Skip to content


March 10, 2013


(Putting the Sex Back into Essex-again!)

Jack Sparrow (the character played by Johnny Depp in Pirates of the Caribbean) is, as a mercenary, an eminent symbol of the historical role of England and the British Crown in the Disney World of contemporary history.

But the British have-just as the Germans had in their Nazi adventure with Hitler-a special taste for order and most Victorian appearances of decency and moral rectitude-above all in an administrative sense.

And in the case of Great Britain and in her relationship with the rest of the world, long is the list of events the analysis of which highlights this confusion between a self-proclaimed decency of state, and the hand and dagger of Macbeth in his frenetic will to the de facto expropriation of the control and rights over others’ property.

And what was historically presented as “Service to Her Majesty” in ceremonies of state on a stage with a lion and unicorn stamped on the background curtain, was nothing more than a ritual form of lending public and moral legitimacy to the figure of the mercenary as accomplice and partner to the crown, in organized and colonial, mercantile exploitation.

And great buildings were built, and monuments erected in London, for instance, in honor of this never denied “matrimony of convenience” as policy of state.

And with the historical development of applied technology as a result of the Industrial Revolutions, the accounts and capital of the business aristocracy only strengthened their position and social relevance through time.

And with that so was strengthened the real power of this a two-headed, Macbethian leviathan of de facto imposition of its own, always and unvaryingly monetary objectives.

And as a result of this, it became even more necessary to employ an increasingly elaborate moral justification of human progress-in the name of God-to provide a cover of ethics and morality that the mercenary-pirate-Lord clearly lacked in his non daylight impulses and behavior.

But it also happened that this technical and financial progress, over the centuries, brought with it a form of material well-being hither unknown to the world, contributing-clearly-to raise the standard of living-and culture itself-of those countries that by then had eventually become industrialized.

And there is an argument-and they are the first to bring it out-that defends colonialism, especially in the Neo Colonial period of the late 1800s-as something that worked eventually in favor of those subjugated populations whose natural resources were exploited albeit in a most noble and gentlemanly way.

But that-nevertheless-does not mean that it was done under the empire of law and order and human morality, which it wasn’t.

In any case, if you come across the right British citizen, after a few gin and tonics, he –or she- will easily come to acknowledge all of this, with a smile and a faint gleam of nostalgia in their eyes.

(Dedicated to The Economist magazine, from the office of the boss and his crew!)


Originally, La Coartada Moral del Poder Fáctico.

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s