Talk:Norberto Ceresole

Top

the biography is a pamphlet against the personage, labeling it as neofascist, in saying I articulate in not addition references, nor is explained supposedly so that he is neofascist. --K4zem 08:27, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

• K4zem, thank you for the comments. I'm aware that I was starting what could become a very controversial biography. I'm still working on the biography, so it is not on a final stage. However, thus far all details of his life are coming from references of those who identified with him and his actions and there is no intention from my part to write anything againts anybody. Please add more details in which way do you think it is a pamphlet (although I would prefer to avoid the use of any adjetives). I have found a statement in which he denies identification with neofacism and antisemitism (VA:Lo que usted quiere decir en el fondo es que el inicio de la demonización surge porque usted enfrenta en un momento dado una determinada visión o un determinado análisis de la realidad que tiene Israel. Entonces, desde ese punto se le ha acusado de fascista. Ceresole: No, no. VA: De ser fascista, antisemita. Ceresole, ¿es antisemita? Ceresole: No, no, absolutamente. Por Dios, además yo vengo de la izquierda, además de una izquierda armada, una izquierda militante, yo vengo de Los Montoneros."(from "Ceresole visto por él mismo")[1]. However he does identified himself with the Montoneros (The Movimiento Peronista Montonero was an Argentinian radical leftist nationalist-catholic guerrilla group), whom he was leader during the 1970's. I'll remove the Antisemitism and Neofacism and include a reference to the Left and Peronism. Later on, either me or somebody else would most likely include a section on the accusations of Anti-Semitism and NeoFacism. However, I think it is important to keep his iedological identification with his friends Robert Faurisson and Ernst Nolte. Caracas1830 (09:00, 27 May 2006 (UTC))

"leftist nationalist-catholic guerrilla group" - quite a varied group, must have been everyone against some wonderful people. Anti-semitic - he must have said something pro-Palestinian sometime in his life - shame on him. You could try a little more filler i this article - but then why make the guy look good. Read site voltaire.org/article134010.html for the apparrent background for this ad hominem wiki article. Liberation ( owned by Rothschilds ), Wisenthal Centre, Voice of America, Le Monde have been spreading a false translation of a Chavez speech - pretty soon it will be "true". The Iranian president is running into the same phenomenon ( they major news papers, the French government, the US government, the Wisenthal Centre, etc don't seem to be able to hire good translators. Maybe someone could offer them some help.

He didn't just say something in favor of Palestina, he did considered himself a holocaust revisionist.

For example Entre todos los sentidos que se le ha dado a la palabra "revisionista", se trata de señalar principalmente el que distingue a los historiadores y científicos sociales que consideran comprobado el hecho de que no hubo -- en ningún caso -- (en los campos de concentración alemanes de la época del Tercer Reich, incluido el territorio no alemán administrado militarmente por Alemania) uso de gases homicidas que supuestamente se operaban en recintos llamados "Cámaras". Junto con muchos otros expertos, químicos, por ejemplo, el revisionista considera, en consecuencia, que no existe cifra definitivamente establecida para evaluar las pérdidas humanas en las comunidades judías durante la segunda guerra mundial pero que, en todo caso, la de seis millones de personas es absolutamente desmesurada. No existe ningún documento ni resto físico o químico que demuestre la existencia de las "fábricas de la muerte" que muestran las películas de Hollywood, bien a partir de novelas, o bien a partir de "memorias" de testigos indirectos. El análisis revisionista ha demostrado hasta la saciedad que esas "memorias", que pretenden reemplazar a documentos inexistentes (como por ejemplo órdenes de exterminio [oficiales o extraoficiales], presupuestos económicos para construir "fábricas de muerte", diseños o representaciones creíbles del "arma del crimen", procedimientos administrativos para ejecutar tan vasto y único crimen, etc. etc.), o bien están basadas en hechos falsos, o bien en testigos directos de dudosa credibilidad. Es imposible, además, reconstruir los hechos históricos a partir de la pura "memoria".[2]. Please provide examples of why you consider the wiki biography is ad hominem. One thing is not to agree with the person's actions, another is what they actually did and support during their life.(Caracas1830 21:36, 24 July 2006 (UTC))

Just a note: your main article claims Mr Ceresole became a spokesperson for Peron in Madrid in 1976. Peron died in Argentina in July 1974. Best regards

S. Hileret

I was referring to his ideas not the person. Thank you for pointing out the problem. (Caracas1830 19:28, 12 August 2006 (UTC))

Hi everyone:

First of all let me join S. Hileret on that particular sentence. It is totally confusing to anybody who has some knowledge of the time. He is quite correct.

Next, I have to say that I read one of this guy's books (I actually re-read it tonight to make sure, as if that were necessary, but I am thorough) and there is no way to credibly say that he is not a Neofascist or a paranoid antisemite. Antisemitism comes in many flavors and his is the sort that usually precedes the pitchforks in the air and the smashed windows on the streets. I can only describe what he writes as a load of ... (fill in whith the substance that disgusts you the most, and you will fall quite short of what I mean)

To him jews are guilty of everything, from the common cold to the plagues in the Middle ages, stopping for a minute at the Lewinsky affair (another jewish plot, you guessed it). There is no way to portray this as anything but antisemitic. Five more minutes of analysis and his ties with the fascism (neofascism is not quite strong enough) can be shown without any real effort on the reader's part. His ties with Nazism can be found in his words of admiration for Martin Heiddeger's card carrying support of Hitler (really he writes that and expects to have us believe his left wing alliance which supposedly in true "innocence by association" has vaccinated him against being, let me call by its rightful name, a "jew hater".

He would be in good company with the legions of alien abduction/alien conspiracies proponents, the moonwalkers and the moonies, as it is, the neo-nazis love him, and the site which actually carries his book obviously considers him required reading. Judge for yourselves, I will not be accused of "trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes" go see it on your own, decide what you will, and own too the company that you will have.

This book of which I speak has the chuzpah (I use the yiddish with all my intention here) of bearing the following title (quite paradoxically considering the content of it) "La falsificación de la realidad - La Argentina en el espacio geopolítico del terrorismo judío" Caradurismo is the only adjective I can think of to describe the effect of the title when one thinks about the book's content. It can be found here: http://www.radioislam.net/islam/spanish/sion/terror/indice.htm But make no mistake, I found it linked in another site http://nuevaderecha.blogia.com/temas/skinheads-amp-skingirls.php Needless to say, if you actually clicked on that link, that this site is quite open in its nazi support. No doubt they find this book to be soothing bed time reading. If after this there is someone here that still thinks the antisemite label is not justified for this person, please, leave me a message here with your email address and I will send you a detailed (several pages long) analysis of the book which I expect you to read, of course, and also find a little bit about the history of Argentina in order to appreciate the degree to which this "author" has sucumbed to Dellirium Tremens or the abuse of hallucinatory drugs. I was going to post it here but it seems to me to be too much to prove an obvious point.

Believe, me, I write from left-wing background, and the quote from that interview gave me a severe case of "other people's shame" (vergüenza ajena). This man does not speak for any left I would care to know. He is instead and, this can be seen also in the book, a supporter of something that in spain was called Franquismo (the neo franquists would walk about 500 feet from him at least, and they are no saints either.)

Let me give you an example: His thesis is that the extermination of the jews is a myth, that actually what happened was a plan to expulse the jews from Germany (he also supports the view that the jews literally "asked for it"). So, the idea was to take them for a stroll in the woods. If anybody here is familiar with popular euphemisms from the Spanish civil war "To be taken for a stroll" (Ser llevado a dar el paseo) was a common way to talk about someone who was taken away to be executed (usually by the franquist) So, in the most convoluted way, he is not quite wrong. C'mon!!!!!

Now, this is not the first example of "revisionism" (better term is Holocaust denial/jewish hatred) I have encountered in my life (in fact I have known people who devote time and effort to debunk these things, so they cannot be mistaken for good scholarship). My indignation is due more to the fact that people would even question the denounciation of this man as a jew hater (I am done with euphemisms, I am sorry) as if his words did not speak volumes just by themselves. To them I say, please, go take a look you do not even need a debunker (if you can read)to recognize this for what it is.

I am no idiot. Not a genius, I am sure, but not an idiot either. I can recognize hatred (paranoid hatred) when I read it, and I hope you read it too, and find it where it is, which in this case means everywhere in the book. If you need help identifying manipulatory rethoric, faulty logic and faulty scholarship, I will be glad to point you to the textbooks that can help you with that. But I do not think you will need them to recognize this for what it is.

I am also someone who lived in Argentina during the time of the Montoneros, and was in the left (although not in that group or many others) The montoneros's leaders were well known for their antisemitic remarks (in spite of the many jews that militated in their lines, a contradiction I have never been able to explain to full satisfaction) I remember when Perón kicked out of the lines those left wing (confused ones, really) who supported him as if he had ever been a left wing leader. I also remember the day he died. Where he lived safely from 1555 until 1973. And so do many people, jews and non jews alike. His wife turned the country over to the most cruel right wing dictatorship my country has seen in a century marked by them that ended with tens of thousands dissapeared (jews and non jews, but if you like you can read in a book called Nunca Mas, what kinds of tortures they reserved for jews or how people were arrested solely because their last names sounded jewish), countles babies and children robbed of their identities (jews and non jews), a whole generation decimated and stripped of its most bright promise of political leadership of any kind which was literally thrown alive from airplanes into the sea to be food for sharks (jews and non jews). The training for these things does not come from the MOSSAD manuals, but from the manuals of the School of the Americas (also known in some circles as the School of the Assassins) and I keep sayin jews and non jews when what I actually mean is Argentine citizens which is what we all were, unfortunately, the current discourse forgets that and, regretably, it needs reminding. So, I am part of the memory that this guy considers useless in the reconstruction of historical events. And I can write volumes on that quote alone, believe me. Suffice to say, that memory (collective memory) would make his arguments fall flat on his face. He knew it, I am sure, which is why he probably prefers paper documents (as if they were not also memory, as if they could not be false such as is the case of a very famous document that Nazis love to throw at us: The protocols of Sion) This book is inscribed firmly in that tradition of so-called "documented history".

If you know a bit of history, are the least familiar with XXth century history or with argentinean history you will no doubt recognize the deformation that this guy executes on every single piece of data. You will also, if you were in the US at the time, recognize pieces of "jewish conspiracy" theories that went rampant after the WTC destruction in some of his arguments about the terrorist bombings in argentina.

If you feel at home with the "conspiranoids" this book is certainly for you.

If on the other hand you find this book to be an absolute delight and in even 50 % in accordance to your own ideas, consider where I found it as "recommended reading" and make sure you wear your swastika. David Duke, Phd will be very proud of you. Personally, I prefer for him to hate me (his hate is a badge of honor in this case), but who do you allow to agree with your views is not my problem.

That the truth be told about what this person writes is indeed my problem and if that means not being objective with a proponent of hate speech, so be it.

As a comedian once said. If your cat has kittens in the oven, do you call them biscuits?

As far as the relation of Peron with nazism/fascism/franquism and his alledged left wing leadership, I only need to remind you of one very telling detail. For more than 15 years Peron was received in Spain, in exile, and protected by the Franco Regime (the one which gave strolls to the republican partisans, remember?) Now, the Spainsh left wing was either exterminated or in exile during that time. Left wing organizers were (not very politely) thrown in Carabanchel Prison to atone for that sin. Franco's favorite hobby horse was the Judeo-masonic conspiracy against Europe (such a pleasure the old man was, really) Does anybody think that Peron would have been able to count on Francos support during his exile in Spain had he been a left wing leader and anything other than a falange supporter? Ceresole actually says that the evidence linking Peron with fascist/nazis/franquists is part of a jewish conspiracy to strip him of his left wing glories.PLEAAAASE! no more. PS: you can read the book in Spanish and, apparently, in Lebanese. Good luck! Meb47 15:20, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the interesting discussion, I am wholly convinced by what Meb47 writes. Amazing these bizarre careers in Latin American nationalisms! The article would benefit from clarifying his pre-carapintada career though. The first paragraph of the article in particular is confusing because of its chronological jumps (or is it just Ceresole's confused mind that accounts for my difficulties in getting it all straight?). Presumably his support for Allende (who after all died in 1973) stems from before his Spanish exile (where, if I understood well, he went in 1976), at which point in turn Perón was already dead, too, and Pineiro no longer had any influence in Cuban politics. Is it fair to say that his career is one from vaguely left-wing radical nationalism towards fascism? Lausanne81 17:20, 26 October 2008

Miss Meb47:

You really seem to be very upset about Ceresole's ideas. I mean, under those mocking and cynic lines there is a lot of hate. In your lines, I see the same hate and irrationality attributed to fundamentalism by the media, e.g.. So I think you're not that different from them. In the media's words, you are a fundamentalist. A fanatic. And that is no whim. You can't consider (not even mention accept) any point of view or hypothesis that claim anything against Israel or zionism's (and related) reputation, and that is proper of a fanatic.

Also you try to frighten away people thinking in Ceresole's (and similars) way claiming that "make sure you wear your swastika". Come on! What is your point? We must believe every word what you say and think that anyone who says the opposite is a nazi? Can't a person desagree with yours beliefs without being a nazi-DelliriumTremens-drugabuser-racist-antisemit??? You try to make from this a black-and-white matter and is not. A person can totally disagree and deeply criticize another person's ideas or points of view, but it does not imply hate or something like that from the first person to the second.

I didn't read any Ceresoles's books, I don't know what they say but I agree with you: "I am no idiot. Not a genius, I am sure, but not an idiot either. I can recognize hatred (paranoid hatred) when I read it". Yours words match perfectly.

Best wishes.

PS: What is the point of mentioning that Ceresole's books are "apparently" in Lebanese? Maybe you were a little too paranoid about Lebanon those days, eh?

Undue weight

This article centers to much in Ceresole's presence in Venezuela which is not consistent with the time he spent in this country or with his writings as I see only one of his books dealing with Venezuelan issues. Also there is almost no relation between the lead and the body of the article. JRSP (talk) 13:21, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Good afternoon to you all from Caracas,

I think that the Norberto Ceresole article needs to be beefed up in the biographical sense. But otherwise, I think the article covers a great deal of facts that need to be studied in order to understand the Hugo Chavez and the Bolivarian Socialism phenomenon.

I have read many of Ceresole´s writings and - very important - the things Chavez said about him. There is no doubt as to the eclectic political personality that Ceresole was, which makes it so difficult for non-Latin Americans to understand the wild mixture of different ideologies into one.

A particular work on Ceresole´s pseudo-fascist views is "Mi amigo Chávez. Conversaciones con Norberto Ceresole" by A. Garrido (Caracas 2001). On page 74, Ceresole clearly states: "Judaism attacks and destroys me." On page 57, he says:"The Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo are the vanguard of the actions by the state of Israel, the Israeli intelligence service, in Latin America."

In an own work, "Caudillo, Ejercito, Pueblo" (Madrid 2000), on page 27, Ceresole talks about a "post-democracy" - and here the real fascist emerges - in which the caudillo or military strongman guarantizes power through a civil-military party (Chavez uses the same terminology, cívico-militar over and over), that - and I quote - works as the intermediary between the will of the leader and the popular mass. Among the values of Ceresole´s post-democracy figures maintaining a power as concentrated, unified and centralized as possible. This is true, unadulterated fascism as intented by Mussolini et al.

Living in Venezuela for years, I have seen how Chavez has moved, and keeps on moving, inexorabily on Ceresole´s lines of thought. The battle against the "bourgeois state", in which both national-socialist and communist lines of thought are combined, is fought with fury every day on state TV and other media. The Chavist state, seeing itself as a result of "the civic-military rising against neo-liberalism and imperialism" is driven day to day by a sometimes irrational drive in nationalizing and centralizing everything, heaping power upon power, and since 2007 this process has gone into an accelerated mode.

I am not here to label Chavez a fascist or whatever. We have to look at facts, at Ceresole´s own words. It is my opinion that on the South American continent, a strange eclectic ideology has emerged, with a clearly militaristic character, combining socialist ideas about liberating oppressed classes in poor nations (exporting Bolivarian Socialism), and a distinct fascist glorification of the own nation, the own race as contrary to the European ones, and forging Venezuela into a militarized society that obeys to its Leader, i.e. Chavez, only. For in the words of Chavez himself, HE is the revolution, HE is the people. He who is against him, or against the revolution, is against the people, thus closing the rhethoric circle.

If you don´t believe it, come to Venezuela and see and listen for yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahvginkel (talk • contribs) 19:43, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a forum. Do you have some secondary reliable sources to support what you say? JRSP (talk) 23:25, 10 July 2009 (UTC)