PHILOSOPHICAL CRISIS IN THE WEST

 

It’s clear there is a spiritual crisis in Liberal Democracy.  What’s not so clear to most is that there is also a philosophical crisis.  For two reasons.  The value of truth has declined if not disappeared. Secondly, there is no understanding that the nature and place of truth must be discussed.

The spiritual crisis shows up in the dehumanization of mankind and the barbarism that still reigns in human affairs.  The philosophical crisis show up in that the discourse on fundamental meaning and purpose is absent from everyday human affairs.  Not only do most people not discuss politics, let alone know enough to discuss it meaningfully as a matter of daily human affairs; but the fundamental issues of philosophy that underlie those discussions and the issues and antagonisms involved are hardly ever discussed amidst the quotidian preoccupations of the masses.

It would seem that the progressives would want to engage in such discussion of the perennial issues and questions, given they seem to want to change the given state of affairs no matter what the cost and as fast as possible.  There is no will or allotted time to consider if change is so urgent and where warp speed transformation is going to take us.  Possibly out of the pot and into the fire.  But how would we know when adamant certainty prevails and the entertaining of fundamental questions is considered laughable or, at best, only for college philosophy class.  Sadly the spirit of such fundamental discourse doesn’t even often prevail in philosophy class.  I know.  I witnessed it for over 30 years of college teaching.  There is a fundamental rupture between thought, life and action in the world.

Philosophy is fascinating and engaging.  But the prevailing felt impatience that such experience is a waste of time and that there in fact is “not enough” time for thinking.  Philosophical thought does slow us down. It does take time.  But that may actually be one of its many benefits given that we are living in a kind of ‘warp speed’ world.  A rush to who knows where.

The idleness of philosophizing is no virtue today.  Though the right to “be idle” seems to be catching on as a ‘human right’ in some liberal strongholds.  But the pressure ‘to get on with it’, whatever “it” is governs our sense of time and how time should be “spent,” and what is worth our time.  Yet not having enough time to “do philosophy” is not really a matter of the quantity of time available.  Most of us waste inordinate amounts of time without realizing it.  What keeps us away from such such idleness, philosophical idleness and will undoubtedly keep the progressive liberals from embracing the “right to idleness” is because of what happens in idleness.  What happens?  One is confronted with one’s thoughts; or, even worse, one is confronted with the boredom bordering on the abyss of existential despair when the exigencies of achieving the next liberal goal is put to rest.

So for those who might want to take a break from the breakneck speed of everyday striving, achieving and just ‘keeping up,’ let’s go back and consider something we might want to think about.  It’s near the beginning of philosophy, about 2500 years ago that a man named Socrates began asking some important questions.  But apparently dangerous questions.  Because if you don’t know the story of Socrates his lifestyle of questioning and teaching the youth philosophically cost him his life.  He was accused, tried and put to death for “corrupting the youth,” and “not believing in the gods of the community.”

But let’s take the risk and consider just one of his questions.  It occurred in a wonderful little dialogue written by his student, Plato, called the “Euthyphro.”  It’s a short dialogue.  You might want to check it out.  But the big question that arises in the course of this dialogical drama is this:  Does God say something is good because it is in itself good; or, is something said to be good only because God says it’s good?

We might reflect for a moment and note that for those who don’t believe in God or a God, that such a question is meaningless.  But if I might be so bold, let’s translate the question into something relevant and meaningful in our world:  Is something good in medicine because it is good; or is it good only because Fauci says it’s good?

I’ll leave you to it to ponder this question if you choose; maybe go back and read the “Euthyphro,” and possibly even do a little research about what others have said regarding this question.  It is a founding and grounding question of the Western tradition, the tradition so vilified and under attack by the forces of “good” who presume to know what is good and bad and where we should go from here.

If I might give a little hint, it’s this.  If the question of the truth about good and bad, right and wrong is not a matter of God and God’s authority, especially for atheists obviously, then consider the nature, origin and legitimacy of authority itself.  Who rightfully has authority over truth, not to mention goodness?  Or, does authority itself guarantee and/or justify claims to truth?  Or, is truth itself not the fundamental determinant of what idea or which officials should have authority?

Have fun!!

Radical Relativism No Defense for Twitter’s Radical Left Censorship

The Left argues that the First Amendment is not “absolute.” So that means it is "relative." Thus, they would conclude, that the egregiously selective and targeted censorship at Twitter was justifiable. Relative to the perceptions and judgements of the Twitter radical Left, the Right's speech is unacceptable. On Twitter today we hear the shallow minds of the Left argue that one should not be able to shout “Fire!” in a crowded theatre; and, one should not be permitted to incite violence against another’s person. Therefore, based on these two examples, all speech, they continue, is relative and all judgements about what is acceptable, permissible and censorable is relative, i.e., not determinable objectively and thus subjectively relative. But we might ask relative to or for whom or what? Why and to what particular relative points of view is speech only relatively or situationally or contextually permissable?

Moreover, with respect to the Left's presumably justificatory examples, more importantly we must point out that the reason yelling ‘fire’ and objecting to permitting inciting violence is not because speech is not absolute nor because such examples are instances of causing or preventing some unconscionable action but because such speech makes it virtually impossible to invoke the other side of speech, namely, the ability and opportunity to question, to object, to inquire, to dialogue and participate democratically in the discourse of knowledge and reality. The Left’s fallaciously superficial if not silly counterexamples are examples of speech acts that violate the nature of speech itself. That is, to question the factuality, truth, reality, goodness of any act of speech, or of any actual events, fulfills upon and honors the nature of speech whether declarative, interrogative, speculative or imaginative. Speech which violates the nature of speech and prevents the fulfillment of its and our human nature is that which must be impermissible. So in short that “speech” should be stopped which stops speech itself from enabling us to fulfill upon our nature, spirit and purposefulness as beings of speech. The 'shout fire/inciting violence' examples are impermissable because they excite or incite actions that stop speech where speech is or may well be required. Real speech has recourse to itself as dialogue that enables the truth and reality of claims to be considered, not imminently and exigently without further linguistic consideration thru impulsive action, but reflectively within the imperatives of the required time to think, speak, reflect, comment and question. Real speech allows and invites a response and provides the time and opportunity for the responder to do so.

The Leftists are radical relativists for whom the only thing that is absolute is their point of view, their proclamation of the real, the true and the good. Thus we on the right are dealing with a dogmatic, authoritarian and effectively violent cabal. In their relativistic defense of censorship, they violently violate speech itself and thereby the very practice that fulfills upon our nature as creatures of language and thought, a practice requiring in principle unbridled, infinite iterations of the word.

The New Conservative Revolution

 "The small and everyday can be solved easily, if we understand the large and essential and put it in its due order." - Martin Heidegger

Despicable Martha's Vineyard Hypocrites Exposed

After Gov. DeSantis' brilliant exposure of the unsurpassable hypocrisy of the Left Liberal elitist utopians holed up at Martha's Vineyard, the "flight & landing" seen round the world, we now know all we need to know about our need to purge this country of these scourges upon democratic society. These "Vineyard" parasites on human life pretend and profess to stand for the D.I.E ideology, namely the values of "diversity," "inclusion" and "equity." What we saw exposed at Martha’s Vineyard is the exact opposite. This scum stand for “diversity,” well, for everything but diversity of political opinion. They use their MSM and Big Tech shills to gaslight the populace that what they profess is actually values they hold. They misrepresent the Conservative Right every chance they get. And the truth is they never met an opportunity to censor, cancel, vilify and assassinate personalities that they did not love. They refuse and suppress the right and actuality of the Right to speak for themselves. So the opinion of the People is a just a little too diverse for them and we get called extremists, terrorists and traitors to democracy. Imagine that.

 

They love diversity of culture and race but just not in their backyards. They are NIMBY on steroids. They love illegal immigrants until they have to take care of them. Of course they are willing to “take care of them” with our tax money and if we keep the brown people in our backyards. The Martha’s Vineyard clan claimed they didn’t have the infrastructure nor the housing for all these brown people. And yet they expect every other community that they ship the little brown people off to in the dark of night to have that infrastructure. They are pathological liars par excellence.

 

The ‘white-as-white-can-be’ Martha Vineyard’s clan loves diversity and equity of education for themselves but one-dimensional, choiceless, “public” woke education for the rest of us. They try to kill educational choice, charter schools and even homeschooling every chance they get. They want to herd all the People’s children into grossly deficient “public schools” so they can brainwash them with woke and genderist nonsense and basically keep them dumbed down in literacy, historical knowledge and in short the ways of truth, freedom, liberation and goodness.

 

The Martha’s Vineyard partisans also love “diversity,” choice and equity in medicine for themselves but not for the people. They work to transform medicine into one-dimensional vaccine madness, a vaccine for every illness. They get to choose their medical care but for the rest of us they want to universally and coercively mandate vaccines and eliminate our civil liberties if we do not conform. Informed consent for them means you either agreement with the Official Medical Mafia or you are an extremist deserving of jail or elimination from society through various kinds of “excommunication.” Bodily sovereignty is not on their list of civil rights except, of course, for themselves when it comes to abortionism, abortion on demand up to the day of birth. But ask for bodily sovereignty with respect to vaccines and they go batshit.

 

The aforementioned Islanders, which includes Barack O’Bama, possibly the only black man on Martha’s Vineyard, the token black man, because he happened to be President and only because he happened to be President, also want the Green New Deal for everyone. They are so kind they want to include us, We the People, in their utopian fast-tracked fiasco. But of course all the rich private jet owners, and the government officials who want to hop around the globe like John Kerry, Green New Dealer Extraordinairre, get to fly by jet anytime and anywhere they want, polluting the atmosphere, in one little hop from D.C. to New York or L.A. or Beijing or anywhere else they want to go, more than thousands of people driving their little gas vehicles just to get to work to survive. So it’s electric vehicles for the rest of Us whether you can afford it or not and super-polluting private jets for the Martha’s Vineyard contingent.

 

So it’s D.I.E. for us or be censored, canceled, vilified or in short “killed,” in one way or another. But it’s hypocrisy and gaslighting on immigration policy, education, medicine and environmentalism coming from the Martha’s Vineyard rich and the fascist propaganda regime, the well-known toadies and ass-kissers in MSM, Corporate America and the Leftist Liberal universities. 

 

The Martha’s Vineyard hypocrital elitists are an effete, enervated and hopefully ephemeral species. Their kind have exhausted all means of honest, effective government, useful productive ideas for progress and any pretense to authentic belief in the value and power of the democratic and constitutionalist traditions of the American republic. If they do not achieve some self-awareness in the near future, they will push the People over the edge of what is tolerable and acceptable for any freedom loving people wishing to be left alone to live peaceably in their communities embracing the conservative values that have made us great, a multi-cultural society of tolerance, opportunity and local democracy in the context of a true federalism as the genius of the Founders intended.

No one wants violence, especially the Conservative Populist Right. It is not us that supported, condoned and whitewashed the BLM violence and murder of the summer of 2020. But when a People is cornered, smothered, vilified and stigmatized, denied of civil rights and proportionate representation in the American conversation, they may not have a choice. 

 

Leftist Liberalism is in terminal crisis. We the People will not be blamed for its demise.

A POLITICAL-CULTURAL CIVIL WAR

 

I think we have to be clear that Trump stands for what is so contrary to establishment foreign policy, trade economics, woke ideology, D.I.E.(diversity/inclusion/equity) policy, climate alarmism, open, i.e., borderless borders, medical authoritarianism, BLM & police de-funding that he thereby stands for a radical conservative transformation returning America to its essence. But as it is now, namely,, the Leftist effort to Socialize & Globalize America,, Trump in effect stands for our recognizing the reality of a re-structuring social/ethical class formation, rupture & conflict. The Elitists, both democrat & republican, don't want the country to see itself as the class divided country, that they made. 

 

The utopian Left wants us to see ourselves as a mass culture which of course they will still keep divided but through diffusion, along the lines of the silly nevertheless violent gender, race, educational battles, inter-regional hatred, cultural & religious fights, medical freedom, etc., i.e., violently divisive conflicts that are manufactured by the mainstream mass media & the universities but are absolutely unnecessary. 

 

 Trump does not simply symbolize all this but surely can also lead the conservative populist movement to a greater solidarity & thereby pound the last nail in the coffin of Leftist/socialist, anti-democratic and proto-fascist radicalism. So it's vital, IMO, that this political moment is not couched in the CNN/MSNBC narrative of hatred & vilification. 

 

There is a genuine political & cultural divide & conflict that the conservatives must not lose or our very existence as an American essence will be made illegal & forced out of playing any part in institutional & historical integrity. This is literally a civil war, but so far, without the shooting, i.e., overt militarized physical violence. So far it has been ethical, journalistic, medical & political autocratic policy violence. 

 

Trump did not create this division. But his presence throws a national spotlight on this real yawning cancerous divide that already exists. Given Trump's presence the Leftists have ramped up the conflict into a cultural civil war in order to destroy his base & him if they can get him. This of course was what the obscene FBI raid on Mar a Lago was all about......the effort to criminalize Trump & remove him & what he represents from the political scene. 

 

Trump & the Right do not want a political class divide. But here it is & his presence makes us aware of it. Conservative-Populist class consciousness is necessary for political solidarity & thereby the preservation of institutional, Constitutional & authentic Federalist integrity. Game on!!