He arrived in 1974 at the University of Zaragoza as a professor and 45 years later he ended his teaching career as Professor of Philosophy. In between, dozens of books, novels, stories, essays and poetry, a few awards that support his literary demand and analytical rigor and an intellectual career marked by his political activity against the dictatorship and the theoretical development of the classical ideas of Marxist thought .

"I have felt absorbed," acknowledges José Luis Rodríguez García in the Presentation to his recent collection of stories, The residence and other stories ( Presses of the University of Zaragoza ), "for the need to make a generational account." The Professor of Philosophy speaks of a theoretical constant in his work, but also literary, for framing his own biography in the future of Marxist theoretical thinking and contemporary revolutionary movements that had their turning point in the French May 68. To the genealogy of the revolutions he dedicated one of his best essays The word and the sword ( Bellaterra ) and the disenchantment of insurrectional dreams plans over all his production, both essay and narrative and poetic. Now, in which at the moment it is his last book (he has two or three in the bedroom for when the retirement frees him of the teaching) sentence with certain disenchantment: "My supposed generation has matured between the surprise and the stupidity".

What do you mean? Surprise, because we could never imagine that we would reach a situation where we would be led by political assumptions that have no idea what politics is. And stupidity, because a large part of those who were waiting for something, no longer a fundamental transformation, but some change that has not come, has made many of those who fought against Franco in those years, we have not been disappointed, but that we have thought that all of this made sense, but then stopped having it, because those who could have done something new or supported a renewed civil society have not wanted to do it. Is this generation of politicians worse than those who made the Transition? Yes, much more. Just look at the way it was argued then and how it is not done now. Herrero de Miñón, a very respectable right-wing man, argued very well, like others on the left, I think of Solé Tura. Now in Parliament and in the press, they are all caons that repeat each other indistinctly. A pathetic situation that has been reached because this new generation has come to politics to earn a living and stay, with no vocation to serve the people or the people. Is this generation of politicians worse than those who made the Transition Yes, much more. Just look at the way it was argued then and how it is not done now. Herrero de Miñón, a very respectable right-wing man, argued very well, like others on the left, I think of Solé Tura. Now in Parliament and in the press, they are all caons that repeat each other indistinctly. A pathetic situation that has been reached because this new generation has come to politics to earn a living and maintain itself, without a vocation to serve the people or people. What remains of the concept of revolution to which you have dedicated much of your theoretical activity? Nothing remains. Fortunately. The revolution, as Marx thought it, is an outdated concept and a disaster, it is the imposition of a brotherhood, call it a party or whatever you want. The revolution has always been oriented, regardless of the contents and the claims, to the magnification of a leader who ultimately becomes a pontiff and liquidates any process of social renewal. The utopias, both classical and modern, especially these, as Todorov said, I do not know if in a slightly exaggerated way, have always led to tyrannies. And the class struggle as a starting point for social analysis has also become obsolete? The concept of class, Sartre said in a text of 56, has a component of union between the subjects that cannot be denied, and that is that We all work, we are all exploited, whether we are women, men, journalists, teachers or waiters. The common point is that we are all producers of surplus value. And that unifies us. But there are movements that think they can escape exploitation. Does it have anything to do with the profusion of identities such as feminism, environmentalism or homosexuality with the dissolution of a common conscience? The problem of identities is that they are constitutive, not ontological. That is why they do not cease to arise constantly, and it seems good to me to enhance that, even that each individual can become a difference, because as Spinoza said the substance is unique but has infinite attributes. The next problem is how the constitution of a crowd with that infinity of attributes is solved. That is the question on which the most interesting philosophers of the last 30 years have been thinking, without finding a solution, such as Deleuze, Rorty or Negri: how to articulate these differences in order to build a common project. Negri, as a communist Christian, saw it more clearly, but Spinoza did not. In the Political Theological Treaty yes, but after the experience that overthrew the De Witt brothers, when he writes the Political Treaty ... Luckily he did not finish it. Isn't it the culmination of his thought? Maybe if he had finished it. But opting for a kind of enlightened despotism, someone who says what things can be accepted and which cannot, I don't know if it is the solution. Rousseau also says something similar, in a note, of just three lines, in The social contract, we must accept all differences, yes, in an example of democracy, but nuances: less those that are more extreme. The solution is that the differences do not reach such an extreme degree of confrontation, they all have to give up something, because when a difference becomes fundamentalist, we are already at the end of the street. Saving the distances, is not representative democracy something similar to that enlightened despotism that Spinoza poses, as opposed to direct democracy? Direct democracy would only be possible in very limited republics. Rousseau made three constitution projects, for Corsica, Geneva and Poland, which were three places where all citizens could gather. Now I do not see any other type of democracy that is not representative, although it has many disadvantages and has been deteriorating since the 20s and 30s. Popper wrote years ago a very conflicting article with which I disagree, but I had a certain sense He said: why will a farmer and an economist vote for an economic program? One thing is that the farmer votes on street matters or that affect him on a vital level, but if he is presented with macroeconomic figures and they say they vote ... 90% of people know absolutely nothing about the economy, starting with me. What Popper said is true, but many may consider it authoritarian. There are those who compare the current situation with interwar Europe, when representative democracy was questioned, are we at that point? Fortunately I think we have enough political dignity to defend ourselves. Salvini, for example, misses the play because the democratic forces react against him. However, the result of the elections in Saxony and Brandenburg and I have been stunned. Seventy years later there is still a party originally founded by surviving Nazi hierarchs. In Spain could the rupture of the constitutional consensus be reached by the independence challenge? Yes, it could, but it does not fall within my hypothesis that secession may occur. Has the State not acted with the necessary forcefulness to curb independence ? I would not say that he has not acted, but that he has not known how to act. The Spanish State, or Spanish citizenship, has failed to find an effective story and that battle has been won by the Government of Catalonia for some time. Nationalism, in general, has an authoritarian streak for the defense that makes its own identity in relation to the other. Nationalism is an extreme political manifestation because of the contempt of the other, and in that sense it seems to me a political scourge. This does not mean that they do not have their own rights, which in some countries are fully recognized. But if you read the French Constitution, from the first article the separation of any region is prevented. In the Italian, article 5 also says that it is impossible and the German, in article 31, says exactly the same, so when Bavaria years ago raised its independence the Supreme Court said no. Germany suffered nationalism and knows what it is, like Italy, and France, which are very Jacobin, have a deep national feeling. Here we hate that national feeling because we link it to Franco, and unfortunately there is some reason. For 40 years we live the national Catholicism, something very sordid and that has not disappeared completely from everyday life. But the Church no longer has the power it had ... The Church has immense power, more than people can imagine. I beg that they pay the IBI, that they persecute them for the immatriculations, for everything that they have robbed to the townspeople and that they eliminate the payment to the Church once in the declaration of the rent. In Germany, the churches are paid by their faithful. Here it is so strong that no party has dared to face it. I did not give credit when the PSOE renewed the Concordat, how is it possible for a secular State to sign an agreement that means neither more nor less than subsidizing the life of all priests and nuns at the cost of my taxes. I prefer that my taxes be given to an immigrant who needs them. And why does the Church continue to enjoy these privileges, because the majority of Spanish society remains anchored to stale Catholicism. You only have to see when communions and weddings arrive, everyone takes their children to communion, even if they stop going to church the next day. Was the Historical Memory Law necessary? Yes, absolutely. It is a necessary tribute to the victims and recognition of what they suffered unfairly. Another thing is how it was done, but in all democracies that experienced worse situations than ours has been honored to those who died. The other day, Germany publicly apologized to Poland, and here I don't know why those of the PP are so afraid of that recognition. My father was a Franco military, and I don't care if they say so, what will I do if I wasn't born? Would you take Franco out of the Valley of the Fallen? Of course. What must be asked is why it was not done 20 or 30 years ago, out of respect for the victims and the prisoners who built it. Why does the Civil War continue to create so much political division today? Because the part of society that is making a fuss is left with a Franco streak, for them Franco is still a hero. The arrival of the Vox energumnos is a symptom that there are people who still think that the Civil War is alive. Returning to independence, should the State's response be political, legal or police? Police never. And in a rule of law, it cannot come from the Executive either. The solution must be legal. But as long as they had sufficient guarantees of the independence of the Judiciary. And that is a very complex problem, because formally the Judiciary is independent, but its cusp is named by the political parties. Is the trial of the process also vitiated? I think not. I have followed many sessions of the trial and the performance of Judge Marchena has always seemed very consistent. Would you favor a pardon if there is a conviction? If you have committed a very clear crime, you should be punished. I would think about it a lot. Would you describe the process of coup d'etat? Political concepts change over time and the coup has changed greatly since it was formulated in the seventeenth century. It would not be because there have been no weapons, but this historical moment requires redefining the key concepts. What did Boris Johnson do in Britain dissolving Parliament is a coup d'etat? Initially not, because he even did it with the approval of Queen Elizabeth II. And the Spanish King is acting correctly before the possible secession of Catalonia? I wrote years ago a pamphlet against the monarchy, but not against it in particular, but against the concept of monarchy as a contraption of political organization. I neither enter nor leave the role that Felipe VI is doing, I think he has not done it very badly, but he could not have done anything else, such as the Queen of England, because he would have created a very strong institutional and political crisis that we are not available of facing The republic was one of the resignations that were made in the Transition, that is why, among other things, I did not vote for the Constitution, and I still believe that a political organization should be sought at the headquarters of the different State. Make a forecast, will there be elections? Pessimistically I think so, because they are facing two halters that don't want to give in to anything. Or Pablo Iglesias surrenders unconditionally, which for him would be a shame, or Pedro Sánchez accepts, which would be a low blow to the voters of the PSOE. I wish there were none, because the three parties on the right, if they join (which would be the death of Citizens), could be strengthened.

According to the criteria of The Trust Project

Know more

Considering cold The brotherhood of the Holy Story

Loose Cape Tweet Policy

LETTERS TO K. Two separate