Items Posted by Jim Kalb
From mystuff.27 Wed Apr 1 05:18:03 1998
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Wed Apr 1 04:37:58 EST 1998
Article: 11731 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: A novel attack on liberalism
Date: 1 Apr 1998 04:37:53 -0500
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <6ft1th$5s4@panix.com>
References: <3522E75A.7D17@bellsouth.net> <352198C9.13C6F0A9@xs4all.nl> <35232256.17DE@bellsouth.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.com
X-Newsposter: trn 4.0-test55 (26 Feb 97)
John Fiegel writes:
> > In Europe ... mainstream politicians are happy to label themselves
> > 'left' or 'right'.
> As they are in the US. Buchanan has a book called "Right from the
> Begining"
Which is evidence he's not or at least not altogether a mainstream
politician. It's extraordinarily rare for an American politician to
refer to himself in such a manner. The book title is of course only an
oblique reference.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Truth is such a flyaway, such a sly-boots, so untranslatable and
unbarrelable a commodity, that it is as bad to catch as light."
(Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Wed Apr 1 05:20:47 EST 1998
Article: 11732 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: A novel attack on liberalism
Date: 1 Apr 1998 04:49:47 -0500
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <6ft2jr$660@panix.com>
References: <351C10E2.6F8FD352@net66.com> <3 <352190DF.73F700CB@net66.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.com
X-Newsposter: trn 4.0-test55 (26 Feb 97)
John Hilty writes:
> He [i.e., me, Jim Kalb] frequently says in this newsgroup that
> government services on behalf of the poor cause more harm to them
> than good, because they undermine the 'organic relations and common
> connections' that presumably would provide better assistance for the
> poor.
I noticed my name, read part of Hilty's post, and thought a comment was
in order.
I don't believe I ever said what he asserts. The quotation of course
is his own invention. Putting that aside, what I have said is that
"welfare programs," "government social services" and the like cause
more suffering than they prevent. By "welfare programs" I meant to
include government welfare expenditures generally, those directly for
the benefit of individuals rich or poor. They would thus include
social security and at least most public education expenditures. The
increased suffering would take into account not only people who suffer
directly from lack of money but also victims of crime, children and
others injured by disordered family life, and lots of others.
It seems to me the situation of poor people and the role of the state
and other institutions can't be discussed in isolation from more
general issues of social organization. The issue as I see it is one of
moral orientation. Are relations and obligations to particular people
of fundamental importance or not? If they must be, for a way of life
most people will find tolerable, what are the consequences when the
state treats it as part of its basic mission to destroy as much as
possible the practical importance of such things through direct state
responsibility for individual welfare and state equal opportunity laws
and programs?
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Truth is such a flyaway, such a sly-boots, so untranslatable and
unbarrelable a commodity, that it is as bad to catch as light."
(Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Wed Apr 1 08:49:10 EST 1998
Article: 11734 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: Eugenics & Plato
Date: 1 Apr 1998 08:48:12 -0500
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <6ftgis$m1c@panix.com>
References: <351FACD2.6B35FB7@xs4all.nl>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.com
In <351FACD2.6B35FB7@xs4all.nl> vtnet writes:
>I think there're similar passages in the laws, but at present I do not
>have the book.
I don't think so. Remember that the Laws is far less utopian than the
Republic. It accepts family life and private property within the
ruling class for example. From Bk. V of the Jowett translation:
Ath. Then let me first give the law of marriage in a simple form;
it may run as follows:-A man shall marry between the ages of
thirty and thirty-five, or, if he does not, he shall pay such and
such a fine, or shall suffer the loss of such and such privileges.
This would be the simple law about marriage. The double law [i.e.,
including a statement of purpose] would run thus:-A man shall
marry between the ages of thirty and thirty-five, considering that
in a manner the human race naturally partakes of immortality,
which every man is by nature inclined to desire to the utmost; for
the desire of every man that he may become famous, and not lie in
the grave without a name, is only the love of continuance. Now
mankind are coeval with all time, and are ever following, and will
ever follow, the course of time; and so they are immortal, because
they leave children's children behind them, and partake of
immortality in the unity of generation. And for a man voluntarily
to deprive himself of this gift, as he deliberately does who will
not have a wife or children, is impiety.
Nothing about a eugenic lottery, quite the contrary. The lesser degree
of state control would make one much more at odds with the rest of the
constitution than in the Republic.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Truth is such a flyaway, such a sly-boots, so untranslatable and
unbarrelable a commodity, that it is as bad to catch as light."
(Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Wed Apr 1 19:55:39 EST 1998
Article: 11748 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: Eugenics & Plato
Date: 1 Apr 1998 17:09:27 -0500
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <6fudun$p1c@panix.com>
References: <351FACD2.6B35FB7@xs4all.nl> <6ftgis$m1c@panix.com> <35229944.28497A17@xs4all.nl>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.com
In <35229944.28497A17@xs4all.nl> vtnet writes:
>Furthermore, your quote in no way suggest that the choice of partner
>was to be free -- and not determined by some kind of ingenious scheme
>to furtively influence choice.
The Jowett translation is available through:
http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/laws.sum.html
There are rules on marriage in Bk. VI. Choice is reasonably free; once
you let private property and the family into the picture it's hard to
be truly utopian.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"I read with some joy of the auspicious signs of the coming days, as they
glimmer already through poetry and art, through philosophy and science,
through church and state." (Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Wed Apr 1 19:55:40 EST 1998
Article: 11749 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: Eugenics & Plato
Date: 1 Apr 1998 17:18:22 -0500
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <6fuefe$pqv@panix.com>
References: <351FACD2.6B35FB7@xs4all.nl> <6ftgis$m1c@panix.com> <35240CC9.66F1@bellsouth.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.com
In <35240CC9.66F1@bellsouth.net> John Fiegel writes:
>it should also be remembered that the Republic is not a blueprint for
>an actual government ... Plato's error was not the creation of
>totalitarianism which could not even have been imaginable to him, but
>the idea that tradition once destroyed can be consciously
>reconstructed.
It was important to Plato that the regime he described be at least
barely possible. He realized of course how unlikely it was that it
could ever be realized and thought its chief use was as a model, but if
it were absolutely impossible it could not even function as that.
The reconstruction of tradition - actually, its replacement by the
knowledge and authority of the Guardians - was as you suggest the key
to the system. If it's not possible for human beings through education
and discipline to attain to adequate scientific knowledge of justice,
then the scheme collapses and becomes an immensely interesting thought
experiment rather than an ideal.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"I read with some joy of the auspicious signs of the coming days, as they
glimmer already through poetry and art, through philosophy and science,
through church and state." (Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Thu Apr 2 09:28:28 EST 1998
Article: 11766 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: Rescuing history from historicism
Date: 2 Apr 1998 09:15:54 -0500
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <6g06iq$32l@panix.com>
References: <3522EBEA.97F8A1AB@msmisp.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.com
Carl Jahnes writes:
> A "Confucian" project may be what you have in mind, but I think this
> is not what will rectify names that many of us in the post Christian
> West care much about. Perhaps you mean "Confucian" in a more
> metaphorical sense!
I think "Confucian" here means Realism, the view that names refer to
metaphysical essences, with the essences in this case revealed through
history and tradition. An alternative is Nominalism, the view that
names are strictly conventional, which suggests either that they
shouldn't be taken seriously (the Taoist view) or that they are to be
defined by the powerful and used for their own purposes (increase of
power if you're a Legalist or the material welfare of the people if
you're a Mohist).
> Naziism is Leftism. Pure and simple.
I think of it as an interesting alternative to liberalism, which
accounts for the obsession of liberals and Nazis with each other. The
similarity is that both are Nominalist and both therefore think of the
highest good as getting one's own way, whatever that way happens to be.
The liberals say that since everyone equally wants to get his own way
it is most rational to have a social order in which to the extent
possible everyone *does* equally get his own way.
The Nazis believe that it is absurd to mix abstract universalism with
primal self-seeking will in such a fashion. They view recognition that
man is by nature a social animal as the way to make a social order. So
if you're starting with the primal self-seeking wills of individuals
the thing to do is to identify the will of each man with the primal
self-seeking will of his concrete society as embodied in the will of a
particular man, the Fuehrer. They then recognize that man strives for
universality, not one external to himself like the abstract
universality of the liberals but one in which the will and what is
universal become identical. The way the particular self-seeking will
of the concrete society becomes universally valid is of course through
a war of universal conquest and domination concretized through the
enslavement, torture and extermination of other peoples.
It's an interesting question which view is a more convincing
implementation of Nominalism and evaluative subjectivity. Sometimes
I'm inclined toward the one, sometimes the other. The Nazi view does
have the advantage of hewing most closely to the concrete and
immediate. On the other hand, if language is useable at all then some
sort of abstract logic must be available to us. Radical individualism
and radical denial of individualism both seem false, so neither view
has an advantage on that score.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"I read with some joy of the auspicious signs of the coming days, as they
glimmer already through poetry and art, through philosophy and science,
through church and state." (Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Thu Apr 2 09:28:30 EST 1998
Article: 11768 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: A novel attack on liberalism
Date: 2 Apr 1998 09:22:02 -0500
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <6g06ua$3g9@panix.com>
References: <351949DB.4BFE4BEB@xs4all.nl> <6fc7fj$ep4@panix.com> <891121001snz@bloxwich.demon.co.uk> <6fmgt0$r4b@panix.com> <3520480C.274E@bellsouth.net> <6fnudo$j92@panix.com> <3521675E.398B@bellsouth.net> <6fpjo5$nqn@panix.com> <35246D85.1AB3@bellsouth.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.com
John Fiegel writes:
> You will want to pass it so it will actually become law. Thus the
> first set of side effects will be the political ones ...
This all seems extraordinarily speculative. For example, payoffs don't
necessarily last forever. They depend for continuance on unpredictable
contingencies, shifting correlations of forces, whatever. They may
provoke contrary results as well; I don't see why it's only immigration
controls that should have such effects.
One could come up with side effects that go in all sorts of directions.
For example, the great majority, including a majority of recent
immigrants, want stricter immigration controls. Enactment of such
controls would thus be a popular victory and a defeat for the permanent
government. Whether in the end that would weaken or energize our
rulers would depend on many other things, none of which can be
predicted. As a general thing, though, it is better to defeat one's
opponents than not to defeat them. Victory is usually encouraging and
defeat the reverse.
To me, it seems likely to be productive to press for something like
stricter immigration controls that most people want, that have few
persuasive drawbacks, and that seem basic for continuation of an
ordered and free society. If your point is that the future is
unpredictable because the world is complex and changing, I agree with
it. If you conclude that nothing should be tried because it may
backfire I don't agree.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"I read with some joy of the auspicious signs of the coming days, as they
glimmer already through poetry and art, through philosophy and science,
through church and state." (Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Fri Apr 3 05:20:47 EST 1998
Article: 11785 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: alt.revolution.counter FAQ
Date: 2 Apr 1998 23:18:58 -0500
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <6g1nvi$c26@panix.com>
References: <6fsthp$2di@panix.com> <6g1ce9$ftg$1@tracy.nacs.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.com
X-Newsposter: trn 4.0-test55 (26 Feb 97)
tsun@acclink.com (tsun) writes:
> Arthur Machen, author of "The Secret Glory," was definately a counter-
> revolutionary. Has anybody read that book?
Not I. What is it about? I think you said in your other post that you
read it on the net. Where is it available?
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"I read with some joy of the auspicious signs of the coming days, as they
glimmer already through poetry and art, through philosophy and science,
through church and state." (Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Fri Apr 3 05:20:48 EST 1998
Article: 11786 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: A novel attack on liberalism
Date: 2 Apr 1998 23:23:31 -0500
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <6g1o83$clk@panix.com>
References: <351949DB.4BFE4BEB@xs4all.nl> <6fc7fj$ep4@panix.com> <891121001snz@bloxwich.demon.co.uk> <6fmgt0$r4b@panix.com> <3520480C.274E@bellsouth.net> <6fnudo$j92@panix.com> <3521675E.398B@bellsouth.net> <6fpjo5$nqn@panix.com> <35246D85.1AB3@bellsouth.net> <6g06ua$3g9@panix.com> <35257017.6D46@bellsouth.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.com
John Fiegel writes:
> If immigration reform is so popular an idea, why is it not even on
> the legislative horizon? If there is one thing politicians read, it
> is poll numbers; and they like nothing better than easy ways to play
> to the crowd.
It's hard to play the crowd when those who run the hall in which you're
speaking play kazoos every time you raise a particular topic. As to
popularity, look at the polls.
> The greatest impediment to the possibility of reform are not the
> forces of consolidation, it is the embrace by the people, both as
> individuals and grouped together in self-interest, of those forces in
> furtherance of their own ends.
No doubt, but I don't see how that impediment applies to immigration
restriction in a serious way.
> I can only say that if it's what most people want and was thought to
> have no drawbacks worth speaking of, we would already have it. That is
> the way our national government works, after all.
I suppose that's true, if it had no drawbacks for anyone. If you want
a populace consisting of a mechanical aggregate of individuals for
whatever reason -- because you don't like the American people as they
have existed historically, because radical individualism is more
important to you than anything else, because it would mean you and
those like you could run things with less friction -- then of course it
has drawbacks. For American governing elites those drawbacks are quite
serious, but for most people they are not. Most people would rather
have greater average prosperity more evenly spread, greater social
peace and stability, a more comfortable environment, one in which
mutual understanding and cooperation are easier to establish, etc.
> And it would be making thimgs worse because the simple fact is you
> cannot have an ordered and free society when society is composed of
> individuals who view the social order as a series of arrangements
> whose purpose it is is to facilitate the satisfaction of their
> appetites and for whom freedom serves as the moral validation of
> those appetites.
How would immigration control promote such an outlook? I would think
it would have the contrary tendency.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"I read with some joy of the auspicious signs of the coming days, as they
glimmer already through poetry and art, through philosophy and science,
through church and state." (Emerson)
From owner-newman@LISTSERV.VT.EDU Sun Apr 5 13:30:47 1998
Received: from listserv.vt.edu (listserv.vt.edu [128.173.4.9])
by mail1.panix.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/PanixM1.3) with ESMTP id NAA27981
for ; Sun, 5 Apr 1998 13:30:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from listserv.vt.edu (listserv.vt.edu [128.173.4.9])
by listserv.vt.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA45116;
Sun, 5 Apr 1998 13:30:06 -0400
Received: from LISTSERV.VT.EDU by LISTSERV.VT.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release
1.8c) with spool id 4063744 for NEWMAN@LISTSERV.VT.EDU; Sun, 5 Apr
1998 13:30:02 -0400
Received: from panix.com (kXMVug60UfPeo/zsPHIkkSdxAzYhQI9H@panix.com
[198.7.0.2]) by listserv.vt.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA34242
for ; Sun, 5 Apr 1998 13:30:01 -0400
Received: (from jk@localhost) by panix.com (8.8.5/8.8.8/PanixU1.4) id NAA23636
for NEWMAN@LISTSERV.VT.EDU; Sun, 5 Apr 1998 13:30:00 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <199804051730.NAA23636@panix.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1998 13:30:00 -0400
Reply-To: newman Discussion List
Sender: newman Discussion List
From: Jim Kalb
Subject: Re: Feminism and the Western Church
To: NEWMAN@LISTSERV.VT.EDU
In-Reply-To: from "Francesca Murphy"
at Apr 4, 98 11:54:53 pm
Status: RO
Francesca Murphy writes:
> I have the impression that women show a greater interest in the
> practice of religion and men show a greater interest in the
> discussion of moral issues. FM
And do women have greater interest in the practice of morality and men
in the discussion of theological issues? I suppose so, at least to the
extent one is speaking of minor morals, to consideration and other
personal practices affecting feelings. Maybe when women become
lopsidedly the ones interested in religion it shows that religion has
lost objective content.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"[H]istory is an impertinence and an injury if it be any thing more than a
cheerful apologue or parable of my being and becoming." (Emerson)
From jk Sun Apr 5 17:26:04 1998
Subject: Re: Evolution
To: cg
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1998 17:26:04 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 960
Status: RO
> Will the next step involve genetic engineering where gender is
> eliminated? It seems we are going in that direction. Then without
> gender, there will be no feminists as there will be neither male nor
> female. With feminism today one does consider what it would be like.
Good question. My inclination is to think that the human organism
(including the social and moral organism) is too complicated to design
a new one running on new principles. So if you abolish gender by
cloning, fiddling with hormonal balances, whatever, you'll end up with
something that'll go haywire and stop functioning in a recognizably
human fashion. In particular the scientific and technological
enterprise will come to an end, so the issue you raise will just go
away.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"[H]istory is an impertinence and an injury if it be any thing more than a
cheerful apologue or parable of my being and becoming." (Emerson)
From owner-newman@LISTSERV.VT.EDU Sun Apr 5 17:30:58 1998
Received: from listserv.vt.edu (listserv.vt.edu [128.173.4.9])
by mail2.panix.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/PanixM1.3) with ESMTP id RAA02997
for ; Sun, 5 Apr 1998 17:30:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from listserv.vt.edu (listserv.vt.edu [128.173.4.9])
by listserv.vt.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id RAA34102;
Sun, 5 Apr 1998 17:30:14 -0400
Received: from LISTSERV.VT.EDU by LISTSERV.VT.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release
1.8c) with spool id 4065959 for NEWMAN@LISTSERV.VT.EDU; Sun, 5 Apr
1998 17:30:13 -0400
Received: from panix.com (YEWZRef6cgeSssqhqluhdbDCFzxB0qlF@panix.com
[198.7.0.2]) by listserv.vt.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id RAA58280
for ; Sun, 5 Apr 1998 17:30:12 -0400
Received: (from jk@localhost) by panix.com (8.8.5/8.8.8/PanixU1.4) id RAA07894
for NEWMAN@LISTSERV.VT.EDU; Sun, 5 Apr 1998 17:30:11 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <199804052130.RAA07894@panix.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1998 17:30:11 -0400
Reply-To: newman Discussion List
Sender: newman Discussion List
From: Jim Kalb
Subject: Re: Feminism and the Western Church
To: NEWMAN@LISTSERV.VT.EDU
In-Reply-To: from "Francesca Murphy"
at Apr 5, 98 07:05:16 pm
Status: RO
> Is gnosticism spirituality without the moral edge? FM
Interesting question. Maybe spirituality in which the physical is not
morally significant?
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"[H]istory is an impertinence and an injury if it be any thing more than a
cheerful apologue or parable of my being and becoming." (Emerson)
From owner-newman@LISTSERV.VT.EDU Sun Apr 5 20:47:03 1998
Received: from listserv.vt.edu (listserv.vt.edu [128.173.4.9])
by mail1.panix.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/PanixM1.3) with ESMTP id UAA01594
for ; Sun, 5 Apr 1998 20:47:03 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from listserv.vt.edu (listserv.vt.edu [128.173.4.9])
by listserv.vt.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA25458;
Sun, 5 Apr 1998 20:45:34 -0400
Received: from LISTSERV.VT.EDU by LISTSERV.VT.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release
1.8c) with spool id 4067702 for NEWMAN@LISTSERV.VT.EDU; Sun, 5 Apr
1998 20:45:33 -0400
Received: from panix.com (WbltV0MiGQtxdLEs7REUigEq871QPKLk@panix.com
[198.7.0.2]) by listserv.vt.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA49408
for ; Sun, 5 Apr 1998 20:45:32 -0400
Received: (from jk@localhost) by panix.com (8.8.5/8.8.8/PanixU1.4) id UAA20881
for NEWMAN@LISTSERV.VT.EDU; Sun, 5 Apr 1998 20:45:31 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <199804060045.UAA20881@panix.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1998 20:45:31 -0400
Reply-To: newman Discussion List
Sender: newman Discussion List
From: Jim Kalb
Subject: Re: Feminism and the Western Church
To: NEWMAN@LISTSERV.VT.EDU
In-Reply-To: from "Francesca Murphy"
at Apr 5, 98 10:53:39 pm
Status: RO
Thus Francesca:
> But if you think about anything you have read about gnosticism, where
> did the morality come in at all? Physical or otherwise?
I was striving for parsimony:
1. You point out the Gnostics like spirituality but don't much care
about morality.
2. People say the Gnostics reject the body and the physical generally.
3. A friend was saying that technology is Gnostic. (I thought he had
OD'ed on Voegelin. It's hazardous for Americans to read Continental
thinkers.)
4. Many people associate feminism with Gnosticism.
Hence my attempted principle that the single defining characteristic of
Gnosticism is rejection of the moral significance of the physical.
Maybe morality has to do with reconciliation of the One and the Many
and matter is the principle of individuation, so fundamental rejection
of matter and fundamental rejection of morality are the same. My
proposed principle also makes clear the radical opposition between
Gnosticism and Christianity, since the Creation and the Incarnation are
pretty stupid if the physical has no moral significance.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"[H]istory is an impertinence and an injury if it be any thing more than a
cheerful apologue or parable of my being and becoming." (Emerson)
From jk Sun Apr 5 21:00:12 1998
Subject: Re: Death Penalty
To: am
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1998 21:00:12 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 841
Status: RO
> I continuously read in the liberal media (New York Times) about how
> the death penalty discriminates against black men. I know this is a
> lie. Does anyone have any facts on this issue?
If I dare cite a neoconservative publication, there's a useful article
by Stanley Rothman and Stephen Powers, _Execution by Quota?_, in the
Summer 1994 _The Public Interest_. The article briefly surveys the
literature, quotes a typical NYT article, and observes that the NYT
claims are patently false.
Rothman is a social scientist at Smith College who was one of the
authors of the '80s study that showed that a plurality of those in a
postiion to have an informed opinion thought that there are racial
differences in intelligence explicable in part on genetic grounds.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Mon Apr 6 07:44:54 EDT 1998
Article: 11805 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: The RESOURCE LISTS
Date: 6 Apr 1998 07:38:31 -0400
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <6gaern$i3g@panix.com>
References: <6g9thv$53m$1@osh2.datasync.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.com
In <6g9thv$53m$1@osh2.datasync.com> cjc@datasync.com (Christopher Vasta) writes:
>Is "Conservative Digest" still being published?
Dunno. The lists don't cover the U.S. conservative movement as such
though. They also don't include _Conservative Chronicle_, _National
Review_, what have you.
>Re: The Literature List: Did you have to include the "Turner Diaries"
>this is a book liberals love.
The point of the lists is to be informative and the book was included
before its current fame (also for that matter before I read it). Since
the intent of the lists is not propagandistic it shouldn't be excluded
on grounds that it's revolting. Not all that is right-wing is good.
If someone wants to understand the various forms right-wing rebellion
can take then the book's probably one he should read.
It's hard to know what lines to draw. For example there's not much
about Naziism in the lists, partly because I don't view radical
unification of society on simple this-worldly principles as
counterrevolutionary, partly because it's covered elsewhere, partly
because that's the way things developed. Maybe it would be impossible
to draw up rational principles that let the TD in and don't include
lots more Nazi literature than the lists cover. Who knows? They're
mainly an accumulation of things people have suggested and I don't
propose to make them perfect.
>I am also surpised to see Jack London on your list. Politically, he
>was an ultraleftist, more of a revolutionary than a
>counterrevolutionary.
We actually had a discussion of the point on a.r.c. Some people wanted
him in, I forget on what grounds -- maybe because he stood for
adventure and integrity against bureaucracy or something.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"[H]istory is an impertinence and an injury if it be any thing more than a
cheerful apologue or parable of my being and becoming." (Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Mon Apr 6 07:44:55 EDT 1998
Article: 11806 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: A Confucian Project
Date: 6 Apr 1998 07:43:38 -0400
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <6gaf5a$i7r@panix.com>
References: <3522EBEA.97F8A1AB@msmisp.com> <3528A8AD.20E3@bellsouth.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.com
In <3528A8AD.20E3@bellsouth.net> John Fiegel writes:
>I propose a Confucian project of the rectification of names.
How would such a project procede?
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"[H]istory is an impertinence and an injury if it be any thing more than a
cheerful apologue or parable of my being and becoming." (Emerson)
From jk Wed Apr 8 09:02:03 1998
Subject: Re: scruton
To: rs
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 09:02:03 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 24992
Status: RO
Scruton's usually interesting even though one can of course find fault
with him from a right-wing as well as left-wing perspective. A
right-wing objection is that Godless conservatism doesn't work except
maybe as an upper-class thing that acts as a moderating influence in a
universal despotism, like Confucianism in China or Stoicism in Rome.
The problem is that conservatism is always adjectival on a fundamental
understanding of what the world is like. If you don't have God you'll
have to make do with the will of Caesar as an ordering principle. The
philosophical outlook of the class through which Caesar acts, the
Chinese literati or the Roman upper classes, then becomes important. I
don't think though that we're likely to have an upper class capable of
acting as bearer of a philosophical outlook Scruton would be happy
with.
From jk Fri Apr 10 05:47:02 1998
Subject: Re: today's show
To: sch
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 05:47:02 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1579
Status: RO
My line of thought was that in private life we tend to get involved in
other people's business when there's some flat rule that applies
whatever the situation (don't kill people) or when in the particular
circumstances we judge that getting involved will do more good than
harm. Government involvement in child care tends I think to treat the
latter type of situation as if it were the former. So Hilary Clinton's
got a problem, even though we all agree that if Joel Steinberg is
beating Lisa to death the cops ought to get involved.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Sleep lingers all our lifetime about our eyes, as night hovers all day
in the boughs of the fir-tree." (Emerson)
From jk Sat Apr 11 10:00:12 1998
Subject: Re: Traditionalism in America
To: b
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998 10:00:12 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 5054
Status: RO
Thanks for the comments:
> 1. There are genuine values in liberalism that most of us cherish,
> that indeed are inherited from Judeo-Christian tradition and which
> help to overcome some of the faults of traditionalism. I consider
> myself a thoroughly orthodox Christian but see in Christianity's
> affirmation of the dignity of each person an indirect affirmation of
> equality of opportunity, freedom as a necessary but not sufficient
> value, and some sort of social safety net. I also endorse
> Constitutionalism as a political value. So, the relations between
> Christian tradition and liberalism are more complicated, it seems,
> than you make them out to be. However, I agree with the corrosive
> nature of "pure" liberalism...as you have so well outlined it.
You raise a point I'd like to have an overall view on but don't -- what
lasting valuable things if any does liberalism tell us?
I favor constitutionalism, the distribution and limitation of public
authority in accordance with fundamental law. I'm not sure of the
relation of that kind of constitutionalism to liberalism. Maybe a
liberal is someone who believes that a formal constitution can be
applied in all cases. If so, I don't think I'm a liberal. Some sorts
of freedom are certainly beneficial or necessary, for a variety of
reasons. What is freedom though, and when and why is it good? The
answer would I think answer whether liberalism has anything special to
tell us.
If a social safety net means general state responsibility for the
material well-being of each person I think in the long run it's
probably a bad thing. It tends to detach the weakest and most marginal
people from all but the most abstract features of the social network
(the pure cash nexus of getting a check in the mail and then spending
it) and that's bad since man is a concretely social animal. At least
that's a problem I think in a liberal state that's reluctant to tell
people how to live or impose penalties without due process, formal
proof up to a reliable standard, etc.
If there were no social safety net there would certainly be plenty of
other ways Christians could find to vindicate human dignity. They
would include both what's usually called charity and the practice of
traditional morality, a system of principles and attitudes that enables
people to rely on those concretely connected to them. So the split
often found in the Church between the socially concerned and the
traditionally minded would recede in importance.
To my mind the question as to things like welfare and equal-opportunity
laws is their practical long-term effect on social life. If a certain
degree of cultural coherence makes it more likely that people will be
treated with dignity rather than in accordance with asocial impulse or
as means for an end, and if EO legislation in a culturally diverse
society means that every workplace will be culturally incoherent, it's
not clear to me it will promote dignity. I've set forth objections to
equal-opportunity legislation at:
http://www.cycad.com/cgi-bin/pinc/july97/kalb-rights.html
> 2. I think you identify liberalism a bit too much with leftist
> thought.
Another good issue. Is there a fundamental difference between the two?
My basic theory is that liberals are slo-mo leftists. I don't think
I'm just refusing to distinguish among things I don't like, or trying
to get a simpler theory to make analysis easier.
Is there much of a line dividing what American liberalism has become
from the Left? If not, then the question seems to be whether
contemporary American liberalism is a development or a perversion of
what came before. The development from John Locke to John Rawls and
beyond seems a natural one to me. Left-liberals tend to believe that
libertarians are either insincere on some basic level, because of
self-interest maybe, or else that their thinking is narrow, crabbed,
undeveloped, whatever. I have a great deal of sympathy with that view
although I haven't thought through opposing views carefully enough.
> I like Os Guinness' suggestion that traditional Christians enter the
> political process with their substantive moral notions and seek to
> forge an "overlapping consensus" with those who share those
> substantive notions. There are few "pure liberals" in politics, I
> would guess. For example, it seems to me quite likely that such an
> overlapping consensus could affirm heterosexual marriage against the
> liberal push to endorse any kind of bonding as marriage.
It's a difficult situation though when the overarching public principles
by which public acts are judged, by the courts but also the respected
commentators, are liberal. At least if the overarching principle is
something with more bite than "let the majority consensus rule."
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Sleep lingers all our lifetime about our eyes, as night hovers all day
in the boughs of the fir-tree." (Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Wed Apr 15 08:17:24 EDT 1998
Article: 11877 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: A novel attack on liberalism
Date: 15 Apr 1998 07:32:05 -0400
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <6h25rl$45b@panix.com>
References: <6fo5av$pfn@panix.com> <3520D7BB.2DF52FF3@xs4all.nl> <35243CD5.E0C49A7D@msmisp.com> <352621B4.8CF193B8@xs4all.nl> <35295CCD.45619271@msmisp.com> <352B9EFD.CFD5ED26@xs4all.nl> <892161497snz@bloxwich.demon.co.uk> <352F9CA6.39EC1900@xs4all.nl> <892330610snz@bloxwich.demon.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.com
In <892330610snz@bloxwich.demon.co.uk> raf391@hormel.bloxwich.demon.co.uk (rafael cardenas) writes:
>The main mechanism today of maintaining upper-class power against the
>people is freedom of movement of capital and the threat of capital
>flight. The upper class invests outside the country, and sells the
>country's assets to foreigners or foreign companies.
Power based on the ability to withdraw and be replaced by outside
competitors is an odd sort of power. I can't help but wonder whether a
different way of speaking about the situation would be appropriate.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Sleep lingers all our lifetime about our eyes, as night hovers all day
in the boughs of the fir-tree." (Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Wed Apr 15 08:17:24 EDT 1998
Article: 11878 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: A Confucian Project
Date: 15 Apr 1998 07:49:49 -0400
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <6h26st$54j@panix.com>
References: <3522EBEA.97F8A1AB@msmisp.com> <3528A8AD.20E3@bellsouth.net> <353149BD.6D0B@bellsouth.net> <35314A67.6776@bellsouth.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.com
In <35314A67.6776@bellsouth.net> John Fiegel writes:
>Nietzsche famously said that the problem with the death of God was not
>that men would believe nothing, but that they would believe anything.
Wasn't that G.K. Chesterton's formulation? I do recall Nietzsche
saying somewhere that rather than believing in nothing men would
believe in Nothing. He seemed to think that Christianity was an
example of the latter.
>Lacking the spiritual wherewithal of a healthy civilization, modern
>civilization has developed the dual political-material persona of
>State-Corporatism. On the one hand through the State, it becomes the
>humanitarian producer and distributor of social justice, the Good
>Shepherd Leviathan; and, on the other through enormous publicly held
>corporations, the hedonistic producer and distributor of economic
>goods, Kubla Kapitalism.
I agree that in the present situation the welfare state is a spiritual
necessity, something people just won't give up. One consequence is the
sense among many that there is something obscene and even demonic about
classical liberalism.
Of course, people don't much like the reality of the welfare state
either. One should contemplate the long-term consequences of a state
of affairs in which all possibilities seem intolerable.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Sleep lingers all our lifetime about our eyes, as night hovers all day
in the boughs of the fir-tree." (Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Wed Apr 15 08:17:25 EDT 1998
Article: 11879 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: A Confucian Project
Date: 15 Apr 1998 08:08:51 -0400
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <6h280j$6db@panix.com>
References: <3522EBEA.97F8A1AB@msmisp.com> <3528A8AD.20E3@bellsouth.net> <353149BD.6D0B@bellsouth.net> <35314A67.6776@bellsouth.net> <3533650C.29379A5A@xs4all.nl>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.com
In <3533650C.29379A5A@xs4all.nl> vtnet writes:
>a profusion of un- or misinformed opinions as members of the societal
>influential classes 'buy' the dedication of the lower classes. This
>opinion was also reflected in Confucius' 'Doctrine of the Mean' (Legge
>translation)
Don't understand the comment on the DofM. It's true I suppose that
part of the point of Confucius' teaching is to explain to the upper
classes how to act in a way that will justify their status as the upper
classes, that if they act that way there will be social stability, and
that if they don't they will eventually stop being the upper classes.
You seem to be saying more than that though.
>Where Confucius preached filial piety as the ultimate good so as to
>keep things stable forever
This seems misleading. I suppose he considered filial piety the root
of all the virtues and good social order, but that's not the same as
the ultimate good. The ultimate good he thought indefinable. Nor was
stability as such the purpose of his teaching. Heaven didn't err when
it changed its mandate, as it did from time to time.
>an attack on (conservative) statism -- and especially of the Confucian
>kind.
Confucius was conservative but no statist. A good Confucian ruler
would do very little, and his officials would resign rather than
cooperate with policies that were wrong. The whole point of his
educational efforts was to create an official class capable of
individual moral judgement. As he commented, a gentleman is not an
implement.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Sleep lingers all our lifetime about our eyes, as night hovers all day
in the boughs of the fir-tree." (Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Wed Apr 15 08:17:26 EDT 1998
Article: 11880 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: The RESOURCE LISTS
Date: 15 Apr 1998 08:15:02 -0400
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <6h28c6$6h0@panix.com>
References: <6g9thv$53m$1@osh2.datasync.com> <6gaern$i3g@panix.com> <6guqjh$bpg$1@osh2.datasync.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.com
In <6guqjh$bpg$1@osh2.datasync.com> cjc@datasync.com (Christopher Vasta) writes:
>I noticed you list the "FREEMAN" magazaine. Are you aware of the
>article a few years back entitled "SOUND OF THE MACHINE".
No.
>The books you mention are dog stories. I only read plot summaries but
>they don't seem to be that political. Orwell did recommend his "The
>Iron Heel" as a realistic portrayal of totalitarianism.
They're listed on the basis of a couple of recommendations from people
who at the time I didn't feel like ignoring. If I read them and decide
they don't belong I might drop them. I'm not going to try to fine-tune
the lists though.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Sleep lingers all our lifetime about our eyes, as night hovers all day
in the boughs of the fir-tree." (Emerson)
From jk Wed Apr 15 05:04:42 1998
Subject: Re: Liberty.txt - Sean Gabb
To: ol
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 05:04:42 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 110339
Status: RO
I found it a very interesting historical discussion.
I think of liberalism as the tendency to believe, based on the view
that values are subjective, that everyone ought to get whatever he
wants, as much and as equally as possible. As such it starts with
efforts to abolish or at least render ineffectual traditional
hierarchies and authorities, establishments of religion, and
antiutilitarian laws. The emphasis on property rights as the sole
legitimate concern of government is of course useful in those efforts
as well as in attracting the political support of increasingly powerful
classes.
Of course, that is not where the effort to establish a universal
rational egalitarian hedonistic order ends. So from my standpoint
contemporary welfare state/civil rights liberalism is the legitimate
successor to classical liberalism. I find it very hard to think of the
latter as a stable resting point. After all, why treat property as
sacred when it appears that fundamental liberal goals could be better
advanced otherwise? So your description of classical liberalism as a
temporary phase to which few were deeply attached seems plausible to
me, as does the connection to the "obscurantist" aspects of English
thought.
I am not myself a liberal, though. The big comment I have is that you
need more of a conclusion. Perhaps a concise statement of why your
kind of freedom is more glorious and works better than "positive
freedom" would help, together with a discussion of what would have to
be the case for recognition of that superiority to be an enduring
controlling factor in practical politics.
Do send me copy of the final essay. If interested you can find some
thoughts on contemporary PC liberalism as the logical outcome of
liberalism generally at
http://www.cycad.com/cgi-bin/pinc/feb98/kalb-pc.html
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Sleep lingers all our lifetime about our eyes, as night hovers all day
in the boughs of the fir-tree." (Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Thu Apr 16 16:19:47 EDT 1998
Article: 11911 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: A Confucian Project
Date: 16 Apr 1998 09:04:10 -0400
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <6h4vka$gsp@panix.com>
References: <3522EBEA.97F8A1AB@msmisp.com> <3528A8AD.20E3@bellsouth.net> <6gaf5a$i7r@panix.com> <3535821A.22D2@bellsouth.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.com
In <3535821A.22D2@bellsouth.net> John Fiegel writes:
>But is the delegitimization of names, the abuse of language, the
>Sophist-ication of rhetoric, which remains the most salient feature of
>our deculturation. Even the rectification which must begin with each
>person, cannot begin because no one knows their own names much less
>the names of those around them.
So we've all become characters (if that's the word) in a late Samuel
Beckett novel? That's going too far I think, man remains human through
it all.
More to the point, we always have choices and can make better or worse
ones. So saying "nothing can be done" is false. We can do our best.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Sleep lingers all our lifetime about our eyes, as night hovers all day
in the boughs of the fir-tree." (Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Fri Apr 17 05:15:39 EDT 1998
Article: 11921 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: A Confucian Project
Date: 16 Apr 1998 16:57:43 -0400
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <6h5rc7$3rh@panix.com>
References: <3535821A.22D2@bellsouth.net> <6h4vka$gsp@panix.com> <35367737.65FE@bellsouth.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.com
X-Newsposter: trn 4.0-test55 (26 Feb 97)
John Fiegel writes:
> > That's going too far I think, man remains human through it all.
> Does he? Humanness is a moral quality, not a biological one. Man,
> homo sapiens, is not naturally human in any materialistic sense.
So what? The material does not exhaust the natural. People can try to
destroy their humanity or that of others but they fail. They may become
evil, but a bad man is still a man.
> If both the "natural" and "super-natural" supports for humanness are
> denied, does man remain human through it all?
Sure, if the denial is in error, and in fact it is. People can say
they believe and maybe even convince themselves they believe all sorts
of things (solipsism, ultimate skepticism, moral relativism, whatever).
Why believe them? Their lives never measure up to their stated
principles. It's an excuse, a pose or a confusion.
> Neither Confucius, nor Aristotle believed that all men had the
> capability of becoming human, and experience rather endorses that
> view than opposes it.
"Man is by nature a political animal." "All men by nature desire to
know." Such statements suggest to me that all men are human. Confucius
said "by nature near together, by practice far apart," and "govern them
by moral force, keep order among them by ritual, and they will keep
their self-respect and come to you of their own accord." So it appears
he thought the same.
> To act well today is to endorse a view of life which forgoes the
> possibilty of all but the most local effectiveness. To be effective
> today is to endorse a view of life dedicated to the will to power
You seem sure we can predict the consequences of our acts, that the
technological understanding of reality has comprehensively formed what
reality is, so amoral power now affects things but nothing else does.
I'm not sure of the basis of that view. Why not think of the
technological outlook at least as applied to human affairs generally as
a superstition?
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Sleep lingers all our lifetime about our eyes, as night hovers all day
in the boughs of the fir-tree." (Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Sun Apr 19 14:09:10 EDT 1998
Article: 11979 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: A novel attack on liberalism
Date: 19 Apr 1998 08:15:53 -0400
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <6hcptp$oip@panix.com>
References: <6h25rl$45b@panix.com> <892931477snz@bloxwich.demon.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.nfs100.access.net
X-Newsposter: trn 4.0-test55 (26 Feb 97)
rafael cardenas writes:
> But are foreign companies competitors to the upper classes? If one's
> fear of internal opposition (in this case, democracy, egalitarianism,
> whatever, whether real or supposed) is greater than one's fear of
> foreigners, or one's potential gain from oppressing one's fellow-
> citizens looks greater than one's potential loss from foreign
> machinations, one will turn to the latter, as Theodosius to the
> Goths, Julian to Tariq, Abd-ar-Rahman to the Slavs, MacMurrough to
> Pembroke, King John to Innocent III, Palaeologus to the Genoese, or
> Cantacuzene to the Turks.
One difference between King inviting in Foreigners to support Throne
and Local Oligarchs inviting in Foreign Moneybags to support
Oligarchical Dominion is that in the former case there would normally
be a deal whereby King and Foreigners each have very different
complementary roles. If King has organizational control and skill,
money, military engineers and cavalry he might be able to work out a
mutually advantageous deal with landless barbarian infantry. Money is
not complementary to money in that way. So in the latter case the
foreigners would soon have power of the same kind acting in the same
way as that of the locals. That would make them competitors.
> The Thatcherites boasted both about the increase in British investment
> overseas and about the extent of foreign investment in Britain. To boast
> about both suggests that the policy that I outlined was deliberate.
To me it sounds like the free-market belief that if British money,
expertise and organization can go where they generate the best return
and foreign m., e. and o. can ditto it will be best for everyone.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Sleep lingers all our lifetime about our eyes, as night hovers all day
in the boughs of the fir-tree." (Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Sun Apr 19 14:09:10 EDT 1998
Article: 11987 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: Neocon suffering
Date: 19 Apr 1998 14:08:18 -0400
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <6hdeii$dhi@panix.com>
References: <1d7qbt8.1lhv84faxg12N@deepblue0.salamander.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.nfs100.access.net
Quotas and their equivalents strike me as just another example of the
tendency within liberalism to move from formal to substantive criteria.
Formal freedom (the law doesn't stop you from doing what you feel like
doing) changes to substantive freedom (the law helps you get what you
want). The same tendency applies to other liberal goals such as
tolerance and equality. It makes sense if you're a liberal -- after
all, why should form be so important?
Non-liberals of course worry that there's very little room for what has
been traditionally viewed as freedom or tolerance or for government
that is responsible to anyone but itself in a polity in which
government takes making everyone factually equal as an overriding goal.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Sleep lingers all our lifetime about our eyes, as night hovers all day
in the boughs of the fir-tree." (Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Mon Apr 20 18:01:48 EDT 1998
Article: 12000 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: A novel attack on liberalism
Date: 20 Apr 1998 06:55:21 -0400
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <6hf9ip$8n8@panix.com>
References: <892931477snz@bloxwich.demon.co.uk> <6hcptp$oip@panix.com> <893022662snz@bloxwich.demon.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.nfs100.access.net
X-Newsposter: trn 4.0-test55 (26 Feb 97)
rafael cardenas writes:
> Thatcher wasn't too keen on free-market determination of wages in the
> coal industry.
You mean that but for something she did wages would have been set by the
free market? I thought the pits were nationalized and subsidized, and
that the unions had rights beyond those of free labor and contract, so
free-market determination of wages was hardly in the picture.
> Bearing in mind that, e.g., the Korean car industry was started using
> British manager snd technicians, the presupposition that the import
> of Korean ownership and technology into the British car industry
> seems an odd one.
So the Koreans reproduce exactly the way the British do things, same
product and same way of producing it? If so, that's even odder. In
other areas they have their own ways of doing things. Do they invest
in Britain on account of international capitalist solidarity?
> But it makes sense in class terms: the more foreigners invest, the
> more difficult it will be for local 'collectivists' to re-regulate or
> re-nationalize in what they believe to be the national interest; the
> more native capital is exported, the less vulnerable it will be to
> such activities.
So the less "capitalists" correspond to a class in British society and
the more they correspond to an abstract function connected to no
particular body of men the better off they are. That might be true,
but it still seems odd to call it a class analysis. Looks more like
nostalgia for the Marxist class struggle.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Sleep lingers all our lifetime about our eyes, as night hovers all day
in the boughs of the fir-tree." (Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Mon Apr 20 18:01:49 EDT 1998
Article: 12005 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: What does this Newsgroup do ???
Date: 20 Apr 1998 18:01:32 -0400
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <6hggjs$t42@panix.com>
References: <1998042019313600.PAA10200@ladder01.news.aol.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.nfs100.access.net
In <1998042019313600.PAA10200@ladder01.news.aol.com> givenrandy@aol.com (GivenRandy) writes:
>What does this newsgroup do?
There's a FAQ posted monthly that can be found at
http://www.panix.com/~jk/faq.arc. I think the FAQ has been acceptable
to most participants, although there are always dissenters. There was
one fellow a year or so ago who wanted blueprints, advice, etc. on
making a device for counting revolutions (of a wheel, say). If his
view of the meaning of "alt.revolution.counter" is correct then
discussions have been seriously off-track for years.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Sleep lingers all our lifetime about our eyes, as night hovers all day
in the boughs of the fir-tree." (Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Tue Apr 21 05:48:46 EDT 1998
Article: 12017 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: A novel attack on liberalism
Date: 21 Apr 1998 05:47:16 -0400
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <6hhpv4$ka6@panix.com>
References: <892931477snz@bloxwich.demon.co.uk> <6hcptp$oip@panix.com> <893022662snz@bloxwich.demon.co.uk> <6hf9ip$8n8@panix.com> <893109656snz@bloxwich.demon.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.nfs100.access.net
In <893109656snz@bloxwich.demon.co.uk> rafael cardenas writes:
>As it happened, the unions had by that time very few rights ... Free
>contract includes the freedom to combine as a union or cartel to
>support one's interests
In America the labor laws give unions substantial rights beyond what
they would have in a pure regime of private property, free labor and
free contract. It's not simply a matter of the free-contract right to
form a cartel. For example, the government defines "bargaining units,"
and if a union wins majority support within a bargaining unit it
becomes illegal for the employer to bargain with anyone else (for
example indidividual employees) with respect to terms and conditions of
employment. It's illegal for an employer to discharge or otherwise
discriminate against an employee for union activity. Ditto of course
for employer boycotts of particular employees (a.k.a. "blacklists").
The right of unions and union organizers to make their case to
employees trumps in important instances the right of the employer to
determine who will be allowed to enter his property and for what
purposes. And so on. I don't know anything specific about British
labor laws, but had assumed that at least up to the early Thatcher
period they were on the whole at least as favorable to unions as
American law and so very substantially more favorable than the
free-market right to cartelize.
>No, they invested in Britain because the British financial market,
>unlike their own, was not prepared to support a strong native car
>industry, and they therefore saw a 'market opportunity' to get their
>products into Europe.
Why wouldn't it have been simpler and more efficient from the
standpoint of those involved for the British automobile industry to
find foreign investors? It's easier to import money than to import an
organization. Or so I would have thought. You seem to think there is
one universal equally-applicable method of organizing workers,
engineers, managers, etc. to make and sell cars, but lots of very
different local variants in styles of investment.
>There are economic risks in patriotism and the British upper class
>have been unwilling for more than a century to take them (except to a
>limited extent between the 1930s and the 1950s, when they really
>didn't have much alternative).
A class that disentangles itself from the affairs of its own country
isn't a ruling class any more. If the capitalist class becomes
sufficiently dematerialized it's not even a class any more, just a
collection of pension funds, insurance companies, whatever, all over
the world performing the function of supplying capital. The ruling
class, if you want to apply a class analysis, must be sought elsewhere.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Sleep lingers all our lifetime about our eyes, as night hovers all day
in the boughs of the fir-tree." (Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Tue Apr 21 12:19:49 EDT 1998
Article: 12025 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: Neocon suffering
Date: 21 Apr 1998 12:19:36 -0400
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <6higuo$ne8@panix.com>
References: <1d7qbt8.1lhv84faxg12N@deepblue0.salamander.com> <6hdeii$dhi@panix.com> <1d7tub9.jslybu1qjijv5N@deepblue5.salamander.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.nfs100.access.net
In <1d7tub9.jslybu1qjijv5N@deepblue5.salamander.com> wmcclain@salamander.com (Bill McClain) writes:
>The shift in emphasis from process to results brings liberals to a
>philosophy that is sinister by their earlier standards. They seem to
>feel a vague discomfort, but few are willing to examine the reasons.
True enough. The fundamental ideal I think is for each to decide for
himself, since all persons are equally persons and all desires equally
desires, with conflicts somehow composed by a perfect process that
treats all equally. The move to a substantive standard visibly forces
the desires of some on others, and can't be approved with an altogether
clear liberal conscience. Still, I think it's inevitable, since the
practical alternatives also fall short of the ideal.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Sleep lingers all our lifetime about our eyes, as night hovers all day
in the boughs of the fir-tree." (Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Wed Apr 22 20:50:20 EDT 1998
Article: 12041 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: A worthy cause
Date: 22 Apr 1998 20:49:16 -0400
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 222
Message-ID: <6hm36c$bus@panix.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.nfs100.access.net
There is currently a campaign to have Patrick Harrington of Third Way
expelled from his post graduate course in information technology at
Greenwich University solely on account of his political affiliations.
The Socialist Workers Party has been sending faxes, letters and
petitions to vice chancellor Dr. David Fussey demanding this.
Obviously you don't have to agree with Third Way about everything or
even very much to object to a campaign by the Socialist Workers to
drive out someone on grounds of political incorrectness. So presumably
it would be good if Dr. Fussey also received faxes putting a civil
liberties argument or some such for the opposite point of view. Fax by
e-mail is available; just send it to Dr. Fussey at:
remote-printer.fussey@441813318875.iddd.tpc.int
If you want to know more about Third Way you can look at
http://www.users.dircon.co.uk/~thirdway/
In my own fax I emphasized:
1. The mission of a university requires it to accept a wide variety of
views on public policy.
2. If the issue is diversity and tolerance then those things should
also be extended to Mr. Harrington, especially in matters that are
unrelated to professional activities and therefore personal.
3. Third Way encourages discussion of public issues and does not in
fact promote bigotry and intolerance, as those words are usually
understood, however politically incorrect it may be.
A couple of articles on the general situation are attached.
>From Independent on Sunday 22 February 1998
>College kicks out trainee for NF link
>
> By Paul George
>
>A trainee lecturer has been asked to leave a
>multi-racial college after it emerged he was a former policy
>member of the far right National Front.
>
>Senior staff at Hammersmith and West London College
>were outraged when they discovered one of the
>trainee teachers sent by the University of Greenwich was
>Patrick Harrington.
>
>Mr Harrington, former leader of the National Front,
>turned up for teacher practice at Hammersmith
>College a fortnight ago. He had only taught one class in
>information technology when he was told to leave.
>
>Mr Harrington, who is now leader of the Third Way,
>a National Front offshoot, said he was "saddened" by
>his expulsion. "I still do not know of what I am
>accused and I fear they were just harking back to the past.
>What has happened is sad because I was forming good
>relationships with people at the college."
>
>Principal John Stone took the decision to bar Mr
>Harrington from the college, which has a high
>proportion of black and Asian students, after being
>informed about Mr Harrington's identity by
>concerned lecturers.
>
>Mr Stone summoned a representative of the
>University of Greenwich to demand an explanation as to why it
>had sent a man who has frequently given speeches
>about the "dangers" posed by the ethnic minorities.
>"After discussions with the University of
>Greenwich it was decided that a more suitable placement could be
>found for Mr Harrington," he said.
>
>A Hammersmith College lecturer said: "Staff at the
>college were stunned when we realised the
>University of Greenwich had sent us a man like Harrington. And
>we are flabbergasted that they are knowingly
>training the leader of the Third Way to become a lecturer."
>
>The college, whose students are mainly aged between
>16 and 20, has an agreement to take people from the
>university's teacher training course on teaching
>practice. But the arrangement is now being reviewed.
>
>Mr Harrington started training to become a
>lecturer at the university's Avery Hill campus in September. His
>future on the course is not in doubt. A teacher
>practice placement is compulsory, but staff at other
>colleges which the university supplies may also object to
>his presence.
>
>The Anti Nazi League has threatened to mount a
>campaign against Mr Harrington, based on the one
>adopted at the Polytechnic of North London in 1984,
>unless he is expelled from the course.
>
>A University of Greenwich spokesman said:
>"Political affiliation is not a criterion for entry to any
>university. What concerns us is the behaviour of students on
>our courses. The University of Greenwich has a robust
>equal opportunities policy and we take any breach of it
>very seriously indeed. We have had no reason to invoke
>the disciplinary procedure in this case."
>
>Harrington gained notoriety in 1984 when, as the
>National Front student organiser, he needed a
>police escort to attend lectures on a philosophy course
>at the Polytechnic of North London. Hundreds of students
>had mounted pickets to stop him from entering the
>building.
>-- end
> From Socialist Worker
> 28 February 1998
> Page 15
>
> Patrick Harrington
>
> Patrick Harrington, former member of the Nazi National Front and now
> leader of another Nazi group, Third Way, is a student at the University of
> Greenwich.
>
> An angry campaign has been launched to get him expelled.
>
> Harrington was discovered when he went on a teacher training placement at
> Hammersmith and West London college. Senior staff were outraged at
> Harrington's presence and he asked him to leave.
>
> But the University of Greenwich refused to expel Harrington immediately
> and instead began the search for an alternative placement.
>
> In the 1980s Harrington was at the Polytechnic of North London. Students
> built a huge campaign about being taught in the same class as a member of
> the National Front and forced the authorities to buckle under the
> pressure.
>
> Harrington formed Third Way after splits in the Nazi movement. It stands
> for the "promotion of ethnic separation and repatriation".
>
> The Anti Nazi League has begun the campaign against Harrington by calling
> on students, trade unions and all anti-Nazis to send protest messages to Dr
> David Fussey, the university's vice chancellor.
>
> If the authorities do not give in the pressure will be stepped up.
>
> *Protest to vice chancellor Dr David Fussey, Southwood House, Avery Hill
> Campus, Bexley Road, Eltham. Fax: 0181 331 8875.
> From:
> http://www.londonstudent.org.uk/13issue/news/newsindex.htm
> --- start
>
> Anti-Nazi League attempts to expel Greenwich lecturer
>
> John House
>
> THE ANTI-NAZI League is campaigning to have a trainee lecturer at
Greenwich
> dismissed from his course after it
> emerged that he has connections with the National Front.
>
> Staff at Hammersmith and West London College were
> stunned when they found, Patrick Harrington, a
> post-graduate student from the University of Greenwich on
> a teacher training placement, was affiliated with the right
> wing party, Third Way.
>
> Patrick Harrington, who is enrolled in a course in Education
> and Training in IT, is currently a member of Third Way, an
> offshoot of the National Front, and became notorious in the
> 80's as a National Front activist at North London
> polytechnic.
>
> Hammersmith and West London College immediately barred
> Harrington when his political connections became apparent.
> But the University of Greenwich has indicated that it intends
> to find a placement in another further education college.
>
> A spokesperson for Greenwich said the university has a
> robust equal opportunities policy and emphasised that
> sufficient grounds to take action against Harrington do not
> exist: "All I can say is College guidelines mean that all we
> have control of is how our students behave while they're
> with us on campus. We only have the right to take action
> against a student if their behaviour on the course is
> unsatisfactory."
>
> The Anti-Nazi league dismissed the Universities defence:
> "It's not a case of equal opportunities. Equal opportunities
> aren't there to give Nazis the opportunity to teach. They've
> gone back on their equal opportunities policy by teaching a
> Nazi."
>
> Greenwich refused to comment on the ethical aspects of its
> admissions procedure for vocational teaching courses.
>
> Greenwich Union is also subject to the university's equal
> opportunities policy. Amanda Walton, VP and Education,
> said: "As far as we know he isn't practising fascism. If he
> started forcing his views on other students then we would
> bar him from our buildings. But we've had no complaints
> and we have to treat him like any other student."
>
> The Anti-Nazi League is stepping up moves to have
> Harrington removed from the University of Greenwich.
>
> The issue raises important questions over where an
> anti-discrimination policy should be applied. To eject
> Harrington on grounds of his poltical views would in itself be
> an act of discrimination. however, were the views of
> Harrington to result in his, or anyone else's, behaviour
> becoming prejudiced against students on ground of race or
> religion, then there would be little option but for Harrington
> to be asked to leave.
>
> Meanwhile, all is well.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Sleep lingers all our lifetime about our eyes, as night hovers all day
in the boughs of the fir-tree." (Emerson)
From news.panix.com!not-for-mail Wed Apr 29 15:19:39 EDT 1998
Article: 12109 of alt.revolution.counter
Path: news.panix.com!not-for-mail
From: jk@panix.com (Jim Kalb)
Newsgroups: alt.revolution.counter
Subject: Re: Monarchy and McCartneyism
Date: 28 Apr 1998 21:10:52 -0400
Organization: Institute for the Human Sciences
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <6i5ums$fuo@panix.com>
References: <353E6BCB.3B28CEEE@bigpond.com> <6hn39k$jhb@axalotl.demon.co.uk> <353FCDD3.4F615CFE@bigpond.com> <3540F012.4C2F@virgin.net> <35412334.485A@virgin.net> <3541B997.19986EE2@bigpond.com> <354240B1.E691F2DE@dolphin.upenn.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panix.nfs100.access.net
In <354240B1.E691F2DE@dolphin.upenn.edu> John Carney writes:
>I am always surprised when sophisticated people dismiss important
>ideas without taking the time to seriously consider them. Monarchy is
>a certainly a serious idea.... Yet very few people today take the time
>to understand the idea of monarchy.
Thanks for going through this stuff.
It's amazing how little anyone knows about monarchism. I did a search
of the electronic Encyclopaedia Britannica and there was almost nothing
on it or related concepts. Current political theorists use
divine-right monarchy as a stock example of weird political ideas
people have had that now seem incomprehensible. The current map of the
political world is missing a whole continent it seems, and most likely
others as well.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Sleep lingers all our lifetime about our eyes, as night hovers all day
in the boughs of the fir-tree." (Emerson)
From jk Mon Apr 27 14:49:15 1998
Subject: Re: Ibn Khaldun and the current situation
To: jw
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 14:49:15 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1084
Status: RO
> How did you happen upon Khaldun?
I had run into his name here and there mentioned in a way that made it
clear that some very intelligent people thought he was one of the very
best political theorists. So when I saw a copy of the abridgement of
the _Muqaddimah_ in a used bookstore a few years ago I bought it and
ended up writing something as a way of clarifying why I thought he was
so important.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Sleep lingers all our lifetime about our eyes, as night hovers all day
in the boughs of the fir-tree." (Emerson)
From jk Tue Apr 28 20:59:57 1998
Subject: Re: Resource List
To: jla
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 20:59:57 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 983
Status: RO
> I'm surprised at your frequent use of Emerson; he wasn't a
> traditionalist conservative in any sense, was he?
Not at all, although one could string together quotes and passages from
his work to produce a traditionalist conservative work. Or any other
kind of work almost.
I quote him because he's a current project. He reached maturity at the
same time as American democracy, and if you want to know something
about this country, what the fundamental issues and problems and
illusions are, he's the one to read. I suppose if you say you're a
Southerner and nothing but then you can ignore him, but otherwise you
have to deal with him. He picks up everything, from his own point of
view of course, but doesn't distort things much especially when you
read all he wrote. Also, he writes beautifully.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Sleep lingers all our lifetime about our eyes, as night hovers all day
in the boughs of the fir-tree." (Emerson)
From jk Wed Apr 29 15:18:21 1998
Subject: Re: Resource List
To: jl
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 15:18:21 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 648
Status: RO
> I've always been attracted to Emerson for his personal qualities
> although, like you, I certainly have trouble with many of his core
> beliefs.
He's such an odd combination of things. His ultimate problem I am
inclined to think is an ethical and religious one. He couldn't quite
give up self-centeredness. In the end he's a dabbler. That's only at
the very end though. By all normal standards he was an extraordinarily
upright, high-minded and disinterested man.
--
Jim Kalb (jk@panix.com and http://www.panix.com/~jk)
"Sleep lingers all our lifetime about our eyes, as night hovers all day
in the boughs of the fir-tree." (Emerson)
Do let me know if you have comments of any kind.
Back to my archive of posts.