Comment Of The Day: “Monday Ethics Warm-Up, 7/29/19: Reverse Racism And Listening To Dead People,” Item #1

I can’t ignore the spate of apocalyptic or otherwise ominous predictions I am seeing in the comments; similar predictions and dire analyses are turning up in other forums as well. Here, for example. And here.

Then there is this Ethics Alarms comment (on the Big Lie #4 post)  by Steve Witherspoon, which ends,

The 2020 presidential election will be a defining moment for the 21st century political left, they have too much invested in their social justice rhetoric to let up or turn back now. They have defined all things that are tot he political right of the extreme political left as evil, it’s time to move ahead full steam. The political left MUST nominate a non-white person to run for President or they risk alienating the entire non-white community and all of the social justice warriors, plus if they were to nominate a “white” person they will prove beyond any doubt that their social justice rhetoric is a complete fraud. Either they practice what they preach or they become completely irrelevant, it’s all in, or it’s nothing.

Regardless if you agree with anything I wrote above or not; we saw the reaction to Trump winning in 2016 and the followup three years of growing hate and irrational behavior from the anti-Trumpers, do you think the hyped-up irrational anti-Trumpers will react with same kind of devastating sorrow this time around; I don’t. Seriously, what happens if President Trump gets reelected in 2020?

Now much maligned Alizia Tyler comes forth with this fascinating exposition. Here is  her Comment of the Day on Item #1 in the post, “Monday Ethics Warm-Up, 7/29/19: Reverse Racism And Listening To Dead People,” beginning with a quote from me:

“The gamble, I suppose, is that whites and men are really, really stupid and cowardly, and this divisive hypocrisy will prevail. I could be wrong, but I think it’s a bad bet.”

Well, there has been some interesting discussion on that topic. I mean, on what will happen when the ‘beast’ so-called is provoked. I am sorry to keep bringing this up — I say ‘sorry’ but I don’t quite mean that, I mean I regret that I have to keep repeating it — but it is important for thinking people to know the facts.

Here, Jordan Peterson talks about ‘masculinity’ as distinct from ‘femininity’ and the difference in their respective vision-quests (he is a Jungian of course!)

You want to know why I keep saying man? Because women do not have a hero’s journey. At best, women – you – are the goal of the journey. The prize, if you will. At worst, you are the temptress. For the true hero to achieve transcendence he must, as Joseph Campbell told us, ‘press beyond the woman, surpass the temptations of her call, and soar to the immaculate ether beyond.’ Today you have illustrated that point as well as any story I can think of. And let me tell you something else. You can consider this a prophecy. Inside the collective is a beast and the beast uses its claws. If you wake the beast the result will be violence. Chaos. I’m sorry to say that these continual protests by radical leftists are going to wake the beast. A beast that you cannot conquer but that will conquer you.

Now, Peterson has referred to the likely eventuality of ‘waking the beast’ (I guess he means Nietzsche’s ‘blond beast’) if the Progressive Leftists keep on with the ceaseless vilifications and reveals its power-mongering hand.

But Peterson is, after all, a Canadian centrist by-and-large: a conservative-leaning Progressive to put it bluntly. His notion of responsible adulthood is summarized in ‘keeping one’s room clean’. He can’t really speak about ‘preserving Occidental culture’ nor can he refer to the Grand Occidental Project. He steers people away from the more difficult and demanding definitions. And look how he labels what he terms the ‘violence’ of the beast: it is chaos. But wait! The entire Occidental process cannot be summarized as creating ‘chaos’. Thus he mistakes creative effort and creative effort — which is a form of violence if you think it through — as producing a negative state: chaos.

But the awakening of a man (and I think a woman can do and must do something similar, or exert an influence over men) to creative duties in this life and to a sense of mission is not to create chaos. It is more accurate to say that we live in chaos now. And if we really think of man as capable of using power (another term for violence if you think about it) in creative, cultural pursuits, then awakening the violence of men is necessary, and good.

And there is no doubt that undermining, disempowering, and reversing the trends of overt Marxianism that are now strongly in operation is a hero’s journey! Maybe that is how it must be defined? and how it must be spiritualized? (I guarantee you though that this language will begin to sound like certain Germanic romanticism and Volkishness . . .)

I am reading now The Crisis of German Ideology: Intellectual Origins of the Third Reich by George L Mosse. Mosse was of course an intellectual critic of Hitlerism and his book — super-interesting — describes the origins of the Germanism which has been soundly vilified. It was not, in itself, something evil (in my view) but when the state took it over it definitely became an evil use of power and ideology. Therefore, the issue is to pay close attention to what the state is doing in our present.

What must be understood — it is a vital piece of understanding — is that the ‘war against whiteness’ is really a war against the core of Europeanism. I am not making this up, not exaggerating. It is an ideological position, extremely virulent and aggressive, that is just one of the tools used by Marxianism in a process of cultural undermining. Marxism has a specific toolbox. You can say ‘white identity’ but that is a mis-guiding term. European identitarianism is closer but it also does not reveal the full story. The full story requires a long, foot-noted essay. In order to preserve what is being undermined, one has to be able to see it and explain it. In chaos one cannot do that . . .

If one does not see, and if one does not clearly recognize, the similarity in time between Weimar Germany and Weimerica in our present (as the right-wing critics ironically use the term) one is being deliberately blind.

35 thoughts on “Comment Of The Day: “Monday Ethics Warm-Up, 7/29/19: Reverse Racism And Listening To Dead People,” Item #1

  1. In response to Steve’s comment, what about “Fauxcohontas?” Is she white, or Cherokee?

    How “POC” does one have to be to satisfy the requirement you discussed? I’m not disagreeing with you, not at all, but one wonders how flexible the Democrats will be in order to get rid of Trump without alienating their base.

    I agree it can’t be Joe Biden or even Bernie Sanders, for the reasons you stated.

      • Okay, to be fair to Sen. Warren, she was for being identified as a person of color before she was against being identified as a person of color.

        So she has that going for her!

    • “In response to Steve’s comment, what about ‘Fauxcohontas?’ “

      Straight from someone I know, “Warren, no f**king way. She’s a f**king minority wannabe.”. After some further discussion regarding that quote, I think I can reasonably translate that the person’s meaning was that she’s not minority pure enough. Yes the person I was talking to is not white, yes the person is an anti-white racist and no I won’t tell you his race.

      • Right now, she’s at the tippity top of my “Top 10 Most Unethical/Untrustworthy Candidates” list, followed by Steyer, Gillibrand, Bernie, Harris, Booker, Castro, Buttigieg, Biden, and O’Roark, and #10 is pretty terrible.

  2. I disagree that Alizia is “much maligned”. Most criticize the long, sometimes obtuse nature of her posts, with the frequent “I know a secret but I am not telling you because you are incapable of understanding it”. Comments, like this one, are long but well reasoned and articulated. Alizia loses me when she goes chasing really, really fast rabbits.

    jvb

    • She often makes her points, which she considers recondite, poorly. Concise statements with a bit less disdain for the readership would serve her better. I often agree with her, but find much of her writing self-indulgent accounting of her particular journey towards a particular understanding. Perhaps some of this is due to English not being her first language? “Sorry, I didn’t have time to make this shorter”, is an apology many of us should reflect on before posting or sending anything.

      • I’m often amused at how she can set people off with her style. I don’t really see what’s so offensive about it. Maybe some people would prefer her to use a different style. Maybe I hated Star Wars because it was a terrible mystery novel. To be maligned for reasons less than substantive has always served me as a sign that the speaker is correct in some way his hearers would prefer he not be correct.

        • “I’m often amused at how she can set people off with her style.”

          Alizia has a distinct style and should start her own blog, who knows, it might become popular if she would allow comments. Because of her participation here at Ethics Alarms, I’d likely be one of her followers at least for a while. You don’t have to agree with those you follow; Michael Corleone said, “Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.” 😉

          “I don’t really see what’s so offensive about it.”

          I’m not sure “offensive” is the correct word to use.

        • “I’m often amused at how she can set people off with her style. I don’t really see what’s so offensive about it.”

          I respect my own time. When reading an Alizia comment, you have to be really careful. She’s ESL and sometimes things get lost in translation (I think this is one of the main drivers of her excessive verbosity), and also because she is a self-hating Hispanic, white-supremacist, Nazi eugenicist loon, and you have to sit back after every point she makes and parse it for hidden meaning or overt but over-your-head insanity. For every good point she makes, there is a condescension soaked, neo-Nazi nugget of mind-melting stupidity, and frankly, who has time for that shit?

          • I respect my own time. When reading an Alizia comment, you have to be really careful. She’s ESL and sometimes things get lost in translation (I think this is one of the main drivers of her excessive verbosity), and also because she is a self-hating Hispanic, white-supremacist, Nazi eugenicist loon, and you have to sit back after every point she makes and parse it for hidden meaning or overt but over-your-head insanity. For every good point she makes, there is a condescension soaked, neo-Nazi nugget of mind-melting stupidity, and frankly, who has time for that shit?

            And yet I do succeed in communicating my points. But let me address the other things, for fun.

            Self-hating Hispanic

            Shouldn’t you have started with ‘self-hating Jew’? Or ex-Jew as the case is. There is a great deal of difficult psychic material there. I exist within a tension that is hard to reconcile. But, my processes have some value because I can plunge into the inner content of these very difficult problems. I sort of ‘inhabit’ them.

            You might not have heard — or paid attention — but my father is a convert to Judaism, and his background is wholly European. There you have just one more level of conflict that I deal with. It is really an apsect of my personality. My being. Speaking of Jung, not long ago I dreamed my father’s great-great-great grandmother invited me to her house. It had some of the feeling of a Medieval mansion and outside the window it was wet and splendorous. I am an example (if you will) of the tainted self. It is my destiny.

            What I am, my dear Humble Talent, is not an anti-Hispanic but one who has a certain contempt for the failures and woundedness of Latin America generally. Five Hundred years of failure . . . and failure continues. True, it is somewhat absurd that I stake everything on ‘European identity’, but the way I look at it is really more in what I serve. You have got to serve something, right? Something larger than one’s limited self? Why would you begrudge me that identification?

            White-supremacist, Nazi eugenicist loon

            What surprises me about you is that you have the intelligence not to fall into reductionist traps, and in your clever writing you dance around many pit-falls, and yet you fall into reductionsim all the same. But what you do is what hundreds and thousands — millions — of average people do. Since they cannot really think things through nor really get a grasp on things, which is hard and demanding, they latch onto easy labels: reductions.

            Instead of doing what you say I do or being what you say I am, I prefer to stick to my own definitions based on self-knowledge. So what I say is that it is imperative to recover the Self that is being slowly destroyed by modern liberal and decadent processes, and for Europeans (America is a colony of Europe) this means, at this point, both coming to terms with the Disaster of Twentieth Century Europe, and the soul-destruction that has resulted from it. That does mean ‘going into the heart of ‘the Germanic’. That is the very heart of Europe. True, I am externalizing interior processes as I alluded above, but this is really the way it should be done. We are after all the ‘subjects’ of the temporal modality. It plays out in us.

            For every good point she makes, there is a condescension soaked, neo-Nazi nugget of mind-melting stupidity, and frankly, who has time for that shit?

            Yes, I understand what disturbs you. It is exactly what disturbs, as I recently said, the NY intellectual establishment. And this is a large part of my effort and ‘work’ if I can put it like that. Any mention of any positive or creative aspect of Germanic culture or Germanicism . . . causes many people to have bowel issues. The ‘war on whiteness’ is at its core a war against ‘the heart of Europe’. I start from this predicate. It took time and effort to get to that understanding.

            And there are complex reasons why this is so, not the least being cultural programing during most of the Twentieth century: a training in self-hate that has led to Europe holding the dagger to its own heart, and being willing to plunge it in. The vilification of the Hun and all that. And yet, still, the very ‘heart of Europe’ is really to be found within the Germanic soul. In any case, that is what I am discovering. Now, what disturbs you is that I allow myself to do something that you cannot do. But what that is is hard to define: you would not be able to define it, and so, in fear, you vilify it. But I have my rôle to perform . . .

          • Give you an inch, and the insults soon resume in feet and then yards!

            Have you ever looked into the question of ressentiment? It consumes the spirit, did you know that? Yours is of a variety that doesn’t quite come out into the open, yet it motivates you like a strange shadow.

            Or am I waxing Jungian? 🙂

            • Eh, there were times I almost told Steve NJ and val to get a room. Was that ressentiment?

              Don’t ask me, though, I’m just a girl.

                • I do. I just choose not to write that way in this venue.

                  In this case, though, I’m simply a romantic who enjoys affectionate teasing that doesn’t always come off that way. No more, no less.

      • John Fowler writes: “She often makes her points, which she considers recondite, poorly.”

        Well there is always room for improvement. Since my former Master left (Charles Green) I have no one to help me. 🙂 I wonder what Charles is up to . . .

        Recondite:

        Mid 17th century: from Latin reconditus ‘hidden, put away’, past participle of recondere, from re- ‘back’ + condere ‘put together, secrete’.

        Truthfully I do start from that premise: that what we see is only a very small part of the picture. You have made me realize how neoplatonic my view is. Do you see things differently?

        Do you know who influenced me to begin to see things in this way the most? Shakespeare. Macbeth. It is a ‘metaphysical play’ don’t you think?

  3. Is there a source for the Peterson quote? I was curious but could only find it verbatim from a fictionalized version of “things he really said”.

    • I can’t remember what page that quote was taken from. Now that I look at it it seems to be a composite of things he said (I think I found the same website as you).

      As to Peterson’s ideas about female hero myths or archetypes a number of videos come up in a search on YouTube with that term.

      What I am beginning to understand better is the degree to which Jungianism is an expression of Germanic romanticism. It was never so clear to me until I read (still am reading) George Mosse (The Crisis of Germanic Ideology). I do not know what quite to make of it at this point however. Peterson describes himself as a scientist and an empiricist and yet I cannot see how Jungian psychology, infused as it is with romanticism, could be taken by Peterson to be scientific. There is something paradoxical about Peterson.

      There are two essays by CG Jung which are highly interesting if one is interested in the European disaster(s) and especially that of Germany and in Germanism: Wotan (1936) and After the Catastrophe (1945). It would be impossible if Peterson, when he refers to the awakening beast, did not have the phenomenon of ‘wotanism’ in mind:

      [From an article on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation website]:

      JP: No. It’s not the role of society to make people feel included. That’s not the role of society. The role of society is to maintain a modicum of peace between people. It’s not the role of society to make people feel comfortable. I think society is changing in many ways. I can tell you one thing that I’m very terrified of, and you can think about this. I think that the continual careless pushing of people by left wing radicals is dangerously waking up the right wing. So you can consider this a prophecy from me if you want. Inside the collective is a beast and the beast uses its fists. If you wake up the beast then violence emerges. I’m afraid that this continual pushing by radical left wingers is going to wake up the beast.

      Although I am suspicious of my own references to Jung’s way of seeing things, I find that I am fascinated by Germanic romanticism. The root of National Socialist state fascism is found in German romanticism. And what further interests me is the phenomenon of deracinated people, in deracinated culture, who (as they say) ‘take the red pill’ and ‘wake up’ to a sense of mission and that there is something important — crucial — to be done. One could look at the productions of Red Ice Radio and numerous similar ‘content-creators’ in this light.

      This is the bizarre and difficult-to-rectify truth of the matter: The present reactionary ‘awakening’ in Europe and in the colonies of Europe shows itself in similar terms as that of the Germanic center — not only Germany but most of Germanic Europe — in the crucial Interwar Period.

      My focus when I first came on here — this was clearly explained then — was to explain the Alt-Right and Right-leaning Reaction to people who did not seem to understand it. The entire, and I mean entire, counter-reaction of the NY intellectual establishment, and the NYTs is a part of that, is a form of preemptive attack on this ‘beast’. This ‘beast’ according to their understanding must be stopped, must be seduced if that will work, must be diverted from its dangerous purposes. And this effort to undermine this fearsome power in Gentile culture results in a certain cultivation of deviancy, because deviancy diverts focus.

      What Peterson advocates for is essentially a return to the former manageability of society under its former terms. His position sort of makes sense from the professional orientation of a clinical psychologist. But he does not seem to take a larger picture into consideration. People like Pat Buchanan do begin to define the ‘larger problem’ but at that exact point they are seen as going off the rails of acceptable discourse. And further to the right from Buchanan is forbidden territory.

      • Here are a couple of paragraphs from Jung’s 1933 Wotan essay.

        But what is more than curious—indeed, piquant to a degree is that an ancient god of storm and frenzy, the long quiescent Wotan, should awake, like an extinct volcano, to new activity, in a civilized country that had long been supposed to have outgrown the Middle Ages. We have seen him come to life in the German Youth Movement, and right at the beginning the blood of several sheep was shed in honour of his resurrection. Armed with rucksack and lute, blond youths, and sometimes girls as well, were to be seen as restless wanderers on every road from the North Cape to Sicily, faithful votaries of the roving god. Later, towards the end of the Weimar Republic, the wandering role was taken over by the thousands of unemployed, who were to be met with everywhere on their aimless journeys. By 1933 they wandered no longer, but marched in their hundreds of thousands. The Hitler movement literally brought the whole of Germany to its feet, from five-year-olds to veterans, and produced the spectacle of a nation migrating from one place to another. Wotan the wanderer was on the move. He could be seen, looking rather shamefaced, in the meeting-house of a sect of simple folk in North Germany, disguised as Christ sitting on a white horse. I do not know if these people were aware of Wotan’s ancient connection with the figures of Christ and Dionysus, but it is not very probable. Wotan is a restless wanderer who creates unrest and stirs up strife, now here, now there, and works magic.

        He was soon changed by Christianity into the devil, and only lived on in fading local traditions as a ghostly hunter who was seen with his retinue, flickering like a will o’ the wisp through the stormy night. In the Middle Ages the role of the restless wanderer was taken over by Ahasuerus, the Wandering Jew, which is not a Jewish but a Christian legend. The motif of the wanderer who has not accepted Christ was projected on the Jews, in the same way as we always rediscover our unconscious psychic contents in other people. At any rate the coincidence of anti-Semitism with the reawakening of Wotan is a psychological subtlety that may perhaps be worth mentioning.

        [ . . . ]

        A mind that is still childish thinks of the gods as metaphysical entities existing in their own right, or else regards them as playful or superstitious inventions. From either point of view the parallel between Wotan redivivus and the social, political, and psychic storm that is shaking Germany might have at least the value of a parable. But since the gods are without doubt personifications of psychic forces, to assert their metaphysical existence is as much an intellectual presumption as the opinion that they could ever be invented. Not that “psychic forces” have anything to do with the conscious mind, fond as we are of playing with the idea that consciousness and psyche are identical. This is only another piece of intellectual presumption. “Psychic forces” have far more to do with the realm of the unconscious. Our mania for rational explanations obviously has its roots in our fear of metaphysics, for the two were always hostile brothers. Hence anything unexpected that approaches us from that dark realm is regarded either as coming from outside and therefore as real, or else as an hallucination and therefore not true. The idea that anything could be real or true which does not come from outside has hardly begun to dawn on contemporary man.

        This is an interesting observation: “Our mania for rational explanations obviously has its roots in our fear of metaphysics, for the two were always hostile brothers.”

        The only thing I know to do is to ‘return to the questions’. What is going on right now in America? What is going on in Europe? If I follow Jung I cannot but look at the issues metaphysically, which for Jung means psychologically and psychically. But Jung’s questions always go right to the very heart of the matter of life, human life, and human value.

  4. What if Trump had not been elected?

    I suggest that we would still see the increasing level of claims of racism. But what if there is no pressure valve and all those whites just keep suppressing their anger at being labeled a racist, xenophobe etc etc.

    Trump may be exactly what we need to release some of that pressure. Pushing back early and often against scurillous and false claims prevents the anger from building so great that the swamp will be unable to keep society from destroying itself.

    Think about a situation that causes you much anger but you contain yourself because you objectively evaluate the costs and benefits of a challenge and you figure it is not worth fighting about. Well, the continuation of that situation will ultimately result in you losing your temper. Now all reason and objectivity are gone and our actions can be destructive.

    Trump may be doing us all a great big favor by doing and saying what we should all be doing when these specious claims of systemic racism are thrown around. Who knows, calling out this BS for what it is might just prevent some teenage white boy from acting out at a Garlic festival in the future. When you feel you are being silenced you rebel.

    • Church shooter Dylann Roof was radicalized in part by the way NBC doctored the audio of George Zimmerman’s 911 call, to make it sound racist. The doctored audio was part of the early hysteria over Trayvon Martin’s shooting, and for Roof, to discover through the internet that the “mainstream media” blatantly lied like that, and suffered little or no consequences in terms of getting their narrative across, must have made him believe that there really was a conspiracy by the “establishment” against white people like himself. That “awakening” seems to have sent him down the rabbit hole to the racist corners of the web.

      Now most of the political, entertainment, education, and news establishments are circling the wagons around straight-up racists like Ilhan Omar, and specifically condemning the idea of “color-blindness” as not affirming enough of the specialness of People of Color (a phrase that itself probably suggests, to the ears of some, superiority over bland, colorless, nonhumans, that is, whites.)

      I think they know that this direction is bad for the country, but they consider it good strategy for them. I don’t think it’s good for either. If they want to stop people from believing that there’s a conspiracy against the “old, white” America, they need to stop acting like they’re part of one.

      • I think they know that this direction is bad for the country, but they consider it good strategy for them. I don’t think it’s good for either. If they want to stop people from believing that there’s a conspiracy against the “old, white” America, they need to stop acting like they’re part of one.

        Spoiler: there IS a conspiracy against “old, white” America.

        Socialists believe their own propaganda about how degenerate, benighted, and stupid their intended victims are. They have ignored history, common sense, and civility. In order to survive within that bubble, they have to believe (or give convincing energy toward) whatever the narrative dictates at the moment, regardless of what that narrative said yesterday, or will tomorrow. One eventually loses sight of objective truth in such an environment.

        They think of WalMart shoppers in pajamas, of trailer parks being emptied, of masses of overweight deplorables being herded into reeducation camps, where their victims can either be productive in service to the progressive utopia, or be terminated. Worse, they have let the mask slip that this is their end game. Irony: those who believe they are our societal betters, the intellectual elite, the enlightened ones, really lack critical thinking skills, by choice and education.

        History teaches that ANY people, no matter how disadvantaged, have the capacity to be dangerous. European stock, mostly what we used to call ‘caucasians,’ have a very specific penchant for violence in pursuit of group goals, of creating support systems that give advantage in that fight, both born out of over a thousand years of fighting and conquest, coupled with a system that encouraged critical thinking and rational thought.

        I have mentioned (a few times, at least) that the left’s behavior is awakening common Americans, who are not only a single race but a creed that crosses race, religion, gender, and traditional political inclination: American freedom and institutions supporting those freedoms. These freedoms, once enjoyed, are not lightly abandoned. This is human nature, which (sans divine intervention) does not change. When such as these ‘deplorables*’ have been ‘motivated’ by an existential threat, even a somewhat remote one, the world has changed.

        Violently. Drastically. Permanently.

        The beast indeed has claws. Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind.

        *An unfortunate term that itself will that one day be recognized as having lost an Presidential election almost by itself. The sheer arrogance implicit in that statement rankled far more than those who ended up voting for President Trump, as the less brainwashed across the board realized that if they will do this to one group, no group is safe.

  5. Sadly I feel that we are headed for a situation like what happened in post-Tito Yugoslavia: The most people are accused of being racist solely on the basis of their skin color and pertinent observations that are verboten according to the left, the more there will be pushback ultimately resulting in violent rhetoric and ethic balkanization.

  6. To expand on what Jack quoted from my comment, I’ll repeat this section of a followup comment…

    “I ask you, what could possibly go wrong inside the brain of an already irrational anti-Trumper that’s been constantly bombarded for four years with unethical and immoral rationalizations justifying their hate? I hope I’m wrong, but what could go wrong? Eventually these emotional lunatics are going to SNAP because they don’t get their way.”

    and another slightly reworded section…

    “I’m worried about what the hoard of irrational hate filled anti-Trump sheep will do. It’ll be kinda like feeding your pet Mogwai after dark and then throwing the resulting Gremlin off the Milwaukee Wisconsin peer straight into Lake Michigan.

    Are these “apocalyptic or otherwise ominous predictions”, you bet they are and like all predictions there is only a chance that they will come true. If there is one thing that history has shown us it’s that when there’s verifiable patterns of escalating unhinged emotional reactions from a group of people and those emotional reactions include physical violence, it’s terribly unwise to disregard the existence of those patterns and plan ahead as if everyone is coexisting peacefully.

    We do not know and cannot predict what the snapping point will be for unhinged people but you damn well better be ready for it IF it happens.

    • Steve, I have seen your sentiment expressed very concisely by commenter in other places in recent years: ‘ammo up.’

      A bit more forthcoming commenter would mention that having a shelf stable three month food and water supply is a… prudent… course of action.

      • “having a shelf stable three month food and water supply is a… prudent… course of action.”

        Even if the country wasn’t heading down a seemingly self destructive path that would be a decent idea if you have room for the storage.

  7. From Jung’s essay on Wotan:

    It was not in Wotan’s nature to linger on and show signs of old age. He simply disappeared when the times turned against him, and remained invisible for more than a thousand years, working anonymously and indirectly. Archetypes are like riverbeds which dry up when the water deserts them, but which it can find again at any time. An archetype is like an old watercourse along which the water of life has flowed for centuries, digging a deep channel for itself. The longer it has flowed in this channel the more likely it is that sooner or later the water will return to its old bed. The life of the individual as a member of society and particularly as part of the State may be regulated like a canal, but the life of nations is a great rushing river which is utterly beyond human control, in the hands of One who has always been stronger than men. The League of Nations, which was supposed to possess supranational authority, is regarded by some as a child in need of care and protection, by others as an abortion. Thus the life of nations rolls on unchecked, without guidance, unconscious of where it is going, like a rock crashing down the side of a hill, until it is stopped by an obstacle stronger than itself. Political events move from one impasse to the next, like a torrent caught in gullies, creeks, and marshes. All human control comes to an end when the individual is caught in a mass movement. Then the archetypes begin to function, as happens also in the lives of individuals when they are confronted with situations that cannot be dealt with in any of the familiar ways.

    It is embarrassing, I know, but I have committed myself to go forward despite all the odd obstacles thrown in my path. When dealing with strange, discomfiting, problematic & dangerous ideas — when one comes into a group setting with them — the group reacts in strange, yet predictable (and repeating) ways.

    Think of Beckett: I can’t go on / I’ll go on

    HT wrote: “For every good point she makes, there is a condescension soaked, neo-Nazi nugget of mind-melting stupidity, and frankly, who has time for that shit?”

    The operative word here is ‘condescension’. (Yet ‘mind-melting stupidity’ must be paid some attention too). That is, the impression that one is being spoken down to. I find this really quite curious and interesting. So, let us examine for a moment the person, and the class of people, who assume that they know. You see, it is those people who feel themselves qualified to speak down to others — to tell them what is and what is not — but cannot or will not open their minds to receive new ideas or to be challenged. I could make a list, it would be rather long, of those who react to being ‘spoken down to’.

    But what if one becomes aware of something that others, in your estimation, simply cannot see? or will not see? How do you speak to those people? Do you turn to parables? Poetry? Laden metaphor? But clever people, the educated class, the class of the university educated, they quickly discern that they are being spoken to in parables and that only rouses their ire all the more.

    The issue we face is that strange, really strange things are going on in our present and we do not seem to have any clear idea what. There is unending discourse on symptom and surface are offered and there is absolutely no depth. For that reason the quickest metaphor that comes to hand is Plato’s Cave. People who stare at the wall in the same way they have been trained and accustomed to stare at their TeeVee. This is looking but it is not seeing.

    John Burger referred to an impression: “I know a secret but I am not telling you because you are incapable of understanding it”.

    But a certain hubris must be recognized here, must it not? Is there any secretness which you yourself have not penetrated? Is there no secret? I would rather begin with at least the assertion that all of Occidental thought, certainly as it expands from Plato, proposes that paideia involves an enlightening of the mind, of the possibility of perceiving truth and of living in accord with it. There are then various phases in the Cave metaphor: one is being stuck in it, but the other is going back down into it and suffering at the hands of those who will not to see.

    And in a present — a very demanding and controlling present when the avenues to ‘higher dimensions’ have been blocked, we are ‘cut off’ in the here-below. We cannot find our bearings. The path is not clear.

    Is it so wrong that I begin from the premise that there is a great deal (more) to be seen, and a great many obstacles to being able to see than what we do see in our dumbed-down present? If we recognize that dumbing down occurs, if we can distinguish it, should we not have the humility to grasp the possibility that we may not be seeing clearly or that we see ‘through darkened glass’?

    Jung writes: “All human control comes to an end when the individual is caught in a mass movement. Then the archetypes begin to function, as happens also in the lives of individuals when they are confronted with situations that cannot be dealt with in any of the familiar ways.”

    Obviously, the allusion is to a time in which people seem to become ‘possessed’, and then our own noticing that this is happening, as one aspect, and our own getting caught in the hysterical flow, which is the other aspect.

    Better to spend some time looking down from above on *what is going on* and trying to see into essences . . . then only to remain in the thrall of things looked at but misunderstood and potentially misinterpreted.

    It is also . . . more fun!

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.