“You Romans think the world ends at Ponte Molle. Don’t you know that Germany has already graduated, while you are only at the alphabet? Weishaupt scattered the first seeds of social reform; he foresaw everything, calculated everything, weighed everything. That great man could tell you, watch in hand: “In seventy years the fruit of Illuminism will have attained maturity. In thirty years it will have spread dismay throughout all this decrepit Europe; it will permit not a single king to say, “To-morrow I shall be king,” nor a single nation to say, “To-morrow I shall have my laws and my religion;” nor a single citizen, “To-morrow I shall be able to say, this house is mine, this sum of money is mine, these estates are my property.” Now we have reached the goal; for seventy years the work of the secret societies has been incessant, ever increasing in activity, vigor, craft, subtlety, and audacity. Now they are impatient: before the eyes of great politicians, writers, and economists they are tearing asunder, one by one, every link of the ancient institutions; it is undermining and crumbling the most massy foundations of every social edifice. Illuminism has issued from its hiding-place, it walks boldly over the heads of nations, it openly publishes its views, sounds the trumpet as conqueror in the great struggle, and proclaims: ‘New men, new laws, new orders, — let Christians become pagans — let kings be the slaves of their subjects, masters of their servants, the nobles of the plebeians, the rich of the poor.’

“But this is precisely the new proclamation of Giuseppe Mazzini.”

“Mazzini, my good friend, announces nothing new. He has nothing more than the merit of candor in publishing to the world that which was whispered in his ear ; all the rest is word for word extracted from Weishaupt’s secret code of Illuminism. Mazzini reproduces one after the other, various articles, clothing them, however, in that nervous, keen, fiery style of his, with which he arouses, spurs, animates, and influences the hearts of young Italy. The articles of the code of Weishaupt are written, it is true, without a tithe of the energy which the pen of Mazzini has lent them, but I repeat, that when he raises his voice so high, he is but the speaking trumpet sounded from a distance by the breath of the admiral.”

— From Fr. Antonio Bresciani’s novel The Jew of Verona: an historical tale of the Italian revolutions of 1846-9 (1854), p.201

The loudest cries for independent nationhood are heard from the rootless literati.

Mazzini, the self-imposed exile in London, who intrigued writers such as Robert Browning, Elizabeth Barrett Browning, George Meredith, Algernon Charles Swinburne, and George Eliot, found himself embroiled in a scandal in 1844.

As a foreign national coordinating acts of revolutionary terror against sovereign states, the British Home Office evidently practiced espionage on his postal communications. Upon Mazzini and his allies discovering this, a petition to the House of Commons was sent decrying the introduction of “the spy system of foreign states” as being “repugnant to every principle of the British Constitution, and subversive of the public confidence, which was so essential to a commercial community.”

To his defense in an editorial for The Times also came, none other than….

Thomas Carlyle.

Yes, Carlyle, that great admirer of great men, made himself a useful idiot for Mazzinian social emancipationism, regardless of what he may have thought. Carlyle called Mazzini “very far indeed from being contemptible,” a man of “genius and virtue, a man of sterling veracity, humanity, and nobleness of mind.”

“Whether the extraneous Austrian Emperor and miserable old chimera of a Pope shall maintain themselves in Italy, or be obliged to decamp from Italy, is not a question in the least vital to Englishmen,” Carlyle claimed.

But he added that “opening of men’s letters, a practice near of kin to picking men’s pockets, and to other still viler and far fataler forms of scoundrelism, be not resorted to in England, except in cases of the very last extremity.” Charles Dickens went on to call Carlyle’s defense “noble.”

Well, that “very last extremity” was in fact achieved. It was thanks to British intelligence and the interception of Mazzini’s letters that the attempted raid on Calabria by the Bandiera brothers was thwarted.

Saved by public opinion, Mazzini would go on to foster friendships with a widening circle of prominent English politicians, families, and literary figures, including reformist thinkers and/or future MPs such Peter Taylor, Joseph Cowen, and William Shaen, and James Stansfield, MP, as well as Stanfield’s influential father-in-law, the radical William Henry Ashurst, supporter of progressive causes from the American anti-slavery movement to Italian liberation.

By 1857, Mazzini was inciting an uprising in Genoa, evading capture by being “hidden in a mattress, almost suffocating, while his tiny, handwritten incriminating missives were hidden in the bodice of a sympathetic Englishwoman married to one of his Italian supporters, as the police inspected the house,” as recounted by Harry W. Rudman. He then shaved his beard and left.

In the aftermath, Mazzini would pen these words:

If the supporters of the Piedmontese Monarchy,–I speak of those who seek the emancipation of Italy through the Monarchy,–were of good faith, and conscientious in the pursuit of their object; they would, long ago, have understood that there are but two ways of driving the Sardinian Government into the field; a threatening internal agitation among the people, or a series of offences to Austria sufficient to excite her to begin the attack; and these two ways would, in fact, be but one. They would continually assail Austria through their press, in a manner calculated to provoke prompt and repeated menaces of repression. Their names would have crowded the list of subscription for the 10,000 muskets. They would incessantly call these Provinces under foreign dominion to insurrection; they would form National Associations with an openly avowed Italian aim; they would organize in those provinces a clandestine press.

Cavour is too moderate! Only relentless and restless agitation, and nothing short of that, will suffice.

This seditious mountebank would go on to have the nerve to lecture people on the Duties of Man, which in 1860 he included among these duties:

[God] divided Humanity into distinct groups or nuclei upon the face of the earth, thus creating the germ of Nationalities. Evil Governments have disfigured the Divine design. Nevertheless you may still trace it, distinctly marked out—at least as far as Europe is concerned—by the course of the great rivers, the direction of the higher mountains, and other geographical conditions. They have disfigured it by their conquests, their greed, and their jealousy even of the righteous power of others; disfigured it so far, that, if we except England and France—there is not perhaps a single Country whose present boundaries correspond to that Design.

These Governments did not and do not recognize any Country save their own families or dynasty, the egotism of caste. But the Divine design will infallibly be realized. Natural divisions, and the spontaneous innate tendencies of the peoples, will take the place of the arbitrary divisions sanctioned by evil Governments. The map of Europe will be re-drawn. The countries of the Peoples, defined by the vote of free men, will arise upon the ruins of the Countries of Kings and privileged Castes, and between these Countries harmony and fraternity will exist. And the common work of Humanity, of general amelioration, and the gradual discovery and application of its Law of Life, being distributed according to local and general capacities, will be wrought out in peaceful and progressive development and advance.

The divine design of the strangulation of “priestcraft,” the spoliation of thrones and the debasement of law. The rebarbarization of Europe into self-governing Judaic endogamous communities with no internal rank or distinction, who will supposedly live in “harmony and fraternity.” Natural divisions, not “arbitrary” ones!

Risorgimento anticlericalism began already with the so-called “neo-Guelph” project of Vincenzo Gioberti, who wanted unification under papal rule. The primary enemy to this project, Gioberti thought, was not the clearly anti-Catholic aims of the revolutionaries which was very clearly demonstrated in the Roman Republic of 1849 (which Mazzini hypocritically justified as an act of piety, claiming that “the Italians had almost lost the religion of Rome, they began to call it a grave, and so it seemed like one… Doomed and contemplating the future, we had to offer up our morituri te salutant for Italy from Rome.”), but an “Austro-Jesuitical faction” conspiring to keep Italy underdeveloped.

Come 1851, the Siccardi laws in Piedmont disestablished ecclesiastical courts and the benefit of clergy. By March 1855, religious orders were banned. Count Cavour dubbed monasteries as being a “source of ignorance, superstition and poverty.”

The consequences of these campaigns are revealed in an 1872 editorial for the Roman newspaper La Capitale, the first republican paper of its kind published after the ultimate annexation of Rome into the Italian state, warning men against the dangers of marrying pious women:

Any man, who marries such a woman [a pious woman], marries her confessor. And one immediately senses his presence in the home. You will not be able to eat what you want; you will have terrible fights every Friday and Sunday about fasting. … You will have no more secrets; your wife’s confessor will know everything that goes on in your house … he will even know what you do in your bedroom!

Instead, you should marry sluts, obviously.

All of this would leave a lasting impact extending to immigrant communities, where Italian Catholics in America were regarded as subversive by Irish and others of a more ultramontane devotion, as told by Peter R. D’Agostino: “On occasion, Italian Catholics (particularly priests) organized that resistance, but generally Irish Catholics embodied the Catholic ideological position against liberal Italian nationalism. As John Talbot Smith explained in 1905, ‘nothing more hateful to American Catholics could be named than the 20th of September, which the Italian colony [of New York] celebrated as the consummation of national glory… For very slight cause the Irish would at any moment have attacked the annual procession, eager to drive the Garibaldians off the face of the earth… and as for considering [Italians] Catholics and aiding them to keep their faith alive, that was out of the question.'”

But just as the Risorgimento was an international effort — its first major act being the Rimini Proclamation of Joachim Murat in 1815, Napoleon I’s brother-in-law, so too the failed anti-Risorgimento in the South of loyalists to Francis II of the Two Sicilies in 1860-1866 would be an international effort. The parallels to the Confederacy, including the timeframe, are interesting also.

Southern Italian brigandage was a complex phenomenon, composed of more opportunistic outlaws and of Bourbon legitimist militias, often interacting in an atmosphere of de facto state collapse as Piedmont attempted to impose its institutions following Garibaldi’s Expedition of the Thousand (which actually ended up swelling to something around 22,000) dethroning the Bourbons.

The most famous brigandier was probably Carmine Crocco, who said of “the motherland, the law” that “the first is a whore, the second worse still.”

Given such episodes in Sicily as the dramatic last stand that was the Seven and a Half Days Revolt in September 1866, the Piedmontese motherland could indeed be dubbed a whore.

Here is an example of a document circulating in the Italian South in the early 1860s, one of many similar ones that received tens of thousands of signatures:

The undersigned, and those making their mark hereunder, inhabitants of the city of Monopoli in the province of Terra di Bari, most devoted subjects of your majesty, are now tired of suffering the unprecedented tyranny, shameless robbery, pillage and squandering of public and private wealth, ever-mounting spurious levies, unfair taxes, cruel state laws, abominable scandals, corruption of public tradition, brutalised public education, ungodliness, and the vicious war waged against the religion of our fathers, the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of Rome, the great pope Pius IX, Vicar of Christ, the cardinals, the bishops, all those good priests who have been ruthlessly sent to prison or into exile, the despoiled monasteries, and the exiled aristocracy. As if this was not enough, there are also the damages to public safety, arbitrary arrests solely on the basis of suspicion, thousands of citizens who languish miserably in prison without coming to trial, all victims of the abhorrent revolution imported from loathsome Piedmont. Wherever we turn, we only see disaster and suffering, and bloody traces of the bitter civil war.

“You know very well how many sacrifices we have made thus far, and we have no aspirations other than to continue to make those sacrifices, to the day we give our lives, if necessary, to defend the cause of our King. The sword that we brandished in Spain, we shall draw again to fight in favor of legitimacy wherever it becomes necessary: the revolutionaries are the same everywhere, and their plans are always iniquitous. The usurpation that has been committed to the detriment of the King of Naples cries out for deserved vengeance, and we consider it a great honor to lend our hand,” wrote Francesc Tristany to his brother, the Carlist general Rafael Tristany, circa December 1861.

Rafael Tristany was appointed by Francis II of the Two Sicilies to head his troops in Abruzzi. More pronounced, however, was Jose Borjes, who allied himself with the brigands of Carmine Crocco until being captured and executed in December 1861. When asked why a Spaniard was heading an Italian regiment, the French legitimist Charles Garnier replied that “legitimists perceived in the end that the revolutionaries of every country tended to make a common cause, and that it was necessary to oppose solidarity against solidarity.”

Francis II had officially surrendered the intention of leading popular revolt after his surrender at Gaeta on February 13, 1861, but loyalist forces persisted regardless.

Simon Sarlin writes of the Neapolitan recruitment drive’s enthusiastic but financially strained nature:

Neither the death of Borges nor that of his comrades was sufficient to put an end to the recruitment operations. From that point onward, the Bourbon agents focused on enlisting Carlists, whose ‘sobriety and discretion [made] their enlistment distinctly preferable in many ways to that of the French’. In an organization where the inability to maintain secrecy had been a major handicap, the experience in the profession of the soldier as well as the exercise of clandestinity that had been acquired by the veteran partisans of Don Carlos clearly represented a significant advantage (out of the nineteen members of the Calabrian expedition, thirteen were between 40 and 50 years of age, while only one was younger than 30). Moreover, the publicity that had been devoted to Borges’s men had made it possible to popularize the Neapolitan cause among the Carlists of the Spanish peninsula, especially in Catalonia, where the Neapolitan consul was confident in October of the possibility of mounting an expedition with 2,000 volunteers. Throughout the spring of 1862, the Italian secret police reported on comings and goings of Bourbon agents between Barcelona, Marseille and Civitavecchia, clearly in preparation for a new expedition that never, however, came to fruition, due to a lack of money.

Overall, however, the royal incursions and the native brigands drifted apart and failed to coordinate. The former had subsided by 1863, and was from the beginning reliant on the expectation that a foreign (Austrian) intervention would be arriving at some point. When these expectations did not materialize, military operations were limited to small attacks on isolated detachments along the frontier before ending entirely. Brigandage would take several more years to be eradicated.

The Mazzinians, Garibaldians and other revolutionists would ultimately settle on the cheap canard of depicting the Southern Italians as a lower race prone to violence, beggary and other vice, owing to North African admixture (which actually seems to be highest in the high-achieving area of Tuscany), climate and other causes.

These memes live on to the present, as the HBD nerds keep believing they can explain the Sicilian mafia by means of consanguinity maps, PISA scores, minute IQ differentials and other tools.

All of these claims turn out to be total nonsense, and many IQ estimates being based on unreliable proxies.

The HBD nerd, like the Jew, will use his Talmudic and rabbinical tools of racial deconstruction/realism to stab other nations in the back, all the while he claims to be defending them against ethnic lobbies through empirical science.

Naples and Sicily are no longer nations, but then neither is Italy. A geographic expression it was, a geographic expression it remains.


2 thoughts on “Controrisorgimento

  1. Pingback: Controrisorgimento | Reaction Times

  2. Pingback: Giacinto de’ Sivo: an enemy of Italian unification | Carlsbad 1819

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