What Happened to Angela Davis?

Roger Kimball:

Saturday marked the 44th anniversary of Angela Davis’s acquittal on charges of murder, kidnapping and conspiracy. Remember Angela Davis? I asked several of my younger colleagues: No one under 35 had heard of her. But the former Black Panther, recipient of the Soviet Union’s Lenin Peace Prize, and two-time vice-presidential candidate on the Communist Party ticket with Gus Hall, was once a household name. That was enough for the Elizabeth A. Sackler Center for Feminist Art at the Brooklyn Museum, which last Thursday bestowed on Ms. Davis the 2016 Sackler Center First Award, “honoring women who are first in their fields.”

Previous honorees include the novelist Toni Morrison, Miss Piggy and Anita Hill—pioneers all, no question. Ms. Davis is surely the first person to have parlayed an appearance on the FBI’s 10 most-wanted list into a tenured professorship at the University of California.

Read it all.

Martin Heidegger on Muhammad Ali

Lesley Stahl on 60 Minutes last night gushed over the late boxer as a "transcendent" specimen of humanity.  Her over-the-top performance put me in mind of what I call the 'Pincers Passage' in Heidegger's 1935 lecture, Introduction to Metaphysics (tr. Ralph Manheim, Doubleday 1961, p. 31, emphasis added.

This Europe, in its ruinous blindness forever on the point of cutting its own throat, lies today in a great pincers, squeezed between Russia on the one side and America on the other.From a metaphysical point of view, Russia and America are the same; the same dreary technological frenzy, the same unrestricted organization of the average man. At a time when the farthermost corner of the globe has been conquered by technology and opened to economic exploitation; when any incident whatever, regardless of where or when it occurs, can be communicated to the rest of the world at any desired speed; when the assassination of a king in France and a symphony concert in Tokyo can be 'experienced' simultaneously, and time as history has vanished from the lives of all peoples; when a boxer is regarded as a nation's great man; when mass meetings attended by millions are looked on as a triumph — then, yes then, through all this turmoil a question still haunts us like a specter:  What for? — Whither? — And what then?

Post-Consensus Politics: A Poetic Epigraph

Here is the first stanza of "The Second Coming" by William Butler Yeats (1865-1939), a fitting epigraph to our entry into the twilight.  But for the philosopher there is consolation: "The owl of Minerva spreads its wings at dusk." (Hegel). 

    Turning and turning in the widening gyre
    The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
    Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
    Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
    The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
    The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
    The best lack all conviction, while the worst
    Are full of passionate intensity.

The Western elites have lost all conviction and are sitting ducks for the passionate intensity of radical Muslims. 

From the Transgressive Left to the ‘Conservative’ Left

Perhaps you have noticed that radicals are rather less interested in speaking truth to power after they get power than before. Their transgressive speech and behavior becomes curiously 'conservative.'  Giving umbrage gives way to taking umbrage.  

Debra Saunders:

What happened to shrugging at an opinion with which you disagree and leaving it at that? That notion is history, as communications executives seem to have convinced themselves that they are not censoring dissenting opinions but rather protecting the innocent from crude speech.

Twitter took that phony stance, too, when it announced a "Trust and Safety Council" in February. "Twitter stands for freedom of expression, speaking truth to power, and empowering dialogue. That starts with safety," CEO Jack Dorsey tweeted.

This is a good example of the sort of Orwellian mendacity we have come to expect from contemporary 'liberals.'   War is peace.   Slavery is freedom.  A defense of religious liberty is a violation of religious liberty.   Those who protest being forced by the government to violate their consciences and religious beliefs are imposing their religious beliefs. Curtailment of speech is free speech.  'Inclusion' is the exclusion of dissent.  

The Orwellian template: X, which is not Y, is Y. 

The open forum is a 'safe space' in which no one's feelings are hurt.

Freedom of speech is freedom from 'micro-aggressions.'

And notice that at bottom it's about money.  Twitter and ESPN toe the party line because it is profitable to do so.  A curious development: significant numbers of once anti-capitalist leftists are now driven by the profit motive to spread  Pee Cee drivel.

Europe at the Edge of the Abyss

Another outstanding essay by Victor Davis Hanson.  I am tempted to quote the entire piece.  I shall resist the temptation.

Because of what Europe has become, it now has few viable choices in dealing with radical Islamic terrorism. Its dilemma is a warning to Americans that we should turn away from a similar path of national suicide.

[. . .]

Europe’s perfect storm is upon us. A shrinking, statist, and agnostic society that does not believe in transcendence, either familial or religious, is now in a war with near neighbors of a very different sort. In the Middle East, the fundamentalists are growing in numbers, and they most certainly do believe that their own lives are nothing in comparison to the Phoenix-like resurrection of their Caliphate and the sensual pleasures in the hereafter that will reward their martial sacrifices in the here and now. Of all the many reasons why immigrants to Europe so often dislike their generous hosts, the simplest may be because they so easily can. Even H. G. Wells could not dream up any better harvest of Eloi by Morlocks, and it would take another St. Jerome (“All were born in captivity and siege, and do not desire the liberty they never knew. Who could believe this?”) to chronicle the Western tragedy. As a general rule, whatever Europe is now doing, we should do the opposite — for our very survival in an increasingly scary world.

Come on Victor, man up!  Make a definite proposal.  Say something plain and blunt.  I understand: you are a highly esteemed historian and you are concerned with your professional standing and credibility.  You enjoy the perquisites of your position among the established.  But what is more important, your professional standing or the continuance of the great country and culture that made it possible for you to have a highly distinguished career and speak your mind freely?

How about this: Propose a moratorium on immigration from Muslim lands.  Or this:  Urge people to vote for Trump if he should garner the Republican nomination.

Related: Civil Courage

St. Jerome on the Collapse of the Roman Empire

The following, which might be relevant to current events, is  borrowed from here.  

St. Jerome was born around the year 340. He came to Rome and was baptized there around 360. He devoted the rest of his life to scholarly pursuits and the translation of the Bible into Latin. He died in 420. He wrote the following observations describing the devastation of the Empire around 406:

"Nations innumerable and most savage have invaded all Gaul. The Whole region between the Alps and the Pyrenees, the ocean and the Rhine, has been devastated by the Quadi, the Vandals, the Sarmati, the Alani, the Gepidae, the hostile Heruli, the Saxons, the Burgundians, the Alemanni, and the Pahnonians.

Oh wretched Empire! Mayence [Mainz, Germany], formerly so noble a city, has been taken and ruined, and in the church many thousands of men have been massacred. Worms [Germany] has been destroyed after a long siege. Rheims, that powerful city, Amiens, Arras, Speyer [Germany], Strasburg, – all have seen their citizens led away captive into Germany. Aquitaine and the provinces of Lyons and Narbonne, all save a few towns, have been depopulated; and these the sword threatens without, while hunger ravages within.

I cannot speak without tears of Toulouse, which the merits of the holy Bishop Exuperius have prevailed so far to save from destruction. Spain, even, is in daily terror lest it perish, remembering the invasion of the Cimbri; and whatsoever the other provinces have suffered once, they continue to suffer in their fear.

I will keep silence concerning the rest, lest I seem to despair of the mercy of God. For a long time, from the Black Sea to the Julian Alps, those things which are ours have not been ours; and for thirty years, since the Danube boundary was broken, war has been waged in the very midst of the Roman Empire. Our tears are dried by old age. Except a few old men, all were born in captivity and siege, and do not desire the liberty they never knew.

Who could believe this? How could the whole tale be worthily told? How Rome has fought within her own bosom not for glory, but for preservation – nay, how she has not even fought, but with gold and all her precious things has ransomed her life…

Who could believe that Rome, built upon the conquest of the whole world, would fall to the ground? That the mother herself would become the tomb of her peoples? That all the regions of the East, of Africa and Egypt, once ruled by the queenly city, would be filled with troops of slaves and handmaidens? That to-day holy Bethlehem should shelter men and women of noble birth, who once abounded in wealth and are now beggars?"

References:
This eyewitness account appears in Robinson, James Harvey, Readings in European History (1906); Duruy, Victor, History of Rome and of the Roman People, vol VIII (1883).

Representatives of the ‘Religion of Peace’ Crucify Priest on Good Friday

Here.  What's the big deal?  These things happen.  As compared to the number of traffic fatalities in Muslim lands over the last ten years the number of crucifixions is vanishingly small.  You are statistically illiterate if you are worried about being crucified as opposed to dying in a traffic accident.

I am of course being sarcastic.  See here.

ISIS is no existential threat to us or our culture.  Thus spoke Obama. A man of his experience and insight should know, right?

On this point  Robert Royal talks sense:

Anyone acquainted with history knows that it’s happened before. Once robust Roman and Christian North Africa, the birthplace of Clement of Alexandria and Origen, Sts. Cyprian and Augustine, Felicity and Perpetua, lacking a strong secular state after the fall of the Western Empire, disappeared under Muslim assault. Except for their moral and intellectual achievements, in today’s North Africa those great figures might as well never have existed.

Something similar is occurring all over the Middle East. It would be foolish to think it cannot also happen, in the longer run, in Europe or the Americas, especially given the West’s demographic collapse.

Obama often says that ISIS isn’t an “existential” threat. By that, he may mean that terrorists and their armies are, for now, too small to conquer or destroy us. But there are many ways to be destroyed – and one of them is by undermining those very “values” the president thinks are “right.” Sometimes the undermining comes, unintentionally, from the very people who think they are defending them.

 

Another Round on Trump

This from a regular reader, professional philosopher, and Trump supporter:

You're disturbed that so many Trump supporters "refuse to admit the man's negatives".  Maybe they do refuse, but I think many of them feel as I do.  He has many negative qualities, and maybe in some ways he's even worse than the average politician, but — as you yourself have often emphasized — we're no longer in a situation where politics is about people with shared loyalties and values coming together to engage in fair rational discussion with each other.  We are in a war.  The left simply hates us, wants to destroy us culturally and maybe personally to while they're at it.  The real American people are facing an existential crisis. 

So what really matters in this situation?  Not the personal failings of any candidate, not even the likelihood that he's sincere or able to do what he says he'll do. What really matters for now is that he is taking the crucial necessary _first step_ toward organizing a real movement to defend America and the west.  What if, when Muslims were poised to invade France, we found out that Charles Martel was actually a child molester?  What if I knew, in 1939, that Churchill was a total fraud and psychopath?  I'd say that in that  kind of situation these considerations make no difference.  If he [Trump] can speak a few basic truths that inspire people to fight back and stand up, for the first and possibly last time, that's all that matters.  (My analogies are extreme, but not _that_ extreme.)  I realize that we won't agree on this; Trumpites and mainstream conservatives are as badly polarized as Trumpites and leftists (which may have deep implications).  But I offer these remarks as a way to understand why the valid criticisms you make of him just don't have much force for me, or for millions of others, I'm assuming.

This is a good response in part because I do reluctantly incline to the view that we are in a war with the Left.  So why should I be concerned with the merely personal foibles and failings of the one man with the best chance of stopping the leftist juggernaut?  Who cares that he is a low life, a vulgarian, a cultural polluter, a hypocrite, a narcissist, an egomaniac, and a serial liar and bullshitter?  One of his most recent lies was the one about not knowing who David Duke is.  But not only did he lie, he lied unnecessarily.  There was no need for him to tell that particular lie since a disavowal of David Duke and the KKK would not have hurt him much, especially since he had already disavowed Duke. This speaks to Trump's lack of good judgment and also perhaps to a lack of seriousness.  Would someone who is serious about winning the presidency lie unnecessarily?  He also demonstrates contempt for his audience in telling a lie that is transparently a lie.

But why should we care about any of this?  One reason is that these are not merely personal defects but defects that could bring down the conservative movement and lead to a victory, perhaps even a landslide victory, by Hillary come November.  This is what lefties are counting on.  They hope Trump will destroy the GOP.  You say you don't care?  But then what party will implement conservative ideas and policies?  The Constitution Party?

Another reason is that it is not clear that Trump is better equipped to defeat Hillary.  Is he better qualified than Cruz?  It is not clear to me or to anyone.  If it is clear to my reader, I should like him to tell me why Trump is a more effective culture warrior than Cruz.  And let's not underestimate the opposition Trump will get in the general election.  Women, minorities, leftists, and a sizeable number of conservatives will align against him.  Among the conservatives, many will not vote at all, and some will vote for Hillary to punish Trump and the GOP for supporting him.

I appreciate the force of my reader's historical analogies.  But let me try one of my own.  Would you have supported the Austrian corporal back in '33 to stop the Communists?  Now  we know what happened after 1933.  Abstract from the sequel and imagine yourself to be a German anti-communist who in '33 is trying to make up his mind about the incendiary outsider.  Would you have rolled the dice? 

Weimar America

Another spectacular column by Victor Davis Hanson.  I will resist the temptation to quote the entire piece. 

On college:

Today’s campuses have become as foreign to American traditions of tolerance and free expression as what followed the Weimar Republic. To appreciate cry-bully censorship, visit a campus “free-speech” area. To witness segregation, walk into a college “safe space.” To hear unapologetic anti-Semitism, attend a university lecture. To learn of the absence of due process, read of a campus hearing on alleged sexual assault. To see a brown shirt in action, watch faculty call for muscle at a campus demonstration. To relearn the mentality of a Chamberlain or Daladier, listen to the contextualizations of a college president. And to talk to an uneducated person, approach a recent college graduate.

On Bernie:

Sanders has little appreciation that he is an artifact of free-market capitalism, which alone has created enough bounty for such a demagogue to call for massive redistribution—in a way impossible for socialists any longer in exhausted Cuba, Greece, Venezuela, or any other command-economy paradise. Where does Sanders think his statism has worked—China, North Korea, Bolivia, Cuba, or the ossified European Union?

On Hillary:

Mrs. Clinton is now like a tottering third-world caudillo—she can’t really continue on in politics and she can’t quit trying if she wants to stay out of jail. Her possible indictment depends entirely on her political viability and utility. She and the once disbarred Bill Clinton might appear like tired, tragic dinosaurs, bewildered that politics have left them behind in their late sixties—were it not for these aging egoists’ routine petulance and sense of entitlement.

On Trump:

Donald Trump is probably not a serious student of the European 1930s, but in brilliant fashion he has sized up the public’s worries over a Potemkin economy, exhaustion with wars, and namby-pamby leadership. His own remedy is 1930s to the core: nationalism, crude bombast, mytho-history, and sloganeering without much detail. Trump’s trajectory is predicated on the premise that a jaded public cares more about emotion than logic, and how a leader speaks rather than what he says.

In European 1930s street-brawling fashion, no one knows quite whether Trump is a 1990s Clinton Democrat, a 1980s Reagan Republican, or a Perotist misfit. He has thrown a ball and chain through the pretentious glass of American campaigning. Trump excites voters because he can profane, smear, interrupt, and fabricate—on the premise that as a performance artist he reifies what they think but don’t dare say about a corrupt political class and its warped, politically correct values. Trump reminds Americans what deterrence is: the supposedly courageous media, the so-called truth-to-power leftists, and the sober and judicious careerist politicians are all terrified how he might reply or react to their criticism. None of them want to spend 2-3 days trading smears with Donald Trump.

On Pope Francis:

Not since Pius XII has a pope proved as mysterious and exasperating as Francis. He seems not to have transcended the parochial time and space of Peronist Argentina. The well-meaning and kindly pope acts as if he is unworried about the historical wages of leftwing authoritarianism and government-mandated redistribution. Why would a pontiff, protected by medieval walls and Vatican territorial security, blast U.S. immigration policy toward Mexican illegal immigrants?

Since Obama’s reelection, the southern border has been wide open, in naked efforts to recalibrate American electoral demography. The U.S. has taken in more immigrants, legal and illegal, than has any other country—the only impediment for entry is being educated, skilled, with resources, and insisting on legality. The U.S. last year allowed nearly $80 billion to be sent in annual remittances to Mexico and Latin America, mostly from those here illegally. Certainly, Mexico, in a most un-Christian fashion, has built walls on its own southern border to prevent unlawful entry, published comic-book manuals to instruct its emigrants how to violate U.S. immigration law, and written into its own constitution repulsive racial prerequisites for emigrating to Mexico—all to the apparent ignorance of the otherwise intrusively editorializing pope. Mexico’s own obsession with exporting its indigenous people to the U.S. is predicated on historic Mexican racism, always emanating from grandees in Mexico City.

On segregation:

Segregation, not integration and assimilation, is the new trajectory of racial relations. “White privilege” is said to be such an insidious aid to career success that careerist whites like Elizabeth Warren, Ward Churchill, Shaun King, and Rachel Dolezal will do almost anything to insist that they are really non-white. The president of the United States invited a rapper for a White House visit. The rapper's latest album cover shows a dead white judge lying at the feet of celebratory African-American men, with fists of money and champagne held in triumph—in front of the White House. Reality imitates art. Could the president give another Cairo speech about such symbolism?

Is it perhaps time to give dictatorship a chance?

I would have liked to have read from Professor Hanson a comparison of the sexual decadence of Weimar Germany and that of Weimar America.

Zapffe Must be Popular!

This weblog averages about 1,350 page views per day.  But yesterday it snagged 10,695 views, and now at 6:20 AM local time it has already racked up 3,200 or so.  What explains this?  Reddit got hold of my Zappfe post, scroll down a bit, and that must be driving the surge.

Perhaps we philosophers need to pay more attention to anti-natalism as a cultural phenomenon and as a component in der Untergang des Abendlandes.

We are losing the will to perpetuate our civilization and its values.  Christians in the Middle East are being slaughtered and their churches pulverized by Muslim savages.  So what did Pope Francis say in response to Donald Trump's call for a wall along the southern U.S. border?  We don't need to build walls, but bridges.  Francis the fool is one dope of a pope.

Evangelicals understand this, though they are too polite and politic to put it the way I just did.  This is why, mirabile dictu, so many of them support Trump, the nasty sybarite of Gotham who builds casinos to the greater glory of Lust, Greed, Gluttony, and Lady Luck.

Point of logic:  'Muslim savages' does not imply that all Muslims are savages.  Or do you think that 'deciduous trees' implies that all trees are deciduous?

UPDATE 2/27:  Traffic settled down a bit yesterday with a mere 4,509 page views.  It should get back to normal over the next few days.  As every conservative appreciates, the 'regard' of fellow mortals is a decidedly mixed blessing.  I am quite happy to bump along at 1, 500 page views per day.  Obscurity is bliss and he who craves fame is a fool.  Fame is conferred by others and the quality of these others is a good measure of the value of fame.

Veiling Statues to Please the Mullahs

Not a pretty sight:  the representatives of a superior culture abasing themselves before the representatives of an inferior one.

Decadent Europe may already be lost.  But we still have time to learn.

Do you think Italy might contain a few cultural treasures worth preserving?  Then you may want to inform yourself of the fact that Muslims are not known for their preservation of antiquities.  See The Destruction of the Middle East for starters.

There is a deep paradox here that would require a lot of writing to set forth properly.  Roughly, it is the very superiority of our culture with its philosophy, science, free speech, open inquiry, toleration of dissent, freedom of religion, and the whole panoply of Enlightenment values together with the advanced technology and prosperity that they make possible that has led and is leading us into decadence.  Our superiority is thus breeding inferiority so that we become easy marks for an inferior culture that believes in itself and its benighted values and is, insofar forth, superior to us in its will to dominate us by any and all methods.

UPDATE (2/1):  Malcolm Pollack (HT: Bill Keezer) writes:

I meant to comment on this when it happened a few days ago:

Rome’s nude statues covered up ahead of Rouhani visit

In further concession to Iranian president, official dinner with Italian PM does not include wine on the menu

What a craven, flabby, neutered thing our civilization has become. This is what ACID syndrome does to its victims: it sickens and enervates them with doubt; it destroys and disables their confidence, potency, and virility; it paralyzes them in the face of peril; it turns their bones and sinews to jelly.

In contrast: Winston Churchill, who was to host a dinner attended by ibn Saud, was told by the Arabian king that those attending must not drink or smoke in his presence. His response?

I said that if it was his religion that made him say such things, my religion prescribed as an absolute sacred ritual smoking cigars and drinking alcohol before, after and if need be during, all meals and the intervals between them. Complete surrender.

The Dead Smokers' Society hereby registers its opposition to this anti-tobacco Islamo-wackery.  Carpe fumam!

Dead Smokers 2