Tony Robert Judt, FBA (2 January 1948 – 6 August 2010)^[1] (pronounced Jutt) was a British historian, essayist, and university professor who specialized in European history. Judt moved to New York and served as the Erich Maria Remarque Professor in European Studies at New York University, and Director of NYU's Erich Maria Remarque Institute. He was a frequent contributor to the New York Review of Books. In 1996 Judt was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and in 2007 a corresponding Fellow of the British Academy.

Overview[link]

A Marxist Zionist as a young man, Judt dropped his faith in Zionism after youthful experience in Israel in the 1960s and came to see a Jewish state as an anachronism; he moved away from Marxism in the 1970s and 1980s. In later life, he described himself as "a universalist social democrat".^[2] Judt's works include the highly acclaimed Postwar, a history of Europe after the Second World War. He was also well known for his views on Israel, which generated significant debate after he advocated a one-state solution to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict.

According to journalist David Herman, Judt's directorship of the Remarque Institute, his book Postwar and his articles on Israel made him "one of the best-known public intellectuals in America," having previously been "a fairly obscure British historian, specialising in modern French history".^[3]

In an interview a few weeks before his death Judt said: "I see myself as first and above all a teacher of history; next a writer of European history; next a commentator on European affairs; next a public intellectual voice within the American Left; and only then an occasional, opportunistic participant in the pained American discussion of the Jewish matter . . ." ^[4]

Family and professional life[link]

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (October 2010)

Judt was born in 1948 in London, England to secular Jewish parents.^[1] He was raised by his mother, whose parents had emigrated from Russia and Romania, and his father, who was born in Belgium and had immigrated as a boy to Ireland and then subsequently to England. Judt's parents lived in North London, but due to the closure of the local hospitals in response to an outbreak of infant dysentery, Judt was born in a Salvation Army maternity unit in Bethnal Green, in the East End of London.^[5] When he was a small boy, the family moved from Tottenham to a flat above his mother's business in Putney, South London. When Judt was nine years of age, following the birth of his sister, the family moved to a house in Kingston-upon-Thames, Surrey. The family's main language was English, although Judt often spoke in French to his father and to his father's family.^[6]

Judt won a place at Emanuel School in Wandsworth, and was one of very few Jewish boys accepted at that institution at that time. Following his education at Emanuel, he went on to study as a scholarship student at King's College, Cambridge.^[7] Judt was the first member of his family to finish secondary school and to go to university.^[8] He obtained a BA degree in history in 1969 and, after spending a year at the École Normale Supérieure in Paris, completed a PhD in 1972.^[9] As a high school and university student he was a left-wing Zionist, and worked summers on kibbutzim. He moved away from Zionism after the Six-Day War of 1967, later stating that "I went with this idealistic fantasy of creating a socialist, communitarian country", but that he came to realise that left-wing Zionists were "remarkably unconscious of the people who had been kicked out of the country...to make this fantasy possible".^[7] He came to describe his Zionism as his particular "ideological overinvestment".^[10] Judt wrote in February 2010 that: "Before even turning twenty I had become, been, and ceased to be a Zionist, a Marxist, and a communitarian settler: no mean achievement for a south London teenager".^[2]

After completing his Cambridge doctorate, he was elected a junior fellow of King's College in 1972, where he taught modern French history until 1978.^[11] Following a brief period teaching social history at the University of California, Berkeley, he returned to Great Britain in 1980 to teach politics at St Anne's College, Oxford. He moved to New York University in 1987.

Judt was married three times, his first two marriages ending in divorce. His third marriage was to Jennifer Homans, The New Republic's dance critic, with whom he had two children.^[1][12] In June 2010, Judt and his son Daniel wrote a dialogue about Barack Obama, politics and corporate behaviour for the New York Times.^[13][14]

Judt's piece in The New York Review of Books for May 27, 2010, refers at length to his teaching time at University of California, Davis, and not to time at Berkeley. The piece also refers to "a month of heavy radiation" for cancer in 2002, relevant to the cause of death.

Writings[link]

European history[link]

Judt's experiences in Paris contributed to what would become a long and fruitful relationship with French political culture. He translated his Cambridge doctorate into French and published it in 1976 as La reconstruction du parti socialiste: 1921-1926. It was introduced by Annie Kriegel, who along with Maurice Agulhon was an important influence upon his early work as a French social historian. Judt's second book, Socialism in Provence 1871-1914: A Study in the Origins of the French Modern Left, an “enquiry into a political tradition that shaped a nation”,^[15] was an attempt to explain early origins and the continuities of left-wing politics in the region. More than any other work by Judt, Socialism in Provence was based upon extensive archival research. It was his one and only attempt to place himself within the social history that was dominant in the 1970s.

Modern French history[link]

In the 1970s and 1980s Judt was a historian of modern France. Marxism and the French Left: Studies in Labour and Politics in France 1830-1981 collects several previously unpublished essays on the 19th and 20th centuries, ending with a discussion of Mitterrand. In Past Imperfect: French Intellectuals, 1944-1956, Judt moved away both from social history towards intellectual history, and from endorsement of French Marxist traditions to their critique. In Past Imperfect, he castigated French intellectuals of the postwar era, above all Jean-Paul Sartre for their “self-imposed moral amnesia”.^[16] Judt criticized what he considered blind faith in Joseph Stalin’s communism. In Judt's reading, French thinkers such as Jean-Paul Sartre were blinded by their own provincialism, and unable to see that their calls for intellectual authenticity should have required them to interrogate their own attachment to communism and criticize the Soviet Union for its policies in postwar eastern Europe. This was in some sense a criticism from within, using French sources and polemical style against famous French intellectuals. Judt made a similar case in some of his more popular writings. For instance, following the recognition by then President Jacques Chirac, in 1995, of the responsibility of the French state during the Collaboration, on the anniversary of the Vel' d'Hiv raid, he claimed in an op-ed published by The New York Times that:

"people like Jean-Paul Sartre and Michel Foucault were curiously silent. One reason was their near-obsession with Communism. While proclaiming the need to "engage", to take a stand, two generations of intellectuals avoided any ethical issue that could not advance or, in some cases, retard the Marxist cause.

Vichy was dismissed as the work of a few senile Fascists. No one looked closely at what had happened during the Occupation, perhaps because very few intellectuals of any political stripe could claim to have had a "good" war, as Albert Camus did. No one stood up to cry "J'accuse!" at high functionaries, as Émile Zola did during the Dreyfus affair. When Simone de Beauvoir, Roland Barthes and Jacques Derrida entered the public arena, it usually involved a crisis far away -- in Madagascar, Vietnam or Cambodia. Even today, politically engaged writers call for action in Bosnia but intervene only sporadically in debates about the French past."^[17]

[edit] Postwar

In the years following the publication of Past Imperfect, Judt turned his attention to the wider issues of European history. He spent the 1980s and much of the 1990s at Emory, Oxford, Stanford, and Vienna, where he taught political theory, learned Czech, and became friendly with a number of east European intellectuals. Erich Maria Remarque’s widow, actress Paulette Goddard, bequeathed her fortune to NYU and this enabled the Institute of European Studies bearing her late husband’s name to come into being under Judt’s direction.

Judt's first broader book of this period – the result of a speech delivered at the Johns Hopkins-SAIS Bologna Center in 1995 – was A Grand Illusion? In this extended essay, he dealt directly with the European Union and its prospects for the future, which, in his view, were quite bleak. According to Judt, Europe’s sense of its divisions had long been one of the “defining obsessions of its inhabitants".^[18] The benefits of European unity, he argued, were unevenly distributed and the regions that EU policy favored came to have more in common with each other than with their neighbors living in the same state. The Baden-Württemberg region in southwestern Germany, the Rhône-Alpes region of France, Lombardy and Catalonia were evoked as examples of disproportionately rich “super-regions”. Another division, Judt claimed, could be seen in the Schengen Agreement. Nothing more than a “highest common factor of discriminatory political arithmetic,”^[19] the Schengen Agreement made Eastern European countries into barrier states designed to keep undesirable immigrants at bay. Similar dangers existed in eastern Europe, where former critics of Soviet universalism deftly recycled themselves into anti-European, nationalist agitators.

These problems, Judt wrote, could find their resolution only in increased national intervention. States would be called upon to redistribute wealth and preserve the decaying social fabric of the societies they governed. This conception of the role of the state was carried over – albeit in slightly different form - into Judt's 2005 book, Postwar: A History of Europe Since 1945.

In Postwar, Judt examined the history of Europe from the end of World War II (1945) to 2005. Writing on such a broad subject was something of a departure for Judt, whose earlier works, such as Socialism in Provence and Past Imperfect, had focused on challenging conventional assumptions about the French Left. Weighing in at nearly 900 pages, Postwar has won considerable praise for its sweeping, encyclopedic scope^[20] and was a runner up for the 2006 Pulitzer Prize for General Non-fiction.^[21] Postwar was described by the BBC in Judt's obituary as "acclaimed by historians as one of the best works on the subject" of modern European history.^[22] The book was named as one of the ten best of 2005 by the New York Times Book Review^[23] and, in 2009, the Toronto Star named it the decade's best historical book.^[24]

[edit] Ill Fares the Land

Judt's last book to be published during his lifetime, Ill Fares the Land, projected lessons learned forward, challenging readers to debate "what comes next?" The book made the case for renewed social democracy; it received mixed reviews.^{[25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35]}

Written under the debilitating effects of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, Ill Fares The Land (2010) has been described as Judt's "most overtly political book" and a "dramatic intervention" in the decline of the progressive ideals of the 20th century.^[36] Judt lamented the breakdown of the post-war Keynesian policy consensus as well as the rise of neo-liberal economics with its political manifestations under Thatcher, Reagan, and others. In analyzing the limited success achieved by Third Way triangulation and the paradoxical resurgence of unfettered capitalism after the Global Financial Crisis, Judt described the recent past as "lost decades" marked by "fantasies of prosperity".^[37] The missing reward from modern government has been social progress, and Judt explored how the social contract which had defined the postwar world – with guarantees of security, stability, and fairness – was no longer considered a legitimate social goal.^[38] He concluded his book with a "passionate appeal for a return to social-democratic ideals."^[37]

Israel[link]

Judt's mother and father were British citizens and secular Jews.^[7] Judt enthusiastically embraced Zionism at age 15. For a time he wished to emigrate to Israel, against the wishes of his parents, who were concerned about his studies. In 1966, having won an exhibition to King's College, Cambridge, he worked for the summer on kibbutz Machanaim. When Nasser expelled UN troops from Sinai in 1967, and Israel mobilized for war, he volunteered to replace kibbutz members who had been called up. During and in the aftermath of the Six-Day War, he worked as a driver and translator for the Israel Defense Forces.^[39] After the war, Judt's belief in the Zionist enterprise began to unravel.

In October 2003, in an article for the New York Review of Books, Judt argued that Israel was on its way to becoming a "belligerently intolerant, faith-driven ethno state." He called for the conversion of "Israel from a Jewish state to a binational one" which would include all of what is now Israel, Gaza, East Jerusalem and the West Bank. This proposed new state would have equal rights for all Jews and Arabs living in Israel and the Palestinian territories.^[40] The article, which presented a view of Middle Eastern history and politics that had rarely been given exposure in the mainstream media in the United States, generated an explosive response, positive as well as negative. It drew strong criticism from pro-Israeli writers who saw such a plan as "destroying" Israel and replacing it with a predominantly Palestinian state governed by a Palestinian majority.^[41][42] The NYRB was inundated with over a thousand letters within a week of the article's publication, peppered with terms like “antisemite” and “self-hating Jew,” and the article led to Judt's removal from the editorial board of The New Republic.^[43] In April 2004 Judt gave a public speech at Columbia University in which he further developed his views.^[44]

In March 2006 Judt wrote an op-ed piece for The New York Times about the John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt paper entitled "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy". Judt argued that "[in] spite of [the paper's] provocative title, the essay draws on a wide variety of standard sources and is mostly uncontentious [.... Does] the Israel Lobby affect our foreign policy choices? Of course — that is one of its goals [...]. But does pressure to support Israel distort American decisions? That's a matter of judgment." He summed up his assessment of Mearsheimer and Walt's paper by asserting that "this essay, by two 'realist' political scientists with no interest whatsoever in the Palestinians, is a straw in the wind." He predicted that "it will not be self-evident to future generations of Americans why the imperial might and international reputation of the United States are so closely aligned with one small, controversial Mediterranean client state."^[45]

In May 2006, Judt continued in a similar vein with a feature-length article entitled "The Country That Wouldn't Grow Up" for the Israeli newspaper Haaretz. The article, published the day before Israeli Independence Day, recaps Israel's short history, describing what Judt saw as a steady decline in Israel's credibility that began with the Six-Day War in 1967.^[46]

On October 4, 2006, Judt's scheduled New York talk before the organization Network 20/20 was abruptly cancelled after Polish Consul Krzysztof Kasprzyk suddenly withdrew his offer of a venue following telephone calls from the Anti-Defamation League and the American Jewish Committee. The consul later told a reporter that "I don't have to subscribe to the First Amendment."^[47] According to The New York Sun, "the appearance at the Polish consulate was canceled after the Polish government decided that Mr. Judt's views critical of Israel were not consistent with Poland's friendly relations with the Jewish state."^[48]

According to the Washington Post, the ADL and AJC had complained to the Polish consul that Judt was "too critical of Israel and American Jewry," though both organizations deny asking that the talk be canceled. ADL National Chairman Abraham Foxman called Judt's claims of interference "wild conspiracy theories." Kasprzyk told the Washington Post that "the phone calls were very elegant but may be interpreted as exercising a delicate pressure. That's obvious — we are adults and our IQs are high enough to understand that." Judt, who had planned to argue that the Israel lobby in the US often stifled honest debate, called the implications of the cancellation "serious and frightening." He added that "only in America — not in Israel — is this a problem," charging that vigorous criticism of Israeli policy, acceptable in Israel itself, is taboo in the US. Of the ADL and AJC, he said, "These are Jewish organizations that believe they should keep people who disagree with them on the Middle East away from anyone who might listen."^[49]

The cancellation brought support from a roster of academics and intellectuals who said there had been an attempt to intimidate and shut down free debate.^[50] Mark Lilla and Richard Sennett wrote a letter to Foxman in protest, which was signed by 114 people and published in the New York Review of Books.^[51] In a later exchange on the subject in the New York Review of Books, Lilla and Sennet argued that "Even without knowing the substance of those 'nice' calls from the ADL and AJC, any impartial observer will recognize them as not so subtle forms of pressure."^[52]

The ADL and AJC defended their decision to contact the Polish consulate and rejected Judt's characterization of them. Foxman accused his critics of themselves stifling free speech when "they use inflammatory words like 'threaten,' 'pressure,' and 'intimidate' that bear no resemblance to what actually transpired." He wrote that the "ADL did not threaten or intimidate or pressure anyone. The Polish consul general made his decision concerning Tony Judt's appearance strictly on his own." Foxman said that Judt has "taken the position that Israel shouldn't exist [and t]hat puts him on our radar," while David A. Harris, executive director of the AJC, said that he wanted to tell the consulate that the thrust of Judt's talk ran "contrary to the entire spirit of Polish foreign policy."^[48]

In a March 2007 interview, Judt argued the American need to block criticism of Israel stemmed from the rise of identity politics in the US. "I didn't think I knew until then just how deep and how uniquely American this obsession with blocking any criticism of Israel is. It is uniquely American." He added ruefully: "Apparently, the line you take on Israel trumps everything else in life".^[53]

Asked about his taste for controversy during an interview with NPR prior to his death, Judt stated "I've only ever published four little essays in a lifetime of book writing and lecturing and teaching, just four little essays which touched controversially on painful bits of other people's anatomies, so to speak. Two of them were about Israel".^[10]

Critical reception[link]

Judt was praised by his peers for his wide-ranging knowledge and versatility in analysis. Jonathan Freedland wrote in NYRB: "There are not many professors in any field equipped to produce, for example, learned essays on the novels of Primo Levi and the writings of the now forgotten Manès Sperber — yet also able to turn their hand to, say, a close, diplomatic analysis of the Cuban missile crisis of 1962."^[54] Freedland further stated that Judt had demonstrated "through more than a decade of essays written for America’s foremost journals... that he belongs to each one of those rare, polymathic categories."^[54] In reviewing Judt's Reappraisals: Reflections on the Forgotten Twentieth Century, Freedland wrote that Judt had put conscience ahead of friendship during his life, and demanded the same courage in others.

In 2009, Judt was awarded a Special Orwell Prize for Lifetime Achievement for his contribution to British political writing.^[55]

Illness and death[link]

In 2008, Judt was diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), also known as Lou Gehrig's Disease. From October 2009, he was paralyzed from the neck down. He was nevertheless able to give a two-hour public lecture.^[56] In January 2010 Judt wrote a short article about his condition, the first of a series of memoirs published in the New York Review of Books.^[57] In March 2010, Judt was interviewed by Terry Gross on NPR's Fresh Air,^[10][58] and in June he was interviewed by the BBC's disability affairs correspondent Peter White for the Radio 4 programme No Triumph, No Tragedy.^[59]

Judt died of ALS at his home in Manhattan on 6 August 2010.^[60] This was two weeks after a major interview and retrospective of his work in Prospect magazine^[4] and the day before an article about his illness was published in the Irish Independent indicating that he "won't surrender any time soon" and comparing his suffering to that of author Terry Pratchett, who was diagnosed with early-onset Alzheimer's disease in 2007.^[61] Shortly before his death, according to The Guardian, he was said to have possessed the "liveliest mind in New York."^[62] He continued his work as a public intellectual right up until his death, writing essays for the New York Review of Books^[62] and composing and completing a synthetic intellectual history under the title Thinking The Twentieth Century with fellow historian Timothy Snyder.^[63][64] He also wrote a memoir entitled The Memory Chalet, which was published posthumously in November 2010.^[65] During his illness, Judt made use of the memory palace technique to remember paragraphs of text during the night, which he placed mentally in rooms of a Swiss chalet and then dictated to his assistant the next day.^[10][56]

Following his death TIME said he was "a historian of the very first order, a public intellectual of an old-fashioned kind and — in more ways than one — a very brave man".^[66] He was also praised for carrying out what he himself described as the historian's task "to tell what is almost always an uncomfortable story and explain why the discomfort is part of the truth we need to live well and live properly. A well-organised society is one in which we know the truth about ourselves collectively, not one in which we tell pleasant lies about ourselves". Mark LeVine, a professor of history at the University of California at Irvine, said that Judt's "writings on European history and the need for a new social contract between rulers and ruled can inspire a new generation of scholars and activists in other cultures".^[38] Timothy Garton Ash, in his obituary in the New York Review of Books, placed Judt in "the great tradition of the spectateur engagé, the politically engaged but independent and critical intellectual."^[67]

Bibliography[link]

Books written[link]

• Judt, Tony; Snyder, Timothy (2012). Thinking the Twentieth Century. London: Penguin Press. ISBN 978-1-59420-323-7. 
• Judt, Tony (2010). The Memory Chalet. London: William Heinemann. ISBN 978-0-434-02096-6. 
• Judt, Tony (2010). Ill Fares the Land. Penguin Press. ISBN 1-59420-276-1. 
• Judt, Tony (2008). Reappraisals: Reflections on the Forgotten Twentieth Century. Penguin Press. ISBN 1-59420-136-6. 
• Judt, Tony (2005). Postwar: A History of Europe Since 1945. Penguin Press. ISBN 1-59420-065-3. 
• Judt, Tony (1998). The Burden of Responsibility: Blum, Camus, Aron, and the French Twentieth Century. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-41418-3. 
• Judt, Tony (1996). A Grand Illusion?: An Essay on Europe. Douglas & McIntyre. ISBN 0-8090-5093-5. 
• Judt, Tony (1992). Past Imperfect: French Intellectuals, 1944-1956. University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-07921-3. 
• Judt, Tony (1990). Marxism and the French Left: Studies on Labour and Politics in France 1830-1982. Clarendon. ISBN 0-19-821578-9. 
• Judt, Tony (1979). Socialism in Provence 1871-1914: A Study in the Origins of the Modern French Left. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-22172-2. 
• Judt, Tony (1976). La reconstruction du parti socialiste : 1921-1926. Presses de la Fondation nationale des sciences politique. 

Books edited[link]

• Judt, Tony, and Lacorne, Denis (2005). With Us Or Against Us : Studies in Global Anti-Americanism. Palgrave. ISBN 0-230-60226-6. 
• Judt, Tony, and Lacorne, Denis (2004). Language, Nation, and State: Identity Politics In A Multilingual Age. Palgrave. ISBN 1-4039-6393-2. 
• Deák, István; Gross, Jan T.; Judt, Tony (2000). The Politics of Retribution in Europe: World War II and its Aftermath. Princeton University Press. ISBN 1-4039-6393-2. 
• Judt, Tony (1989). Resistance and Revolution in Mediterranean Europe 1939-1948. Routledge. ISBN 0-415-01580-4. 

See also[link]

• Eric Hobsbawm
• Raymond Aron

References[link]

External links[link]

• New York Review of Books - Articles written by Judt
• Historical Society, Boston University - Interview with Judt on Europe
• "If words fall into disrepair, what will substitute? They are all we have" - One of Judt's final essays

Obituaries

• Tony Judt An East End Intellectual. The Economist. Volume 396 Number 8695 August 14–20, 2010, page 72.
• Professor Tony Judt by The Daily Telegraph
• Elliott, Michael. Tony Judt: A Public Intellectual Remembered by Time magazine
• Hannan, Daniel. Tony Judt was the foremost chronicler of post-war Europe. - The Daily Telegraph
• Grimes, William. Tony Judt, Chronicler of History, Is Dead at 62. - The New York Times
• Nelson, Valerie, J. Tony Judt dies at 62; leading historian of postwar Europe. - Los Angeles Times
• Schudel, Matt. Tony Judt, scholar of European history, dies at 62. - The Washington Post
• Doward, Jamie. Historian Tony Judt dies aged 62 - The Guardian
• Wheatcroft. Geofrey. Obituary: Tony Judt, The Guardian
• Goldberg, Saul. Tony Judt: the captivating wit and intellect of my friend and teacher. - The Guardian
• Acclaimed British historian Tony Judt dies aged 62 - BBC News
• Taylor, Jerome. Historian 'saw the big picture, but went to the heart of the matter'. - The Independent
• Historian Tony Judt, 62, Dies After Battle with Lou Gehrig’s Disease - video report by Democracy Now!
• LeVine, Mark. Tony Judt: An intellectual hero
• Tony Judt, historian and critic, dead at age 62 by The Globe and Mail

This biographical article needs additional citations for verification. Please help by adding reliable sources. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous or harmful. (August 2010)

Evgeny Morozov, born 1984 in Soligorsk, Belarus,^[1] is a writer and researcher who studies political and social implications of technology.

Life[link]

Morozov is a visiting scholar at Stanford University,^[2] a fellow at the New America Foundation, and a contributing editor of and blogger for Foreign Policy magazine, for which he writes the blog Net Effect. He has previously been a Yahoo! fellow at Georgetown University's Walsh School of Foreign Service, a fellow at the Open Society Institute, director of new media at the NGO Transitions Online, and a columnist for the Russian newspaper Akzia. In 2009 he was chosen as a TED fellow where he spoke about how the Web influences civic engagement and regime stability in authoritarian, closed societies or in countries "in transition."^[3]

Morozov's writings have appeared in various newspapers and magazines around the world, including The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, The Economist, The Guardian, New Scientist, The New Republic, Times Literary Supplement, Newsweek International, International Herald Tribune, Boston Review, Slate, and the San Francisco Chronicle.^[4]

Thought[link]

Morozov expresses skepticism about the popular view that the Internet is helping to democratize authoritarian regimes, arguing that it could also be a powerful tool for engaging in mass surveillance, political repression, and spreading nationalist and extremist propaganda. He has also criticized what he calls "The Internet Freedom Agenda" of the US government, finding it naive and even counterproductive to the very goal of promoting democracy through the Web.^[5]

[edit] The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom

In January 2011, Morozov published his first book The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom (ISBN 978-1586488741). In addition to exploring the impact of the Internet on authoritarian states, the book investigates the intellectual sources of the growing excitement about the liberating potential of the Internet and links it to the triumphalism that followed the end of the Cold War.^[6] Morozov also argues against the ideas of what he calls cyber-utopianism (the inability to see the Internet's darker side) and Internet-centrism (the growing propensity to view all political and social change through the prism of the Internet.) ^[7]

References[link]

External links[link]

• Personal website
• Net.Effect, Morozov's blog at Foreign Policy magazine
• netdelusion.com, the Net Delusion book site (includes excerpts and additional information about the book)
• Video (with mp3 available) of discussion about cyber-war and social media with Morozov and Ethan Zuckerman on Bloggingheads.tv
• "The Digital Dictatorship" in The Wall Street Journal, 2010-2-20.
• "Texting Toward Utopia: Does the internet spread democracy?" in Boston Review (March/April 2009)
• "Cyber-Scare: The exaggerated fears over digital warfare" in Boston Review (July/Aug 2009)
• "Edit This Page: Is it the End of Wikipedia?" in Boston Review (Nov/Dec 2009)
• "The Internet in Society: Empowering and Censoring Citizen?", an animated talk presented by the RSA
• "TED Talks: How the Net aids dictatorships", Morozov's TED talk
• "Twitter Can't Save You", review of The Net Delusion in "The New York Times"
• "Caught in the net", review of The Net Delusion in "The Economist"
• "Political Repression 2.0", Morozov's oped in "The New York Times"
• "Form and Fortune: Steve Jobs's pursuit of perfection—and the consequences", Morozov's essay in The New Republic

Philip George Zimbardo
Zimbardo speaking in Poland, 2009
Born	(1933-03-23) March 23, 1933 (age 79) New York City, New York
Residence	United States
Nationality	American
Fields	Psychology
Institutions	Yale University New York University Columbia University Stanford University
Alma mater	Brooklyn College Yale University
Known for	Stanford prison study, spouse of Christina Maslach, UC Berkeley, Time paradox, Lucifer Effect, Abu Ghraib
Influences	Stanley Milgram
Spouse	Christina Maslach

Philip George Zimbardo (born March 23, 1933) is a psychologist and a professor emeritus at Stanford University. He is president of the Heroic Imagination Project. He is known for his Stanford prison study and authorship of various introductory psychology books and textbooks for college students, including The Lucifer Effect and The Time Paradox.

Early years[link]

Zimbardo was born in New York City on March 23, 1933, from a family of Sicilian immigrants. He completed his BA with a triple major in psychology, sociology, and anthropology from Brooklyn College in 1954, where he graduated summa cum laude. He completed his M.S. (1955) and Ph.D (1959) in psychology from Yale University, where Neal E. Miller was his advisor.^[1] He taught at Yale from 1959 to 1960. From 1960 to 1967, he was a professor of psychology at New York University. From 1967 to 1968, he taught at Columbia University. He joined the faculty at Stanford University in 1968.

Prison study[link]

In 1971, Zimbardo accepted a tenured position as professor of psychology at Stanford University. With a government grant from the U.S. Office of Naval Research, he conducted the Stanford prison study in which 24 clinically sane individuals were randomly assigned to be "prisoners" or "guards" in a mock prison located in the basement of the psychology building at Stanford (three additional college students were selected as alternates, only one of whom participated^[2] in the study). The planned two-week study into the psychology of prison life ended after only six days due to emotional trauma being experienced by the participants. The students quickly began acting out their roles, with "guards" becoming sadistic and "prisoners" showing extreme passivity and depression.

The volunteers knew they were being used in a study but they did not know when the study would be taking place, so the initial shock of being randomly arrested one morning and taken to the mock prison put them in a mild state of shock. On arrival, the "prisoners" were stripped, searched, shaved and deloused, which caused a great deal of humiliation. They were then issued uniforms, ID numbers, and escorted to their cells by the volunteer prison guards. These changes isolated the prisoners making it harder for them to portray their individual characteristics. The guards themselves were not given any specific instruction or guidelines for the way they were to treat the prisoners. Instead, the psychologists allowed them to do whatever was needed to keep order in the prison. They were dressed very professionally in identical uniforms. They also wore a whistle around their neck and carried a night stick.

At the beginning of the experiment, Zimbardo started off with nine guards and nine prisoners. All the original volunteers were kept as backups and 3 prisoners as well as 3 guards occupied the prison at a time. Their first night in the prison, the volunteer prisoners were awakened at 2:30 AM by the guards blowing their whistles. They did this several times to familiarize the prisoners with how things were going to work and to let them know who was in charge.

The study shows that before the volunteer prisoners started showing signs of distress, they did not take the guards and their authority seriously. The prisoners mocked the guards, trying to regain their individuality. This, however, was short-lived. The prisoners soon realized that the attitude of the guards was very serious and that they demanded obedience. This began a long string of confrontational quarrels between the guards and prisoners. The guards used physical punishment and exercises, such as pushups, in order to show their authority to the prisoners.

In the morning of only the second day, a rebellion broke out among the volunteer prisoners. They ripped off their uniforms and locked themselves in their cells by pushing their beds up against the door. In response to this, the guards became very angry and called for backup assistance to the situation. This surprised Zimbardo as well as the rest of the psychologists because they had not thought it would be taken this far. Guards who were not on duty were called in and the guards who were assigned to only the night shift stayed with the guards who came in all the way through their shift the next morning. The tactic the guards came up with was to fight back in order to discipline the unruly prisoners and make them obey. In response to the prisoners barricading themselves in their cells, the guards used fire extinguishers on them to get them away from the entrances.

Once the guards were able to get into the cells, they stripped the inmates naked, tore apart the beds and the cell, and put the prisoners who had started the rebellion in solitary confinement. As all nine guards could not be on duty at once, they began rewarding the prisoners for good behavior. The prisoners who had not been involved in starting the riot were allowed to lie in their beds, wash themselves and brush their teeth and eat while those who had started the riot were not allowed to. The guards continued to use tormenting tactics to break up the prisoners relations with each other to avoid further organized resistance. In the case with one prisoner, who was a smoker, the guards were able to control his behavior because they decided when and if he was allowed to smoke.

Less than two full days into the experiment, one inmate began suffering from depression, uncontrolled rage, crying and other mental dysfunctions. The prisoner was eventually released after screaming and acting unstable in front of the other inmates. This prisoner was replaced with one of the alternates.^[2]

On the third day, the study allowed visiting hours for friends and family. The visitation was closely monitored and timed with many rules and restrictions.

The next event that added to the prison experiment "drama" was a rumored escape plan that the prisoners were planning on carrying out directly after visiting hours. The prisoner was going to have some of his friends round up, break into the prison and free all of the prisoners. After one of the guards overheard this plan, an informant was placed in among the prisoners and the escape never happened. The prisoners who had been thought to have organized the escape were disciplined and harassed with more pushups and toilet cleaning.

At some point, even the prisoners who were thought of as role models, those who obeyed all of the guards' commands were being punished. Going to the bathroom was considered a privilege rather than a necessity, and those who acted out against the guards were made to urinate and defecate in a bucket in their cell.

By the end of the experiment, there was no unification among prisoners as well as guards. The guards also had won complete control over all of their prisoners and were using their authority to its greatest extent. One prisoner had even gone as far as to go on a hunger strike. Refusing to eat, the guards put him into solitary confinement for three hours (even though their own rules stated the limit that a prisoner could be in solitary confinement was only one hour). Instead of the other prisoners looking at this inmate as a hero and following along in his strike, they chanted together that he was a bad prisoner and a troublemaker. Prisoners and guards had rapidly adapted to their roles, stepping beyond the boundaries of what had been predicted and leading to dangerous and psychologically damaging situations.

One-third of the guards were judged to have exhibited "genuine" sadistic tendencies, while many prisoners were emotionally traumatized and five had to be removed from the study early.

Zimbardo himself started to give into the roles of the situation. He had to be shown the reality of the experiment by Christina Maslach, his girlfriend and future wife, who had just received her doctorate in psychology.^[3]

At the end of the experiment, after all the prisoners had been released and the guards let go, everyone was brought back into the same room for evaluation and to be able to get their feelings out in the open towards one another. Ethical concerns surrounding the famous study often draw comparisons to the Milgram experiment, which was conducted in 1961 at Yale University by Stanley Milgram, Zimbardo's former high school friend.

Similar studies[link]

There were ethical issues in researching the original study. A subsequent study looked at the power of roles in selected situations.^[4]

A 2006 study was conducted by the British Broadcasting Company replicating the study by Zimbardo.^[5] This study, due to the fact that was conducted in later times, had more restrictions. While there were restrictions, there were also great differences. The first of the differences was how the participants were filtered. The Stanford Prison Experiment only gave the participants interviews and then certain personality tests. The BBC study used first psychometric tests, which combined a series of personality, attitude and mood tests. These tests were self-report tests. The second measure to filter the participants was a telephone interview. If they had passed through the first two filters the final was a full clinical interview. The second difference was how the participants were labeled either to be guards or prisoners. The Stanford Prison Experiment used random assignment to arrange them into the two groups. The BBC study first divided the participants into groups of smaller numbers in which they were organized by key psychological dimensions. From here they were then separated into prisoners and guards. Another difference was how the prisoners were brought to the mock prisons. The Stanford Prison Experiment participants were actually arrested for crimes which they did not commit, while those in the BBC study were just brought to the location by a blacked out car.

When it comes to the difference in the results between the Stanford Prison Experiment and the BBC prison study, it is clear that the BBC study is more of a struggle to figure out what to do when there is no direction given. There was more of a conflict within the two groups than between the two groups themselves. The Stanford Prison Experiment was looking at what happened when you gave one group authority over another and the power the situation.^[6] Philip Zimbardo himself even made a critique on the BBC study describing the differences in the setup, execution and results of the study. The setup differences range from the actual participants age and how the Stanford Prison Experiment actually used college students, while the BBC prison study used men of different ages. The two studies differed with how they were executed and how rules were set up and a hierarchy was put in place. Neither of these happened in the BBC prison study. In the conclusion, Zimbardo states that the conclusion was only one that was put in place for media, not for science.^[7]

Other endeavors[link]

Prof. Philip G. Zimbardo, Berlin, Germany, 2008

After the prison experiment, Zimbardo decided to look for ways he could use psychology to help people; this led to the founding of The Shyness Clinic in Menlo Park, California, which treats shy behavior in adults and children. Zimbardo's research on shyness resulted in several bestselling books on the topic. Other subjects he has researched include mind control and cultic behavior.^[8]

Zimbardo is the co-author of an introductory Psychology textbook entitled Psychology and Life, which is used in many American undergraduate psychology courses. He also hosted a PBS TV series titled Discovering Psychology which is used in many college telecourses.^[9]

In 2002, Zimbardo was elected president of the American Psychological Association. Under his direction, the organization developed the website PsychologyMatters.org, a compendium of psychological research that has applications for everyday life. Also that year, he appeared in the British reality television show, The Human Zoo. Participants were observed inside a controlled setting while Zimbardo and a British psychologist analyzed their behavior.

In 2004, Zimbardo testified for the defense in the court martial of Sgt. Ivan "Chip" Frederick, a guard at Abu Ghraib prison. He argued that Frederick's sentence should be lessened due to mitigating circumstances, explaining that few individuals can resist the powerful situational pressures of a prison, particularly without proper training and supervision. The judge apparently disregarded Zimbardo's testimony, and gave Frederick the maximum 8-year sentence. Zimbardo drew on the knowledge he gained from his participation in the Frederick case to write a new book entitled, The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil, about the connections between Abu Ghraib and the prison experiments.^[10]

In September 2006, Zimbardo joined the faculty at Palo Alto University as Professor of Psychology, where he teaches social psychology to doctoral students in the clinical psychology program.

Zimbardo's writing appeared in Greater Good Magazine, published by the Greater Good Science Center of the University of California, Berkeley. Zimbardo's contributions include the interpretation of scientific research into the roots of compassion, altruism, and peaceful human relationships. His most recent article with Greater Good magazine is entitled: "The Banality of Heroism",^[11] which examines how ordinary people can become everyday heroes. In February 2010, Zimbardo was a guest presenter at the Science of a Meaningful Life seminar: Goodness, Evil, and Everyday Heroism, along with Greater Good Science Center Executive Director Dacher Keltner.

Zimbardo, who officially retired in 2003, gave his final "Exploring Human Nature" lecture on March 7, 2007, on the Stanford campus, bringing his teaching career of 50 years to a close. David Spiegel, professor of psychiatry at the Stanford University School of Medicine, called Zimbardo "a legendary teacher", saying that "he has changed the way we think about social influences."^[12]

Though retired Zimbardo still conducts research at Stanford University and teaches one class at the former Pacific Graduate School of Psychology, now Palo Alto University.

Zimbardo has made appearances on American TV, such as The Daily Show with Jon Stewart on March 29, 2007,^[13] The Colbert Report on February 11, 2008 ^[14] and Dr. Phil on October 25, 2010. ^[15]

Zimbardo is currently heading a movement for everyday heroism as the founder and director of The Heroic Imagination Project (HIP), a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting heroism in everyday life. The project is currently collecting data from former American gang members and former individuals with ties to terrorism for comparison, in an attempt to better understand how individuals change violent behavior. This research portion of the project is co-headed by Dr. Rony Berger, Dr. Yotam Heineburg, and Dr. Leonard Beckum. ^[16] He published an article contrasting heroism and altruism in 2011 with Dr. Zeno Franco and Kathy Blau in the Review of General Psychology.^[17]

Recognition[link]

In 2005, Zimbardo received the Dagmar and Václav Havel Foundation Vision 97 Award in Prague.

In 2003, Zimbardo, Gian Vittorio Caprara and Claudio Barbaranelli an academic of the University of Rome La Sapienza were awarded the sarcastic Ig Nobel Award for Psychology^[18] for their report "Politicians' Uniquely Simple Personalities."^[19]

Works[link]

• Influencing attitude and changing behavior: A basic introduction to relevant methodology, theory, and applications (Topics in social psychology), Addison Wesley, 1969
• The Cognitive Control of Motivation. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman, 1969
• Stanford prison experiment: A simulation study of the psychology of imprisonment, Philip G. Zimbardo, Inc., 1972
• The psychology of imprisonment: privation, power and pathology, Stanford University, 1972
• Influencing Attitudes and Changing Behavior. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley Publishing Co., 1969, ISBN 0-07-554809-7
• Canvassing for Peace: A Manual for Volunteers. Ann Arbor, MI: Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, 1970, ISBN
• Influencing Attitudes and Changing Behavior (2nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison Wesley., 1977, ISBN
• How to Overcome Shyness. Family Circle magazine, May 31, 1977 page 14 (with questionnaire)
• Cults go to high school: A theoretical and empirical analysis of the initial stage in the recruitment process, American Family Foundation, 1985
• Shyness: What It Is, What to Do About It, Addison Wesley, 1990, ISBN 0-201-55018-0
• The Psychology of Attitude Change and Social Influence. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1991, ISBN 0-87722-852-3
• Psychology (3rd Edition), Reading, MA: Addison Wesley Publishing Co., 1999, ISBN 0-321-03432-5
• The Shy Child : Overcoming and Preventing Shyness from Infancy to Adulthood, Malor Books, 1999, ISBN 1-883536-21-9
• Violence Workers: Police Torturers and Murderers Reconstruct Brazilian Atrocities. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2002, ISBN 0-520-23447-2
• Psychology - Core Concepts, 5/e, Allyn & Bacon Publishing, 2005, ISBN 0-205-47445-4
• Psychology And Life, 17/e, Allyn & Bacon Publishing, 2005, ISBN 0-205-41799-X
• The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil, Random House, New York, 2007, ISBN 1-4000-6411-2
• The Time Paradox: The New Psychology of Time That Will Change Your Life, Simon & Schuster, New York, 2008, ISBN 1-4165-4198-5
• The Journey from the Bronx to Stanford to Abu Ghraib, pp. 85–104 in "Journeys in Social Psychology: Looking Back to Inspire the Future", edited by Robert Levine, et al., CRC Press, 2008. ISBN 0-8058-6134-3
• Zimbardo, Philip G. " A Simulation Study of the Psychology of Imprisonment Conducted at Stanford University." The Stanford Prison Experiment. 2009. Web. 1 Dec 2009
• Psychology, AP* Edition, Zimbardo, Phil, Johnson, Robert, Weber, Ann, Gruber, Craig, Allyn & Bacon, Boston, 2010

See also[link]

• Human experimentation in the United States
• List of social psychologists
• Stanford prison experiment
• Banality of evil
• Milgram experiment
• Seductive Poison

References[link]

External links[link]

• Zimbardo's official website
• Philip G. Zimbardo Papers (Stanford University Archives)
• Appearances on C-SPAN
• Philip Zimbardo at TED Conferences
• Philip Zimbardo at the Internet Movie Database
• Works by or about Philip Zimbardo in libraries (WorldCat catalog)
• Philip Zimbardo on the Lucifer Effect, in two parts

Beppe Grillo
Leader of the Five Star Movement
Incumbent
Assumed office October 4, 2009
Personal details
Born	(1948-07-21) 21 July 1948 (age 63) Genoa, Italy
Nationality	Italian
Political party	Five Star Movement
Relations	Married
Children	6
Occupation	Comedian, Activist, Politician
Religion	Roman Catholicism
Website	http://www.beppegrillo.it/

Giuseppe Piero Grillo, better known as Beppe Grillo (born 21 July 1948), is an Italian activist, blogger, comedian and actor. He has been involved in politics since 2009 as leader of the Five Star Movement.

Biography[link]

Grillo was born in Genoa, Liguria.

After receiving his degree as an accountant, Grillo became a comedian by chance, improvising a monologue in an audition. Two weeks later he was discovered and launched by Italian TV presenter Pippo Baudo. He subsequently participated in the variety show Secondo Voi for two years (1977–78). Later, in 1979, he participated in Luna Park by Enzo Trapani, and Fantastico.

In the 1980s his success rose further, thanks to shows like Te la do io l'America (1982, 4 episodes) and Te lo do io il Brasile (1984, six episodes). In these shows, he narrated his experiences of his visits to the United States and Brazil, with anecdotes and witticisms about the culture, lifestyle and beauty of these places.

As a result, his popularity grew more and more, and he became the protagonist of another show developed especially for him, called Grillometro (Grillometer). In 1986, he was the star of prize-winning advertisements for a brand of yogurt.

Soon after this, his performances began to be characterized by an increasing level of political satire, often expressed in such a direct way that he quickly offended a lot of Italian politicians. In 1987 during the Saturday night TV show Fantastico 7, he attacked the Italian Socialist Party and its leader Bettino Craxi, then Italy's Prime Minister, on the occasion of his visit in the People's Republic of China. Grillo said:

If the Chinese are all socialists, whom do they steal from?

The joke hinted at the totalitarianism of the PRC, but even more to the widespread corruption for which the Italian Socialist Party was known. As a consequence, Grillo was effectively and silently banished from publicly owned television; yet, he was vindicated a few years later when the Italian Socialist Party had to be disbanded in a welter of corruption scandals known as Tangentopoli, uncovered by the Mani pulite investigation. Craxi himself died in Tunisia, unable to return to Italy where he would have been jailed for several convictions.

Consequently, from the beginning of the 1990s his appearances on television became rare: according to many people, the reason for this is a silent ostracism by politicians offended by his revelations about their hidden financial activities, frauds and false claims. When one of his shows was finally allowed to be broadcast by RAI, in 1993, it obtained a record share of 16 million viewers. He was later banned definitively from Italian television.

He currently performs in theatres in Italy and abroad, often with outstanding success.^[1] Grillo's themes include energy usage, political and corporate corruption, finance, freedom of speech, child labour, globalization, and technology. Recently Grillo started to encourage the use of Wikipedia as the future of knowledge sharing, and generally he is a strong proponent of internet freedom.^[2]

Political activism[link]

Beppe Grillo in Bologna speaking at V-Day.

Grillo has spearheaded several national and international political campaigns. On Sept. 8, 2007, he organized a "V-Day Celebration" in Italy; the "V" stood for vendetta, vengeance, and vaffanculo ("fuck off"). During the rally, Grillo projected the names of two dozen Italian politicians who had been convicted of crimes ranging from corruption and tax evasion to abetting a murder. More than 2 million Italians participated in this rally.^[3] Grillo also used this rally to urge Italians to sign a petition calling for the introduction of a Bill of Popular Initiative to remove members of the Italian Parliament who have criminal convictions of any kind from their office.^[4] According to Internet scholars, V–day was the first case in Italian history of a political demonstration developed and promoted via word–of–mouth mobilization on the blogosphere and the social web.^[5]

This was followed by the second V-Day on 25 April 2008, in Turin, S.Carlo square. This V-Day was dedicated to the Italian press and its government financial support; Grillo heavily criticized the Italian press for the lack of freedom; Umberto Veronesi (about his support for incinerators); NATO bases in Italy, the politicians (Silvio Berlusconi had recently been re-elected) and Retequattro, still holding on to TV frequencies already assigned to Europa 7 [2].

Beppe Grillo in Turin during electoral campaign.

On 1 September 2005, thanks to contributions from readers of his blog, Grillo bought a full page advertisement in the Italian newspaper La Repubblica in which he called for the resignation of the Bank of Italy's (then) governor Antonio Fazio over the Antonveneta banking scandal. In October 2005, Time chose him as one of the "European Heroes 2005" for his constant battle against corruption and financial scandals.^[6]

On 22 November 2005 Grillo also bought a page in the International Herald Tribune, again claiming that members of the Italian Parliament ought not to represent citizens if they have ever been convicted in a court of law, even in the first degree of the three available in the Italian system.^[7] His blog now contains a regularly updated list of members of the Italian Parliament who have been convicted in all three degrees, in what he calls "operation Clean Parliament".^[8] Grillo claimed, in 2007, that data suggested that even Scampia, the most dangerous suburb of Naples and one of the areas with the highest crime rate in Europe, actually had a lower crime rate than the Italian parliament's membership.^[9]

On 26 July 2007 Grillo was permitted to speak to the members of the European Parliament in Brussels, where he drew attention to the dangerous, negative state of current Italian politics.^[10]

In August 2008, Grillo was the subject of a report on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's (ABC-TV) international affairs program "Foreign Correspondent". Titled "The Clown Prince" the report profiled Grillo's life, political activism, V Day campaign, and use of the internet as a political tool.^[11]

In 2010, he started a political movement called "Movimento 5 stelle" ("Movement five stars"), without the desire to be a leader and to be elected, but only to join, by the Internet, people who believe in ideals like honesty and direct democracy, and saying that politicians are only subordinates of the people and that they should work for the country only for a short time and only if they are not condemned for crimes, and thinking about the problems of their country without any other interest. The movement will be truly a party chance only from the next political round, when they will purpose their name not only in some regions but also in the political elections. The five stars represent the five basic points of the shared program: Water, Environment, Transport, Connectivity, Growth.

Beppegrillo.it[link]

Grillo maintains a blog (available in Italian, English and Japanese) at beppegrillo.it which is updated daily. Comments to posts regularly top the thousands (in the Italian version). According to Technorati, the blog is ranked among the 10 most visited blogs in the world. In 2008, The Guardian ranked Grillo's blog among the world's most powerful blogs.^[12]

Grillo often receives letters of appreciation and support from prominent figures, such as Antonio Di Pietro (former Italian Minister of Infrastructures), Fausto Bertinotti (former President of the Italian Chamber of Deputies), Renzo Piano, and even Nobel Prize Winners (like Dario Fo, Joseph E. Stiglitz, Dalai Lama, Muhammad Yunus).^[13]

Legal issues[link]

In 1980 he was found guilty of manslaughter for a car accident in which he was the driver; three passengers lost their lives.^[14]

During his shows Grillo never hesitates to name firms and personalities he considers corrupt, always supporting his views with data and documents^{[citation needed]}. For this reason he has been sued several times for libel by many people and organizations which he had exposed, such as Telecom Italia.

When Italian judges were investigating the Parmalat scandal, which was then the world's largest corporate bankruptcy scandal ever, Grillo was called to testify as he anticipated the imminent collapse of the dairy conglomerate in one of his shows. When he was asked by judges how he has been able to discover that, he simply said that Parmalat's financial holes were so evident that anybody who had enough ability to see them would see them, since the corporate accounting was easily accessible.^[15]

Criticism[link]

Grillo is often criticized for his lifestyle. In particular, critics blame him for owning a motor yacht and a Ferrari sports car, both being in contradiction with his well known ecologist stance. In his blog he admits that he did, in fact, acquire both but has since sold them.^[14]

Grillo is also criticized for taking advantage of the Condono Tombale, a fiscal amnesty granted by the first Berlusconi government in 2001, which Grillo publicly opposed.^[16] Grillo commented on this issue during the V-Day demonstration. He said that he had personally benefitted by only €500^{[citation needed]}.

Grillo has proposed that members of the Italian Parliament who have a criminal record should be barred from public office. As Grillo himself has been found guilty of involuntary manslaughter caused by a car accident^[14] his critics^[who?] say he has no right to represent Italians either. Grillo has always stated that he is not interested in becoming a member of the Italian Parliament anyway.^[14] Despite this, in July 2009 he publicly expressed his intention to present himself as a candidate for the PD's primary elections^[17] which, however, does not imply automatic presence in the Italian parliament.

Another proposal of his is that members of Parliament be limited to two government terms of office after which they might not stand again. Detractors^[who?] argue that this would shorten the political life of competent and expert politicians, usually drawing Alcide De Gasperi, Aldo Moro and Enrico Berlinguer as examples of brilliant politicians who served more than two terms. Marco Travaglio replied that, for that sake, also the political life of much less popular Clemente Mastella would have suffered.^[18]

Grillo is criticized as being a mere demagogue who attacks politicians on superficial issues and their private lives while unable to provide a valid alternative. For instance, Daniele Luttazzi, famous Italian satirist, criticized Grillo in 2007 in an open letter published on the website of the news magazine Micromega. Luttazzi accused Grillo of being a "demagogue" and a "populist", suggesting Grillo to choose between satire and politics, asserting the two are incompatible.^[19]

In 2007 Grillo criticized the "Memorial Day of Foibe Massacres and Istrian-Dalmatian exodus" and the President of the Italian Repubblic Giorgio Napolitano^[20]

Filmography[link]

Grillo has appeared in three movies:

• Cercasi Gesù (1982)
• Scemo di Guerra (1985)
• Topo Galileo (1987)

In 2008, Grillo featured in the documentary, The Beppe Grillo Story, produced by Banyak Films for Al Jazeera English.

References[link]

External links[link]

Official websites[link]

• The English version of Beppe Grillo's personal blog
• Beppe Grillo's fans meeting map around the world

Other resources[link]

• 'Time' article about Grillo
• 'New York Times' video about Grillo
• 'New Yorker' Beppe’s Inferno