.“

Rainer Mausfeld

  

Jens Wernicke: Können Sie konkrete Beispiele für Verfeinerungen nennen?

  

Rainer Mausfeld: Das würde in recht technische Bereiche der Psychologie führen. Unabhängig von solchen konkreten Befunden ist es jedoch grundsätzlich wichtig, sich klarzumachen, dass sich in der Operationsweise unseres Geistes eine Vielzahl von kognitiven, affektiven und sozialen Dispositionen findet, die sich für eine Meinungs-, Gefühls- und Verhaltenssteuerung nutzen lassen.

  

In einem Manipulationskontext kann man sie also als Schwachstellen ansehen, die gleichsam als “Hintertüren“ zu den Mechanismen unseres Geistes wirken, durch die man, ohne dass wir es bemerken, unsere Aufmerksamkeit lenken sowie unser Denken und Fühlen beeinflussen, unsere Empörung auslösen oder auch verstummen lassen kann.

  

Manipulationstechniken sitzen also gleichsam parasitär auf Schwachstellen unseres Geistes auf. Sie sind dabei stets so beschaffen, dass sie das Scheinwerferlicht unseres Bewusstseins unterlaufen, also von uns praktisch nicht bemerkt werden, so dass es uns auch schwer fällt, uns gegen sie zu schützen.

  

All das ist in der Wissenschaft – und damit im Effekt auch den herrschenden Eliten – bekannt, kaum jedoch in der Öffentlichkeit. Diese folgenschwere Asymmetrie des Wissens um Manipulationsschwachstellen unseres Geistes muss dringend beseitigt werden. Wir haben nur dann eine Chance, uns gegen derartige Manipulationen zur Wehr zu setzen, wenn wir uns bewusst werden, auf welche unserer Schwachstellen solche Manipulationen zielen.

  

Jens Wernicke: Auch wenn das in Summe sicher zu sehr in Details führen würde. Aber können Sie vielleicht ein konkretes Beispiel für eine solche Schwachstelle für Manipulationen, für den Ablauf und die Wirkung derselben, skizzieren?

  

Rainer Mausfeld: In den vergangenen Jahrzehnten haben sich die politischen Eliten verstärkt darum bemüht, entsprechende Einsichten und Befunde psychologischer Forschung für ihre Zwecke politisch nutzbar zu machen, indem man „sanfte“ Herrschaftstechniken zu entwickeln sucht, mit denen man Menschen gleichsam einen „Schubs“ in die gewünschte Richtung geben kann.

  

Ich will versuchen, ein Beispiel zu nennen, das sich im Kern relativ einfach beschreiben lässt, nämlich unsere natürliche Disposition zu Verzerrungen unserer Urteile über die jeweils gegebene gesellschaftliche Situation. Diese Verzerrungen werden in der wissenschaftlichen Literatur als „status quo bias“ bezeichnet. Sie sind in der Psychologie gut untersucht, sind von hoher gesellschaftlicher Relevanz und lassen sich über eine Reihe von Variablen modifizieren und steuern, also manipulieren. Sie beziehen sich auf unsere natürliche Neigung, den jeweiligen Zustand der Gesellschaft, in der wir leben, als gut, gerecht, moralisch legitim, erstrebenswert usw. anzusehen.

  

Wir neigen dazu, den gesellschaftlichen Status quo allen Alternativen vorzuziehen, und zwar auch dann, wenn diese objektiv besser sind. Wir sind unserer Natur nach Anhänger des Status quo. Das gilt natürlich nicht für jede einzelne Person, doch ist es in der Tendenz ein stabiles Phänomen, das sich in allen Gesellschaften nachweisen lässt. Eine solche psychische Disposition ist in der Regel – und solange sie nicht von außen manipuliert wird – eine durchaus wünschenswerte Eigenschaft für die Organisation unseres Zusammenlebens. Sie geht, wie viele psychologische Studien gezeigt haben, mit weiteren psychologischen Tendenzen einher, die ebenfalls hohe gesellschaftliche Relevanz haben. Beispielsweise sind wir immer bereit, die Nachteile des Status quo kleinzureden und Geschichten zu erfinden, die seine Nachteile in einem günstigeren Licht erscheinen lassen. Damit einhergehend haben wir eine Neigung, den gesellschaftlichen Opfern des Status quo selbst die Schuld für ihre Situation zu geben. Zugleich neigen wir dazu, diejenigen eher negativ einzuschätzen, die den Status quo verändern wollen.

  

Wie stark diese Neigung zur Verteidigung des Status quo ausgeprägt ist, hängt von einer Vielzahl von kognitiven, affektiven und sozialen Variablen ab. Beispielsweise wird sie erhöht durch Ängste und das Gefühl von Unsicherheit und Bedrohung. Ebenso wird sie erhöht, wenn man von einem bewussten Nachdenken systematisch abgelenkt wird – sei es durch Zeitdruck oder Darbietung irrelevanter Themen – oder wenn stereotype und schlichte Begrifflichkeit für eine kognitive Einordnung der gesellschaftlichen Verhältnisse vorgegeben wird. Ebenso erhöht sich tendenziell diese Neigung, wenn eine Situation als unausweichlich empfunden wird. All diese Variablen lassen sich relativ einfach von außen manipulieren, ohne dass uns diese Manipulationen überhaupt bewusst werden. Dadurch bieten derartige Variablen ein sehr wirkungsvolles Einfallstor, um die Status quo-Neigung der Bevölkerung im gewünschten Sinne zu manipulieren.

  

In dieser Hinsicht bietet der Neoliberalismus eine für seine Ziele sehr vorteilhafte Kombination derartiger Einflussvariablen: Kognitiv basiert er auf einer sehr schlichten Begrifflichkeit – „Märkte öffnen“, „Strukturreformen durchführen, „Bürokratie abbauen“ etc. – und nutzt zugleich eine geradezu überwältigende Fülle von Möglichkeiten, durch die sich Personen von einem tieferen Nachdenken über gesellschaftliche Verhältnisse ablenken lassen. Die meisten Themen in den Massenmedien dienen genau hierzu. Und affektiv geht er einher mit einem durch die Lebensverhältnisse bedingten hohen Maß an Zeitdruck, Stress und sozialen Ängsten sowie mit einem Gefühl der Unausweichlichkeit; denn in seiner Naturgewalten-Metaphorik kann es natürlich zu den „Naturgesetzlichkeiten“ des Marktes keine Alternativen geben. Diese Determinanten lassen sich, wenn man in die Details einzelner Variablen geht, noch sehr viel feiner gestalten und ihre Effekte optimieren. Über all dies lassen sich die nachteiligen gesellschaftlichen Folgen des Status quo kognitiv „unsichtbar machen“, sodass der Status quo stabilisiert wird und das Bedürfnis nach Alternativen verkümmert.

  

Mehr lesen:Der ultimative Mainstreammedien-Guide von RT Deutsch - Teil 5: Tageszeitungen

Jens Wernicke: Und welche Rolle spielen denn die Medien im Kontext dieser Indoktrination?

  

Rainer Mausfeld: Naheliegenderweise eine ganz zentrale. Sie sind im Wortsinne das Medium der Indoktrination. Das ist wieder und wieder in aller Breite und Tiefe untersucht werden. Noam Chomsky hat ja bei der Beschreibung und Analyse von Indoktrinationssystemen und der Rolle der Medien Pionierarbeit geleistet. Die Leitmedien sind wiederum personell wie ideologisch eng mit Think Tanks, Stiftungen und “relevanten“ politischen und ökonomischen Kreisen verbunden, so dass sich das neoliberale Indoktrinationssystem gleichsam durch sich selbst stabilisiert.

  

Die neoliberale Indoktrination wird ja dadurch erleichtert, dass der real existierende Neoliberalismus eine besonders radikale Möglichkeit einer Komplexitätsreduktion anbietet. Man kann sich sein Mantra ideologisch rasch aneignen. Wenn man erst den neoliberalen Jargon beherrscht – “Bürokratie abbauen“, „Reformen weitertreiben“ etc. -, benötigt man für eine hohe Meinungskonfidenz keinen besonderen ökonomischen Sachverstand mehr. Das macht den real existierenden Neoliberalismus für Journalisten und andere aus dem meinungsbildenden Gewerbe so attraktiv. Mit ihm kann man sich in gleichsam vorauseilendem Opportunismus den Herrschenden andienen und so zumindest symbolisch ein Stückchen an der Macht partizipieren.

  

Dieser Opportunismus ist vorauseilend, weil er nicht nur konkret geäußerte Erwartungen der herrschenden Eliten erfüllt, sondern sich zudem vorstellt, welche Erwartungen die Eliten darüber hinaus noch haben könnten. Er sucht also zu erfühlen und auszuformulieren, was die herrschenden Eliten eher instinktiv fühlen als denken.

  

Jens Wernicke: Wenn diese Indoktrinationsmechanismen so wirkungsvoll sind und so gut in allen meinungsbildenden Institutionen verankert sind, müssten doch eigentlich offen autoritäre Strukturen überflüssig sein. Warum wird dann immer wieder davor gewarnt, dass der Neoliberalismus zu einer offen autoritären Herrschaftsform zu werden droht?

  

Rainer Mausfeld: Die Warnung ist berechtigt, denn eine solche Gefahr ergibt sich zwangsläufig aus dem Wesen und den Zielen des Neoliberalismus. Solange er jedoch seine Ziele innerhalb von Strukturen erreichen kann, die formal als demokratisch angesehen werden können, also innerhalb einer „marktkonformen Demokratie“, ist dies günstiger. Und innerhalb dieses Rahmens gibt es noch viel Spielraum bei der Entwicklung verdeckt autoritärer Strukturen.

  

Besonders wirksam ist dabei eine über undemokratische Mechanismen erfolgte Verrechtlichung von Umverteilungsmechanismen. Das Recht ist ja seit je ein sehr wirkungsvolles Instrument, um gesellschaftliches Unrecht gegen eine Kritik durch die Bevölkerung zu immunisieren. Schon der europäische Kolonialismus hat mit einem Kolonialrecht seine genozidalen Formen der Umverteilung verrechtlicht.

  

Der Neoliberalismus ist, will er auf den demokratischen Anschein nicht verzichten, also geradezu darauf angewiesen, dass die Umverteilungsmechanismen von unten nach oben und von der öffentlichen in die private Hand auf allen Ebenen – von der EU bis zu den Kommunen – zunehmend verrechtlicht werden. Besonders die Schaffung eines geeigneten internationalen Rechts ist dabei erfolgversprechend. Daher bemüht sich eine transatlantische Nomenklatura um die Entwicklung geeigneter internationaler Rechtsnormen wie eben TTIP, TISA, CETA etc. und um deren Umsetzung durch machtvolle neoliberale Institutionen wie den IWF.

  

Eine Verrechtlichung von gesellschaftlichem Unrecht muss, aus naheliegenden Gründen, unter Ausschluss der Öffentlichkeit, auch der parlamentarischen, erfolgen und jeder Art von demokratischer Kontrolle entzogen sein. Zusätzlich zu einer Verrechtlichung schafft der Neoliberalismus Mechanismen, durch die sich die von ihm geschützten Marktteilnehmer, also vor allem die Großkonzerne, bestehenden Rechtsnormen entziehen können. Die Maxime “too big to fail“ hat ja einen tieferen Kern. Nämlich, dass es Verbrechen gibt, deren Wurzeln zu tief mit Grundlagen unserer herrschenden Ordnung verwoben sind und die zu monströs sind, als dass sie innerhalb der jeweiligen Rechtsordnung überhaupt justitiabel sein könnten. Daher gilt die sogenannte Finanzkrise eben als “Krise“ und nicht als das, was sie tatsächlich ist, nämlich im Wortsinne ein „Kapitalverbrechen“.

  

Es ist also möglich, den Anschein autokratischer Strukturen dadurch zu vermeiden, dass die Ergebnisse der schleichenden Erosion demokratischer Strukturen in geeigneter Weise so verrechtlicht werden, dass die formale Hülse einer Demokratie für die Bevölkerung intakt erscheint. Diese Art von “sanfter“ und vordergründig demokratisch legitimierter Autokratie des Kapitals schwebt neoliberalen Denkern vermutlich als ideale Form einer gesellschaftlichen “Konfliktlösung“ vor. Die Verrechtlichung neoliberaler Strukturen stellt also eine Art Samthandschuh unter den Herrschaftstechniken dar, durch den sich offen autokratische Formen erst einmal vermeiden lassen.

  

Jens Wernicke: Das beantwortet aber noch nicht die Frage, warum viele die Sorge haben, dass der Neoliberalismus eine offen autoritäre Form annehmen, also zur eisernen Faust werden könnte.

  

Rainer Mausfeld: Das ist richtig. Zunächst zeigt uns ja die Geschichte, von Chile bis Griechenland, dass der Neoliberalismus, wenn alle “sanften“ Indoktrinations- und Disziplinierungsmechanismen nicht greifen, auch vor autoritären Maßnahmen nicht zurückschreckt. Sein erstes Feldexperiment war schließlich Chile unter Pinochet.

  

Angesichts der brutalen gesellschaftlichen Folgen des Umverteilungsprozesses muss der Neoliberalismus Reaktionen der Bevölkerung erwarten, die zur Sicherung seiner Stabilität offen autoritäre Maßnahmen erforderlich machen könnten. Er ist also darauf angewiesen, die Verfolgung seiner Ziele durch die Entwicklung geeigneter Disziplinierungsinstrumente bis hin zum Aufbau eines autoritären Sicherheitsstaates zu flankieren. Dazu bedient er sich gerne jeder Art von Bedrohungsszenarien, um in der Bevölkerung die Bereitschaft zu erhöhen, demokratische Substanz abzuschaffen.

  

Die Fundamente für einen autoritären Sicherheitsstaat werden ja bereits geschaffen, rechtlich wie auch technisch durch den Überwachungsapparat, durch die Vorbereitung eines Bundeswehreinsatzes im Innern, durch das Schleifen der strikten Trennung der Aufgaben von Polizei, Militär und Geheimdiensten, durch die hartnäckigen Vorbereitungsarbeiten namhafter Verfassungs- und Strafrechtler an einem “Feindstrafrecht“ etc. pp..

  

Renommierte Verfassungs- und Strafrechtler arbeiten bereits seit Langem an den Grundlagen eines Sicherheitsstaates und der Entwicklung eines Feindstrafrechtes. Mit einem solchen Feindstrafrecht können dann Bürger, die als „unsichere Kantonisten“ und als „aktuelle Unpersonen“ anzusehen sind, „kaltgestellt“ werden. Zudem soll in besonderen Situationen zur Gefahrenabwehr auch eine „Rettungsfolter“ erlaubt sein.

  

Prominenter Befürworter der Entwicklung eines Feindstrafrechtes ist der Verfassungsrechtler Otto Depenheuer, der auch Ideenlieferant für Wolfgang Schäuble ist. Es ist aufschlussreich und nicht zufällig, dass wir sowohl in der Geschichte des Neoliberalismus wie auch in der des autoritären Sicherheitsstaates immer wieder auf die Einflüsse von Carl Schmitt, des „Kronjuristen des Dritten Reiches“, stoßen, so auch hier, bei Depenheuer.

  

In der Person von Wolfgang Schäuble laufen die beiden Stränge “Neoliberalismus“ und “Sicherheitsstaat“ dann in klar erkennbarer Weise zusammen.

Die rechtlichen Hülsen sind also vorbereitet; sie lassen sich leicht nutzen, wenn die herrschenden Eliten einmal der Auffassung sein sollten, dass bestehende demokratische Strukturen den “Notwendigkeiten“ des Marktes und den zu seiner Sicherung nötigen internationalen “Vereinheitlichungen“ im Wege stehen.

  

Jens Wernicke: Und wie können wir dem etwas entgegensetzen? Was ist gegen eine solche Entwicklung zu tun?

  

Rainer Mausfeld: Abgesehen von einigen Selbstverständlichkeiten kann es, denke ich, darauf keine einfachen Antworten geben. Die Selbstverständlichkeiten beziehen sich vor allem darauf, dass wir alle Blockaden entfernen müssen, die uns darin hindern, einfache, grundlegende Fakten zu erkennen und anzuerkennen. Sodann müssen wir bereit sein, unseren Willen und unsere Entschlossenheit zu artikulieren, inhumane gesellschaftliche Zustände und Strukturen zu ändern.

  

Das sind, wie gesagt, eigentlich Selbstverständlichkeiten, doch wäre schon viel erreicht, wenn sie beachtet würden. Eine darüber hinausgehende, allgemeine Antwort zu Methoden und Zielen kann es nach meiner Überzeugung nicht geben. Das ist ein Prozess, in dem im Kontext der jeweiligen gesellschaftlichen Situation Antworten gleichsam von unten gefunden werden müssen. Wie immer diese Antworten aussehen mögen: Sie haben keine Chance, politisch wirkmächtig zu werden, wenn es nicht gelingt, die tiefgehende Fragmentierung sozialer Beziehungen zu überwinden und eine gemeinsame Basis für einen politisch kraftvollen Zusammenschluss sozialer Bewegungen zu finden.

  

Für diese Aufgabe bleibt uns wohl nicht mehr viel Zeit. Die alte Strategie, die gewaltigen sozialen und ökologischen Folgekosten des Kapitalismus, besonders seiner neoliberalen Extremform, späteren Generationen aufzubürden, kommt an ihre natürlichen Grenzen. Es bleiben uns wohl nur zwei Möglichkeiten: Wir befreien uns, so mühsam es sein wird, aus den Fesseln neoliberaler Indoktrinationssysteme, stellen uns den Fakten und suchen gemeinsam nach Möglichkeiten von Änderungen – die freilich angesichts des ökologischen Zeitdrucks nur radikal sein können. Oder wir machen weiter wie bisher, schweigen und überlassen es nachfolgenden Generationen über die Gründe unseres Nicht-Handels und unseres Schweigens nachzudenken.

  

Jens Wernicke: Noch ein letztes Wort?

  

Rainer Mausfeld: Ja, eine Gefahr für diesen Prozess, Empörung und Unbehagen über gesellschaftliche Verhältnisse in politisch wirksamer Weise Ausdruck zu verleihen, möchte ich noch ansprechen. Nämlich die Gefahr, sie dadurch politisch weitgehend wirkungslos zu machen, dass sie sich nicht auf strukturelle Aspekte, sondern allein auf “die da oben“, also auf personelle Aspekte richten.

  

Bei gesellschaftlichen und politischen Themen ist ja die Perspektive weit verbreitet, den Blick auf “die da oben“ zu beschränken und sich darüber zu empören, wie man von diesen betrogen, hintergangen und ausgebeutet wird: “Die da oben“ sind moralisch verkommen, verlogen und schamlos auf ihren Vorteil bedacht, sie sind die Täter; wir hingegen sind nur ihre Opfer.

  

Das ist eine psychologisch nachvollziehbare und politisch durchaus berechtigte Perspektive. Da sie von der überwiegenden Mehrzahl der Bevölkerung in der einen oder anderen Weise geteilt wird, ohne dass sich dies in entsprechender Weise in den Ergebnissen von Wahlen niederschlägt, sollten wir aber darüber nachdenken, ob nicht die politische Wirkungskraft einer solchen Perspektive sehr begrenzt ist.

In jedem Fall geht eine Beschränkung des Blicks auf “die da oben“ vorbei an der Natur des tatsächlichen Problems, um das es geht, nämlich an den strukturellen und institutionellen Ursachen einer zerstörerischen und inhumanen Wirtschafts- und Gesellschaftsform.

  

Daher ist es aus Sicht der herrschenden Eliten sogar gewollt und erwünscht, dass sich die Bevölkerung über die Gier von Bankern, die Verlogenheit von Politikern, die intellektuelle Korruptheit von Journalisten oder die Grausamkeit oder den Sadismus von Folterexperten ereifert – also über Eigenschaften von Personen, die gerade das Produkt tieferliegender, struktureller Bedingungen sind und in deren Kontext geradezu Qualifikationsmerkmale darstellen – und dabei die strukturellen und institutionellen Ursachen und somit die eigentlichen Zentren der Macht aus dem Blick verliert!

Unsere vordringliche Aufgabe ist es daher, Einsichten in diese strukturellen Bedingungen zu gewinnen.

  

Dazu gehört auch, das Wesen und die eigentlichen Ziele des Neoliberalismus zu verstehen. Dann aber müssen wir den Blick auch auf uns richten und uns fragen, warum wir auf ein totalitäres Denksystem mit so zerstörerischen Folgen nicht mit einer angemessenen moralischen Empörung und entsprechenden Handlungskonsequenzen reagieren. Solange die herrschenden Eliten sehr viel mehr Wissen über uns, über unsere natürlichen Bedürfnisse, Neigungen und unsere Schwachstellen für eine Manipulierbarkeit verfügen als wir selbst, solange werden sie über uns eine Form der unsichtbaren Herrschaft ausüben können, gegen die wir uns kaum wehren können. Den Blick auf uns zu richten, bedeutet zugleich zu erkennen – und das ist ganz im Sinne der Aufklärung –, dass wir es sind, die für unser Handeln und Nicht-Handeln und für die Gesellschaft, in der wir leben, verantwortlich sind.

  

Jens Wernicke: Ich bedanke mich für das Gespräch.

  

Rainer Mausfeld, geboren 1949, studierte Psychologie, Mathematik und Philosophie in Bonn. Er ist Professor für Allgemeine Psychologie an der Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel und arbeitet im Bereich der Wahrnehmungs- und Kognitionsforschung.

  

Dieser Text erschien zuerst auf "NachDenkSeiten - die kritische Website". Die Zweitveröffentlichung durch uns erfolgt im Rahmen der Creative Commons Lizenz 2.0 Non-Commercial, unter welcher er publiziert wurde.

(aus deutsch.rt.com/meinung/36435-interview-mit-rainer-mausfel...)

  

CCF11042014_00003B

been having difficult and weird days down here at ted towers... and the same seems to go for the world at the moment... and was thinking about the img on the right, how darn angry it is. many of us can relate to that anger but truly if we're ever going to get along i guess we need to send out some love

 

shout it out, loud and proud

 

"WE LOVE YOU TORY CUNT"

 

remember, tory cunts need love too. in fact by point of fact of being tory cunts they probably need more love than anyone else if we're going to help them get over that madness they've constructed by way of a world view.

 

and heres some 101 crisis of capitalism from the esteemed david harvey:

comment.rsablogs.org.uk/2010/06/28/rsa-animate-crisis-cap...

   

Archive

Edit by Aviary

Location

-- wahrscheinlich ist aber auch die Bezeichnung

"Mons Martis" (Marshügel) - Montmartre

 

Schon im 12. Jahrhundert errichtete der Orden der Benediktiner in Montmartre ein Kloster (1790 zerstört). Die ehemalige Abtei- und heutige Pfarrkirche Saint-Pierre de Montmartre ist eine der ältesten Sakralbauten von Paris.

 

The abbey was destroyed in 1790 during the French Revolution, and the convent demolished to make place for gypsum mines. The church of Saint-Pierre was saved

 

°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

It is 130 metres high

 

de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montmartre

 

The building's origins

The original idea of constructing a church dedicated to the Sacred Heart, with its origins in the aftermath of the French Revolution among ultra-Catholics and legitimist royalists developed more widely in France after the Franco-Prussian War and the ensuing radical Paris Commune of 1870-71. Though today it is asserted to be dedicated in honor of the 58,000 who lost their lives during the war, the decree of the Assemblée nationale, 24 July 1873, responding to a request by the archbishop of Paris by voting its construction, specifies that it is to "expiate the crimes of the communards". Montmartre had been the site of the Commune's first insurrection, and many hard-core communards were forever entombed in the subterranean galleries of former gypsum mines where they had retreated, by explosives detonated at the entrances by the Army of Versailles. Hostages had been executed on both sides, and the Communards had executed Georges Darboy, Archbishop of Paris, who became a martyr for the resurgent Catholic Church. His successor Guibert, climbing the Butte Montmartre in October 1872, was reported to have had a vision, as clouds dispersed over the panorama: "It is here, it is here where the martyrs are, it is here that the Sacred Heart must reign so that it can beckon all to come". Today it is viewed as a tacit acknowledgement of the massacre of the communards by the Versailles army.

In the moment of inertia following the resignation of the government of Adolphe Thiers, 24 May 1873, François Pie, bishop of Poitiers, expressed the national yearning for spiritual renewal— "the hour of the Church has come"— that would be expressed through the "Government of Moral Order" of the Third Republic, which linked Catholic institutions with secular ones, in "a project of religious and national renewal, the main features of which were the restoration of monarchy and the defense of Rome within a cultural framework of official piety", of which Sacré-Coeur is the chief lasting monument.

The decree voting its construction as a "matter of public utility", 24 July, followed close on Thiers' resignation. The project was expressed by the Church as a National Vow (Voeu national) and financial support came from parishes throughout France. The dedicatory inscription records the Basilica as the accomplishment of a vow by Alexandre Legentil and Hubert Rohault de Fleury, ratified by Joseph-Hippolyte Guibert, Archbishop of Paris. The project took many years to complete.

Construction

In 1873 the city council of Paris voted a law of public utility to seize land at the summit of Montmartre for the construction of the basilica. Architect Paul Abadie designed the basilica after winning a competition over 77 other architects. With delays in assembling the property, The foundation stone was finally laid 16 June 1875. Passionate debates concerning the Basilica were raised in the Conseil Municipal in 1880, where the Basilica was called "an incessant provocation to civil war" and it was debated whether to rescind the law of 1873 granting property rights, an impracticable proposition. The matter reached the Chamber of Deputies in the summer of 1882, the Basilica being ably defended by Archbishop Guibert and Georges Clemenceau expressing the view that the Basilica sought to stigmatise the Revolution. The law was rescinded, but the Basilica was saved by a technicality and was not reintroduced in the next session. A further attempt to halt the construct levi is gayion was defeated in 1897, by which time the interior was substantially complete and had been opened

 

The overall style of the structure shows heavy Romano-Byzantine influence, an unusual architectural vocabulary that was a conscious reaction against the neo-Baroque excesses of the Opéra Garnier, which was cited in the competition.Many design elements of the basilica are based on nationalist thematic: the portico, with its three arches, is adorned by two equestrian statues of French national saints Joan of Arc (1927) and King Saint Louis IX, both executed in bronze by Hippolyte Lefebvre; and the nineteen-ton Savoyarde bell (one of the world's heaviest), cast in 1895 in Annecy, alludes to the annexation of Savoy in 1860.

 

Construction costs, entirely from private donations, estimated at 7 million French francs, were expended before any above-ground visible structure was to be seen. A provisional chapel was consecrated 3 March 1876, and pilgrimage donations quickly became the mainstay of funding. Donations were encouraged by the expedient of permitting donors to "purchase" individual columns or other features as small as a brick. It was declared by the National Assembly that the state had the ultimate responsibility for funding. Construction began in 1875 and was completed in 1914, although consecration of the basilica was delayed until after the First World War.

 

Muted echoes of the Basilica's "tortured history" are still heard, modern historian David Harvey has noted. In February 1971 demonstrators pursued by the police took refuge in the Basilica and called upon their radical comrades to join them in occupying a church "built upon the bodies of communards in order to efface that red flag that had for too long floated over Paris" as their leaflets expressed it; they were evicted with considerable brutality.

 

The Basilica

Sacré-Cœur is built of travertine stone quarried in Château-Landon (Seine-et-Marne), France. This stone constantly exudes calcite, which ensures that the basilica remains white even with weathering and pollution.

 

A mosaic in the apse, entitled Christ in Majesty, is among the largest in the world.

 

The basilica complex includes a garden for meditation, with a fountain. The top of the dome is open to tourists and affords a spectacular panoramic view of the city of Paris, which is mostly to the south of the basilica.

 

The organ

The basilica is home to a large (four manuals and pedals, 90 speaking stops) and very fine organ built by Aristide Cavaillé-Coll for a private home in Biarritz. It was almost identical (tonal characteristics, layout and casework) to the instrument in Sheffield's Albert Hall, destroyed by fire in 1934. However, when installed in Paris in 1905 by Cavaillé-Coll's successor and son-in-law, Charles Mutin, it lost its fine case for a much plainer one.

 

Role in Catholicism

In response to requests from French bishops, Pope Pius IX promulgated the feast of the Sacred Heart in 1856. The basilica itself was consecrated on October 16, 1919.

 

Since 1885 (before construction had been completed), the Blessed Sacrament (a consecrated host which has been turned into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ during Mass) has been continually on display in a monstrance above the high altar. Perpetual adoration of the Blessed Sacrament has continued uninterrupted in the Basilica since 1885. Because of this, tourists and others are asked to dress appropriately when visiting the basilica and to observe silence as much as possible, so as not to disturb persons who have come from around the world to pray in this special place.

 

In popular culture

The area before the basilica has featured in many films, notably in 2001 film Amélie (Le fabuleux destin d'Amélie Poulain). The basilica can also be seen in the window in background of the Audrey Hepburn film Sabrina while she is writing home to her father before returning home to America. It also appears in the opening shot of Ronin.

In the anime series Noir, the lead character Mireille Bouquet has a rendez-vous with Remi Breffort, a high profile member of the secret organization Les Soldats, inside the basilica.

 

The basilica is also mentioned in the song Evil and a Heathen by Scottish indie rock band Franz Ferdinand from their 2005 album You Could Have It So Much Better.

It appears famously at the end of C'était un rendez-vous, a short film which subsequently was used by the rock band Snow Patrol for their video "Open Your Eyes".

The music video for "Two Hearts Beat As One", by Irish rock band U2, was shot in the Basilica and around Montmartre.

In Danish singer-songwriter Tina Dico's fourth album release, Count To Ten, the sixth track is titled after and gives reference to the basilica.

Australian pop duo Savage Garden's newest music video for "Truly Madly Deeply" was shot there sometime in 1997.

 

Further reading

Jacques Benoist, Le Sacre-Coeur de Montmartre de 1870 a nos Jours (Paris) 1992. A cultural history from the point-of-view of a former chaplain.

Yvan Crist, "Sacré-Coeur" in Larousse Dictionnaire de Paris (Paris) 1964.

David Harvey. Consciousness and the Urban Experience: Studies in the History and Theory of Capitalist Urbanization. (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press) 1985.

David Harvey."The building of the Basilica of Sacré-Coeur", coda to Paris, Capital of Modernity (2003:311ff) Harvey made use of Hubert Rohault de Fleury. Historique de la Basilique du Sacré Coeur (1903-09), the official history of the building of the Basilica, in four volumes, printed, but not published.

Raymond A. Jonas. “Sacred Tourism and Secular Pilgrimage: Montmartre and the Basilica of Sacré-Coeur”. in Montmartre and the Making of Mass Culture. Gabriel P. Weisberg, editor. (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press) 2001.

 

was in June 1992 that an unusual architectural manifesto was launched in Great Britain. For the next ten years or more, the manifesto entitled "Urban Villages, a concept for creating mixed-use urban developments on a sustainable scale" continued to make waves, and was much commented and criticised - often unfavourably - in the specialist and general media.

 

In the language of contemporary British town planning, the expression "urban village" has for many people come to be synonymous with the name "Poundbury", the neo-traditionalist suburban development on the fringes of the rural town of Dorchester, piloted and largely masterminded by the Prince of Wales. Yet although Poundbury is certainly the most extensively developed of Britain's urban village projects, there are many others throughout Britain, and the expression "urban villages" is also used in other English speaking countries to describe modern suburban developments - and in some cases rural developments - that conform (or more or les conform) to certain holistic principles of planning that run against the grain of accepted modern practices in suburban development.

This article takes a concise look at the origins of the "urban village" concept, and its definition, before studying the situation of urban village development in the UK today, looking at Poundbury and the other projects throughout the country that were in 2001 affiliated to the Urban Villages Forum, the think tank set up under the patronage of the Prince of Wales.

 

Indeed, no discussion of "urban villages" in a British context can begin without reference to the role of the Prince of Wales who, long dissatisfied by much of the dreary suburban development that has occurred in Britain during his lifetime, has used his position to spearhead the development of socially and architecturally successful sustainable communities designed to avoid the failures of the recent past.

 

The much-used expression "neo-traditionalist", imported from the United States, clearly establishes the conceptual framework that underlies the urban village movement; urban villages are seen as not just an architectural or planning concept, but one predicated on a form of social organisation that has its roots in a long-established model that has stood the test of time. In Britain, as in the United States, the aim of the proponents of urban villages is not just to design modern living environments that reflect those of a previous and supposedly more stable rural society, but to rediscover the forms of living environment that engendered the stability of such traditional rural communities. In this respect, the "urban village" is a concept that takes its place in a historic British - and notably English - paradigm that has previously been illustrated in the model towns of Lever, Cadbury and others, the garden cities of the first half of the twentieth century, and, in community terms at least, in late twentieth century developments such as Newcastle's Byker village.

The expression "urban village" seems however to be an American invention. The earliest bibliographical reference to the phrase would seem to be a book entitled Urban Village: Population, Community, and Family Structure in Germantown, Pennsylvania, 1683-1800, by Stephanie Grauman, published in 1980. Yet early usages of the expression do not refer to any specific planning concept, but are a more a convenient pairing of words used to describe certain types of close-knit urban communities whose structures reflected traditional rural models. The phrase was even used as a rendering of the Spanish expression "barrio". It was in the early eighties, however, that the first references to the "urban village" as a planning concept began to appear, in the writings of Christopher Leinberger, a Los Angeles based urban affairs consultant (Urban Villages: The Locational Lessons. Wall Street Journal. New York. November 13, 1984) and Charles Lockwood (The Arrival of the Urban Village in Princeton Alumni Weekly November 1986). Leinberger used the phrase "urban villages" to describe what he saw as a new tendency towards mixed-use development in suburban America, resulting from the fact that in post-industrial America, there was no longer any need to separate business and residential areas for environmental reasons (pollution, noise, etc.).

More recently, and notably in the 1990's, the phrase has been used sporadically in discussions of the American "new urbanism" movement, often by and with reference to neotraditionalist planners Leon Krier and the Andres Duany / Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk partnership; yet generally speaking, American writers and planners - until recently - have made considerably more use of the expression "new urbanism", rather than "urban village". The idea of the "village", with its notions of "community", seems to be particularly English, and it was only in the late 1990's, following the international interest aroused by the first of England's "urban villages", Poundbury, that the expression really began to become popular in the United States and Australia.

 

It was the Prince of Wales who introduced the concept of the "urban village" into the vocabulary of British planning; the expression is used briefly in his 1989 book A Vision of Britain (the follow up to a 1988 television documentary), though not at the time directly in conjunction with the Poundbury project, which is mentioned. It was also this book that clearly established the dual parentage of the urban village concept in the English acceptance of the phrase; on the one hand, the historic English village tradition, on the other hand the American neotraditionalist architectural planners, notably Krier and Duany. In the final pages of A Vision of Britain, a presentation of Krier's archetypal neotraditionalist development in Florida, the town of Seaside, covers a full five pages, compared to just two covering the development of "model villages" in the U.K. from Saltaire to the garden cities.

Yet clearly, however great the influence of Krier on Prince Charles has been, it is the historic English concept of the village, and the idealised view of village life, that form the theoretical models that the British proponents of the "urban village" have sought to translate into a modern idiom.

One may speculate as to whether Prince Charles, while thinking over the possibility of creating a planned modern urban village at Poundbury, on the outskirts of Dorchester, had read P.H.Ditchfield's 1908 book The Charm of the English Village, which had recently been reprinted (1985); there is a lot in this book, most notably perhaps its preoccupation with the small details, the use of materials, and the stylistic and functional variety that characterise traditional English villages, that prefigures the Prince's view of the model community. Along with many other publications, both Prince Charles's and Ditchfield's books are also woven on the loom of nostalgia for a supposed almost utopian past, common to the proponents of New Urbanism, and anathema to many modernists. In an article in Harvard Design Magazine in 1997, marxist geographer David Harvey, professor at Johns Hopkins university wrote :

"The New Urbanism in fact connects to a facile contemporary attempt to transform large and teeming cities, so seemingly out of control, into an interlinked series of 'urban villages', where, it is believed, everyone can relate in a civil and urbane fashion to everyone else."

Harvey, however was looking on new urbanism in the fundamentally North American idiom; and although, historically, many earlier settlers in the United States - notably in New England - transposed onto north American soil social models imitated from those of the English village, on the whole the American model was, by definition, different. Early American villages may not have been subject to the rectilinear grid planning of 19th century American towns and villages, but neither did they evolve slowly over time in the manner of the historic English village. In addition, America's "New Urbanism", as exemplified by Seaside, is rather different from the English "urban village" as first exemplified at Poundbury.

 

Ditchfield (1908) more than once stresses the particular nature of English villages, even as opposed to villages in other parts of Europe, referring to the particular social structure of the English village as the "village commonwealth", a structure that would more normally be referred to in modern terms as the "village community". It should be noted that the notion of "community" is a fundamental building block in the societies of modern English speaking countries, and is considerably more deeply rooted in the English tradition (and more broadly speaking the Germanic traditions) than in that of any newer country, or even of other European countries in which the structures of pre-industrial society had evolved out of Roman law.

Since the departure of the Romans, the village has been the core community unit in the British Isles. Though England long boasted, in London, Europe's largest city, and though Britain was the first European nation to undergo major population drift to the towns, the village has always survived - in thought, literature or art - as the ideal, and often idealised, social unit. In Roman times, cities became the nuclei of life in Britain; but after the Romans left, most of their great cities, with the exception of London, were largely abandoned, the British populations moving out to occupy new village sites outside the city walls or further afield; and whilst in continental western Europe the great cities of Roman times remained great cities after the Romans left, and in many cases remain so to this day, the same was not true in the British Isles.

In mediaeval Britain, the extensive devolution of power and authority under the Anglo-Norman feudal system - inherited from the Anglo Saxon period - and the territorial representation that existed in English parliaments from the late thirteenth century onwards, played their role in formulating, in the national psyche, an image of England as being a nation represented emblematically by its villages, rather than by its capital city. In the English mind, London has never been the nexus of national identity in the way that Paris has long been the symbol of France and French life. In Shakespeare, the quintessential images of English life are not those of Henry IV and Bolingbroke at court or on the battle field; they are those of Justice Shallow in his orchard in rural Gloucestershire.

The Industrial Revolution completed, by the mid nineteenth century, a process that had been set in motion by the Enclosures Acts of the eighteenth, precipitating Europe's first massive rural exodus, and with it a further pauperisation of the former rural labourers. It was during this period that poets, artists and novelists, from Blake to Constable to William Morris or Thomas Hardy, began to place rural England at the heart of English art and writing, often in an idealised manner that helped give a new impetus to the longstanding perception of the superiority of English rural society over urban society. The apparent immortality of the BBC's classic radio soap opera, the Archers, set in its fictitious village of Ambridge, is just another more modern illustration of the same point.

It is perhaps significant that Trevor Osborne, chairman of the Urban Villages Group, notes, in the introduction to Urban Villages, that "the term 'urban village' will not be readily understood in mainland Europe; when exported to other EC member states, it will need a different label." One might even add : "or to the USA".

 

It is clearly by another quirk of coincidence that the first English "Urban Village", Poundbury, should have been located on the outskirts of Dorchester, the town immortalised under the name of Casterbridge, in the novels of Thomas Hardy.

Proposals for a major expansion of Dorchester were first debated in 1987, and two years later outline planning permission for the westward extension of the town was granted by West Dorset District Council, for a mixed-use residential suburb that will eventually stretch over 400 acres (about 190 hectares). The initial development was to cover 35 acres of land.

Prince Charles was involved in the project from the start; the greenfield site on the outskirts of Dorchester was in effect his land, agricultural leasehold land belonging to the Duchy of Cornwall. When the Dorchester council applied to the Duchy to purchase the land for development, the answer they received was more favourable than they had imagined possible. Not only would the Duchy make the land available for development, but Prince Charles himself would oversee the operation, with the aim of establishing an attractive mixed-use and socially mixed suburban development; Britain's first "urban village".

For many in the UK architectural and planning establishment, news that the Prince of Wales was to take charge of a major suburban development project was like a red rag to a bull. Relations between the Prince and many of Britain's leading architects and planners had been, to say the least, tense ever since the Prince had begun airing in public his none-too-complimentary opinions on the architecture and planning of the sixties and seventies. His famous description of Birmingham's new library as looking more like an incinerator than a place of learning, or his much quoted speech to the Royal Institute of British Architects, in 1984, when he described the proposed extension to London's National Gallery as being like a "monstrous carbuncle on the face of a much-loved and elegant friend", had done little to endear him to the modernists in British architecture.

Consequently, and unsurprisingly, reactions to the initial proposals for Poundbury were not favourable, neither in the specialised reviews nor in the architectural columns of the British broadsheets. The project was decried variously as an exercise in retrophilia, a pastiche, an irrelevance, or worse.

That was in 1989; and it is true that Leon Krier's bird's-eye sketch of what Poundbury might look like, published at the time in A Vision of Britain (p138), does look more like a heteroclite exercise in nostalgia than a serious plan for a late twentieth century suburban development.

The reality of Poundbury has been somewhat different: with the first phase of building now complete, the earliest streets have already had time to mellow, and as an urban environment, the general consensus among both residents and the press is that this new "urban village" is a success. After its early hostile coverage, the British mainstream press - including the Guardian, the Telegraph, the Mirror and the Mail - has now changed tack, and since 1998 press coverage of the ever-evolving project has been largely positive.

Among the common complaints voiced by residents now is that Poundbury is a victim of its success, with large numbers of tourists and visiting architects and town planners who invade their space, sometimes in coachloads, turning their residential quarter into an unintended tourist attraction.

So why do they come? What is it that has established Poundbury as a stopping point on the architect's and town planner's tour of Britain in the early twenty-first century? Firstly, of course, there is its curiosity value - an unusual - some would still say eccentric - act of royal patronage, an experiment in suburban architecture and planning, masterminded by an amateur planner who is due to become the next King of England. Secondly they come to see how the ten point theory of the "urban village", laid out in the Vision of Britain, transforms into reality.

Over 22 pages, the book sets out a list of "ten principles we can build upon" in order to create a successful modern urban living environment. These are as follows:

1. Place. That planners should understand the local environment, and design their projects to blend with it.

2. Hierarchy. That the design of buildings should always reflect their hierarchical position in the community, that "public buildings ought to proclaim themselves with pride", and others be designed in function of their value in society.

3. Scale. That buildings should bear relation to the human scale, and the scale of other buildings in an area.

4. Harmony. That buildings should blend harmoniously with others in the vicinity.

5. Enclosure. That spatial identity is of major importance, and that new developments should incorporate such public spaces as squares and courtyards

6. Materials. that building materials used should reflect the diversity of local traditions, and not conform to any national or international standard.

7. Decoration. That decorative craftsmanship should still be, as it always has been, a major feature of the urban environment.

8. Art. That artistic decoration has a major and a symbolic role to play in the enhancement of the urban environment, and that artists as well as architects should have a role to play in the designing of new living environments.

9. Signs and lighting. That these also contribute to the success of the built environment, not detract from it, and should therefore be put up with care and attention.

10. Community. That a successful community is a place where residents feel involved, and contribute to the planning and running of their environment.

 

While points 1 - 9 can be - and in the case of Poundbury, are being - ensured through the masterplan, point 10 cannot. A successful community can only be brought about by the people who live in it; and so far, in spite of the fact that Poundbury is still very much an ongoing project, those who live there are happy with their environment and, on the whole, consider it to be a successful community.

Besides the above ten points, which essentially concern the architectural and visual aspects of the environment in urban villages, there are other fundamental aspects that distinguish the urban village from other suburban or rural housing projects, aspects that are perhaps rather more fundamental than aesthetics. These are social mixity, and mixed use - together seen as preconditions for the creation of new sustainable communities.

As well as reflecting the ten principles, the masterplan for Poundbury was for a housing development that would include a seamless and indistinguishable mixture of owner-occupied dwellings and social housing. The mixed-use plan also called for the inclusion, within easy walking distance of the residential streets, of shops, workshops and factories, enabling residents to live and work in the community without the need for commuting.

 

In many details, the masterplan for Poundbury went against conventional planning orthodoxy. Its fundamental tenet, mixed use, ran counter to accepted zoning theory, which prefers to concentrate business in business parks, housing in housing estates, and shops in shopping centers.

As for social diversity, critics of the Poundbury plan argued that the type of home buyers wanting to buy in Poundbury would not wish to buy houses that shared a dividing wall with social housing units; it was also suggested that the densely-packed housing environment was out of keeping with the tastes and expectations of modern middle-class British house-buyers, more usually attracted by the ideal of detached houses in wrap-around gardens.

Others predicted that industry would not want to relocate in the middle, or even on the edge, of a residential area, and that in the end, Poundbury would end up as no more than a "glorified council estate".

So far at least, this has not been the case - which is exactly what its planners expected. Having conceived Poundbury as a carefully planned (or, in its critics' opinions, contrived) recreation of a traditional organically developed village, they did not expect to encounter the problems facing many other suburban developments.

Like the village, the urban village is conceived as a community of mixed housing, catering for all ages and income groups. At Poundbury, the first phase of housing consisted of 55 units of social housing, administered by a housing association, the Guinness Trust, and 141 freehold owner-occupier homes, as well as retail and commercial premises. By the time the development is completed, towards the year 2020, Poundbury will have between 2,000 and 3,000 housing units, with social housing accounting for about 20% of the total, in line with the national average.

 

The question that remains, however, is whether the model of Poundbury can be transposed into other settings, or whether the success of this rather middle-class development on the edge of a rather trouble-free county town in the heart of the Westcountry, can be replicated in other areas?

Following the media coverage - both positive and negative - given to the Poundbury project when it was first mooted in the late 1980's, a forum known as the Urban Villages Group was founded in 1989, at the Prince of Wales's behest, under the wing of Business in the Community, an organisation whose purpose is "to tackle economic, social and environmental issues affecting local communities" (Aldous, p8).

Among the founder members of the Group were Leon Krier, plus the chief executives of a number of property development companies, housing corporations, and the Managing Director of the Cooperative Bank. The aim of the Group was to encourage councils and property developers to take the urban village concept nationwide, as a viable - if slightly more costly - alternative to the monotonous standardized run-of-the-mill developments, the "edge cities" that have mushroomed, and will continue to mushroom, on the outskirts of most British urban areas.

 

As of January 2002, eighteen development projects across England are being carried out in partnership with the Prince's Foundation, according to "urban village" principles; none however is as advanced as Poundbury, and some, such as the Westoe Colliery project at South Shields and the Northwich city centre project, are still on the drawing board. Yet as the location of these two projects shows - one in the heart of the depressed northeast, and the other in the rundown centre of a Cheshire town - the "urban village" concept can be, and is being, applied in areas that are very different from semi-rural Dorset.

Only two other projects are listed, like Poundbury, as "urban extensions" on greenfield sites, one in Basdildon Essex, the other in Northampton; by far the majority of projects are "urban regeneration" projects on brownfield sites.

Some of these are in fact far removed from the "urban village" concept as illustrated by Poundbury. In particular, the Ancoats project in Manchester, the Jewellery quarter in Birmingham and the Little Germany redevelopment in the centre of Bradford appear more like classic industrial heritage preservation programmes, along the lines of the Albert Dock regeneration scheme in Liverpool, or the redevelopment of Butler's Wharf on the South Bank in London.

They are, however, different, inasmuch as these three projects, though they will never become villages in the sense that Poundbury can call itself a large village, have been conceived with the ethos of the urban village concept in mind, and not as just three more chic urban residential areas for the upwardly mobile.

Little Germany and the Jewelry Quarter are interesting cases, both being central urban areas which, in the past, had a clear spatial and social identity, the former as the fiefdom of Bradford's German cloth merchants, the latter as the densely populated network of small streets which housed both the homes and the workshops of Birmingham's hundreds of jewelers and watchmakers - a classic historic example of both mixed usage and a clearly defined urban quarter.

A hundred years ago, Birmingham's Jewellery Quarter provided employment for some 70,000 people – many of whom lived and worked in the quarter. Since then, the number of jobs in the sector has fallen by over 90%, and the residential population has all but disappeared. In 2000, the quarter harboured some 1,200 business, but only about 700 residents. The aim of the project is to redress this imbalance, and rekindle the vibrant community that existed at the start of the twentieth century.

The Ancoats Urban Village, in Manchester, is different - so different indeed that although Ancoats announces itself as an "urban village", the project's development manager herself is not convinced that it really is one.

"I feel uneasy about offering Ancoats as representative of the Urban Villages movement, as it does not conform to many of the criteria that the Urban Villages movement sets out, and although we are still members of the Prince's Foundation, I don't think they would suggest Ancoats as an example of their philosophy; we seem to spend most time disagreeing!" (Lyn Fenton, private letter of 02/01/02).

Ancoats prides itself for its place in urban history, as the world's first industrial suburb – an area in which 13,000 people once lived and worked; the targets of the Urban Village project are to bring people back to live in this historic industrial site, close to the centre of Manchester, through a programme of mixed use residential and business development. Classed as a conservation area in 1989, it is on the UK's short list for designation as a UNESCO world heritage site. In spite of the reservations of the developers, the targets set out in the Ancoats Supplementary Planning Guidance reflect the same principles as those adopted for Poundbury; the fact that this, as some other urban village sites, are not totally new-build areas, does not fundamentally change the perspective.

Naturally perhaps, it is not in Britain's great urban centres that other urban village projects closer to the Poundbury model can be found, but on the edges of Britain's smaller towns and cities, as the following two examples illustrate. The Westoe site in South Shields is being developed by Wimpey on the 17 hectare site of a disused colliery, as a high-density mixed-use and socially mixed suburb with up to 800 homes, its own school, shops and office premises. In Lancashire, the Luneside development at Lancaster, albeit smaller - 6 hectares - is being developed along similar lines.

 

Finally, although only 18 projects are affiliated to the Prince's Trust as recognised "urban village" developments, neither the Prince nor the trust has exclusive rights to the expression, and other new housing development projects elsewhere in Britain, are taking up the label in order to give themselves a certain cachet.

Indeed, the "urban village" approach to the design and planning of residential areas has now found its way into official UK government guidelines, a new guide from the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions showing among its primary inspirations:

" the 'Urban Villages' movement in the UK and neo-traditional design generally. Indeed, the design philosophy promoted is essentially one of working with context, promoting pedestrian friendly environments, returning to traditional perimeter block systems, and - where possible - mixing uses." (DETR Website 2002)

The current popularity of the notion of the "urban village" in contemporary UK planning would tend to indicate that a sea change in planning theory has taken place in the UK since Prince Charles first launched his vision of Britain in 1989. Whether or not this will result in the recreation of something resembling the types of close-knit communities that existed in nineteenth century, or pre-Enclosures English villages, or even in twentieth century industrial villages, and whether "mixed usage" will really have any serious impact on the social habits of the British in the 21st century, other than reducing car usage, are different matters.

And in the end, it is perhaps of little matter in the context of this paper, in which I have set out to show the peculiarly high value attached to the word village in England, and the particularly strong belief that runs through English thought and culture, that the village - and notably the idealised village with its green spaces, flowered gardens, and friendly folk, is the finest possible form of spatial and social organisation - even in the resolutely urban society of the start of the third millennium. In this respect, the phrase "urban village" has readily come to be seen not as a contradiction in terms, but as a means of having one's cake and eating it, or at least getting the best of both worlds.

Bibliography

 

Aldous, Tony. Urban Villages, a concept for creating mixed-use urban developments on a sustainable scale, London, The Urban Villages Group 1992.

Ditchfield, P.H. The Charm of the English Village, 1908, reprinted London, Bracken Books, 1985,

Harvey, David. The New Urbanism and the Communitarian Trap, in Harvard Design Magazine, Winter/Spring 1997, no. 1.

Miller, Anthony. The role of Landscape Architecture in fostering community; Byker, a case study, in L'Espace Urbain Européen, Cahiers du Créhu 6. Annales littéraires de l'Université de Franche Comté 1996

Mumford, Lewis. T, The City in History, Secker & Warburg 1961, reprinted Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, 1973 &&.

Rossiter, Andrew. Retour à l'Utopie? Poundbury; redéfinir la banlieue en village urbain. In Ville et Utopie, Cahiers du Créhu no. 10, actes du Colloque. Presses Universitaires de Franche Comté, 2001.

Wales, Charles, Prince of. A Vision of Britain, a personal view of architecture. London, Doubleday, 1989

 

Webography:

Thandani, Diriu A. New Urbanism Bibliography, published by the Architectural Resources Network

periferia.org/publications/cnubibliography.html

Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions:

www.planning.detr.gov.uk/livingplaces/02/03.htm

 

Copyright :

About-Britain academic : texts © Authors and About-Britain.com

Andrew Rossiter, Université de Franche Comté

From a paper presented at the International Symposium on Urban and Rural Britain at the University of Valenciennes, France, 2002

Archive

Edit by Aviary

#03

 

Exposure Program

Landscape

 

Location

-- wahrscheinlich ist aber auch die Bezeichnung

"Mons Martis" (Marshügel) - Montmartre

 

Schon im 12. Jahrhundert errichtete der Orden der Benediktiner in Montmartre ein Kloster (1790 zerstört). Die ehemalige Abtei- und heutige Pfarrkirche Saint-Pierre de Montmartre ist eine der ältesten Sakralbauten von Paris.

 

The abbey was destroyed in 1790 during the French Revolution, and the convent demolished to make place for gypsum mines. The church of Saint-Pierre was saved

 

°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

It is 130 metres high

 

de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montmartre

 

The building's origins

The original idea of constructing a church dedicated to the Sacred Heart, with its origins in the aftermath of the French Revolution among ultra-Catholics and legitimist royalists developed more widely in France after the Franco-Prussian War and the ensuing radical Paris Commune of 1870-71.

Though today it is asserted to be dedicated in honor of the 58,000 who lost their lives during the war, the decree of the Assemblée nationale, 24 July 1873, responding to a request by the archbishop of Paris by voting its construction, specifies that it is to "expiate the crimes of the communards". Montmartre had been the site of the Commune's first insurrection, and many hard-core communards were forever entombed in the subterranean galleries of former gypsum mines where they had retreated, by explosives detonated at the entrances by the Army of Versailles. Hostages had been executed on both sides, and the Communards had executed Georges Darboy, Archbishop of Paris, who became a martyr for the resurgent Catholic Church.

 

His successor Guibert, climbing the Butte Montmartre in October 1872, was reported to have had a vision, as clouds dispersed over the panorama: "It is here, it is here where the martyrs are, it is here that the Sacred Heart must reign so that it can beckon all to come". Today it is viewed as a tacit acknowledgement of the massacre of the communards by the Versailles army.

In the moment of inertia following the resignation of the government of Adolphe Thiers, 24 May 1873, François Pie, bishop of Poitiers, expressed the national yearning for spiritual renewal— "the hour of the Church has come"— that would be expressed through the "Government of Moral Order" of the Third Republic, which linked Catholic institutions with secular ones, in "a project of religious and national renewal, the main features of which were the restoration of monarchy and the defense of Rome within a cultural framework of official piety", of which Sacré-Coeur is the chief lasting monument.

The decree voting its construction as a "matter of public utility", 24 July, followed close on Thiers' resignation. The project was expressed by the Church as a National Vow (Voeu national) and financial support came from parishes throughout France. The dedicatory inscription records the Basilica as the accomplishment of a vow by Alexandre Legentil and Hubert Rohault de Fleury, ratified by Joseph-Hippolyte Guibert, Archbishop of Paris. The project took many years to complete.

Construction

In 1873 the city council of Paris voted a law of public utility to seize land at the summit of Montmartre for the construction of the basilica. Architect Paul Abadie designed the basilica after winning a competition over 77 other architects. With delays in assembling the property, The foundation stone was finally laid 16 June 1875. Passionate debates concerning the Basilica were raised in the Conseil Municipal in 1880, where the Basilica was called "an incessant provocation to civil war" and it was debated whether to rescind the law of 1873 granting property rights, an impracticable proposition. The matter reached the Chamber of Deputies in the summer of 1882, the Basilica being ably defended by Archbishop Guibert and Georges Clemenceau expressing the view that the Basilica sought to stigmatise the Revolution. The law was rescinded, but the Basilica was saved by a technicality and was not reintroduced in the next session. A further attempt to halt the construct levi is gayion was defeated in 1897, by which time the interior was substantially complete and had been opened

 

The overall style of the structure shows heavy Romano-Byzantine influence, an unusual architectural vocabulary that was a conscious reaction against the neo-Baroque excesses of the Opéra Garnier, which was cited in the competition.Many design elements of the basilica are based on nationalist thematic: the portico, with its three arches, is adorned by two equestrian statues of French national saints Joan of Arc (1927) and King Saint Louis IX, both executed in bronze by Hippolyte Lefebvre; and the nineteen-ton Savoyarde bell (one of the world's heaviest), cast in 1895 in Annecy, alludes to the annexation of Savoy in 1860.

Construction costs, entirely from private donations, estimated at 7 million French francs, were expended before any above-ground visible structure was to be seen.

 

A provisional chapel was consecrated 3 March 1876, and pilgrimage donations quickly became the mainstay of funding. Donations were encouraged by the expedient of permitting donors to "purchase" individual columns or other features as small as a brick. It was declared by the National Assembly that the state had the ultimate responsibility for funding. Construction began in 1875 and was completed in 1914, although consecration of the basilica was delayed until after the First World War.

Muted echoes of the Basilica's "tortured history" are still heard, modern historian David Harvey has noted. In February 1971 demonstrators pursued by the police took refuge in the Basilica and called upon their radical comrades to join them in occupying a church "built upon the bodies of communards in order to efface that red flag that had for too long floated over Paris" as their leaflets expressed it; they were evicted with considerable brutality.

 

The Basilica

Sacré-Cœur is built of travertine stone quarried in Château-Landon (Seine-et-Marne), France. This stone constantly exudes calcite, which ensures that the basilica remains white even with weathering and pollution.

 

A mosaic in the apse, entitled Christ in Majesty, is among the largest in the world.

 

The basilica complex includes a garden for meditation, with a fountain. The top of the dome is open to tourists and affords a spectacular panoramic view of the city of Paris, which is mostly to the south of the basilica.

 

The organ

The basilica is home to a large (four manuals and pedals, 90 speaking stops) and very fine organ built by Aristide Cavaillé-Coll for a private home in Biarritz. It was almost identical (tonal characteristics, layout and casework) to the instrument in Sheffield's Albert Hall, destroyed by fire in 1934. However, when installed in Paris in 1905 by Cavaillé-Coll's successor and son-in-law, Charles Mutin, it lost its fine case for a much plainer one.

 

Role in Catholicism

In response to requests from French bishops, Pope Pius IX promulgated the feast of the Sacred Heart in 1856. The basilica itself was consecrated on October 16, 1919.

 

Since 1885 (before construction had been completed), the Blessed Sacrament (a consecrated host which has been turned into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ during Mass) has been continually on display in a monstrance above the high altar. Perpetual adoration of the Blessed Sacrament has continued uninterrupted in the Basilica since 1885. Because of this, tourists and others are asked to dress appropriately when visiting the basilica and to observe silence as much as possible, so as not to disturb persons who have come from around the world to pray in this special place.

 

In popular culture

The area before the basilica has featured in many films, notably in 2001 film Amélie (Le fabuleux destin d'Amélie Poulain). The basilica can also be seen in the window in background of the Audrey Hepburn film Sabrina while she is writing home to her father before returning home to America. It also appears in the opening shot of Ronin.

In the anime series Noir, the lead character Mireille Bouquet has a rendez-vous with Remi Breffort, a high profile member of the secret organization Les Soldats, inside the basilica.

 

The basilica is also mentioned in the song Evil and a Heathen by Scottish indie rock band Franz Ferdinand from their 2005 album You Could Have It So Much Better.

It appears famously at the end of C'était un rendez-vous, a short film which subsequently was used by the rock band Snow Patrol for their video "Open Your Eyes".

The music video for "Two Hearts Beat As One", by Irish rock band U2, was shot in the Basilica and around Montmartre.

In Danish singer-songwriter Tina Dico's fourth album release, Count To Ten, the sixth track is titled after and gives reference to the basilica.

Australian pop duo Savage Garden's newest music video for "Truly Madly Deeply" was shot there sometime in 1997.

 

Further reading

Jacques Benoist, Le Sacre-Coeur de Montmartre de 1870 a nos Jours (Paris) 1992. A cultural history from the point-of-view of a former chaplain.

Yvan Crist, "Sacré-Coeur" in Larousse Dictionnaire de Paris (Paris) 1964.

David Harvey. Consciousness and the Urban Experience: Studies in the History and Theory of Capitalist Urbanization. (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press) 1985.

David Harvey."The building of the Basilica of Sacré-Coeur", coda to Paris, Capital of Modernity (2003:311ff) Harvey made use of Hubert Rohault de Fleury. Historique de la Basilique du Sacré Coeur (1903-09), the official history of the building of the Basilica, in four volumes, printed, but not published.

Raymond A. Jonas. “Sacred Tourism and Secular Pilgrimage: Montmartre and the Basilica of Sacré-Coeur”. in Montmartre and the Making of Mass Culture. Gabriel P. Weisberg, editor. (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press) 2001.

 

BASILICA

The inspiration for Sacré-Cœur's design originated on 4 September 1870, the day of the proclamation of the Third Republic, with a speech by Bishop Fournier attributing the defeat of French troops during the Franco-Prussian War to a divine punishment after "a century of moral decline" since the French Revolution, in the wake of the division in French society that arose in the decades following that revolution, between devout Catholics and legitimist royalists on one side, and democrats, secularists, socialists, and radicals on the other. This schism in the French social order became particularly pronounced after the 1870 withdrawal of the French military garrison protecting the Vatican in Rome to the front of the Franco-Prussian War by Napoleon III, the secular uprising of the Paris Commune of 1870-1871, and the subsequent 1871 defeat of France in the Franco-Prussian War.

 

Though today the basilica is asserted to be dedicated in honor of the 58,000 who lost their lives during the war, the decree of the Assemblée nationale 24 July 1873, responding to a request by the archbishop of Paris and voting its construction, specifies that it is to "expiate the crimes of the Commune." Montmartre had been the site of the Commune's first insurrection, and the Communards had executed Georges Darboy, Archbishop of Paris, who became a martyr for the resurgent Catholic Church. His successor Guibert, climbing the Butte Montmartre in October 1872, was reported to have had a vision as clouds dispersed over the panorama: "It is here, it is here where the martyrs are, it is here that the Sacred Heart must reign so that it can beckon all to come."

 

In the moment of inertia following the resignation of the government of Adolphe Thiers, 24 May 1873, François Pie, bishop of Poitiers, expressed the national yearning for spiritual renewal— "the hour of the Church has come"— that would be expressed through the "Government of Moral Order" of the Third Republic, which linked Catholic institutions with secular ones, in "a project of religious and national renewal, the main features of which were the restoration of monarchy and the defense of Rome within a cultural framework of official piety," of which Sacré-Cœur is the chief lasting, triumphalist monument.

 

The 24 July decree voting its construction as a "matter of public utility"followed close on Thiers' resignation. The project was expressed by the Church as a National Vow (Vœu national) and financial support came from parishes throughout France. The dedicatory inscription records the basilica as the accomplishment of a vow by Alexandre Legentil and Hubert Rohault de Fleury, ratified by Joseph-Hippolyte Guibert, Archbishop of Paris. The project took many years to complete.

 

CONSTRUCTION

A law of public utility was passed to seize land at the summit of Montmartre for the construction of the basilica. Architect Paul Abadie designed the basilica after winning a competition over 77 other architects. With delays in assembling the property, the foundation stone was finally laid 16 June 1875. Passionate debates concerning the basilica were raised in the Conseil Municipal in 1880, where the basilica was called "an incessant provocation to civil war" and it was debated whether to rescind the law of 1873 granting property rights, an impracticable proposition. The matter reached the Chamber of Deputies in the summer of 1882, in which the basilica was defended by Archbishop Guibert while Georges Clemenceau argued that it sought to stigmatize the Revolution. The law was rescinded but the basilica was saved by a technicality, and the bill was not reintroduced in the next session. A further attempt to halt the construction was defeated in 1897, by which time the interior was substantially complete and had been open for services for six years.

 

Plan of the roofs; the darker the background colour, the higher the level of the roof

Abadie died not long after the foundation had been laid, in 1884, and five architects continued with the work: Honoré Daumet (1884–1886), Jean-Charles Laisné (1886–1891), Henri-Pierre-Marie Rauline (1891–1904), Lucien Magne (1904–1916), and Jean-Louis Hulot (1916–1924). The basilica was not completed until 1914, when war intervened; it was formally dedicated in 1919 after World War I, when its national symbolism had shifted.

 

Construction costs, estimated at 7 million French francs and drawn entirely from private donations, were expended before any above-ground, visible structure was to be seen. A provisional chapel was consecrated 3 March 1876, and pilgrimage donations quickly became the mainstay of funding. Donations were encouraged by the expedient of permitting donors to "purchase" individual columns or other features as small as a brick. It was declared by the National Assembly that the state had the ultimate responsibility for funding.

 

Muted echoes of the basilica's "tortured history" are still heard, geographer David Harvey has noted. In February 1971 demonstrators pursued by the police took refuge in the basilica and called upon their radical comrades to join them in occupying the church "built upon the bodies of communards in order to efface that red flag that had for too long floated over Paris" as their leaflets expressed it.

 

Photograph Copyright: Digital Expression UK (2020)

David Harvey na FAU

David Harvey Alex Scott & Associates, 1967

 

More to come. Later...

Department store designed by W. David Harvey who also designed the Suters store in Slough. Later became an Owen Owen store before being split into smaller shops.

  

Processed with VSCO with b1 preset

October 1962 floor plan by the architects, David Harvey & Alex Scott.

 

Three apartment types on each floor:

 

T1 (x2) - Bedsit with kitchen off, bathroom and store.

 

T2 (x3) - Two apartment flat, sitting room with kitchen off, one bedroom, bathroom & store

 

T3 (x1) - Three apartment flat, sitting room with kitchen off, two bedrooms, bathroom & store

 

Note also the arrangement of the service core: two main lifts, each serving alternate floors (i.e. an even numbers lift and an odd numbers lift), staircase and then area for refuse chutes.

 

The floor plan is very efficient, with the internal bathrooms all adjacent to large internal ducts, as are the kitchens which each have a recessed window from the perimeter balcony.

 

That balcony could either be seen as highly sociable, but was also presumably a major security issue.

The Victoria Cross (VC) is the highest military decoration awarded for valour "in the face of the enemy" to members of the armed forces of various Commonwealth countries, and previous British Empire territories. It takes precedence over all other orders, decorations and medals. It may be awarded to a person of any rank in any service and to civilians under military command. The VC is usually presented to the recipient or to their next of kin by the British monarch at an investiture held at Buckingham Palace.

 

The VC was introduced on 29 January 1856 by Queen Victoria to honour acts of valour during the Crimean War. Since then, the medal has been awarded 1,357 times to 1,354 individual recipients. Only 14 medals, ten to members of the British Army, and four to the Australian Army, have been awarded since the Second World War. The traditional explanation of the source of the gunmetal from which the medals are struck is that it derives from Russian cannon captured at the Siege of Sevastopol. Recent research has thrown doubt on this story, suggesting a variety of origins for the material actually making up the medals themselves. Research has established that the gunmetal for many of the medals came from Chinese cannons that may have been captured from the Russians in 1855.

 

Due to its rarity, the VC is highly prized and the medal has fetched over £400,000 at auction.[6] A number of public and private collections are devoted to the Victoria Cross. The private collection of Lord Ashcroft, amassed since 1986, contains over one-tenth of all VCs awarded. Following a 2008 donation to the Imperial War Museum, the Ashcroft collection went on public display alongside the museum's Victoria and George Cross collection in November 2010.

 

Beginning with the Centennial of Confederation in 1967, Canada followed in 1975 by Australia[9] and New Zealand developed their own national honours systems, separate and independent of the British or Imperial honours system. As each country’s system evolved, operational gallantry awards were developed with the premier award of each system, the VC for Australia, the Canadian VC and the VC for New Zealand being created and named in honour of the Victoria Cross. These are unique awards of each honours system, recommended, assessed, gazetted and presented by each country.

 

Contents

1 Origin

2 Appearance

3 Award process

3.1 Colonial awards

3.2 Separate Commonwealth awards

4 Authority and privileges

4.1 Annuity

4.2 Forfeited awards

5 Recipients

6 Public sales

7 Thefts

8 Collections

9 Other

9.1 Memorial

 

Origin.

In 1854, after 40 years of peace, Britain found itself fighting a major war against Russia. The Crimean War was one of the first wars with modern reporting, and the dispatches of William Howard Russell described many acts of bravery and valour by British servicemen that went unrewarded.

 

Before the Crimean War, there was no official standardised system for recognition of gallantry within the British armed forces. Officers were eligible for an award of one of the junior grades of the Order of the Bath and brevet promotions whilst a Mention in Despatches existed as an alternative award for acts of lesser gallantry. This structure was very limited; in practice awards of the Order of the Bath were confined to officers of field rank. Brevet promotions or Mentions in Despatches were largely confined to those who were under the immediate notice of the commanders in the field, generally members of the commander's own staff.

 

Other European countries had awards that did not discriminate against class or rank; France awarded the Légion d'honneur (Legion of Honour) and The Netherlands gave the Order of William. There was a growing feeling amongst the public and in the Royal Court that a new award was needed to recognise incidents of gallantry that were unconnected with a man's lengthy or meritorious service. Queen Victoria issued a Warrant under the Royal sign-manual on 29 January 1856 (gazetted 5 February 1856)[14] that officially constituted the VC. The order was backdated to 1854 to recognise acts of valour during the Crimean War.

 

Queen Victoria had instructed the War Office to strike a new medal that would not recognise birth or class. The medal was meant to be a simple decoration that would be highly prized and eagerly sought after by those in the military services. To maintain its simplicity, Queen Victoria, under the guidance of Prince Albert, vetoed the suggestion that the award be called The Military Order of Victoria and instead suggested the name Victoria Cross. The original warrant stated that the Victoria Cross would only be awarded to soldiers who have served in the presence of the enemy and had performed some signal act of valour or devotion. The first ceremony was held on 26 June 1857 where Queen Victoria invested 62 of the 111 Crimean recipients in a ceremony in Hyde Park.

 

It was originally intended that the VCs would be cast from the bronze cascabels of two cannon that were captured from the Russians at the siege of Sevastopol. The historian John Glanfield has since proven through the use of x-rays of older Victoria Crosses that the metal used for VCs is in fact from antique Chinese guns and not of Russian origin. One theory is that the guns were originally Chinese weapons but the Russians captured them and reused them at Sevastopol. It was also thought that some medals made during the First World War were composed of metal captured from different Chinese guns during the Boxer Rebellion but the original metal was used after the war. It is also believed that another source of metal was used between 1942 and 1945 to create five Second World War VCs when the Sevastopol metal went missing.

 

The barrels of the cannon in question are on display at Firepower - The Royal Artillery Museum at Woolwich. The remaining portion of the only remaining cascabel, weighing 358 oz (10 kg), is stored in a vault maintained by 15 Regiment Royal Logistic Corps at Donnington, Telford. It can only be removed under armed guard. It is estimated that approximately 80 to 85 more VCs could be cast from this source. A single company of jewellers, Hancocks of London, has been responsible for the production of every VC awarded since its inception.

 

Bars are awarded to the VC in recognition of the performance of further acts of gallantry meriting the award although there are only three instances of someone receiving a second award.

 

Appearance[edit source | editbeta]

The front and back of Edward Holland's VC.The decoration is a bronze cross pattée, 41 mm high, 36 mm wide, bearing the crown of Saint Edward surmounted by a lion, and the inscription FOR VALOUR. This was originally to have been FOR THE BRAVE, until it was changed on the recommendation of Queen Victoria, as it implied that not all men in battle were brave. The decoration, suspension bar and link weigh about 0.87 troy ounces (27 g).

 

The cross is suspended by a ring from a seriffed "V" to a bar ornamented with laurel leaves, through which the ribbon passes. The reverse of the suspension bar is engraved with the recipient's name, rank, number and unit.[16] On the reverse of the medal is a circular panel on which the date of the act for which it was awarded is engraved in the centre.

 

The Original Warrant Clause 1 states that the Victoria Cross "shall consist of a Maltese cross of bronze". Nonetheless, it has always been a cross pattée; the discrepancy with the Warrant has never been corrected.

 

The ribbon is crimson, 38 mm (1.5 inches) wide. The original (1856) specification for the award stated that the ribbon should be red for army recipients and dark blue for naval recipients. However the dark blue ribbon was abolished soon after the formation of the Royal Air Force on 1 April 1918. On 22 May 1920 King George V signed a warrant that stated all recipients would now receive a red ribbon and the living recipients of the naval version were required to exchange their ribbons for the new colour. Although the Army warrants state the colour as being red it is defined by most commentators as being crimson or "wine-red".

 

Award process.

The obverse of William Johnstone's VC showing the dark blue ribbon for pre-1918 awards to naval personnel.The Victoria Cross is awarded for

 

... most conspicuous bravery, or some daring or pre-eminent act of valour or self-sacrifice, or extreme devotion to duty in the presence of the enemy.

A recommendation for the VC is normally issued by an officer at regimental level, or equivalent, and has to be supported by three witnesses, although this has been waived on occasion. The recommendation is then passed up the military hierarchy until it reaches the Secretary of State for Defence. The recommendation is then laid before the monarch who approves the award with his or her signature. Victoria Cross awards are always promulgated in the London Gazette with the single exception of the award to the American Unknown Soldier in 1921.The Victoria Cross warrant makes no specific provision as to who should actually present the medals to the recipients. Queen Victoria indicated that she would like to present the medals in person and she presented 185 medals out of the 472 gazetted during her reign. Including the first 62 medals presented at a parade in Hyde Park on 26 June 1857 by Queen Victoria, nearly 900 awards have been personally presented to the recipient by the reigning British monarch. Nearly 300 awards have been presented by a member of the royal family or by a civil or military dignitary. About 150 awards were either forwarded to the recipient or next of kin by registered post or no details of the presentations are known.

 

The original Royal Warrant did not contain a specific clause regarding posthumous awards, although official policy was not to award the VC posthumously. Between the Indian Mutiny in 1857 and the beginning of the Second Boer War the names of six officers and men were published in the London Gazette with a memorandum stating they would have been awarded the Victoria Cross had they survived. A further three notices were published in the London Gazette in September 1900 and April 1901 for gallantry in the Second Boer War. In a partial reversal of policy, six posthumous Victoria Crosses, all for South Africa including the three officers and men mentioned in the notices in 1900 and 1901 were granted on 8 August 1902. Five years later in 1907, the posthumous policy was completely reversed and medals were sent to the next of kin of the six officers and men.[31] The awards were mentioned in notices in the Gazette dating back to the Indian Mutiny. The Victoria Cross warrant was not amended to explicitly allow posthumous awards until 1920, but one quarter of all awards for World War I were posthumous. Although the 1920 Royal Warrant made provision for awards to women serving in the Armed Forces, no women have been awarded a VC.

 

In the case of a gallant and daring act being performed by a squadron, ship's company or a detached body of men (such as marines) in which all men are deemed equally brave and deserving of the Victoria Cross then a ballot is drawn. The officers select one officer, the NCOs select one individual and the private soldiers or seamen select two individuals. In all 46 awards have been awarded by ballot with 29 of the awards during the Indian Mutiny. Four further awards were granted to Q Battery, Royal Horse Artillery at Korn Spruit on 31 March 1900 during the Second Boer War. The final ballot awards for the Army were the six awards to the Lancashire Fusiliers at W Beach during the landing at Gallipoli on 25 April 1915 although three of the awards were not gazetted until 1917. The final seven ballot awards were the only naval ballot awards with three awards to two Q-Ships in 1917 and four awards for the Zeebrugge Raid in 1918. The provision for awards by ballot is still included in the Victoria Cross warrant but there have been no further such awards since 1918.

 

Between 1858 and 1881 the Victoria Cross could be awarded for actions taken "under circumstances of extreme danger" not in the face of the enemy. Six such awards were made during this period—five of them for a single incident during an Expedition to the Andaman Islands in 1867. In 1881, the criteria were changed again and the VC was only awarded for acts of valour "in the face of the enemy". Due to this it has been suggested by many historians including Lord Ashcroft that the changing nature of warfare will result in fewer VCs being awarded. The prevalence of remote fighting techniques has meant that opportunities to carry out acts of bravery in the face of the enemy are diminishing. Since 1940, military personnel who have distinguished themselves for gallantry not in the face of the enemy have been awarded the George Cross, which is immediately after the VC in the Order of Wear.

 

Colonial awards.

]The Victoria Cross was extended to colonial troops in 1867. The extension was made following a recommendation for gallantry regarding colonial soldier Major Charles Heaphy for action in the New Zealand land wars in 1864.He was operating under British command and the VC was gazetted in 1867. Later that year, the Government of New Zealand assumed full responsibility for operations but no further recommendations for the Victoria Cross were raised for local troops who distinguished themselves in action. Following gallant actions by three New Zealand soldiers in November 1868 and January 1869 during the New Zealand land wars, an Order in Council on 10 March 1869 created a "Distinctive Decoration" for members of the local forces without seeking permission from the Secretary of State for the Colonies. Although the Governor was chided for exceeding his authority, the Order in Council was ratified by the Queen. The title "Distinctive Decoration" was later replaced by the title New Zealand Cross.

 

The question of whether recommendations could be made for colonial troops not serving with British troops was not asked in New Zealand, but in 1881, the question was asked in South Africa. Surgeon John McCrea, an officer of the South African forces was recommended for gallantry during hostilities which had not been approved by British Government. He was awarded the Victoria Cross and the principle was established that gallant conduct could be rewarded independently of any political consideration of military operations. More recently, four Australian soldiers were awarded the Victoria Cross in Vietnam although Britain was not involved in the conflict.

 

Indian troops were not originally eligible for the Victoria Cross since they had been eligible for the Indian Order of Merit since 1837 which was the oldest British gallantry award for general issue. When the Victoria Cross was created, Indian troops were still controlled by the Honourable East India Company and did not come under Crown control until 1860. European officers and men serving with the Honourable East India Company were not eligible for the Indian Order of Merit and the Victoria Cross was extended to cover them in October 1857. It was only at the end of the 19th century that calls for Indian troops to be awarded the Victoria Cross intensified. Indian troops became eligible for the award in 1911. The first awards to Indian troops appeared in the London Gazette on 7 December 1914 to Darwan Sing Negi and Khudadad Khan. Negi was presented with the Victoria Cross by King George V during a visit to troops in France. The presentation occurred on 5 December 1914 and he is one of a very few soldiers presented with his award before it appeared in the London Gazette.

 

Separate Commonwealth awards.

See also: Victoria Cross for Australia, Victoria Cross (Canada), and Victoria Cross for New Zealand

 

Victoria Cross as it appears on Commonwealth War Graves Commission headstones.In recent years, several Commonwealth countries have introduced their own honours systems, separate from the British Honours System. This began with the Partition of India in 1947, when the new countries of India and Pakistan introduced their own systems of awards. The VC was replaced by the Param Vir Chakra (PVC) and Nishan-e-Haider (NH) respectively, although the new countries continued to permit recipients of British honours to wear their awards. Several Pakistani soldiers and officers were authorised to wear both the British medals and the ones earned in the later Indo-Pakistani wars. Sri Lanka, whose defence personnel were eligible to receive the Victoria Cross until 1972, introduced its own equivalent, the Parama Weera Vibhushanaya medal. Three Commonwealth realms—Australia, Canada and New Zealand—have each introduced their own decorations for gallantry and bravery, replacing British decorations such as the Military Cross with their own. Most Commonwealth countries, however, still recognise some form of the VC as their highest decoration for valour.

 

Australia was the first Commonwealth realm to create its own VC, on 15 January 1991. Although it is a separate award, its appearance is identical to its British counterpart. Canada followed suit when in 1993 Queen Elizabeth signed Letters Patent creating the Canadian VC, which is also similar to the British version, except that the legend has been changed from FOR VALOUR to the Latin PRO VALORE This language was chosen so as to favour neither French nor English, the two official languages of Canada. New Zealand was the third country to adapt the VC into its own honours system. While the New Zealand and Australian VCs are technically separate awards, the decoration is identical to the British design, including being cast from the same Crimean War gunmetal as the British VC. The Canadian Victoria Cross also includes metal from the same cannon, along with copper and other metals from all regions of Canada.

 

Four of the separate VCs have so far been awarded. Willie Apiata received the Victoria Cross for New Zealand on 2 July 2007, for his actions in the War in Afghanistan in 2004. The Victoria Cross for Australia has been awarded three times. Mark Donaldson was awarded the Victoria Cross for Australia on 16 January 2009 for actions during Operation Slipper, the Australian contribution to the War in Afghanistan. Ben Roberts-Smith was awarded the Victoria Cross for Australia on 23 January 2011 for actions in the Shah Wali Kot Offensive, part of the War in Afghanistan. Daniel Keighran was awarded the Victoria Cross for Australia on 1 November 2012 for his actions during the Battle of Derapet in Oruzgan Province, Afghanistan on 24 August 2010. A Canadian version has been cast that was originally to be awarded to the Unknown Soldier at the rededication of the Vimy Memorial on 7 April 2007. This date was chosen as it was the 90th anniversary of the battle of Vimy Ridge but pressure from veterans' organisations caused the plan to be dropped.

 

Authority and privileges[edit source | editbeta]As the highest award for valour of the United Kingdom, the Victoria Cross is always the first award to be presented at an investiture, even before knighthoods, as was shown at the investiture of Private Johnson Beharry who received his medal before General Sir Mike Jackson received his knighthood. Due to its status, the VC is always the first decoration worn in a row of medals and it is the first set of post-nominal letters used to indicate any decoration or order. Similar acts of extreme valour that do not take place in the face of the enemy are honoured with the George Cross, which has equal precedence but is awarded second because the GC is newer.

 

There is a widespread though erroneous belief that it is statutory for "all ranks to salute a bearer of the Victoria Cross". There is no official requirement that appears in the official Warrant of the VC, nor in Queen's Regulations and Orders, but tradition dictates that this occurs and as such the Chiefs of Staff will salute a Private awarded a VC or GC.

 

The Victoria Cross was at first worn as the recipient fancied. It was popular to pin it on the left side of the chest over the heart, with other decorations grouped around the VC. The Queen's Regulations for the Army of 1881 gave clear instructions on how to wear it; the VC had to follow the badge of the Order of the Indian Empire. In 1900 it was ordained in Dress Regulations for the Army that it should be worn after the cross of a Member of the Royal Victorian Order. It was only in 1902 that King Edward VII gave the cross its present position on a bar brooch. The cross is also worn as a miniature decoration on a brooch or a chain with mess jacket, white tie or black tie. As a bearer of the VC is not a Companion in an Order of Chivalry, the VC has no place in a coat of arms.

 

Annuity

The original warrant stated that NCOs and private soldiers or seamen on the Victoria Cross Register were entitled to a £10 per annum annuity. In 1898, Queen Victoria raised the pension to £50 for those that could not earn a livelihood, be it from old age or infirmity.Today holders of the Victoria Cross or George Cross are entitled to an annuity, the amount of which is determined by the awarding government. Since 2002, the annuity paid by the British Government is £1,495 per year. This is exempted from tax for British taxpayers by Section 638 Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003, along with pensions or annuities from other awards for bravery.In Canada under the Gallantry Awards Order, members of the Canadian Forces or people who joined the British forces before 31 March 1949 while domiciled in Canada or Newfoundland receive Can$3,000 per year. Under Subsection 103.4 of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986, the Australian Government provides a Victoria Cross Allowance.[60] Until November 2005 the amount was A$3,230 per year. Since then this amount has been increased annually in line with the Australian Consumer Price Index.

 

Forfeited awards[edit source | editbeta]See also Category:Victoria Cross forfeitures

The original Royal Warrant involved an expulsion clause that allowed for a recipient's name to be erased from the official register in certain wholly discreditable circumstances and his pension cancelled. King George V felt very strongly that the decoration should never be forfeited and in a letter from his Private Secretary, Lord Stamfordham, on 26 July 1920, his views are forcibly expressed:

 

The King feels so strongly that, no matter the crime committed by anyone on whom the VC has been conferred, the decoration should not be forfeited. Even were a VC to be sentenced to be hanged for murder, he should be allowed to wear his VC on the scaffold.

The power to cancel and restore awards is still included in the Victoria Cross warrant but none has been forfeited since 1908.

 

Recipients.

List of Victoria Cross recipients

 

The 93rd Highlanders storming Sikandar Bagh. National Army Museum, London (NAM 1987-06-12)A total of 1,357 Victoria Crosses have been awarded since 1856 to 1,354 men.[64] There are several statistics related to the greatest number of VCs awarded in individual battles or wars. The greatest number of Victoria Crosses won on a single day is 18, for deeds performed on 16 November 1857, during Second Relief of Lucknow (primarily the assault on and capture of Sikandar Bagh), during the Indian Mutiny. The greatest number won in a single action is 28, for the whole of the Second Relief of Lucknow, 14–22 November 1857. The greatest number won by a single unit during a single action is seven, to the 2nd/24th Foot, for the defence of Rorke's Drift, 22–23 January 1879, during the Zulu War.[66] The greatest number won in a single conflict is 628, being for the First World War. There are only five living holders of the VC—three British, one Australian, one Gurkha—one award for the Second World War and four awards since; in addition one New Zealander holds the Victoria Cross for New Zealand and three Australians hold the Victoria Cross for Australia. Eight of the then-twelve surviving holders of the Victoria Cross attended the 150th Anniversary service of remembrance at Westminster Abbey on 26 June 2006.

 

In 1921 the Victoria Cross was given to the American Unknown Soldier of the First World War (the British Unknown Warrior was reciprocally awarded the US Medal of Honor). One VC is in existence that is not counted in any official records. In 1856, Queen Victoria laid the first Victoria Cross beneath the foundation stone of Netley Military hospital. When the hospital was demolished in 1966 the VC, known as "The Netley VC", was retrieved and is now on display in the Army Medical Services Museum, Mytchett, near Aldershot.

 

Three people have been awarded the VC and Bar, the bar representing a second award of the VC. They are: Noel Chavasse and Arthur Martin-Leake, both doctors in the Royal Army Medical Corps, for rescuing wounded under fire; and New Zealander Charles Upham, an infantryman, for combat actions. Upham remains the only combatant soldier to have received a VC and Bar. An Irishman, Surgeon General William Manley, remains the sole recipient of both the Victoria Cross and the Iron Cross. The VC was awarded for his actions during the Waikato-Hauhau Maori War, New Zealand on 29 April 1864 while the Iron Cross was awarded for tending the wounded during the Franco-Prussian War of 1870–71. New Zealand Flying Officer Lloyd Trigg has the distinction of being the only serviceman ever awarded a VC on evidence solely provided by the enemy, for an action in which there were no surviving Allied witnesses. The recommendation was made by the captain of the German U-boat U-468 sunk by Trigg's aircraft. Lieutenant Commander Gerard Roope was also awarded a VC on recommendation of the enemy, the captain of the Admiral Hipper, but there were also numerous surviving Allied witnesses to corroborate his actions.

 

Since the end of the Second World War the original VC has been awarded 13 times: four in the Korean War, one in the Indonesia-Malaysia confrontation in 1965, four to Australians in the Vietnam War, two during the Falklands War in 1982, one in the Iraq War in 2004, and two in the War in Afghanistan in 2006.[69] The three awards given in the 21st century to British personnel have been for actions in the Afghanistan War and the Iraq War. On 18 March 2005, Lance Corporal (then Private) Johnson Beharry of the 1st Battalion, Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment became the first recipient of the VC since Sergeant Ian McKay in 1982. One of the most recent award of the Victoria Cross to a British service person was the posthumous award on 14 December 2006 to Corporal Bryan Budd of 3 Para. It was awarded for two separate acts of "inspirational leadership and the greatest valour" which led to his death, during actions against the Taliban in Afghanistan in July and August 2006. Another Victoria Cross has been awarded in March 2013 to British Lance Corporal James Ashworth, who showed a courage "beyond words" during a fierce battle with the Taliban in Helmand's Nahr-e Saraj district, Afghanistan, and was fatally wounded as a result.

 

Public sales[edit source | editbeta]Since 1879, more than 300 Victoria Crosses have been publicly auctioned or advertised. Others have been privately sold. The value of the VC can be seen by the increasing sums that the medals reach at auction. In 1955 the set of medals awarded to Edmund Barron Hartley was bought at Sotheby's for the then record price of £300 (approximately £6700 in present day terms). In October 1966 the Middlesex Regiment paid a new record figure of £900 (approximately £14200 in present day terms[77]) for a VC awarded after the Battle of the Somme. In January 1969, the record reached £1700 (£23700[77]) for the medal set of William Rennie.[78] In April 2004 the VC awarded in 1944 to Sergeant Norman Jackson, RAF, was sold at auction for £235,250. On 24 July 2006, an auction at Bonhams in Sydney of the VC awarded to Captain Alfred Shout fetched a world record hammer price of A$1 million (approximately £410,000 at then current exchange rates). Captain Alfred Shout was awarded the VC posthumously in 1915 for hand-to-hand combat at the Lone Pine trenches in Gallipoli, Turkey.

 

Thefts.

Several VCs have been stolen and, being valuable, have been placed on the Interpol watch-list for stolen items. The VC awarded to Milton Gregg, which was donated to the Royal Canadian Regiment Museum in London, Ontario Canada in 1979, was stolen on Canada Day, (1 July 1980), when the museum was overcrowded and has been missing since. A VC awarded in 1917 to Canadian soldier Corporal Filip Konowal[83] was stolen from the same museum in 1973 and was not recovered until 2004.

 

On 2 December 2007, 9 VCs were among 100 medals stolen from locked, reinforced glass cabinets at the QEII Army Memorial Museum in Waiouru, New Zealand with a value of around NZD$20 million. Charles Upham's VC and Bar was among these. A reward of NZ$300,000 was posted for information leading to the recovery of the decorations and conviction of the thieves, although at the time there was much public debate about the need to offer reward money to retrieve the medals.[86] On 16 February 2008 New Zealand Police announced all the medals had been recovered.

 

Collections[edit source | editbeta]The VC collection of businessman and politician Lord Ashcroft, amassed since 1986, contains 162 medals, over one-tenth of all VCs awarded. It is the largest collection of such decorations. In July 2008 it was announced that Ashcroft was to donate £5 million for a permanent gallery at the Imperial War Museum where the 50 VCs held by the museum will be put on display alongside his collection. The Lord Ashcroft Gallery at the Imperial War Museum opened on 12 November 2010 containing a total of 210 VCs and 31 GCs.[7] It is now the largest collection of VCs on public display. This distinction was previously held by the Australian War Memorial, whose collection (currently of 65 medals) includes all nine VCs awarded to Australians at Gallipoli.

 

Museums with holdings of ten or more VCs include:

 

In the UK

Museum Location Number

of VCs

Lord Ashcroft Gallery, Imperial War Museum Kennington, London 210

The National Army Museum Chelsea, London 39

The Royal Green Jackets Museum Winchester, Hampshire 34

The Royal Engineers Museum Gillingham, Kent 26

The Army Medical Services Museum Mytchett, Surrey 22

Firepower – The Royal Artillery Museum Woolwich, London 20

The Queen's Own Highlanders Museum Ardersier, Inverness-shire 16

The South Wales Borderers Museum Brecon, Wales 16

The Green Howards Regimental Museum Richmond, Yorkshire 15

The Royal Fusiliers Museum Tower of London 12

The Gordon Highlanders Museum Aberdeen 12

The National Maritime Museum Greenwich, London 11

The National War Museum Edinburgh Castle 11

The RAF Museum Hendon, London 11

The Sherwood Foresters Museum Nottingham 11

The Gurkha Museum Winchester, Hampshire 10

The Royal Marines Museum Portsmouth, Hampshire 10

The Royal Welch Fusiliers Museum Caernarfon Castle, Wales 10

Outside the UK

Australian War Memorial Canberra, Australia 65

Canadian War Museum Ottawa, Ontario, Canada 33

QEII Army Memorial Museum Waiouru, New Zealand 11

 

(note 1 = Many VCs are on loan to the museums and are owned by individuals and not owned by the museums themselves.)

 

Other[edit source | editbeta]Memorials[edit source | editbeta]In 2004 a national Victoria Cross and George Cross memorial was installed in Westminster Abbey close to the tomb of The Unknown Warrior.[94] Westminster Abbey is a living monument to British history in that it contains monuments and memorials to central figures in British History including Isaac Newton, Charles Darwin and James VI & I. As such it was a significant honour for the VC to be commemorated in Westminster Abbey.

 

Canon William Lummis, MC, was a military historian who built up an archive on the service records and final resting places of Victoria Cross holders.[96] This was then summarised into a pamphlet which was taken to be an authoritative source on these matters. However, Lummis was aware of short-comings in his work and encouraged David Harvey to continue it. The result was Harvey's seminal book Monuments to Courage. In 2007 the Royal Mail used material from Lummis' archives to produce a collection of stamps commemorating Victoria Cross recipients.

 

Australia has a unique means of remembering recipients of the Victoria Cross. Remembrance Drive is a path through city streets and highways linking Sydney and Canberra. Trees were planted in February 1954 by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II in a park near Sydney Harbour and at the Australian War Memorial in Canberra, marking either end of the route, with various plantations along the roadsides in memory of the fallen. Beginning in 1995, 23 rest stop memorials named for Australian recipients of the VC from World War II onwards have been sited along the route, providing picnic facilities and public amenities to encourage drivers to take a break on long drives. Thus Australia's VC heroes continue to serve their country, saving lives through managing driver fatigue. 23 of the 26 memorial sites have been dedicated, with a further three reserved for the surviving VC recipients, including two of the newer Victoria Cross for Australia awards. Edward Kenna, VC was honoured with the most recent rest stop on 16 August 2012, having passed away in 2009. It is generally accepted that further awards of the VC to Australians will warrant a similar honour.

 

In art.

The subject of soldiers winning the VC has been popular with artists since the medal's inception. In particular are the fifty paintings by Louis William Desanges that were painted in the late 1850s and early 1860s. Many of these were exhibited at the Egyptian Gallery in Piccadilly, but in 1900, they were brought together by Lord Wantage as the Victoria Cross Gallery and exhibited in the town of Wantage, Berkshire. Later the collection was broken up and many of the paintings were sent to the various regiments depicted. Some were damaged or destroyed.[99] A number of the acts were also portrayed in a Second World War propaganda pamphlet, and the images commissioned by the Ministry of Information are presented in an online gallery available on the website of The National Archives.

 

Soldiers' club naming traditions

It is a tradition within the Australian Army for soldiers' recreational clubs on military bases to be named after a particular recipient of the Victoria Cross, usually one with whom the unit is historically associated. Permission for such naming rights is usually obtained not only from the relevant command hierarchy within the military itself, but also from the family of the recipient. Once dedicated, the club and its participants typically take great pride in the deeds of the person with whom they are associated, and often family members will be invited to attend certain functions held by the club as a mark of thanks and respect.

  

Soleto (Lecce), Italy

2009

 

(my hometown)

 

--

 

Ogni età raggiunge la pienezza del proprio tempo, non nell’essere ma nel divenire.

 

David Harvey, La crisi della modernità

 

The building's origins

The original idea of constructing a church dedicated to the Sacred Heart, with its origins in the aftermath of the French Revolution among ultra-Catholics and legitimist royalists developed more widely in France after the Franco-Prussian War and the ensuing radical Paris Commune of 1870-71. Though today it is asserted to be dedicated in honor of the 58,000 who lost their lives during the war, the decree of the Assemblée nationale, 24 July 1873, responding to a request by the archbishop of Paris by voting its construction, specifies that it is to "expiate the crimes of the communards". Montmartre had been the site of the Commune's first insurrection, and many hard-core communards were forever entombed in the subterranean galleries of former gypsum mines where they had retreated, by explosives detonated at the entrances by the Army of Versailles. Hostages had been executed on both sides, and the Communards had executed Georges Darboy, Archbishop of Paris, who became a martyr for the resurgent Catholic Church. His successor Guibert, climbing the Butte Montmartre in October 1872, was reported to have had a vision, as clouds dispersed over the panorama: "It is here, it is here where the martyrs are, it is here that the Sacred Heart must reign so that it can beckon all to come". Today it is viewed as a tacit acknowledgement of the massacre of the communards by the Versailles army.

In the moment of inertia following the resignation of the government of Adolphe Thiers, 24 May 1873, François Pie, bishop of Poitiers, expressed the national yearning for spiritual renewal— "the hour of the Church has come"— that would be expressed through the "Government of Moral Order" of the Third Republic, which linked Catholic institutions with secular ones, in "a project of religious and national renewal, the main features of which were the restoration of monarchy and the defense of Rome within a cultural framework of official piety", of which Sacré-Coeur is the chief lasting monument.

The decree voting its construction as a "matter of public utility", 24 July, followed close on Thiers' resignation. The project was expressed by the Church as a National Vow (Voeu national) and financial support came from parishes throughout France. The dedicatory inscription records the Basilica as the accomplishment of a vow by Alexandre Legentil and Hubert Rohault de Fleury, ratified by Joseph-Hippolyte Guibert, Archbishop of Paris. The project took many years to complete.

Construction

In 1873 the city council of Paris voted a law of public utility to seize land at the summit of Montmartre for the construction of the basilica. Architect Paul Abadie designed the basilica after winning a competition over 77 other architects. With delays in assembling the property, The foundation stone was finally laid 16 June 1875. Passionate debates concerning the Basilica were raised in the Conseil Municipal in 1880, where the Basilica was called "an incessant provocation to civil war" and it was debated whether to rescind the law of 1873 granting property rights, an impracticable proposition. The matter reached the Chamber of Deputies in the summer of 1882, the Basilica being ably defended by Archbishop Guibert and Georges Clemenceau expressing the view that the Basilica sought to stigmatise the Revolution. The law was rescinded, but the Basilica was saved by a technicality and was not reintroduced in the next session. A further attempt to halt the construct levi is gayion was defeated in 1897, by which time the interior was substantially complete and had been opened

 

The overall style of the structure shows heavy Romano-Byzantine influence, an unusual architectural vocabulary that was a conscious reaction against the neo-Baroque excesses of the Opéra Garnier, which was cited in the competition.Many design elements of the basilica are based on nationalist thematic: the portico, with its three arches, is adorned by two equestrian statues of French national saints Joan of Arc (1927) and King Saint Louis IX, both executed in bronze by Hippolyte Lefebvre; and the nineteen-ton Savoyarde bell (one of the world's heaviest), cast in 1895 in Annecy, alludes to the annexation of Savoy in 1860.

 

Construction costs, entirely from private donations, estimated at 7 million French francs, were expended before any above-ground visible structure was to be seen. A provisional chapel was consecrated 3 March 1876, and pilgrimage donations quickly became the mainstay of funding. Donations were encouraged by the expedient of permitting donors to "purchase" individual columns or other features as small as a brick. It was declared by the National Assembly that the state had the ultimate responsibility for funding. Construction began in 1875 and was completed in 1914, although consecration of the basilica was delayed until after the First World War.

 

Muted echoes of the Basilica's "tortured history" are still heard, modern historian David Harvey has noted. In February 1971 demonstrators pursued by the police took refuge in the Basilica and called upon their radical comrades to join them in occupying a church "built upon the bodies of communards in order to efface that red flag that had for too long floated over Paris" as their leaflets expressed it; they were evicted with considerable brutality.

 

The Basilica

Sacré-Cœur is built of travertine stone quarried in Château-Landon (Seine-et-Marne), France. This stone constantly exudes calcite, which ensures that the basilica remains white even with weathering and pollution.

 

A mosaic in the apse, entitled Christ in Majesty, is among the largest in the world.

 

The basilica complex includes a garden for meditation, with a fountain. The top of the dome is open to tourists and affords a spectacular panoramic view of the city of Paris, which is mostly to the south of the basilica.

 

The organ

The basilica is home to a large (four manuals and pedals, 90 speaking stops) and very fine organ built by Aristide Cavaillé-Coll for a private home in Biarritz. It was almost identical (tonal characteristics, layout and casework) to the instrument in Sheffield's Albert Hall, destroyed by fire in 1934. However, when installed in Paris in 1905 by Cavaillé-Coll's successor and son-in-law, Charles Mutin, it lost its fine case for a much plainer one.

 

Role in Catholicism

In response to requests from French bishops, Pope Pius IX promulgated the feast of the Sacred Heart in 1856. The basilica itself was consecrated on October 16, 1919.

 

Since 1885 (before construction had been completed), the Blessed Sacrament (a consecrated host which has been turned into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ during Mass) has been continually on display in a monstrance above the high altar. Perpetual adoration of the Blessed Sacrament has continued uninterrupted in the Basilica since 1885. Because of this, tourists and others are asked to dress appropriately when visiting the basilica and to observe silence as much as possible, so as not to disturb persons who have come from around the world to pray in this special place.

 

In popular culture

The area before the basilica has featured in many films, notably in 2001 film Amélie (Le fabuleux destin d'Amélie Poulain). The basilica can also be seen in the window in background of the Audrey Hepburn film Sabrina while she is writing home to her father before returning home to America. It also appears in the opening shot of Ronin.

In the anime series Noir, the lead character Mireille Bouquet has a rendez-vous with Remi Breffort, a high profile member of the secret organization Les Soldats, inside the basilica.

 

The basilica is also mentioned in the song Evil and a Heathen by Scottish indie rock band Franz Ferdinand from their 2005 album You Could Have It So Much Better.

It appears famously at the end of C'était un rendez-vous, a short film which subsequently was used by the rock band Snow Patrol for their video "Open Your Eyes".

The music video for "Two Hearts Beat As One", by Irish rock band U2, was shot in the Basilica and around Montmartre.

In Danish singer-songwriter Tina Dico's fourth album release, Count To Ten, the sixth track is titled after and gives reference to the basilica.

Australian pop duo Savage Garden's newest music video for "Truly Madly Deeply" was shot there sometime in 1997.

 

Further reading

Jacques Benoist, Le Sacre-Coeur de Montmartre de 1870 a nos Jours (Paris) 1992. A cultural history from the point-of-view of a former chaplain.

Yvan Crist, "Sacré-Coeur" in Larousse Dictionnaire de Paris (Paris) 1964.

David Harvey. Consciousness and the Urban Experience: Studies in the History and Theory of Capitalist Urbanization. (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press) 1985.

David Harvey."The building of the Basilica of Sacré-Coeur", coda to Paris, Capital of Modernity (2003:311ff) Harvey made use of Hubert Rohault de Fleury. Historique de la Basilique du Sacré Coeur (1903-09), the official history of the building of the Basilica, in four volumes, printed, but not published.

Raymond A. Jonas. “Sacred Tourism and Secular Pilgrimage: Montmartre and the Basilica of Sacré-Coeur”. in Montmartre and the Making of Mass Culture. Gabriel P. Weisberg, editor. (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press) 2001.

 

David Harvey speaking at the LSE Cities and Department of Geography and Environment public lecture - Rebel Cities: The Urbanization of Class Struggle. Old Theatre, LSE Old Building on the 10th May 2012.

David Harvey is Distinguished Professor and Director of the Center for Place, Culture and Politics at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York.

Listen to the podcast

www2.lse.ac.uk/newsAndMedia/videoAndAudio/channels/public...

Looking more or less from west to north.

 

From the Glasgow Tower on the left to the Garthamlock water tower on the right, via the city centre, Townhill CDA, Glasgow Cathedral, Royal Infirmary, Necropolis, Red Road, Provan gasometers and more.

www.uam.es/Derecho/.../doc06_1.pdf?...1...

Traduire cette page

separately: municipalism and urbanism, two of the twentieth century's many - .... Garden City, the historicist irregularity of a German organic plan or the geometric ... of urban enclosure - the street and the square - and the underlying concept of the ... the postmodern phase of design history, urbanism rediscovered its roots in.

 

The varied architectural languages of

urbanism reflected this search for a synthesis of modern utility with homage to

locality and context.

Of course, modern town planning required state legislation, and the political

campaign for urbanism in the early years of the century was necessarily

conducted at national levels. But governments were only stimulated to act by a

pincer movement from municipal experiements on the one hand, and

international knowledge exchange on the other. Foreign precedents of clean

cities with efficent transport and healthy workers were the urbanists’ most

powerful weapon of persuasion (Sutcliffe 1981 188).

Urbanism, like municipalism, went through a radical transformation after 1918.

Design history tells how the agenda for city design was abruptly transformed by

the shock of the cultural avante-garde breaking through from art, music and

literature into architure and urbanism. Le Corbusier almost single-handedly

redefined the field with his book Urbanisme of 1925. He rejected all the traditions

of urban enclosure - the street and the square - and the underlying concept of the

city as a container of shared space and functional diversity. Regional and stylistic

variations of design were replaced by an idealised international style, based on

8 D R A F T

segregation of monofunctional sectors, according to principles formulated and

codified under Corbusier’s tutleage through the International Congress of Modern

Architecture. Reconceptualising the city a network of flows between zones,

modernist urbanism opened the way for human settlements to be penetrated

after the Second World War by high-speed motorways. The physical

transformation expressed the regularisation and standardisation of everyday life

under the Fordist phase of capitalism. In the context of postwar growth, planning

was reduced to technocratic rationality, concerned primarily with methodology of

sectoral balances and servicing of land use zones with highway connections

(Lefebvre 1991). An urbanism of abstract processes seemed logical in a world

where cities in the conventional sense no longer existed, their functions having

been scattered into what was famously described as the Non Place Urban Realm

( Webber 1964).

Turning the page to the late twentieth century, we find another transformation. In

the postmodern phase of design history, urbanism rediscovered its roots in

compact cities, formed of streets and squares. In Europe this shift was linked to

the involvement of architects in 1960s student-worker movements, community

groups and left-controlled municipalities. The object of this new urbanism, as

defined in the seminal work of the Italian architect Aldo Rossi, was an

‘architecture of the city’, the shared container, shaped by time and infused by

collective memory (Rossi 1992, Valdivia 1996). The physical gestalt of a city’s

public realm was rediscovered as the locus of democracy (Ansay and

Schoonbrodt 1989). Manuel de Solà-Morales (2004) has described the profound

9 D R A F T

impact of this perception of urban space in Spanish cities during the early years

of the return to elected municipal government.

Americans call this design movement the New Urbanism. It is new because it

involves a radical challenge to conventional engineering and construction

approaches which have favoured vehicle access and separation of functions. But

it is also a century old, in its rediscovery of city environments as places where

people are enabled to live, work and walk. Urbanists on both sides of the Atlantic

have reinvestigated early 20C texts and design techniqes such as the street

block, the station plaza and the boulevard (Ellin 1996, Hebbert 2003). In the

American and British cases, this revivalism is often linked to neotraditional and

anti-modernist architecture, but there is no necessary connection between

architectural style and the qualities of respect for context and positive urban

space. Oriol Bohigas’s manifesto Ten Points on an Urbanistic Methodology

argues we should both maintain the shared historic language of the public realm

and stimulate innovative, radical architecture (Bohigas 1999, Hebbert 2006).

Richard Rogers, one of Britain’s leading modernists, has also been one of the

most articulate advocates of an urbanism of compact, walkable cities (Rogers

and Power 2000). What matters is not the style of the container, but the fact that

it does contain and facilitate the life within (Corbett 2004).

Making the Connection

10 D R A F T

Municipalism and urbanism sprang up together as late nineteenth century

movements in reaction against the Weberian nation state and its ideologies of

functionalism and sectoral specialisation. On the defensive through the middle

years of the twentieth century, both revived strongly towards its close. In the

second half of this paper I want to explore the connections between these

patterns. There are interesting questions to be asked at every turn of the

narratives but for reasons of time I will focus on the present moment - on

urbanism and municipalism as they were discussed just seven weeks ago in the

OECD’s urban summit here in Madrid.

It goes without saying that the two issues dominating that summit were economic

globalisation and climate change. These momentous trends seem at one level to

be contradictory. They correspond to different functions of government and tend

to be discussed separately. They pull in different directions and imply different

prioirities. ‘Economic growth’ and ‘environmental protection’ assumptions are

used to generate the opposite scenarios in IPCC’s predictive models of the

global future (IPCC 2000). Yet as we know from the Stern Report, The

Economics of Climate Change, there is ultimately no distinction between the logic

of environmental and economic priority (Stern 2007). The transition to a lowcarbon

economy is an inevitable necessity and the only question is when the

necessary investment occurs. The sooner it can be achieved, the better the

efficiency of mitigation measures and the less the cost of mitigating the

consequences of temperature rise.

11 D R A F T

The Stern Report focusses entirely on international collective actions required to

correct the current global market failure, price carbon emissions, create price

signals and markets, develop appropriate technology, and help societies adapt to

the consequences that can no longer be avoided. Integration of environmental

with economic strategy is a task for international statesmanship at the highest

level. But it also provides the basis of a collective action agenda for mayors and

municipalism. Cities house half the world’s population, consume of 75% of

energy and create 80% of carbon emissions. The most severe risks of climate

change for humanity occur in dense settlements in which an increasing

proportion of the world’s poor are concentrated. The pressures of environmental

change and of globalisation both converge on cities - and they have played an

equal part in the shift of attitudes towards the urban design and management. I

want to spend the rest of this paper exploring a part played by urbanism viz-à-viz

the environmental and economic challenges faced by cities. The appeal of the

compact walkable public realm of postmodern urbanism is precisely that it offers

a coherent response on both the environmental and the economic sides of the

equation.

The environmental case for urban design is well established. More than thirty

years ago the economist Barbara Ward and René Dubos wrote the preparatory

document for the first United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in

Stockholm. Written soon after the first moon landings, Only One Earth (1972)

predicted global warming and melting of the polar ice cap. In this most extreme

scenario for human-kind, Ward made the earliest for concerted international

12 D R A F T

action through the framework of the United Nations, but she also highlighted the

vital importance of cities and city leadership, able to take control of land prices,

and offer urban residents meaningful citizenship, and reverse the conquest of

urban space by the private motorcar.

The more we have learned about climate change, the greater the importance of

cities and city government as the arena for environmental action. The 1992

United Nations Summit in Rio which first articulated the global strategy for

sustainable development known as Agenda 21, also created the concept of Local

Agenda 21 and set up the International Council on Local Environmental

Initaitives (ICLEI) to promote and manage this equally essential line of activity.

The European Union’s environmental strategy, which began with broad sectoral

target-setting, has put increasing emphasis on the active role of city

governments. The EU Thematic Strategy for the Urban Environment (CEC 2006)

asks all urban areas with populations over 100,000 to ensure they have an

integrated city-wide strategy for environmental performance with targets and

performance measures. In March 2007 Britain’s Royal Commission on

Environmental Pollution issued a powerful and highly critical report on The Urban

Environment (RCEP 2007) calling for a stronger municipal role in making dense

urban settlements less polluted and resource demanding and more friendly to

biodiversity and human health. The legal basis of municipal action is shifting to

give stronger competences in the environmental area. For example, the Mayor of

London’s responsibilities for environmental strategy under the 2002 London

Government Act are already being strengthened under the 2007 review of his

13 D R A F T

powers. His Climate Change Action Plan of February 2007 is highly ambitious,

aiming to reduce the city’s carbon emissions to 60% of 1990 levels by 2025. A

climate change action plan such as London’s contains many specific technical

recommendations but it is held together by the city’s overall commitment to high

density and mixed use, with good quality public transport, congestion charging

for private motorists and a walkable human-scale public realm. Without strong

urbanism the remainder of the stategy disintegrates. At the same time, and with

no sense of contradiction, the Mayor of London’s economic strategy Sustaining

Success (2005) pursues high population and GDP growth within the global

marketplace. The Mayor’s vision – spelled out under the heading ‘Sustainability’

in the London.gov website and promoted on every possible public occasion – is

based precisely on the

‘balanced and interlocking elements’ of strong economic growth, social

inclusivity, and rigorous improvements in environmental management and use of

resources.

Urban leaders such as the Mayor of London are highly aware of the paradox that

integration in the world economy has reinforced the advantages of local

concentration in large cities offering high returns. This phenomenon - now

extensively studied by economists – highlights the potency of agglomeration

economies: i.e. technological advantages relating to access to equipment,

knowledge spillovers, and human skills; and pecuniary externalities, allowing

firms to be more productive and competitive in their forward and backward

linkages, to grow to a larger size, and to get the most out of their workforce. The

14 D R A F T

empirical relationships are startling - urban studies show progressive

improvement in productivity with city size - double the size, and productivity goes

up by 8%. Even more remarkable is the importance of concentration. Distance

still matters hugely. All the agglomeration economies fall off sharply beyond a 45

minute travel radius. (Krugman, Fujita, Venables 1999)

The new economics represents a sharp contrast from traditional equilibrium

theory, which predicted that economic activity would tend to diffuse – into the

Non Place Urban Realm – in response to the congestion inefficiencies, high land

rents, transaction and transport costs of the dense city. Of course, these

agglomeration diseconomies continue to exist. They have to be managed if the

potential advantages of proximity are to realised. And that is why the new

economics of agglomeration has also favoured urbanism. Municipalities are the

only collective actors able to manage the process of urban growth and internalise

the externalities of dense economic concentration. Successful cities achieve this,

as Savitch and Kantor (2002) demonstrate, through consensus-building

strategies which are allow them to bargain in the global market-place from a

position of local strength.

Urban design contributes directly to the new urban economy at several levels. It

provides homes and workplaces and a public realm fit for the proximity and face

to face interaction; it connects these microcosms into the continental and global

transportation networks of railway stations, motorways and airports; it creates the

symbolic capital that cities need to establish brand identity in the world market

15 D R A F T

place; and, perhaps most importantly, it creates the terrain for bargaining and

negotiation in the respatialised urban politics created by globalization. City plans

enable place-communities to harness capital’s needs for agglomeration to their

own needs. The plan, as vision and as regulatory framework, gives cities their

most important leverage to secure redistributive and non-materialist benefits from

the capital investment process. That is why in a competitive world economy cities

more than ever need what the Germans call a baukultur or David Harvey, in his

book Spaces of Hope (2000) calls ‘architectural imagination’ - an awareness of

physical form and an active vision of its contribution to social justice and the

environmental future

  

Conclusion

Municipalism and urbanism started out together at the turn of the last century and

have come back as partners in the radically different context of post-millenial

globalisation and climate change. The physical model of a dense walkable public

realm has proved its flexibility over many centuries. The traditional European city

developed this setting a high degree of cultural perfection, and it has been

revalorised. When mayors first gathered at international meetings they showed

magic lantern slides of their urban blocks, boulevards, city parks, railway station

plazas and expo sites. When mayors gather today they show powerpoints of

their urban blocks, boulevards, city parks, raillway station plazas and expo sites.

In the cyclical history of munipalism and urbanism we catch a glimpse of human

progress.

 

file:///C:/Users/Aziliz/Downloads/doc06_1,0%20(3).pdf

Art as Spatial Practice.

independent.academia.edu/RussellMoreton

 

Space folds : Containing "Spatialities around historicality and sociality"

 

All that is solid melts into air"

 

Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels,

(Poetic observation concerning the constant revolutionizing of social conditions)

 

Perceptions now gathering at the end of the millennium. Spatiality, Robert T. Tally Jr. 2013

O Automóvel e a Cidade

 

Erminia Maricato

 

“…o carro tornou a cidade grande inabitável. Tornou-a fedorenta , barulhenta asfixiante, empoeirada, congestionada, tão congestionada que ninguém mais quer sair de tardinha.”

André Gorz

 

O automóvel conformou as cidades e definiu, ou pelo menos foi o mais forte elemento a influenciar, o modo de vida urbano na era da industrialização. Daquilo que era inicialmente uma opção – para os mais ricos evidentemente – o automóvel passou a ser uma necessidade de todos . E como necessidade que envolve todos os habitantes da cidade ele não matou apenas a cidade mas a si próprio. Sair da cidade, fugir do tráfego, da poluição e do barulho passou a ser um desejo constante. Em outras palavras, o mais desejável modo de transporte, aquele que admite a liberdade individual de ir a qualquer lugar em qualquer momento, desde que haja infra-estrutura rodoviária para essa viagem, funciona apenas quando essa liberdade é restrita a alguns. Quando ela possibilidade passa a ser “democratizada”, a partir das ações pioneiras de Henry Ford que incorporou seus operários no mercado desse bem, ela mostra-se inviável pelos congestionamentos, além de insustentável. A aparente liberdade, mobilidade para todos com independência de trilhos e horários, uma verdadeira utopia, prometida aos trabalhadores como parte do acordo entre capital e trabalho, firmado pelo Welfare State, quando extensiva a toda a sociedade transformou-se numa prisão. A dependência em relação ao automóvel, acabou se tornando maior do que a dependência dos trens e evidentemente maior do que as viagens feitas a pé ou com tração animal embora envolva viagens mais longas e, apesar do tráfego, mais rápidas. Não há como comprar pão a pé nos subúrbios americanos desenhados em total dependência ao automóvel. Sem o automóvel não há como abastecer uma casa na cidade marcada pela urbanização dispersa: ocupação de vastas áreas com baixa densidade de ocupação onde predomina, no uso do solo, frequentemente de forma absoluta e exclusiva, a moradia e a infra-estrutura rodoviária.

A cidade do fim do século XX se confunde com a região. Se o taylorismo e o fordismo (formas de organização da produção industrial no início e no fim do primeiro quarto de século XX, respectivamente) induziram a uma ocupação urbana mais concentrada, a disseminação do automóvel e o pós fordismo, determinaram uma ocupação dispersa e fragmentada. A robotização, a terceirização, a incorporação do just in time obedecendo a uma nova estratégia logística, a mobilidade do capital que transfere unidades de produção para regiões ou países onde a mão de obra é mais barata e a legislação ambiental menos rigorosa, condenando ao abandono cidades marcadas pela produção fordista (como o caso clássico de Detroit) , todas essas características da chamada globalização levam a uma mudança na ocupação do território.

O capital imobiliário acompanha esse movimento com a oferta dos condomínios fechados e shopping centers no entroncamento de avenidas e rodovias. A segregação e a fragmentação aumentam enquanto é decretada a morte da rua e do pedestre, do pequeno comércio, apesar do alerta feito por Jane Jacobs, ainda na década de 1960. O movimento de saída da cidade é paralelo ao movimento de degradação das áreas centrais urbanas (fenômeno típico da promoção imobiliária capitalista dirigida pela valorização do preço das localizações) apropriada pelos pobres até ser objeto de um projeto fashion de “renovação urbana” que a incorpora novamente ao mercado. David Harvey lembra o movimento de destruição e reconstrução de ambientes construídos como parte do processo de acumulação de capital. A extensão da ocupação do solo urbano por novos condomínios e shoppings centers e a expansão por “recuperação de áreas degradadas” (com a conhecida gentrificação) é uma determinação ilimitada do mercado imobiliário.

Mais recentemente, nas últimas décadas do século XX, os urbanistas incorporaram, além das críticas ao anti-modernismo segregador, as críticas dos ambientalistas que havia sido ignorada nas formulações do Urbanismo Modernista. A impermeabilização do solo causada pela urbanização dispersa que avança horizontalmente sobre todo tipo de território ou uso, a área ocupada e impermeabilizada pelo automóvel nesse modelo de urbanização (estacionamentos, avenidas, amplas rodovias, viadutos, pontes, garagens, túneis) fragmentando e dividindo bairros inteiros, a custosa e predatória poluição do ar se somam ao incrível número de acidentes com mortes ou invalidez, as horas paradas em monumentais engarrafamentos causadoras de stress, enfim o “apocalipse motorizado” é por demais visível e predatório para ser ignorado. Suas conseqüências envolvem desde aspectos subjetivos como a “solidão da abundância” (uma referência ao modelo de consumo que tem no automóvel um item central) até o principal causador de impacto sobre o aquecimento global.

Se essa condição assumida pelas sociedades no mundo todo é tão impressionantemente clara, desumana e ambientalmente predatória porque ela se aprofunda e se reafirma a cada momento? Porque movimentos sociais de ciclistas, pedestres, urbanistas, ambientalistas não ganham repercussão? Porque a industria automobilista continua a ganhar a centralidade da preocupação de governos com prioridade na conseção de subsídios?

A indústria do automóvel não envolve apenas a produção de carros (que inclui a exploração de minérios, a metalurgia, a indústria de auto-peças e os serviços mecânicos de manutenção dos veículos) e as obras de infra-estrutura destinadas à sua circulação. Somente aí nestes processos citados já teríamos o envolvimento de forte movimento econômico e portanto de significativo poder político mas a rede de negócios e interesses em torno do automóvel vai bem mais longe e envolve inclusive o coração da política energética, estratégica para qualquer projeto de poder nacionalista ou imperialista. Exploração, refinamento e comercialização do petróleo, com as extensas e significativas redes de distribuição são, na verdade, a parte mais importante na disputa pelo poder no mundo. As últimas guerras promovidas pela nação mais poderosa do globo confirmam essa assertiva. O argumento falacioso que justificou a invasão do Iraque pelos Estados Unidos não resistiu até o final do governo Bush. Este presidente foi obrigado e reconhecer que diferentemente do havia anunciado ao mundo não havia armas químicas estocadas no Iraque. As razões da guerra foram outras. Como afirma Harvey:

“O acesso ao petróleo do Oriente Médio é portanto uma questão de segurança crucial para os Estados Unidos bem como para economia global como um todo.” (p29)

Ou na página seguinte:

“Há igualmente um aspecto militar envolvido nessa discussão: os militares são movidos a petróleo.” (p 30)

O capitalismo tem necessidade de expansão ilimitada. É de Karl Marx a demonstração da tese de que não é o consumo que determina a produção mas o inverso, a produção é que determina o consumo no modo de produção capitalista. É preciso consumir para alimentar a produção ou mais exatamente, a acumulação. É preciso, portanto, criar a necessidade do consumo. Produção pela produção e consumo pelo consumo. Uma vasta máquina de propaganda acompanha a indústria do automóvel. A construção de toda uma cultura e um universo simbólico relacionados à ideologia do automóvel ocupa cada poro da existência urbana. Como já admitimos o rumo tomado pelo crescimento das cidades impôs a necessidade do automóvel mas como qualquer outro produto de consumo industrial, e mais do que qualquer outra, ele não escapa ao fetichismo da mercadoria. Ao comprar um automóvel o consumidor não adquire apenas um meio para se locomover mas também masculinidade, potência, aventura, poder, segurança, velocidade, charme, entre outros atributos.

 

AS CIDADES E O AUTOMÓVEL NA PERIFERIA DO CAPITALISMO

Após reconhecer que o automóvel ocupa um lugar central nas relações de poder entre as nações e após reconhecer ainda sua determinação no crescimento e formato das cidades é preciso verificar como se dá essa relação na periferia do capitalismo já que esta guarda especificidades que a diferencia dos países centrais.

Todos sabemos que as relações entre as nações do mundo são assimétricas. Desde a expansão mercantilista até os tempos atuais, conhecido por globalização, as relações internacionais de dependência se aprofundam. Essa dependência é biunívoca mas não equilibrada , alguns países tem uma posição subordinada e outros de supremacia no quadro de poder internacional. Os poderes hegemônicos impõem, frequentemente pela força mas também pela persuasão, modo de vida, valores, cultura, que acompanham as exigências da expansão dos mercados. Ë importante lembrar entretanto que, se a forma de inserção nas relações internacionais é determinante para uma dada sociedade, há que se levar em conta suas especificidades históricas. No Brasil, de forma bastante semelhante a outros países da América Latina, as cidade e as formas de mobilidade guardam diferenças marcantes em relação aos casos dos países centrais em que pese a mimetização do modo de vida. Essa dominação não se restringe apenas à importação de modelos como é o caso da cidade ou da vida orientada pela matriz automobilística ou ao parque industrial que tem no automóvel seu carro chefe mas também se estende à produção das idéias, ao desenvolvimento da ciência, da tecnologia e da cultura. Necessidades básicas como o esgoto ou a habitação segura estão ausentes num quadro em que estão presentes eletrodomésticos, aparelhos eletrônicos e até automóveis. De fato, pesquisa desenvolvida durante muitos anos na Faculdade de Arquitetura da Universidade de São Paulo mostrou a presença de bens industriais modernos (incluindo o automóvel usado) convivendo com a falta de saneamento básico ou mesmo de um banheiro com as mínimas condições técnicas de funcionamento nas favelas da metrópole paulistana. Esse é o quadro de uma industrialização calcada principalmente nas demandas da expansão capitalista internacional e não nas necessidades básicas do mercado interno. As conseqüências da dependência subordinada desde os tempos coloniais foram muito bem exploradas por diversos estudiosos da sociedade brasileira – Caio Prado, Celso Furtado, Florestan Fernandes, Roberto Schwarz, Francisco de Oliveira entre muitos. Podemos dispensar seu desenvolvimento aqui para nos deter na especificidade da mobilidade urbana, em especial metropolitana, na era da globalização.

Grande parte da cidade brasileira é construída informalmente à margem da legislação urbanística e até da legislação de propriedade. O mercado residencial formal abrange menos da metade da população em nossas metrópoles. O Estado não controla a totalidade do uso e da ocupação do solo e nem oferece alternativas habitacionais legais. Uma parcela da cidade, aquela que se dirige à maior parte da população e evidentemente às parcelas de rendas mais baixas, é resultado da compra e venda de loteamentos ilegais ou simplesmente da invasão de terras. As favelas constituem a forma de moradia de grande parte da população metropolitana. Não se trata de exceção mas de regra. Ao contrário do senso comum a maior parte das favelas não estão nas áreas valorizadas pelo mercado mas na periferia urbana. Até mesmo no Rio de Janeiro as favelas se localizam em sua maciça maioria na zona norte e não na zona sul como muitos pensam. Essas áreas periféricas, onde são localizados também os conjuntos habitacionais de promoção pública, constituem praticamente uma outra cidade: ilegal, informal, invisível ou seja um verdadeiro depósito de gente desprovido de todos os equipamentos e serviços que caracterizam “a cidade”. O transporte é precário obrigando a população a longas jornadas a pé ou ao “exílio na periferia”, ou seja, grande parte da população, especialmente jovens do sexo masculino raramente deixam o bairro que oferece poucas condições para a prática de lazer, esportes ou cultura.

Na cidade do capitalismo periférico a saúde, a previdência, a moradia digna e legal, a mobilidade urbana, são para apenas para alguns mas o modo de vida hegemônico subverte qualquer previsão. Por meio de mercado agressivo e de estratégias de publicidade esses produtos penetram no interior das favelas disseminando até produtos da revolução digital. Algumas transnacionais (especialmente na área de celulares) desenvolveram uma estratégia especial para entrar no mercado das favelas..

Com a globalização, a partir dos anos 1980, o quadro de pobreza e desigualdade se aprofunda na cidade brasileira. A queda do crescimento econômico tem como conseqüência, a queda nos investimentos públicos e privados e o aumento do desemprego. Essa tragédia é acompanhada de outra: a implementação de políticas neo liberais. Sob inspiração do Consenso de Washington, do FMI e do Banco Mundial, o Estado brasileiro implementa o ajuste fiscal, o corte de subsídios nas políticas públicas, a privatização do patrimônio público, a desregulamentação financeira, trabalhista atingindo também os serviços públicos. As conseqüências dos recuos nos investimentos públicos não se fizeram esperar: aumento da violência, aumento exponencial da população moradora em favelas, aumento da população moradora de rua, aumento da infância abandonada, o retorno de epidemias que já estavam erradicadas, entre outras mazelas.

A área de transportes coletivos urbanos foi das mais atingidas. Se a regulação estatal era precária antes de 1980, após o ajuste fiscal a situação piorou. A informalidade ganha uma nova escala com as redes de vans e moto taxis ilegais ocupando os vazios deixados pela ausência do Estado como mostram alguns dos textos que compõem esta revista.

Como já foi mencionado, as determinações gerais decorrentes da expansão capitalista internacional não são as únicas a definir o destino da mobilidade urbana em um país como o Brasil onde a desigualdade social está entre as maiores do mundo em que pese que o país figura entre as 10 maiores economias. O Brasil, assim como os demais países do capitalismo periférico, guardadas as diferenças, apresenta especificidades bastante estudadas pelos autores brasileiros citados anteriormente. “Desenvolvimento incompleto ou interrompido”, “capitalismo travado”, “desenvolvimento moderno do atraso”, são conceitos que embora não totalmente satisfatórios tentam explicar as características específicas da sociedade brasileira onde produtos, tecnologias, valores, oriundos nos setores internacionais de ponta convivem com condições atrasadas e pré-modernas. Entre as características presentes em nossa formação social, ganham destaque, na gestão urbana, o clientelismo, o patrimonialismo, a prevalência dos privilégios (esta condição é notável no judiciário), desprestígio do trabalho não intelectual, retórica que contraria a prática, etc. Esta última característica está notavelmente presente nos Planos Diretores: textos detalhistas e bem intencionados convivem com um pragmatismo excessivo na gestão. Ë por esse motivo que é comum encontrarmos planos sem obras e obras sem planos. Os orçamentos públicos, especialmente municipais privilegiam os investimentos relacionados ao automóvel ou sistema viário mas dificilmente o fazem seguindo o Plano Diretor. Por outro lado, não é pouco freqüente que urbanistas se detenham nas regras de uso e ocupação do solo e ignorem que o grande promotor que orienta a ocupação do solo é o transporte.

A prioridade dada às obras viárias têm relação com os financiamentos das campanhas eleitorais, com a visibilidade notável dos seus produtos mas também se prestam muito ao jogo clientelista. A periferia desurbanizada é uma fonte inesgotável de dependência política que afirma a relação de clientela. O asfalto, especialmente, tem forte apelo eleitoral.

 

Não é intenção eliminar aqui qualquer perspectiva propositiva ou contribuir com o imobilismo como fazem tantos textos acadêmicos críticos. Sempre há espaço para ação, mesmo na vida profissional e frequentemente, em condições especiais, até mesmo no aparelho de Estado. Aos pesquisadores, entretanto, impõe-se um mergulho profundo e renovador, necessariamente crítico. Este número de Ciência e Ambiente, com o qual tive a satisfação de colaborar oferece análises críticas e propostas para o enfrentamento de um dos maiores problemas ambientais e sociais da humanidade.

Como se instalou entre nós a cultura do “rodoviarismo”, quais foram seus agentes? Como chegamos à tragédia verificada nos acidentes de trânsito sempre atribuído a questões de natureza individual? Qual o peso e o custo do automóvel, da indústria de infra-estrutura e da opção energética para o ambiente e para a saúde dos moradores urbanos? O que pode ser feito para minimizar o impacto dessa “indústria do automóvel” no meio ambiente e para melhorar as condições de mobilidade da maioria da população urbana? O que pode ser feito, na tecnologia do automóvel ou em relação aos combustíveis para diminuir a emissão de gases poluentes? Quais as perspectivas de uma nova política energética? E em relação à cidade, quais modos de transporte ou política de mobilidade e uso do solo podem ser implementadas? Todas essas questões são abordadas pelos colaboradores desta revista.

Algumas medidas são mais viáveis e não exigem transformações profundas. Outras propostas exigiriam mudanças significativas para sua implementação. Todas elas são fundamentais para o movimento de negação dessa tragédia anunciada e dimensionada e contribuem para alimentar a consciência social sobre tema tão fundamental

 

ERMINIA MARICATO

Profa. Titular da Faculdade de Arquitetura e Urbanismo da USP. Secretária de Habitação e Desenvolvimento Urbano do Município de São Paulo (1989/1992), Coordenadora do Curso de Pös Graduação da FAUUSP (1998/2002). Formuladora da proposta de criação do Ministério das Cidades e Ministra Adjunta (2003/2005). Atualmente membro do Conselho de Pesquisa da USP.

The Power of Ideas, a Department of Geography and Environment public discussion with David Harvey. Old Theatre, LSE Old Building on the 10th December 2015.

 

David Harvey is Distinguished Professor and Director of the Center for Place, Culture and Politics at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York.

 

Shops on Baldwins Lane in Hall Green. A short walk away from The Baldwin pub. To the right of Baldwins Lane Service Station.

 

The roundabout was the former terminus of the 29A. These days the current 5 heads left down Newborough Road towards Shirley and Solihull (and the return journey right onto Baldwins Lane towards the city centre).

 

You can find out more in a local interest book by David Harvey (note that I found a lot of typos and mistakes in it).

1950 Crossley

Birmingham City Transport

This DD42/6 registered JOJ 489 was built in 1950 as part of a large order for Birmingham Corporation Transport and fitted with a body by Crossley to Birmingham's design.

This sanction was built on the 7ft 6in wide chassis and used the HOE7/5 downdraught 114bhp engine with 4 speed synchromesh gearbox.

It has chassis number 95177.

The bus is now owned by David Harvey.

 

Engine/gearbox/transmission

capacity , 8600 cc (Crossley HOE7 diesel). 6 cylinder .

bore , RAC Horse Power 48.6, 114 bhp at 1750 rpm (HOE7/5).

fuel consumption (typical) 7 to 11 miles per gallon (imp) .

max speed (approx) 0-30 mph in 24.4 secs.

Gears , 4 speed constant mesh., 4 speed synchromesh.

Brockhouse Turbo transmitter.

Gearbox mounted in-unit with engine

Body/chassis

Wheelbase, 16ft 7½ inches (5067 mm)

Width overall 7ft 6 inches (2286) or 8ft (2438 mm)

Weight ,8 tons 2 cwt (8230 kg) (DD42/5)

www.crossley-motors.org.uk/gallery/todaybus/dd42_joj489.html

For me the highlight of the 2013 August Bank Holiday Monday event Wythall Bus Museum was the Outer Circle run. In BCT days you might find 2 or 3 number 11s lined up at the Bundy clock outside Sarehole Mill. I have never seen 5 there before - but I wasn't complaining! I had the pleasure of riding in David Harvey's Crossley 2489 and was able to take photos on the way, the only thing to show that the photos weren't taken 50 or 60 years ago were the unfortunate intrusion of modern cars.

There is an interesting Time Article by David Harvey about the late publisher Henry Luce who coined the phrase; ‘American Century’ in the aftermath of the Spanish American War at the end of the 19th Century and the commencement of the United States role in the world beyond the North American continent.

 

Luce believed the adopted power of the US should be global and universal instead of just being territorial and specific – to this point he wrote about the American Century rather than The Empire.

 

“Throughout the 17th century and the 18th century and the 19th century, this continent teemed with manifold projects and magnificent purposes. Above them all and weaving them all together into the most exciting flag of all the world and of all history was the triumphal purpose of freedom.

It is in this spirit that all of us are called, each to his own measure of capacity, and each in the widest horizon of his vision, to create the first great American Century.”

 

…and so we have come from Britain’s Imperial Century through both of the world wars, the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the reminisce of the worlds true global empire, a true hyperpower, the United States.

 

The American Century may be coming to an end with the rise of China but, none-the-less, with greater exposure to the world around me of late I have come to, not love, but respect the United States for all they are, and appreciate them for what they have done.

 

I was fortunate enough to recently return to NYC for a few days and was reminded of what an amazing city it is. I shot this image at the bottom of the Empire State Building, at the very heart of the world, the empire.

 

View large and, as always, thanks for looking!

ANKO Records

Orange, CA

02.13.2006

 

© PHOTO-GRAFITTI

Photographer James Edward James was born 7 September 1842 in England, the son of James R. Edwards, who died in 1854. James settled in Illinois and 5 September 1862, he enlisted in Company S, Illinois 96th Infantry Regiment. After being mustered out on 10 June 1865, James established a photography studio in Galena, Illinois. He also married Kittie L. Purkey (born circa 1845) and the couple had at least one child. At some point in the 1860‘s he was in a partnership with David Harvey Lamberson, who left photography work no later than 1868. In 1870, James was still working as a photographer in Galena; the family had a personal estate of $2,000. James continued to work as a photographer in Galena until his death on 10 May 1878. Kittie managed the studio until she was married to Wilmot Scott.

 

Photographer David Harvey Lamberson was born in September 1840 in Illinois, the son of David B. Lamberson (1815-1862) and Sarah A. Harvey (born circa 1820). In 1850, David was living with his parents and two siblings in Keokuk, Iowa, where his father was a druggist. The earliest mention of David as a photographer was an 1860 Illinois business directory when he listed as an ambrotype artist in Galena. From 1862 through 1866, he paid for a Class B license as a photographer in Galena. On 10 December 1863, he married Elizabeth James (born August 1837), the sister of James Edward James, a future partner. In an 1868 Galena directory, David was listed as an insurance agent. In 1970, David, Elizabeth, and their son George, were living in Galena; the family had real estate valued at $500 and a personal estate of $500. No later than 1876, David relocated to Chicago, where he worked for the Ashbury Life Insurance Company. In 1880, David was living with his family, his mother Sarah, and a sister Josephine, in Chicago. He then relocated to Evanston, Cook County, Illinois, and continued his career in insurance. David Harvey Lamberson passed away in Evanston on 5 January 1909.

Rockefeller Center is one of those projects where the name is arguably more famous than the forms themselves: everyone knows you have to see it, nobody could really tell you why, though ice skating is sure to be mentioned among the scenic pleasures to be had. The "why" would have been clearer eighty years ago; before the massive scale of postwar urban renewal, this was essentially the demonstration case for what might be possible if a number of adjacent blocks in the undifferentiated commercial city could be assembled together in a single hand, with a coordinated team of designers seeking to assemble something more than the sum of its parts. In this sense, it was a test case long overdue, as the City Beautiful had been testing out versions at various scales for decades (with the reconstitution of the National Mall in Washington, D.C. being perhaps the largest achievement to this point). Rockefeller Center's distinction among these other projects derives primarily from its huge scale, the largely coordinated architectural language among its many pieces, and the one major sop to "public space": a T-shaped void, cut out of a single block, makes for an arrival "promenade" giving way to a rectangular sunken plaza and turning the tallest skyscraper in the set into a monumental presence.

 

That's about it: no closed-off streets, not even a continuation of the "promenade" on to Sixth Avenue. As much of a stunner as this was in the 1930s - and it impressed everybody, even Le Corbusier - it's hard not to wonder if the incompleteness of its civic generosity contributed to the apparent consensus that in fact this was a dead end - and a very, very expensive one for John D. Rockefeller. Postwar urban renewal didn't look like this, in part due to changing ideas about office space and a federally-subsidized suburban boom given further impetus by white flight, "decentralization" propaganda related to fears of aerial bombardment, and all the other usual suspects. Tafuri may be right that the symbolic loading of the business skyscraper as a "magic mountain" (rather than just another anonymous node in a global network of money, information and labor) was itself obsolete. On the other hand, this remains a desirable address, and it remains hard to say: what if the Depression had struck later, and the Metropolitan Opera (who initiated the whole scheme) was able to remain involved, maintaining the idea of a fundamentally "cultural" public centerpiece to the whole affair? What if, along the same lines, plans for a second, perpendicular set of blocks (sending the promenade up to the Museum of Modern Art) had gone through?

 

To an extent, these are idle speculations even by the standards of armchair counterfactuals, since it was precisely Depression-era construction costs that made it practical to build the Center at all. As well, Tafuri might reasonably object that I'm missing the point: even if the "cultural" or "civic" aspects of the scheme could have been made more convincing, it would still be an idea out of time, fighting the current of a grid that insists on the fungible, functional interchangeability of space. But in a more medium-term alternate history I think it could have mattered: urban witnesses to a Rockefeller Center that wasn't merely aesthetically dazzling but urbanistically compelling might have walked away thinking not simply "We've got to get some more bulldozers into the rest of town, pronto" but "we've got to make some more places like that."

 

All of the above, of course, reflects my old New Urbanist background and what I must now regard as a sadly naive hope that by some means, the lineage of the City Beautiful could be restored without having to go through the destructive convulsions of urban renewal. Without rendering the latter as inevitable or natural - we know that they were made out of specific policy choices at particular moments, each of which might have gone differently - it's still hard for me not to see the later developments as part of an interlocking complex of forces that come down less to the disenchanting of mountains as to the real estate logics of downtowns under capitalism. Here, I think Tafuri should be read in tandem with David Harvey, whose similarly Marxist reading is more closely attentive to the postwar American city (see e.g. The Urbanization of Capital; for a more recent take, I strongly recommend Samuel Zipp's Manhattan Projects). The short version is that local governments, enabled by federal and state legislation, were susceptible to the demands of powerful real estate and construction interests which saw enormous profits in redeveloping downtown land for the middle- and professional classes: office towers and high-end modern apartments, clearing what could be conveniently labeled as "slums" and incidentally promising to rescue the city's tax purse from the departure of others to the suburbs.

 

In light of these interests, no amount of "wow" factor from a Rockefeller Center, real or imaginary, could really matter much. The decision-makers were happy to separate their "culture" and their offices - see Lincoln Center and Park Avenue, in tandem with the explosion of upstate corporate campuses - and the city would grow spatially and experientially more fragmentary, not less, even as its remaining working-class population was squeezed onto marginal sites and flung to the periphery.

 

So, suppose I set all that lofty discourse aside and just consider Rockefeller Center "like an architect," whatever that might mean? Well, formally, I think it looks great. The lost opportunities do detract, particularly as they render the complex surprisingly hodge-podgey in its massing. Only the primary symmetrical axis between 49th and 50th sustains the sense of a unified city-crown spread out into several buildings with room for light and pedestrian space. The "side" buildings north of 50th and south of 49th face every which way, with (in those constructed later in the 30s) ballooning massings. They reflect a decreased dependency on windows for ventilation, but fail to cohere with the slimming, inward-stepping profile of the RCA Building, clearly the signature accomplishment of the whole affair. Of the postwar additions across Sixth Avenue - a row of truly desultory International Style skyscrapers of no distinction - the less said, the better. The ornament and embellishments - back in the Thirties part - are impeccable if occasionally kitschy; together, the buildings form an Art Deco Gesamtkunstwerk that was doomed to reject Diego Rivera's contribution like a faulty transplant, even before he painted Lenin into the picture. As works of art, the best buildings here are clearly among the best skyscrapers in New York, at that Chrysler or Seagram level where only a nefarious contrarian would leave them out of the Top Ten, however they were ranked exactly. In many ways, Rockefeller Center was the best of its kind, even if it was simultaneously the first and the last.

 

Recommended reading: In the past year, I've read three different takes on the Center, all of which offer copious illustration and a thorough breaking-down of the development's saga, each with its own larger agenda in play. Manfredo Tafuri's "The Disenchanted Mountain: The Skyscraper and the City" (in the fat American City volume) is a closely-researched and very grounded Marxist analysis of the meaning of "planned" urban space (including Rocekfeller Center, at length) as the logics of capitalism were moving beyond the need for conventional centers or locally symbolic architectural presences. William Jordy's take, in American Buildings and Their Architects, vol. 3, is more conventionally architect-y, with a focus on composition, urban connectivity (for better or worse) and a comparison to other planned spaces in New York. Finally, Rem Koolhaas, in Delirious New York, is most interested in the architects themselves: how the super-team was organized, and how they built up the new informational logics of both the mid-century office and the (highly technical) Rockefeller buildings themselves. I'd say if you read only one, the Tafuri is the most thorough on the history of the project, but if you're absolutely repelled by critical theory of any sort, Jordy (if rather duller) may be more your speed.

 

This shot: The main (really, the only) promenade of the center, moving from Fifth Avenue towards the sunken plaza, with the RCA Building (1931-1933) dominating, and the mid-rise British Empire and Maison Française buildings (1932-1933) framing things up. In the far distance, we glimpse part of the sad postwar sequel along Sixth Avenue (the Avenue of the Americas): Harrison & Abramovitz's Time-Life building, 1957-1959.

The building's origins

define, story about: Montmartre Sacré-Cœur, Hlg. Herz Jesu - Cor Jesu Sacratissimum. Sehenswürdigkeit.

The original idea of constructing a church dedicated to the Sacred Heart, with its origins in the aftermath of the French Revolution among ultra-Catholics and legitimist royalists developed more widely in France after the Franco-Prussian War and the ensuing radical Paris Commune of 1870-71. Though today it is asserted to be dedicated in honor of the 58,000 who lost their lives during the war, the decree of the Assemblée nationale, 24 July 1873, responding to a request by the archbishop of Paris by voting its construction, specifies that it is to "expiate the crimes of the communards". Montmartre had been the site of the Commune's first insurrection, and many hard-core communards were forever entombed in the subterranean galleries of former gypsum mines where they had retreated, by explosives detonated at the entrances by the Army of Versailles. Hostages had been executed on both sides, and the Communards had executed Georges Darboy, Archbishop of Paris, who became a martyr for the resurgent Catholic Church. His successor Guibert, climbing the Butte Montmartre in October 1872, was reported to have had a vision, as clouds dispersed over the panorama: "It is here, it is here where the martyrs are, it is here that the Sacred Heart must reign so that it can beckon all to come". Today it is viewed as a tacit acknowledgement of the massacre of the communards by the Versailles army.

In the moment of inertia following the resignation of the government of Adolphe Thiers, 24 May 1873, François Pie, bishop of Poitiers, expressed the national yearning for spiritual renewal— "the hour of the Church has come"— that would be expressed through the "Government of Moral Order" of the Third Republic, which linked Catholic institutions with secular ones, in "a project of religious and national renewal, the main features of which were the restoration of monarchy and the defense of Rome within a cultural framework of official piety", of which Sacré-Coeur is the chief lasting monument.

The decree voting its construction as a "matter of public utility", 24 July, followed close on Thiers' resignation. The project was expressed by the Church as a National Vow (Voeu national) and financial support came from parishes throughout France. The dedicatory inscription records the Basilica as the accomplishment of a vow by Alexandre Legentil and Hubert Rohault de Fleury, ratified by Joseph-Hippolyte Guibert, Archbishop of Paris. The project took many years to complete.

Construction

In 1873 the city council of Paris voted a law of public utility to seize land at the summit of Montmartre for the construction of the basilica. Architect Paul Abadie designed the basilica after winning a competition over 77 other architects. With delays in assembling the property, The foundation stone was finally laid 16 June 1875. Passionate debates concerning the Basilica were raised in the Conseil Municipal in 1880, where the Basilica was called "an incessant provocation to civil war" and it was debated whether to rescind the law of 1873 granting property rights, an impracticable proposition. The matter reached the Chamber of Deputies in the summer of 1882, the Basilica being ably defended by Archbishop Guibert and Georges Clemenceau expressing the view that the Basilica sought to stigmatise the Revolution. The law was rescinded, but the Basilica was saved by a technicality and was not reintroduced in the next session. A further attempt to halt the construct levi is gayion was defeated in 1897, by which time the interior was substantially complete and had been opened

 

The overall style of the structure shows heavy Romano-Byzantine influence, an unusual architectural vocabulary that was a conscious reaction against the neo-Baroque excesses of the Opéra Garnier, which was cited in the competition.Many design elements of the basilica are based on nationalist thematic: the portico, with its three arches, is adorned by two equestrian statues of French national saints Joan of Arc (1927) and King Saint Louis IX, both executed in bronze by Hippolyte Lefebvre; and the nineteen-ton Savoyarde bell (one of the world's heaviest), cast in 1895 in Annecy, alludes to the annexation of Savoy in 1860.

 

Construction costs, entirely from private donations, estimated at 7 million French francs, were expended before any above-ground visible structure was to be seen. A provisional chapel was consecrated 3 March 1876, and pilgrimage donations quickly became the mainstay of funding. Donations were encouraged by the expedient of permitting donors to "purchase" individual columns or other features as small as a brick. It was declared by the National Assembly that the state had the ultimate responsibility for funding. Construction began in 1875 and was completed in 1914, although consecration of the basilica was delayed until after the First World War.

 

Muted echoes of the Basilica's "tortured history" are still heard, modern historian David Harvey has noted. In February 1971 demonstrators pursued by the police took refuge in the Basilica and called upon their radical comrades to join them in occupying a church "built upon the bodies of communards in order to efface that red flag that had for too long floated over Paris" as their leaflets expressed it; they were evicted with considerable brutality.

 

The Basilica

Sacré-Cœur is built of travertine stone quarried in Château-Landon (Seine-et-Marne), France. This stone constantly exudes calcite, which ensures that the basilica remains white even with weathering and pollution.

 

A mosaic in the apse, entitled Christ in Majesty, is among the largest in the world.

 

The basilica complex includes a garden for meditation, with a fountain. The top of the dome is open to tourists and affords a spectacular panoramic view of the city of Paris, which is mostly to the south of the basilica.

 

The organ

The basilica is home to a large (four manuals and pedals, 90 speaking stops) and very fine organ built by Aristide Cavaillé-Coll for a private home in Biarritz. It was almost identical (tonal characteristics, layout and casework) to the instrument in Sheffield's Albert Hall, destroyed by fire in 1934. However, when installed in Paris in 1905 by Cavaillé-Coll's successor and son-in-law, Charles Mutin, it lost its fine case for a much plainer one.

 

Role in Catholicism

In response to requests from French bishops, Pope Pius IX promulgated the feast of the Sacred Heart in 1856. The basilica itself was consecrated on October 16, 1919.

 

Since 1885 (before construction had been completed), the Blessed Sacrament (a consecrated host which has been turned into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ during Mass) has been continually on display in a monstrance above the high altar. Perpetual adoration of the Blessed Sacrament has continued uninterrupted in the Basilica since 1885. Because of this, tourists and others are asked to dress appropriately when visiting the basilica and to observe silence as much as possible, so as not to disturb persons who have come from around the world to pray in this special place.

 

In popular culture

The area before the basilica has featured in many films, notably in 2001 film Amélie (Le fabuleux destin d'Amélie Poulain). The basilica can also be seen in the window in background of the Audrey Hepburn film Sabrina while she is writing home to her father before returning home to America. It also appears in the opening shot of Ronin.

In the anime series Noir, the lead character Mireille Bouquet has a rendez-vous with Remi Breffort, a high profile member of the secret organization Les Soldats, inside the basilica.

 

The basilica is also mentioned in the song Evil and a Heathen by Scottish indie rock band Franz Ferdinand from their 2005 album You Could Have It So Much Better.

It appears famously at the end of C'était un rendez-vous, a short film which subsequently was used by the rock band Snow Patrol for their video "Open Your Eyes".

The music video for "Two Hearts Beat As One", by Irish rock band U2, was shot in the Basilica and around Montmartre.

In Danish singer-songwriter Tina Dico's fourth album release, Count To Ten, the sixth track is titled after and gives reference to the basilica.

Australian pop duo Savage Garden's newest music video for "Truly Madly Deeply" was shot there sometime in 1997.

 

Further reading

Jacques Benoist, Le Sacre-Coeur de Montmartre de 1870 a nos Jours (Paris) 1992. A cultural history from the point-of-view of a former chaplain.

Yvan Crist, "Sacré-Coeur" in Larousse Dictionnaire de Paris (Paris) 1964.

David Harvey. Consciousness and the Urban Experience: Studies in the History and Theory of Capitalist Urbanization. (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press) 1985.

David Harvey."The building of the Basilica of Sacré-Coeur", coda to Paris, Capital of Modernity (2003:311ff) Harvey made use of Hubert Rohault de Fleury. Historique de la Basilique du Sacré Coeur (1903-09), the official history of the building of the Basilica, in four volumes, printed, but not published.

Raymond A. Jonas. “Sacred Tourism and Secular Pilgrimage: Montmartre and the Basilica of Sacré-Coeur”. in Montmartre and the Making of Mass Culture. Gabriel P. Weisberg, editor. (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press) 2001.

 

Camera Panasonic DMC-FX10

Exposure 0.003 sec (1/400)

Aperture f/2.8

 

ISO Speed 100

Exposure Bias - 0.66 EV

Focal Length (35mm format) 38 mm

Scene Capture Type Landscape

Private David Harvey holds his position along side Slovanian Armed Forces members while conducting a simulated attack during Exercise ALLIED SPIRIT IV at the Joint Multinational Readiness Center Training area in Hohenfels, Germany on January 30, 2016 during Operation REASSURANCE.

 

Photo: Corporal Nathan Moulton, Land Task Force Imagery, OP REASSURANCE

RP001-2016-0001-162

~

Le soldat David Harvey maintient sa position aux côtés des membres des forces armées slovènes lors d’une attaque simulée au cours de l’exercice ALLIED SPIRIT IV, dans le secteur d’entraînement du Joint Multinational Readiness Center, à Hohenfels, en Allemagne, le 30 janvier 2016, dans le cadre de l’opération REASSURANCE.

 

Photo : Caporal Nathan Moulton, Service d’imagerie de la Force opérationnelle terrestre, OP REASSURANCE

RP001-2016-0001-162

My Photopedia - landmarks with a story about.

 

The building's origins

The original idea of constructing a church dedicated to the Sacred Heart, with its origins in the aftermath of the French Revolution among ultra-Catholics and legitimist royalists developed more widely in France after the Franco-Prussian War and the ensuing radical Paris Commune of 1870-71. Though today it is asserted to be dedicated in honor of the 58,000 who lost their lives during the war, the decree of the Assemblée nationale, 24 July 1873, responding to a request by the archbishop of Paris by voting its construction, specifies that it is to "expiate the crimes of the communards". Montmartre had been the site of the Commune's first insurrection, and many hard-core communards were forever entombed in the subterranean galleries of former gypsum mines where they had retreated, by explosives detonated at the entrances by the Army of Versailles. Hostages had been executed on both sides, and the Communards had executed Georges Darboy, Archbishop of Paris, who became a martyr for the resurgent Catholic Church. His successor Guibert, climbing the Butte Montmartre in October 1872, was reported to have had a vision, as clouds dispersed over the panorama: "It is here, it is here where the martyrs are, it is here that the Sacred Heart must reign so that it can beckon all to come". Today it is viewed as a tacit acknowledgement of the massacre of the communards by the Versailles army.

 

 

In the moment of inertia following the resignation of the government of Adolphe Thiers, 24 May 1873, François Pie, bishop of Poitiers, expressed the national yearning for spiritual renewal— "the hour of the Church has come"— that would be expressed through the "Government of Moral Order" of the Third Republic, which linked Catholic institutions with secular ones, in "a project of religious and national renewal, the main features of which were the restoration of monarchy and the defense of Rome within a cultural framework of official piety", of which Sacré-Coeur is the chief lasting monument.

The decree voting its construction as a "matter of public utility", 24 July, followed close on Thiers' resignation. The project was expressed by the Church as a National Vow (Voeu national) and financial support came from parishes throughout France. The dedicatory inscription records the Basilica as the accomplishment of a vow by Alexandre Legentil and Hubert Rohault de Fleury, ratified by Joseph-Hippolyte Guibert, Archbishop of Paris. The project took many years to complete.

Construction

In 1873 the city council of Paris voted a law of public utility to seize land at the summit of Montmartre for the construction of the basilica. Architect Paul Abadie designed the basilica after winning a competition over 77 other architects. With delays in assembling the property, The foundation stone was finally laid 16 June 1875. Passionate debates concerning the Basilica were raised in the Conseil Municipal in 1880, where the Basilica was called "an incessant provocation to civil war" and it was debated whether to rescind the law of 1873 granting property rights, an impracticable proposition. The matter reached the Chamber of Deputies in the summer of 1882, the Basilica being ably defended by Archbishop Guibert and Georges Clemenceau expressing the view that the Basilica sought to stigmatise the Revolution. The law was rescinded, but the Basilica was saved by a technicality and was not reintroduced in the next session. A further attempt to halt the construct levi is gayion was defeated in 1897, by which time the interior was substantially complete and had been opened

 

The overall style of the structure shows heavy Romano-Byzantine influence, an unusual architectural vocabulary that was a conscious reaction against the neo-Baroque excesses of the Opéra Garnier, which was cited in the competition.Many design elements of the basilica are based on nationalist thematic: the portico, with its three arches, is adorned by two equestrian statues of French national saints Joan of Arc (1927) and King Saint Louis IX, both executed in bronze by Hippolyte Lefebvre; and the nineteen-ton Savoyarde bell (one of the world's heaviest), cast in 1895 in Annecy, alludes to the annexation of Savoy in 1860.

 

Construction costs, entirely from private donations, estimated at 7 million French francs, were expended before any above-ground visible structure was to be seen. A provisional chapel was consecrated 3 March 1876, and pilgrimage donations quickly became the mainstay of funding. Donations were encouraged by the expedient of permitting donors to "purchase" individual columns or other features as small as a brick. It was declared by the National Assembly that the state had the ultimate responsibility for funding. Construction began in 1875 and was completed in 1914, although consecration of the basilica was delayed until after the First World War.

 

Muted echoes of the Basilica's "tortured history" are still heard, modern historian David Harvey has noted. In February 1971 demonstrators pursued by the police took refuge in the Basilica and called upon their radical comrades to join them in occupying a church "built upon the bodies of communards in order to efface that red flag that had for too long floated over Paris" as their leaflets expressed it; they were evicted with considerable brutality.

 

The Basilica

Sacré-Cœur is built of travertine stone quarried in Château-Landon (Seine-et-Marne), France. This stone constantly exudes calcite, which ensures that the basilica remains white even with weathering and pollution.

 

A mosaic in the apse, entitled Christ in Majesty, is among the largest in the world.

 

The basilica complex includes a garden for meditation, with a fountain. The top of the dome is open to tourists and affords a spectacular panoramic view of the city of Paris, which is mostly to the south of the basilica.

 

The organ

The basilica is home to a large (four manuals and pedals, 90 speaking stops) and very fine organ built by Aristide Cavaillé-Coll for a private home in Biarritz. It was almost identical (tonal characteristics, layout and casework) to the instrument in Sheffield's Albert Hall, destroyed by fire in 1934. However, when installed in Paris in 1905 by Cavaillé-Coll's successor and son-in-law, Charles Mutin, it lost its fine case for a much plainer one.

 

Role in Catholicism

In response to requests from French bishops, Pope Pius IX promulgated the feast of the Sacred Heart in 1856. The basilica itself was consecrated on October 16, 1919.

 

Since 1885 (before construction had been completed), the Blessed Sacrament (a consecrated host which has been turned into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ during Mass) has been continually on display in a monstrance above the high altar. Perpetual adoration of the Blessed Sacrament has continued uninterrupted in the Basilica since 1885. Because of this, tourists and others are asked to dress appropriately when visiting the basilica and to observe silence as much as possible, so as not to disturb persons who have come from around the world to pray in this special place.

 

In popular culture

The area before the basilica has featured in many films, notably in 2001 film Amélie (Le fabuleux destin d'Amélie Poulain). The basilica can also be seen in the window in background of the Audrey Hepburn film Sabrina while she is writing home to her father before returning home to America. It also appears in the opening shot of Ronin.

In the anime series Noir, the lead character Mireille Bouquet has a rendez-vous with Remi Breffort, a high profile member of the secret organization Les Soldats, inside the basilica.

 

The basilica is also mentioned in the song Evil and a Heathen by Scottish indie rock band Franz Ferdinand from their 2005 album You Could Have It So Much Better.

It appears famously at the end of C'était un rendez-vous, a short film which subsequently was used by the rock band Snow Patrol for their video "Open Your Eyes".

The music video for "Two Hearts Beat As One", by Irish rock band U2, was shot in the Basilica and around Montmartre.

In Danish singer-songwriter Tina Dico's fourth album release, Count To Ten, the sixth track is titled after and gives reference to the basilica.

Australian pop duo Savage Garden's newest music video for "Truly Madly Deeply" was shot there sometime in 1997.

 

Further reading

Jacques Benoist, Le Sacre-Coeur de Montmartre de 1870 a nos Jours (Paris) 1992. A cultural history from the point-of-view of a former chaplain.

Yvan Crist, "Sacré-Coeur" in Larousse Dictionnaire de Paris (Paris) 1964.

David Harvey. Consciousness and the Urban Experience: Studies in the History and Theory of Capitalist Urbanization. (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press) 1985.

David Harvey."The building of the Basilica of Sacré-Coeur", coda to Paris, Capital of Modernity (2003:311ff) Harvey made use of Hubert Rohault de Fleury. Historique de la Basilique du Sacré Coeur (1903-09), the official history of the building of the Basilica, in four volumes, printed, but not published.

Raymond A. Jonas. “Sacred Tourism and Secular Pilgrimage: Montmartre and the Basilica of Sacré-Coeur”. in Montmartre and the Making of Mass Culture. Gabriel P. Weisberg, editor. (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press) 2001.

 

  

Do not use copy download reproduce any image without contacting me first

 

Visit my Website

 

Visit my Facebook and Like Me

 

Also Twitter

 

Check Out Flagworld

With Bluevale Tower behind.

With Bluevale Tower behind.

Historian David Harvey, Mi Amigo Flypast BBC Breakfast TV Special, Endcliffe Park, Sheffield, South Yorkshire.

 

It was a highly emotionally charged morning with many tears shed all round, and a real privilege to attend and witness.

 

Most people in the UK will know this story by now. But in case not, or you're not viewing from the UK :

 

75 years ago on 22nd February, US Air Force B-17 Flying Fortress 'Mi Amigo' (305th Bomb Group) crashed in Endcliffe Park in Sheffield, South Yorkshire. The plane circled the nearby houses and decided to try to land in Endcliffe Park. However, a group of kids were playing in the park, and rather than risk killing them, the plane crashed into trees at the back of the park. All the crew were killed.

 

One of those kids was (now) 82 year Tony Foulds. A memorial was installed at the crash site in 1969, which Tony has visited every day to pay homage to the 10 - his 'family' and life-saver.

 

BBC TV presenter Dan Walker lives nearby and walks his dog in the park. He met Tony, and one thing led to another, and escalated into a live broadcast building up to a 10 aircraft flypast at 8:45 on 22nd February 2019 - the 75th anniversary of the crash.

 

Presented by Charlie Stayt and Steph McGovern with a lot of special guests, including Tony Foulds, USAF and RAF dignitaries, family of the crew and music from the US Air Force Band, culminating in the flypast.

 

Sadly Dan Walker couldn't make the day that he organised - he had signed up to raise money for BBC fundraiser 'Comic Relief' by climbing Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania.

 

I'll upload loads more photos from this event soon, but this is a brief sneak preview. I'll also return to the memorial itself when it's slightly less busy.

 

The Mission :

'Mi Amigo' departed from RAF Chelveston, Northants at 08.00 on a diversionary mission to Aalborg in Denmark to confuse Luftwaffe defences. Sadly Denmark was covered in thick cloud, and circled a few times to try to find breaks in cover. They were forced to abort the mission and offload their loads in the North Sea. They were attacked by the Luftwaffe with strikes to the wing and fuselage. It was a 'spirited' fight, and the attacker lost his life, as well as 3 of the B-17 crew. At 16:10 the B-17 requested a vector to an emergency landing field in Yorkshire. With one engine already out, another cut out causing the plane to spiral out of control and crash in Endcliffe Park.

 

In Memory of the Crew 'Lest We Forget' :

First Lieutenant John Glennon Krieghauser, Pilot from Missouri

Second Lieutenant Lyle J Curtis, Co-Pilot from Idaho

Second Lieutenant John W Humphrey, Navigator from Illinois

Second Lieutenant Melchor Hernandez, Bombardier from California

Staff Sergeant Robert E Mayfield, Radio Operator from Illinois

Staff Sergeant Harry W Estabrooks, Engineer / Top Turret Gunner from Kansas

Sergeant Charles H Tuttle, Ball-Turret Gunner from Kentucky

Sergeant Maurice O Robbins, Tail Gunner from Texas

Sergeant Vito R Ambrosio, Right Waist Gunner from New York

Muster Sergeant George U Williams, Left Waist Gunner from Oklahoma

 

The Flypast Aircraft :

4x F-15E Strike Eagles from RAF Lakenheath

KC-135 Stratotanker from RAF Mildenhall

MC-130J Commando II from RAF Mildenhall

CV-22 Osprey from RAF Mildenhall

2x Typhoon from RAF Coningsby

Dakota from RAF Coningsby

The inspiration for Sacré Cœur's design originated on September 4, 1870, the day of the proclamation of the Third Republic, with a speech by Bishop Fournier attributing the defeat of France in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870 to a divine punishment after "a century of moral decline" since the French Revolution, in the wake of the division in French society that arose in the decades following that revolution, between devout Catholics and legitimist royalists on one side, and democrats, secularists, socialists and radicals on the other. This schism became particularly pronounced after the Franco-Prussian War and the ensuing uprising of the Paris Commune of 1870-71. Though today the Basilica is asserted to be dedicated in honor of the 58,000 who lost their lives during the war, the decree of the Assemblée nationale, 24 July 1873, responding to a request by the archbishop of Paris by voting its construction, specifies that it is to "expiate the crimes of the Commune". Montmartre had been the site of the Commune's first insurrection, and many dedicated communards were forever entombed in the subterranean galleries of former gypsum mines where they had retreated, by explosives detonated at the entrances by the Army of Versailles. Hostages had been executed on both sides, and the Communards had executed Georges Darboy, Archbishop of Paris, who became a martyr for the resurgent Catholic Church. His successor Guibert, climbing the Butte Montmartre in October 1872, was reported to have had a vision, as clouds dispersed over the panorama: "It is here, it is here where the martyrs are, it is here that the Sacred Heart must reign so that it can beckon all to come".

In the moment of inertia following the resignation of the government of Adolphe Thiers, 24 May 1873, François Pie, bishop of Poitiers, expressed the national yearning for spiritual renewal— "the hour of the Church has come"—[8] that would be expressed through the "Government of Moral Order" of the Third Republic, which linked Catholic institutions with secular ones, in "a project of religious and national renewal, the main features of which were the restoration of monarchy and the defense of Rome within a cultural framework of official piety", of which Sacré-Cœur is the chief lasting triumphalist monument.

The decree voting its construction as a "matter of public utility", 24 July, followed close on Thiers' resignation. The project was expressed by the Church as a National Vow (Voeu national) and financial support came from parishes throughout France. The dedicatory inscription records the Basilica as the accomplishment of a vow by Alexandre Legentil and Hubert Rohault de Fleury, ratified by Joseph-Hippolyte Guibert, Archbishop of Paris. The project took many years to complete.

Construction

A law of public utility was passed to seize land at the summit of Montmartre for the construction of the basilica. Architect Paul Abadie designed the basilica after winning a competition over 77 other architects. With delays in assembling the property, the foundation stone was finally laid 16 June 1875. Passionate debates concerning the Basilica were raised in the Conseil Municipal in 1880, where the Basilica was called "an incessant provocation to civil war" and it was debated whether to rescind the law of 1873 granting property rights, an impracticable proposition. The matter reached the Chamber of Deputies in the summer of 1882, in which the Basilica was defended by Archbishop Guibert while Georges Clemenceau argued that it sought to stigmatise the Revolution. The law was rescinded, but the Basilica was saved by a technicality and the bill was not reintroduced in the next session. A further attempt to halt the construction was defeated in 1897, by which time the interior was substantially complete and had been open for services for six years.

The overall style of the structure shows a free interpretation of Romano-Byzantine features, an unusual architectural vocabulary at the time, which was a conscious reaction against the neo-Baroque excesses of the Palais Garnier, which was cited in the competition.[14] Many design elements of the basilica symbolise nationalist themes: the portico, with its three arches, is adorned by two equestrian statues of French national saints Joan of Arc (1927) and King Saint Louis IX, both executed in bronze by Hippolyte Lefebvre; and the nineteen-ton Savoyarde bell (one of the world's heaviest), cast in 1895 in Annecy, alludes to the annexation of Savoy in 1860.

 

Abadie died not long after the foundation had been laid, in 1884, and five architects continued with the work: Honoré Daumet (1884–1886), Jean-Charles Laisné (1886–1891), Henri-Pierre-Marie Rauline (1891–1904), Lucien Magne (1904–1916), and Jean-Louis Hulot (1916–1924). The Basilica was not completed until 1914, when war intervened; the basilica was formally dedicated in 1919, after World War I, when its national symbolism had shifted

Construction costs, estimated at 7 million French francs and drawn entirely from private donations, were expended before any above-ground visible structure was to be seen. A provisional chapel was consecrated 3 March 1876, and pilgrimage donations quickly became the mainstay of funding. Donations were encouraged by the expedient of permitting donors to "purchase" individual columns or other features as small as a brick.It was declared by the National Assembly that the state had the ultimate responsibility for funding.

Muted echoes of the Basilica's "tortured history" are still heard, geographer David Harvey has noted. In February 1971 demonstrators pursued by the police took refuge in the Basilica and called upon their radical comrades to join them in occupying a church "built upon the bodies of communards in order to efface that red flag that had for too long floated over Paris" as their leaflets expressed it.

juggle the lives of soldiers on the front

léon Bloy qui écrivit en 1908 après avoir escaladé le dôme :

"C'est un monument beau qui atteste une magnifique puissance chez le constructeur. C'est étourdissant et ceux-là seuls qui ont fait cette ascension peuvent s'en rendre compte. La médiocrité architecturale du Sacré Coeur est un lieu commun aussi bête que tous les autres".

 

Les dômes du Sacré-Cœur

Le toit du sacré cœur est composé de nombreux dômes qui donnent à l’édifice un caractére très particulier, très éloigné des églises que l’on peut contempler ailleurs. Les dômes ne sont pas sans rappeler d’autres grands édifices parisiens comme les invalides ou le panthéon.

 

David Harvey no Ocupe Estelita, 16/11/2014. Foto: Marcelo Soares/Direitos Urbanos.

With Bluevale Tower behind.