[P2P-F] Fwd: Summations
michelsub2004 at gmail.com
Thu Jun 8 21:52:59 CEST 2017
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Kanth, Rajani <rkanth at fas.harvard.edu>
Date: Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:19 AM
To: "michelsub2004 at gmail.com" <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>
[For Paul Feyerabend]
I have now explained the Paradigm that rules us all, east, west, north,
It is the genre of Modernism that first arose in Europe, and was then
'extended' ,largely involuntarily , to the world as whole.
[In a nutshell: it involved a materialist world-view , a material ,
self-serving definition of'progress', an asocial acquisitive
individualism, reliance on a select, favored version of science that
advanced its interest, and the use of illimitable force as legitimate
means to impose its fiats upon disbelievers/skeptics ].
That term covers it all , A to Z.
The older terminology of “Capitalism”, ‘Modernism’, etc., is inadequate to
describe the whole.
In effect, my term sublates all of that.
But, it is even more.
It points directly to our real anthropology as so-called 'homo sapiens',
seriously misread by EM fantasies.
It also suggests that in anthropic societies, culture and philosophy are
vital causal agents, with politics and economics derivative.
It questions, therefore, the ruinous reign of Classical Scientific
Materialism – itself based on received Newtonian ideas (which Quantum
Physics now places in serious question) – in the realm of (European) ideas.
I also point out that the real revolution of EM was in raising
(individual) self-interest above the societal interest, something never
before achieved in human society, anywhere.
Whilst all of Europe gave in to this ethos, it is the Anglo-Norman
formations that pushed it to the ad absurdum non-limits transparently
Amorality is its culmination: with anomie, angst, and despair its neon-lit
Travel from the US to Iceland, e.g., and one can ‘taste’ the difference:
you move from an Unsociety - where but the law , armed with lethal force,
keeps some modicum of peace - to where a shared , tribal morality
sustains basic decencies.
Defining civilization as the pacification of social and natural threats to
survival, EM societies are a linear descent into abject barbarism (so,
sorry, the Lincoln Centre and the Royal Shakespeare Theatre will NOT serve
irrefutable markers of civilisation).
Oscar Wilde joked that America went straight from barbarism to decadence
bypassing the stage of civilization: of course , he was Wrong (in his
categories as well).
It never abandoned barbarism.
Worse, the barbarism is, today, globally self-limiting in the negative
sense of leading us all into Annihilation.
I have also suggested that men and women, universally , constitute two
sub-species with distinct instinctual traits that can be worked against
but not erased.
I have called these the ‘paradigm of masculinity’ and the ‘paradigm of
femininity’ , understood as a cluster of traits.
In radical brevity, men possess the instinct to kill, women , the instinct
to nurture (culture can either reinforce , or antidote - the antidotes can
only be weak - these impulses).
This is both universal and timeless.
This goes against the grain of the specious EM rhetoric of ‘equality’,
and its dismissal of instincts as explanatory variables in human affairs
under the jibe of ‘essentialism’.
I explained that this presumption (against instincts) stemmed from the
Judeo-Christian view (though it may not be unique to that faith) that we
are created in the image of ‘god’ and so cannot have ‘animal’ traits ( a
pre-Darwinian idea, in origins).
Now this is not to say that EM practices actually prescribe an equality of
Au contraire, feminists had to struggle for generations, and have still not
The real intent was to protect humans (in particular, males, of European
origin) from the influence of ‘base’ instincts: indeed the ‘natuurvolk’
(native peoples, women) on the other hand, were seen as wholly
‘animalistic’ in their ways w/out any dissonance.
Consider Shakespeare’s Taming of the Shrew to understand this succinctly:
wild horses, natives, and women had to be ‘tamed’.
It also meant that women were gratuitously included in the oxymoronic
phrase ‘human nature’, inclusive of the violent proclivities of males, and
their violent 'contribution' to his-story.
I have argued that EM claims ‘progressiveness’ for itself - and appears
persuasive - given its provenance in the obvious iniquities of Feudal
Europe ( a quite false basis of comparison - yes, bad is better than
worse! : I use the template of simple tribal societies, our natural
heritage, instead, to show up the glaring lesions of EM society ,
But, what really transpired was that the prior dictatorship of the church
and state was replaced by that of the new rulers of commercial society, no
Every freedom such folk gave their underlings was either tokenism
compared to what they allowed themselves (to trade, invest, loot, and
plunder), or quite chimerical.
Plus some putative freedoms were entirely negative: such as ‘freeing’ the
peasant, involuntarily, from vital access to commons, pastures, fields
and meadows (Enclosures) , and/or from state subsidies (welfare
provisions, such as Speenhamland).
I can throw a house dog on to the streets and give it its ‘freedom’: and am
relieved, thereby, of its maintenance expenses.
Of course, the ‘dog’, in this case, was never consulted.
Worse, EM substituted a crass, pseudo-anthropology of our kind.
It subverted all our original, antic , anthropic impulses of kinship and
domesticity: i.e. care, consideration, and hospitality, and taught us,
instead, that we are , all, necessarily, selfish , individualistic, and
acquisitive – which I deem a sordid EM libel upon the human race.
This is the crux of it.
As a particular breed of hominids, we are communal, tribal , creatures ,
finding the ‘meaning of life’ in kinship, family, and emotive
EM brutishly razed that idea (and its ontic basis) and ‘freed’ us, to leave
it all and go ‘venturing’ ( the ‘climb every mountain’, tripe) into
In other words the Captains Commercial extended their native, vicious,
greed and lust, gratuitously, to the entire human species as an ‘ideal’ –
and as such drove most of us to the nether limits of sanity.
Outside of the tribal/familial matrix we are fit only for ‘treasons,
stratagems, and spoils’: which is the blithe EM exhortation!
Worse, we lose, like giddy flies, balance and perspective , our deeply
ingrained societal sense of sanity.
And so real ‘human nature’ was subverted/suborned, and we were foredoomed,
lost as castaways, far from our native shores of weal and hospitality.
Little wonder that early EM ‘pioneers’ were no more than pirates, brigands,
and looters: Drake, Pizarro, and Columbus.
And are their epigones ,today, any different?
No: but a whole lot crazier.
Society – an end in itself - was seen as no more than a means - of
personal advancement , thereby standing our anthropic natures on is head.
As Hegel saw it, correctly, ‘civil society’ is the arena only of a
ruinous ‘universal egoism’.
This, ab initio, eliminated (as much as it could) the moral-social impulse,
that stems entirely from our communal being, substituting arid ,
paper-deep, disingenuous legality in its stead.
The Amoral society is not an anthropic society at all, and the current
planetary crisis is the direct result of such EM revaluations (or,
devaluation) of values.
What EM wilfully destroyed , as if it were an execrable anathema, our
original benefice of The Convivial Society.
In sum, EM dismantled, by virtue of its regressive, predatory
orientations, the very basis of our social and natural worlds.
All the vainglory of' liberte, egalite, and fraternite ' is no more than
idle gibber if there is not even a bare physical existence to look forward
to, for the planet, and its varied species.
It is EM that gave us WW 1 and 2, or, rather, European Wars 1 and 2 .
Yes, the 'world' was dragged into the carnage:by EM forces.
Japan is the exception that proves the rule, but only did so, it must be
noted, after first adopting EM orientations.
EMs , across history, torched all societies they encountered, either to
annex/loot , or organise a fire-sale of their vital resources right
The Bible, the Navy, and Compound Interest were the original Troika that
led the First Waves of Colonisation: the sophisticated EMs that succeeded
them let only the first of that Trinity go.
Today, China, and most nations have been, perforce (it must be noted) ,
inducted into the EM game (EM , for four centuries, was never prone to
let sleeping dogs lie: that, quite contrary to its evangelical
expansionism) : yet, in mordant irony, these nouvelle Non-European EMs may
well beat the original EMs at their own game.
And now the same 'globalised' madness is, inexorably, precipitating the
onset of EW3.
What grandiloquent, yet tragic, irony that the ruling
'civilisation-mongers' of yesteryear - the 'advanced', 'developed', 'First"
Worlders - are, in high tones, preparing us All, unknowingly, for an
Endgame that could put paid to all pretensions, peoples, species - nay,
the planet itself!
Is that the zenith of 'progress'?
No , this is not hyperbole: have a glance at the Doomsday Clock.
And let us give credit where it is due: it was NOT set (at where it is) by
Women, Native peoples, or Other Non-Traditional societies.
R E F E R E N C E S
Kanth, R. Farewell to Modernism: On Human Devolution in the
Twenty-First Century. NY : Peter Lang,
_______ The Post-Human Society, Warsaw: De Gruyter, 2015
[© R.Kanth 2017]
P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the P2P-Foundation