Una ideologia pels temps que corren.

Doncs no és que hagi parit cap pensament ni original ni tant sols que tingui prou materialitat per a ser penjat en un blog, però el que si que m'ha passat és que he llegit un escrit breu però potent i il·lustrador del que una acció vital políticament compromesa, que és el mateix que vitalment compromesa, ja que la vida és vida política encara que no vulguem.

Es tracta de les tesis del Groucho-Marxisme!

Aquí us adjunto els punts de que consta l'escrit en anglès,-això si-(Per Bob Black):

Groucho Marxism, the theory of comedic revolution is much more than a
blueprint for crass struggle: like a red light in a window, it illuminates hu-
manity’s inevitable destiny, the declasse society. G-Marxism is the theory of
permanent revelry. (Down boy! There, that’s a good dogma.)
1. The example of the Marx Brothers themselves shows the unity of Marxist the-
ory and practice (for instance, when Groucho insults somebody while Harpo
picks his pocket). Moreover, Marxism is dialectical (isn’t Chico the classic
dialect comedian?). Comedians who fail to synthesize theory and practice
(to say nothing of those who fail to sin at all) are un-Marxist. Subsequent
comedians, failing to grasp that separation is “the discrete charm of the bour-
geoisie,” have lapsed into mere pratfalls on the one hand, and mere prattle
on the other.
2. Because G-Marxism is practical, its acheivements can never be reduced to
mere humor, entertainment, or even “art.” (The æsthetes, after all, are less
interested in the appreciation of art than in art that appreciates.) After a
genuine Marxist sees a Marx Brothers movie, he tells himself: “If you think
that was funny, take a look at your life!”
3. Contempary G-Marxists must resolutely denounce the imitative, vulgar “Marx-
ism” of the Three Stooges, Monty Python, and Bugs Bunny. Instead of vulgar
Marxism, we must return to authentic Marxist vulgarity. Rectumification is
likewise in order for those deluded comrades who think that “the correct line”
is what the cop makes them walk when he pulls them over.
4. Class-conscious Marxists (that is, Marxists who are conscious that they have
no class) must spurn the anemic, trendy, narcissistic “comedy” of comedic re-
visionists like Woody Allen and Jules Feiffer. Already the comedic revolution
has superseded mere neurosis — it’s ludic but not ludicrous, discriminating
but not discriminatory, militant but not military, and adventurous but not
adventurist. Marxists realise that today you have to look into a funhouse
mirror to see the way you really are.
5. Although not entirely lacking in glimmers of Marxist insight, socialist (sur)realism
must be distinguished from G-Marxism. It is true that Salvador Dali once
gave Harpo a harp made out of barbed wire; however, there is no evidence
that Harpo ever played it.
6. Above all, it is essential to renounce and revile all comedic sectarianism such
as that of the equine Trots. As is well-known, Groucho repeatedly proposed
sex but opposed sects. For Groucho, then, there was a difference between
being a Trot and being hot to trot. Further, the Trot slogan “Wages for
Horsework” smacks of reform, not revelry. Trot efforts to claim A Day at the
Races and Horsefeathers for their tendency must be indignantly rejected; in
truth National Velvet is more their style.
The burning issue confronting G-Marxists today is the party question, which
— naive, reductionist “Marxists” to the contrary — is more than just “Whay
wasn’t I invited?” That never stopped Groucho! Marxists need their own
disciplined vanguard party, since they’re rarely welcome at anybody else’s.
7. Guided by the Marxist leader-dogmas of misbehaviourism and hysterical ma-
terialism, inevitably the masses will embrace, not only G-Marxism, but also
each other.
8. Groucho Marxism, then, is the tour de farce of comedy. As Harpo is reliably
reported to have said: “In other words, comedy is riotous or it is nothing!
So much to do, so many to do it to! On your Marx, get set — go!”


BORED AGAIN? Why not rattle your cage? I propose a dialog of the
disaffected, a conspiracy of the equals, a politics of pleasure. Ours is the anomic
power of negative thinking and corrosive laughter. The unruly amongst the
institutionalised have only themselves — and possibly each other. Let’s confer.
The choice is sedition or sedation. Any number can play.