Footnotes to Plato from the foothills of the Superstition Mountains

  • The China Convergence

    This Substack piece by N. S. Lyons is very long but very good. I invite my top commenters — I won't name names lest I inadvertently omit someone — to weigh  in on it or parts of it. The drift of the piece is announced early on:

    . . .when it comes to the most fundamental political questions, China and the United States are not diverging but converging to become more alike.

    In fact, I can already predict and describe the winner set to prevail in this epochal competition between these two fiercely opposed national systems. In this soon-to-be triumphant system…

    Despite a rhetorical commitment to egalitarianism and “democracy,” the elite class deeply distrusts and fears the people over whom it rules. These elites have concentrated themselves into a separate oligarchic political body focused on prioritizing and preserving their rule and their own overlapping set of shared interests. Wracked by anxiety, they strive constantly to maximize their control over the masses, rationalizing a need to forcefully maintain stability in the face of dangerous threats, foreign and domestic. Everything is treated as an emergency. “Safety” and “security” have become be the watchwords of the state, and of society generally.

    Who can deny that given the events of the last few days?

    Deeper in, the following passage caught my attention due to my interest in Carl Schmitt:

    Across the West, the managerial elite therefore immediately went into a frenzy over the danger allegedly presented by “populism” and launched their own revolt, declaring a Schmittian state of exception in which all the standard rules and norms of democratic politics could be suspended in order to respond to this existential “crisis.” In fact, some began to question whether democracy itself might have to be suspended in order to save it.

    “It’s Time for the Elites to Rise Up Against the Ignorant Masses,” New York Time Magazine journalist James Traub thundered with an iconic 2016 piece in Foreign Policy magazine. This quickly became a view openly and proudly embraced among the managerial elite, who no longer hesitated to express their frustration with democracy and its voters. (“Did I say ‘ignorant’? Yes, I did. It is necessary to say that people are deluded and that the task of leadership is to un-delude them,” Traub declared.) “Too Much Democracy is Killing Democracy,” is how a 2019 article published by neocon rag The Bulwark put it, arguing for Western nations to take their “bitter technocratic medicine” and establish “a political, social, and cultural compact that makes participation by many unnecessary.”

    My posts on Carl Schmitt are collected here. Most relevant is perhaps A Good Summary of the Political Thinking of Carl Schmitt. (Written 17 February 2019)


    6 responses to “The China Convergence”

  • Asian Family Harrassed by Three Black Teens on NYC Subway

    Leftists have something like the Midas touch. Everything  King Midas touched turned to gold; most of what leftists touch turns to crap. NYC and San Fran are prime examples. No surprise that these crapholes are bleeding population 'big time.' 

    The Asians, bien-pensant 'liberals' apparently, blamc 'society' and not the racism of the black teens.  

    More than a soupçon of absurdity is added to the story by the fact that "Cops are calling it a hate crime – something the Youngs say shouldn't be the case."

    I rather doubt that the Youngs understand why it should not be a 'hate crime,' but Nat Hentoff does. 

    Nat Hentoff on 'Hate Crime' Laws

    An oldie but a goodie less than six minutes long by the late,  great civil libertarian.  We of the Coalition of the Sane and Reasonable need to punch back hard against the willfully self-enstupidated wokesters who promote 'hate crime' blather. As Hentoff points out, 'hate crime' is thought crime.

    Here is a recent example of what we are up against:

    “Under the proposed statute, ‘intimidate and harass’ can mean whatever the victim, or the authorities, want them to mean. The focus is on how the victim feels rather than on a clearly defined criminal act. This is a ridiculously vague and subjective standard,” he said.

    “The absence of intent makes no difference under this law. You are still guilty of the crime because the victim felt uncomfortable.

    “The bill will lead to the prosecution of conservatives, pastors, and parents attending a school board meeting for simply expressing their opposition to the liberal agenda,” Kallman said.

    The proposed statute is obviously insane and anti-civilizational as any reasonable person will immediately discern. Like it or not we are now in the Age of Feeling.  

    Let it be noted en passant that 'liberal agenda' is not quite the right phrase; 'hard' Left' and 'woke' are more fitting adjectives.  To say it again: don't confuse a classical with a contemporary liberal. The latter slouches toward the Gomorrah of wokery. A pox be upon all who so slouch.

    Related: The Age of Feeling or the Age of Pussies?

    The Asian family story here.


  • Diplomad 2.0 on the Biden ‘Special’ Counsel

    We all know it's a joke, a joke worthy of that all-time jokester and comedian, Lavrenti Beria.

    Beria would have appreciated AG Garland's "sudden" naming of a Special Counsel to look into Hunter Biden, this after years of saying no SC was needed. He also would have appreciated that the Special Counsel (SC) named is none other than US Attorney David Weiss (another miserable Trump appointment), who "investigated" Hunter for the past three three years: remember the laptop? On top of it, Beria would have appreciated how Garland has violated the law by picking Weiss; the law requires that the SC come from outside of the government, certainly not be a DOJ Attorney and the one, on top of it all, who has protected the Biden Crime Family (BCF) for these past three years. Let us not forget that Weiss masterminded that other joke: the "plea deal" for Hunter which would have allowed that crackhead to skate on serious tax fraud and gun charges that would have put any of us in the slammer for years.

    Well, of course, it turned out some honest judge threw out the plea deal as it contained promises of, in essence, permanent immunity for Hunter from any other prosecutions. 

    Read it all.  Garland & Co. see themselves and their 'president' as above the law while piously intoning, "No man is above the law, not even the president of the United States."  


    3 responses to “Diplomad 2.0 on the Biden ‘Special’ Counsel”

  • Thoughts in and of Ancient Lycia

    From my Turkish journal, 22 February 1996.

    Leader of the Stack.


  • Edith Stein: Faith, Reason, and Method

    Top o' the Stack.

    August 9th is the feast day of St. Theresa Benedicta of the Cross in the Catholic liturgy.  She is better known to philosophers as Edith Stein (1891-1942), brilliant Jewish student of and assistant to Edmund Husserl, philosopher in her own right, Roman Catholic convert, Carmelite nun, victim of the Holocaust at Auschwitz, and saint of the Roman Catholic Church. One best honors a philosopher by re-enacting his thoughts, sympathetically but critically. Herewith, a bit of critical re-enactment.

    In the 1920s Stein composed an imaginary dialogue between her two philosophical masters, Edmund Husserl and Thomas Aquinas. Part of what she has them discussing is the nature of faith.

     


  • Matt Taibbi

    Campaign 2024, Officially Chaos. Excerpts:

    The cognoscenti never figured out or accepted that the support for protest candidates like Trump or Bernie Sanders even is rooted in wide generalized rage directed their way. To this day they don’t accept it. They keep thinking they can wish it away, describe it away (see Bump’s description of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. as “not at this point serious competition”), indict it away. If you drop 76 charges on a candidate and he goes up in polls, you might want to consider that you might be part of the problem. But they can’t take even that heavy a hint.

    [. . .]

    Democrats meanwhile are repeating the process of cooling turnout by blasting their own protest candidate, and instead of an alert-if-off-putting Hillary Clinton on the ticket, the standard-bearer is a half-sentient, influence-peddling version of Donovan’s Brain, with no one behind him but Kamala Harris — who just got asked by a trying-to-be-friendly reporter at ABC if “race and gender” were a cause of her own historically low approval rating. Absent a big switch, our future is either Donald Trump, who by next year will be in more restraints than Hannibal Lecter on the tarmac, or this DNC dog’s breakfast. Other countries are surely already laughing. It’s getting harder to resist joining them.


  • #Walk Away Campaign

    'Liberals' who have awakened from 'wokery.' Numerous interesting  video testimonials. Plenty of data for political psychologists. 

    Bro Joe recommends this one by a charming Los Angeles actress. 


  • A Short History of Slavery

    Candace Owens, about five and a half minutes.  A crisp refutation of widespread leftist lies and omissions. Do your bit and propagate this video.

    "Truth is not a leftist value." (Dennis Prager) Some of you think that I came up with the line. Not so. I got it from Prager. Always give credit where credit is due. Or are you a plagiarist like Joe Biden?

    His plagiarism is a comparatively minor element given the depth of his moral corruption, as is becoming increasingly evident. The case against Biden 2024 is massive even if you don't agree with me that the hard-Left/'woke' policies this puppet promotes are destructive unto national suicide.

    Political views aside, anyone can see that Biden is physically unfit for office and non compos mentis, not of sound mind. These two absolutely undeniable points disqualify him, especially as commander-in-chief. (Our geopolitical adversaries are licking their chops and testing the old fool with blatant provocations in preparation for events that few want to talk about.) Biden's supporters will deny his moral corruption; their denial, however, only serves to make evident their moral corruption and disregard for facts.


  • Beware of Projecting . . .

    . . . your attitudes and values into others.

    Leader of the Stack. Excerpts:

    We are not all the same 'deep down,' and we don't all want the same things. You say you value peace and social harmony? So do I. But some are bellicose right out of the box. They love war and thrive on conflict, and not just verbally.  

    It is dangerous to assume that others are like we are.  (I am thinking right now of a very loving and lovable female neighbor  who makes that dangerous assumption: she has a 'Coexist' sticker affixed to her bumper.)

    Liberal 'projectionism' — to give it a name— can get your irenic self killed.

    Coexist sticker
     
    [. . .]
     

    There can be no peaceful coexistence in one and the same geographical area over the long term except under classical liberalism.  For classical liberalism alone is tolerant of deep differences and is alone respectful of our equally deep ignorance of the ultimate truth about the ultimate matters.  Why must we be tolerant? Because we do not know. The classical liberal  is keenly aware of the evil in the human heart and of the necessity of limited government and dispersed power. So he is justified in making war against fanaticism, one-sidedness, and totalitarian systems of government whether theocratic or 'leftocratic.'  It would not be a war of extermination but one of limitation. It would also be limited to one's geographical area and not promoted abroad to impose the values of classical liberalism on the benighted tribalists of the Middle East and elsewhere.

    Finally, can American conservatism and the ideology of the Democrat Party in its contemporary incarnation peacefully coexist? Obviously not, which is why there is a battle for the soul of America. Either we defeat the totalitarian Left or we face a nasty trilemmatic trident: acquiesce and convert; or accept dhimmitude; or be cancelled in one’s livelihood and then eventually in one's life.


    One response to “Beware of Projecting . . .”

  • Facing Reality: Two Truths About Race in America

    Some notes on Charles Murray. Substack latest.

    Includes a comment by 'Jacques,' a credentialed philosopher who dare not appear under his real name in these race-delusional and totalitarian times.

    The Republic is collapsing into a police state. Here is another bit of evidence of how the totalitarian state can and will mercilessly crush anyone it wants to for any reason it can fabricate. In this case a harmless January 6th trespasser is labelled an 'insurrectionist' and a 'terrorist' and sentenced to prison. He committed suicide.  Propagate the video. 


    4 responses to “Facing Reality: Two Truths About Race in America”

  • David Brooks

    Read for free his What if We Are the Bad Guys Here? 

    I invite Vito Caiati's comments and anyone else's who is capable of saying something intelligent and to the point.

    Addendum 8/6

    I wonder if David Brooks can understand the point of the graphic below. In its third clause, the First Amendment guarantees free speech and the freedom of the press.  Now there was evidence of election fraud in the 2020 election.  Maybe a lot, maybe a little. No matter. But even if there was none all, we all have the right to express our opinion on the question, even Donald J. Trump. No man is below the law! Not even the president of the United States.  By indicting him, the deep state operatives in the DOJ, CIA, FBI, NSA, the White House, and wherever else are plainly interfering with the  2024 election.

    And yet these people go on and on about democracy. But what could be more anti-democratic than election fraud? 

     


    12 responses to “David Brooks”

  • The Lethal Chamber of the Soul

    I float the suggestion that the problem of the external world was originally ontological, not epistemological.

    The material world is the great lethal chamber of the soul. Only spiritual heroes can arouse themselves sufficiently to escape from its stupefying effect upon consciousness. (Paul Brunton)

    The Brunton quotation is distinctly Emersonian, as witness:

    The influence of the senses has in most men overpowered the mind to that degree that the walls of time and space have come to look real and insurmountable; and to speak with levity of these limits is, in the world, the sign of insanity. (Ralph Waldo Emerson, "The Oversoul")

    The outer senses are seductive. To seduce is to lead astray. From the Latin infinitive ducere, to lead. Dux, ducis is one who leads, a leader. Hence il Duce who led Italians astray into Fascism. (The latter term is  used properly to  refer only to the political philosophy of Benito Mussolini.)  Here are some other English verbs that derive from ducere: deduce, reduce, induce, educe, educate, abduct, deduct, conduct, induct, etc. and their abstract and concrete nominal forms: abduction, induction, inductance, etc. and abductor, inductor, etc.

    But I digress.

    The outer senses are seductive. They lead us to posit their objects as ultimately and unquestionably real when they are not. The world of the senses comes to exhaust the cartography of Being. Simone Weil, Platonist that she is, is good on this.  As seductive, the outer senses are deceptive: they deceive us into thinking that what is only derivatively real, and thus a mix of the real and the unreal, is ultimately or fully real. The deception concerns not their being, but their mode of being.

    Among the philosophical acts whereby philosophy and the philosopher first come to be is by the suspension of our natural world affirmation.  This suspension was ancient long before it was modern. The problem of the external world was originally ontological, not epistemological. The question concerned the mode of being of the objects of the outer senses, not "our knowledge of the external world," to borrow a title from Bertrand Russell's eponymous 1929 collection of lectures. The ancient question was not the question: How do we know that there is an external world? but the question: What is the ontological status (illusory, merely apparent but not illusory, fully real) of the external world? 

    This curious shift from the ontological to the epistemological may be illustrated by the different attitudes toward the paradoxes of Zeno of Elea. What is Zeno arguing? Four possibilities of interpretation:

    A. There is no motion. Motion is wholly unreal. Whatever is real is intelligible. (Parmenidean principle: Omne ens qua ens intelligibile est.) Nothing contradictory is intelligible. Motion is unintelligible because contradictory. Ergo, nothing moves. Motion is an illusion.

    B. Motion is wholly real, 'as real as it gets.' The apparent contradictions involved in motion are merely apparent. The Zenonian arguments are fallacious and they can be shown to be fallacious. The 'calculus solution.' See Wesley Salmon.

    C. Motion is phenomenally real, but not noumenally real. It is neither wholly unreal not wholly real. It is mere appearance.  Ultimate reality is motionless , but phenomeal reality is not nothing.

    D. Motion is unintelligible but nonetheless real. Mysterian position. The Zenonian arguments cannot be refuted, but motion is nevertheless wholly real. Motion is actual, hence possible, despite the fact that we cannot understand how it is possible. 


  • Would Schpenhauer Allow Comments . . .

    . . . on his weblog, The Scowl of Minerva?

    Find out at Substack.


  • But isn’t math racist?

    Here

    Filed under: Academentia, Wokery.


  • Democracy with State-Sponsored Election Interference?

    I should think they are incompatible. Might a bit of Orwellian re-definition help?

    Maybe it is like this. Just as the border is secure as DHS-head Alejandro Mayorkas defines 'secure,' state-sponsored election interference is compatible with democracy as the regime and its media shills define 'democracy.'

    Our political enemies from the Big Guy on down are not just brazen and repeated liars, they are something worse: subverters of language.

    I hand off to Alan Dershowitz, the best legal mind in the country, and  a Democrat.



Latest Comments


  1. https://www.thefp.com/p/charles-fain-lehman-dont-tolerate-disorder-charlie-kirk-iryna-zarutska?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

  2. Hey Bill, Got it now, thanks for clarifying. I hope you have a nice Sunday. May God bless you!

  3. Vini, Good comments. Your command of the English language is impressive. In my penultimate paragraph I wrote, “Hence their hatred…

  4. Just a little correction, since I wrote somewhat hastily. I meant to say enemies of the truth (not from the…

  5. You touched on very, very important points, Bill. First, I agree that people nowadays simply want to believe whatever the…

  6. https://barsoom.substack.com/p/peace-has-been-murdered-and-dialogue?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=841240&post_id=173321322&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1dw7zg&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email



Categories



Philosophy Weblogs



Other Websites