Ok

En poursuivant votre navigation sur ce site, vous acceptez l'utilisation de cookies. Ces derniers assurent le bon fonctionnement de nos services. En savoir plus.

lundi, 05 décembre 2016

Carlo Galli - Il nomos della terra di Carl Schmitt

carl-schmitt-nauka-o-konstytucji_WoAP2688.JPG

Carlo Galli - Il nomos della terra di Carl Schmitt

vendredi, 02 décembre 2016

Timo Kölling: Philosophie im Gegenlauf - Leopold Zieglers Kritik der Neuzeit

zieglerleo.jpg

Timo Kölling: Philosophie im Gegenlauf - Leopold Zieglers Kritik der Neuzeit

Der badische Philosoph Leopold Ziegler (1881–1958) gehört zu den weithin vergessenen konservativen Denkern des zwanzigsten Jahrhunderts. Der Heidelberger Philosoph und Dichter Timo Kölling erinnerte am 7. Juli 2016 in der Bibliothek des Konservatismus an den Gelehrten, den Jüngere wie Edgar Julius Jung, Ernst Jünger, Walter Nigg und Frithjof Schuon als Lehrer verehrten. Obgleich ihm die Habilitation und damit eine klassische akademische Laufbahn verwehrt blieben, entfaltete Ziegler eine beachtliche Wirksamkeit, die 1929 in der Verleihung des Goethepreises der Stadt Frankfurt ihren Ausdruck fand.

jeudi, 01 décembre 2016

CARL SCHMITT AND POLITICAL THEOLOGY WITH RICHARD SUBWORTH

Theologie_politique_Carl_Schmitt (1).jpg

CARL SCHMITT AND POLITICAL THEOLOGY WITH RICHARD SUBWORTH

Presseschau Dezember 2016

RMP-3.jpg

Presseschau
Dezember 2016
 
Wieder einige Links. Bei Interesse anklicken...
 
###
 
AUßENPOLITISCHES
 
RT Exklusiv: Assange über die geheime Welt der US-Regierung
 
Beginn eines amerikanischen Albtraums?
 
Trump gewinnt Präsidentschaftswahl
 
Gabriel: Trump schlimmer als Islam
 
(Deutsche Reaktionen…)
US-Wahl
Das große Wehklagen
 
(Ebenfalls zu den Reaktionen der deutschen Journalisten zu Trump…)
Sichere Verlierer: Medien und Demoskopen
Good Night Medien
 
Unser Zwangsfernsehen war laut Forsa und Co. dicht am Wahlergebnis dran
 
New Balance lobt Trump – Kunden verbrennen ihre Sneaker
 
NGO mit Verbindungen zu Clinton und Soros wiegelt zu Anti-Trump-Protesten auf
 
Black Trump Supporter Smacks Down CNN Reporter for Race Baiting
 
The Huffington Post ending editor's note that called Donald Trump 'racist'
 
(Nur hohle Worte…)
Nachgehakt: 23 Stars hatten angekündigt auszuwandern, sollte Trump Präsident werden
 
Ex-Kommunarde über Donald Trump
"Trump ist der erste Internetmensch" - so erklärt Langhans die US-Wahl
 
Richtungswechsel in den USA
Das ist Trumps Wirtschaftsprogramm
 
Die Political Correctness ist am Ende
von Frauke Petry
 
Meinung
Eine Epoche geht zu Ende
von Thomas Fasbender
 
Donald Trump – Alternative für Amerika?
 
Szene-Kaleidoskop III: Bachmann, Trump, Kernschmelze in USA
 
US-Wahl
„Aber Hillary hat doch mehr Stimmen gewonnen!“
von Lukas Mihr
 
Streiflicht
Der Super-GAU für Linke
von Dieter Stein
 
Putin? Merkel? Trump trifft lieber Brexit-Kämpfer Farage
 
Vor dem Hass kommen Verachtung und Ignoranz
Richtigstellung einer verzerrten Kampagne
 
Trump und der Kreml
Der Friede profitiert
von Thomas Fasbender
 
Obama lobt Merkel für ihre „Stärke und Entschlossenheit“
 
Trotz neuer lukrativer Jobs
Ehemalige EU-Kommissare erhalten 100.000 Euro Übergangsgeld
 
EU: Belohnung für Versagen?
Kommissionschef Jean-Claude Juncker erhält eine Gehaltserhöhung in Höhe von 10.362 Euro
 
Schweden baut sich neuen staatlichen Medienkonzern
 
Schluss mit Münzen und Scheinen
Schweden plant digitale Währung
Die schwedische Zentralbank will ihrem Ruf als Vorreiter in der Finanzwelt gerecht werden und plant die Einführung einer Digitalwährung. Der Weg für die E-Krone scheint geebnet.
 
Nach Wetterchaos: Stockholm verteidigt gendergerechtes Schneeräumen
 
Französischer Trump
François Fillon – Stichflamme aus der Tiefe Frankreichs
 
Die EU-Abgeordnete tobt
Großbritannien will Steuern auf Rekordtief senken
 
US-Armee soll Gefangene in Afghanistan gefoltert haben
 
Als syrischer Christ in Deutschland – ein Gespräch mit Kevork Almassian
 
Erdogan droht mit Grenzöffnung
 
Recep Tayyip Erdogan droht mit Öffnung der Grenzen
 
(Dazu ein Kommentar…)
Meinung
Die Supereuropäer pfeifen im Walde
von Thomas Fasbender
 
Notstandsdekret eingesetzt
Erdoğan schließt erneut Zeitungen und Vereine
 
(Überall nur noch sich untereinander streitende "Nazis" und "Rassisten"…)
Nach „Nazi-Herrschaft“-Vorwurf wirft Türkei EU „Rassismus“ vor
 
Südafrika: Oppositionspolitiker fordert Enteignung von Weißen
 
Reaktionen auf Fidel Castros Tod
"Brutaler Diktator, Horror, Exekutions-Kommandos"
Die Welt trauert um Fidel Castro. Vor allem jener Teil, der dem Sozialismus nahesteht. Die pathetischsten Worte findet der griechische Regierungschef Tsipras. Am meisten irritiert der neu gewählte US-Präsident Trump.
 
Fidel Castro und Che Guevara
 

RMP-2.jpg

INNENPOLITISCHES / GESELLSCHAFT / VERGANGENHEITSPOLITIK
 
Zu wenige Rücklagen für viele Sozialversprechen
"Sinkflug Deutschlands hat eingesetzt" - Experten warnen vor Finanzkollaps
 
Deutsche Rentenversicherung
Renten-Rücklage sinkt schneller als angenommen
 
Bundesregierung beschließt Enteignungen im Notfall
 
(Zur politischen Klasse)
Sag beim Abschied leise Servus
 
(Selbstverständnis der politischen Klasse)
Für Demokratie und Teilhabe: seid bereit!
von Michael Paulwitz
 
Frank-Walter Steinmeier
Der Verlegenheitskandidat
von Felix Krautkrämer
 
Wahl des Bundespräsidenten
Berliner Wagenburg
von Michael Paulwitz
 
Bundesregierung
Merkel kandidiert wieder für Kanzleramt
Die Ungewissheit ist beendet: Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel will wieder für den CDU-Vorsitz und das Kanzleramt kandidieren. Geht ihr Plan auf, könnte sie länger regieren als Konrad Adenauer.
 
Merkels Entscheidung – Das richtige Signal in unsicheren Zeiten?
Anne Will: Ich bin genauso das Volk!
 
(Zu Merkel)
Yes, she did it again!
 
Dr. Merkel und das gesammelte Schweigen
Von Heiner Flassbeck
 
Václav Klaus zu Massenmigration, Medien und Merkel: „Deutschland ist das Schlachtfeld Europas!“
 
(Auch ein Grund für die "Refugees Welcome"-Euphorie…)
Spätaussiedler distanzieren sich zunehmend von der Union
Einwanderer bevorzugen linke Parteien
 
(Hirnakrobatik der neuen Berliner Stadtregierung)
Rot-rot-grüne Erziehungsdiktatur
von Michael Paulwitz
 
Baden-Württembergs Innenminister rät von Selbstverteidigung ab
 
Nach Razzia gegen Salafisten
Wendt: „Äußerungen von Frau Özoguz sind grenzenlose Frechheit“
 
Ströbele soll Gauland als Alterspräsident verhindern
Grüne drängen ihren Parteiveteran Ströbele, noch einmal für den Bundestag anzutreten. Seine Mission: AfD-Vize Gauland von der Parlamentseröffnung verdrängen.
 
(Dazu…)
Grüner Ströbele tief im RAF-Sumpf
 
Mecklenburg-Vorpommern: Ein Facebook-Like für die AfD kostet den Ministerjob
Sascha Ott von der CDU wird nicht wie geplant Justizminister. Der Grund: Er hatte auf der Facebook-Seite der AfD Nordwestmecklenburg den Button "Gefällt mir" geklickt.
 
Privatsphäre in Deutschland
Schleichend zum Überwachungsstaat
BND-Gesetz, Vorratsdatenspeicherung, verschlüsselte Dienste wie WhatsApp knacken: In den vergangenen Monaten wurden in Deutschland teils drastische Überwachungsmaßnahmen auf den Weg gebracht.
 
Social Media
Wenn das Netz weiter lügt, ist mit Freiheit Schluss
Von Volker Kauder
 
CDU-Bouillon fordert Überwachung von WhatsApp
 
Volkstrauertag
Gesinnungskitsch
von Thorsten Hinz
 
(bizarr…)
Tipps zur Reinigung und Pflege der Stolpersteine
 
(Clara-Zetkin-Straße in Pirna; Grüne und SPD unterstützen Ehrung für KPD-Politikerin)
Clara bleibt
Vorläufiges Ende um Pirna-Posse
 
LINKE / KAMPF GEGEN RECHTS / ANTIFASCHISMUS / RECHTE
 
RMP-1.jpgKontrakultur Halle: die Gesichter der ersten Reihe
 
SPD-Mann nicht mehr im Landtag
„Endstation Rechts“ und „Storch Heinar“ vor der Pleite
 
Ehemaliges Rote Hilfe-Mitglied
Berliner Bezirksverordnete lassen Drohsel durchfallen
 
Nach Protesten
Innenminister Stahlknecht sagt Teilnahme an Diskussion über Rechtsruck ab
 
(Der "antifaschistisch" orientierte Publizist Butterwegge will Politiker werden…)
Linker Bundespräsidentenkandidat19
Butterwegge sagt Pegida und AfD Kampf an
 
Gleicke warnt vor Schönfärberei der Lage in Ost-Ländern
 
(Projekt Entdeutschung…)
Niedersachsen
Rot-Grün stellt Antrag auf mehrsprachigen Unterricht
 
SPD fordert Toleranzbekenntnis für Bayernhymne
 
Für den Einsatz gegen Kriminalität
Kriminalbeamte zeichnen Amadeu-Antonio-Stiftung aus
 
(Inszenierung des Holocaust gegen FPÖ-Bundespräsidentschaft)
Holocaustüberlebende warnt vor FPÖ-Bundespräsident
 
Trauriger Appell
Mit diesem bewegenden Video will eine 89-Jährige vor einem großen Fehler warnen
 
„Feine Sahne Fischfilet“
WDR bewirbt linksextreme Band
 
Mühlheim
Hintergrund ist Gründung von AfD-Ortsverband
„Bündnis gegen Rechts“ formiert sich
 
Angeblicher Neonazi-Überfall
Linkspartei-Politiker wegen Vortäuschens einer Straftat verurteilt
 
Nach Veröffentlichung von Beleidigung
Facebook sperrt Kolumnistin Anabel Schunke
 
AfD-Schatzmeister in Neukölln
Berliner Schule feuert Lehrer – weil er bei Pegida mitdemonstriert
 
Dresden verbietet Pegida-Chef Bachmann Demo-Leitung
 
Bayern
SPD-Bürgermeisterin feuert Nikolaus wegen Facebook-Like
 
Streiflicht
Soziale Ächtung als Druckmittel
von Dieter Stein
 
Hundertschaft im Einsatz
Linksextremisten behindern Rettungseinsatz
 
(Antidemokratische Gerichtsurteile)
AfD
Plakatzerstörung als Meinungsfreiheit
von Felix Krautkrämer
 
Unterhaching
Mutmaßliche Linksextremisten verwüsten AfD-Büro
 
Mutmaßlicher Linksextremist prügelt AfD-Politiker ins Krankenhaus
 
Frechen: Linksextreme schänden Ehrenmal
 
Berlin
Bekennerschreiben aufgetaucht
Gedenkorte für Kerstin Heisig und Uwe Lieschied geschändet
 
PKK-Ableger
130 Linksextremisten aus Deutschland kämpfen in Syrien
 
EINWANDERUNG / MULTIKULTURELLE GESELLSCHAFT
 
RMP-4.jpgDeutschland zahlt XXL-Flüchtlingsharem 360.000 Euro im Jahr
 
Syrischer Geschäftsmann reist mit vier Ehefrauen und 23 Kindern ein
 
Unterbringung und Betreuung
So viel kostet Deutschland ein Flüchtling
Knapp 900.000 Flüchtlinge sind im Jahr 2015 nach Deutschland gekommen - überwiegend aus Syrien. In diesem Jahr werden weniger als 300.000 Menschen erwartet, die hierzulande Schutz suchen. Besonders die Städte ächzen unter den damit verbundenen Kosten.
 
Hamburg
Flüchtlingshilfe Integration teurer als geplant
 
Polizei enttarnt fast tausend minderjährige Asylbewerber als Erwachsene
 
(Nun Landtags-Beratung…)
Karben
"Flüge schon gebucht"
Schülerin aus Klasse geholt und abgeschoben
 
(Linke Funktionäre sind "geschockt")
Abschiebung aus Schule in Karben
Beuth rechtfertigt Abschiebung
 
Wie SPD, Linke und Grüne Abschiebungen verhindern
 
»Wir haben die Pflicht zu helfen« – Im Gespräch mit Lothar Fritze
 
Gauck in Offenbach
Bundespräsident kommt nach Offenbach
Gauck will mit Schülern über Zusammenleben in Deutschland reden. Der Besuch ist in diesem Jahr schon die zweite hohe Anerkennung für die Integrationsleistung der Stadt.
 
Bundespräsident Gauck in Offenbach
Staatsbesuch in der Hauptstadt der Integration
 
Besuch in Offenbach zum Thema Integration
 
Berlin
Flüchtlingsamt: Mitarbeiter prangern chaotische Zustände an
 
(Der nächste Sympathieträger…)
Firas Alshater macht Videos und hat Buch geschrieben
Vom Flüchtling zum YouTube-Comedian
 
"Islamic State of Germany"
Trump-Lager zeigt islamisches Deutschland
 
Steine auf Polizisten
Ungarn verurteilt illegalen Einwanderer zu zehn Jahren Haft
 
Studie
Islamisten kehren nach Deutschland zurück, „um sich zu erholen“
 
Aus Rücksicht auf moslemische Einwanderer
Immer mehr Schulen in Neuss verbannen Schweinefleisch
 
„Wirtschaftliche Entscheidung“
Woolworth-Filiale räumt Weihnachtsartikel
 
Offenbach
Fraktion forderte Bericht über städtische Einrichtungen
AfD-Vorstoß zu christlichen Traditionen in Kitas abgelehnt
 
Tagen hinter Knastmauern
AfD findet vielerorts keine Versammlungsräume mehr
 
Westen waren keine Uniform
Mitglieder der „Scharia-Polizei“ freigesprochen
 
Islamist schlich sich beim Verfassungsschutz ein
 
(Rassismus gegen Deutsche)
So schlimm war der Rassismus in Deutschland seit 1945 noch nie
 
Gestiegene Kriminalität
Im Westen nichts Neues – oder doch? In den Straßen von Freiburg
 
Sicherheitsvorkehrungen
Mehr Polizisten, Personenkontrollen, Taschenverbote: Weihnachtsmärkte rüsten kräftig auf
 
Verlogene feministische Erklärungsmuster
Zu den Hintergründen von sexuellen Übergriffen
 
(Sexuelle Belästigungen und Polizeiarbeit)
Polizeiermittlungen
„Anzeige bringt nichts“ und: „Ja, wir haben Tat verschwiegen“
von Martina Meckelein
 
Phantombild nach Überfall in der Düsseldorfer Altstadt
Polizei sucht diesen Mann wegen Missbrauchs einer über 80-Jährigen
 
Prozess in Hamburg
Freispruch nach Silvester-Übergriffen: Opfer fühlt sich wehrlos
 
Razzien gegen mutmaßlich kriminelle Tschetschenen
 
Zelle zu klein: Rumänischer Straftäter bleibt in Deutschland
 
Bericht des Justizministeriums
Nordafrikaner beschmieren Haftzellen mit Kot und Blut
 
Brutaler Angriff in Jülich
Familien-Fehde soll Attacke bei Fußballspiel ausgelöst haben
 
Kiel
Türke schlägt Polizisten krankenhausreif – Staatsanwaltschaft sieht keinen Haftgrund
 
(Türkischer Migrationshintergrund)
Düren
Zehn verletzte Polizisten
Gewaltexzess nach Streit über falsch geparktes Auto
 
Niedersachsen
Frau am Strick fast zu Tode geschleift
 
Versuchter Mord
Hameln: Zweijähriger saß mit im Auto
 
("Südländisches Aussehen")
Räuberische Erpressung – Offenbach
 
Angetanzt, begrapscht und bedrängt
Sexuelle Übergriffe bei Jugendfeier in Münchner Rathaus
 
Baby aus Kinderwagen gehoben
Polizei sucht brutalen Räuber
 

RMP-5.jpg

KULTUR / UMWELT / ZEITGEIST / SONSTIGES
 
Erstmalig
Hamburg will Vermieter enteignen und Wohnungen zwangssanieren
 
Meinung
Zwangsbeglücktes Sanieren
von Lukas Steinwandter
 
Mehr gleich besser?
Deutschland verfällt dem Dämmwahn
 
Konflikt
Denkmalschutz kann auch zerstören
Eigentümer historischer Objekte im Raum Höchstadt wollen oder können Auflagen nicht erfüllen und tun nichts für deren Erhalt.
 
(Bundesweite Gefahr von Flächenabrissen)
Historische Fassaden in Pfaffenhofen
Denkmalschützer fürchten um Gesicht der Stadt
In Pfaffenhofen sorgen sich Bürger um historische Fassaden in der Altstadt. Sie befürchten, dass der Denkmalschutz gerade am zentralen Platz, dem Hauptplatz, zunehmend unterlaufen werden könnte. Gefährdet sind historische Fassaden, deren Häuser generalsaniert wurden.
 
Berlin: Rot-Rot-Grün plant deutsch-arabische Schule
 
JF-TV
„Demo für Alle“: Hessische Verhältnisse
 
Badengegangene Bildung Baden-Württemberg
Inklusion statt Bildung: Die Schüler in Brandenburg und Sachsen sind am besten, Bremen und Baden-Württemberg bilden das Schlusslicht. In Brandenburg und Sachsen sitzen kaum Kinder von Einwanderern in den Schulen, in Bremen jedes zweite.
 
(Dazu…)
Sensationsrede des Monats! Linkes Denken ist utopie-besoffen. Jörg Meuthen AFD
 
Bielefeld
9,5 Prozent Wahlbeteiligung
Studentenausschuß fordert Gender-Toiletten
 
Suche nach Gegenstrategie
Evangelische Kirche warnt vor Gender-Gegnern
 
Die Manipulation der Massenmedien
Quer-denken.tv
 
(Thema Ausgrenzung und Medien)
Mit dir tanze ich nicht
von Dieter Stein
 
(PC-Wächter…)
Sprachpolizei warnt vor verbalen Tretminen
von Felix Krautkrämer
 
„Orientierungshilfe für die Praxis“
Österreich: Presserat gibt Tips für Flüchtlings-Berichterstattung
 
Nach Vorwürfen der „Mitschuld“ an Trump-Sieg
Facebook will verstärkt gegen Falschmeldungen vorgehen
 
Christopher Lasch vs. Michael Seemann: Blinde Elite und globale Klasse
 
Strategische Schneisen (1): Entkoppelung
 
Paradigmenwechsel
 
Die Entwicklung einer Wirtschaft der Fürsorge
 
(Deutsche Bischöfe auf dem Tempelberg)
Bekenntnis oder Unterwerfung
von Dieter Stein
 
Warnt vor Rechtspopulismus
EKD-Ratsvorsitzender verteidigt Auftritt ohne Kreuz
 
An der Schlosskirche in Wittenberg
Dänischer Künstler klebt seinen Penis an Luthers Thesen-Tür
 
Bremer Kirche
Muezzin soll mit „Allahu Akbar“ christlichen Gottesdienst eröffnen
 
Muslimas als Zielgruppe
Dolce & Gabbana bringt Luxus-Kopftücher für Muslimas auf den Markt. Das Thema schlägt hohe Wellen – haben Modelabels einen neuen Markt gefunden? Noch zeigen sich Fashion-Häuser zögerlich.
 
Niederlande
Angebliches Rassismus-Symbol
200 Festnahmen bei Protesten gegen „Zwarten Pieten“
 
(Seichte Beruhigungs-Komödie…)
Komödie "Willkommen bei den Hartmanns"
Ziemlich beste Flüchtlingsfreunde
Der Regisseur Simon Verhoeven präsentiert in "Willkommen bei den Hartmanns" eine Kinokomödie zur deutschen Flüchtlingskrise - mit viel Krawall und ein paar bizarren Fehlgriffen, aber ehrfurchtgebietendem Mut zur politischen Aktualität.
 
Pöbeln bis der Arzt kommt
Stark zunehmende Gewalt in Notaufnahmen
 
(Dazu…)
Gewalt in den Notaufnahmen
Kommentar zur Gewalt in den Notaufnahmen
 
Maler Gerhard Richter rechnet mit Merkels Flüchtlingspolitik ab
 
(Neue Prüderie)
Babenhausen
Kunst wird aus Rathaus verbannt
Ist dieses Bild „potenziell frauenfeindlich“?
 
Trug sie es für Adolf Hitler?
Eva Brauns Höschen versteigert
 
Zika-Virus: Grünes Licht für Freilandtest mit Gentechnik-Mücken in Florida
 
Schmelzende Eisdecke könnte Schadstoffe aus dem Kalten Krieg freilegen
In den 60er Jahre wurde in Grönland ein militärischer Stützpunkt unter dem Eis aufgegeben. Eine internationale Studie mit Beteiligung der Universität Zürich zeigt nun: Durch den Klimawandel könnten gefährliche Abfallstoffe wieder an die Oberfläche gelangen, die eigentlich als für immer unter dem Eisschild begraben betrachtet wurden.
 
Schutz der Meere
Barbara Meier taucht nach Geisternetzen
Berlin - Ungewohntes Terrain für Barbara Meier (30): Das Model hat den Laufsteg gegen die Schiffsplanke und das Abendkleid gegen den Taucheranzug getauscht und alte und kaputte Fischernetze aus der Ostsee geholt.
 

dimanche, 27 novembre 2016

Konrad Adam: Volksparteien ohne Volk (JF-TV Direkt)

konrad-adam.jpg

Konrad Adam: Volksparteien ohne Volk (JF-TV Direkt)

JF-TV Direkt: Dieter Stein im Gespräch mit Dr. Konrad Adam. "Volksparteien ohne Volk - Thesen zur politischen Lage", am JF-Stand auf der Frankfurter Buchmesse 2016.

 

mardi, 22 novembre 2016

The Willful State: Frederick the Great’s Report on the Prussian Government

koenigs-image--1-_620x349.jpg

The Willful State:
Frederick the Great’s Report on the Prussian Government

Frederick the Great
Exposé du gouvernement prussien, des principes sur lesquels il roule, avec quelques réflexions politiques
Berlin, 1775-1776[1]

One often encounters people who have no faith in the ability of a small nation to achieve anything worthwhile.[2] Yet one typically does not have the luxury of choice. One may prefer to live in a large and populous country, but in any event one must work with what one has. Furthermore, the fact is that small states can and do on occasion “punch above their weight” and influence the course of history. In support of the proposition that even the smallest of nations may dare to be ambitious, I give a most powerful example: the Kingdom of Prussia.

When Frederick the Great became King of Prussia in 1740, the population of his little north German realm numbered just over 2 million. This was only a third of the population of England, itself a rather small European power, and Frederick’s kingdom did not enjoy the protection of the English Channel. Instead, Prussia, also a land poor in natural resources, was protected solely by the sheer will to organize all of the little state’s means into the mightiest army possible. The gambles were huge, the threats of annihilation repeated, and yet through it all it was little Prussia which emerged victorious. The machine set in march by Frederick would double in population by the conquest of Silesia and, a century later, give Bismarck the means to unite Germany. Thus Prussia shows how a small principality may become the greatest of European powers.

The lessons of Prussian statecraft are then of interest to all those, be they leaders or citizens of nations great or small, who wish to maximize their potential and fulfill a great project. How did Frederick go about building his machine of state? For this, we may turn to the Great King himself, for he was a prolific writer. In the mid-1770s, he wrote a private[3] Report on the Prussian Government, on the Principles on Which It Operates, with some Political Reflections. The work, as so often with Frederick, is of an admirable lucidity and clarity. I will provide an overview of the Report, which apparently has never been published in English, with translations of substantial passages.

Frederick argues for a unitary state in which all the branches of government — military, budgetary, and political (under which he refers exclusively to foreign policy) — are continuously and harmoniously united towards a single goal. For the insecure Prussia of Frederick’s day, that goal was above all maintaining military preparedness and a “rainy day” war-chest, to both guarantee the state’s security and seize any opportunities which, by the vagaries of international politics, should present themselves. Frederick asserts that the prince must himself give the example, carefully monitoring all aspects of his state’s operation and personally ensuring that military merit is honored above money. Good manners must be promoted among the citizens and fertility encouraged. Above all else, one must concentrate one’s efforts on the decisive, always being thrifty, and not wasting resources on side-projects. The bolder one’s enterprises, the greater the gains.

In short, Frederick’s politics are the antithesis to the bourgeois democratic politics we have grown used to in the postwar era. We may say that Western politics have tended to be ever-more obsessed with materialist consumerism (welfare, purchasing power, GDP; and our politicians even fail to deliver these) and egalitarian “victimocracy” (symbolic and real spoils for various aggrieved groups, namely ethnic minorities, sexual minorities, and women). In both cases, individual and sectional interests are taken as the frame reference, rather than the interests of the community as a whole.

Finances: Frugality Above All

Frederick begins: “To have a general idea of this government, one must examine in detail all the government’s branches, and then combine them together.” These branches are finances, the military, and international politics/foreign policy (la politique). Frederick emphasizes the importance of the budget, which he often compares to an organism’s nervous system: “I begin by finances, which are like the sinews of the human body, which move all its members.”[4] Public finances should be as frugal as possible — notwithstanding spending on fortifications, infrastructure, and foreign allies — so as to amass a healthy war chest that can last until peace is signed:

But one must remark that if we draw all extraordinary war funds from the treasury, we will last only four campaigns, which means that by necessity we must take hold of Saxony, husband as best we can the treasury, which must specifically only serve to fill the emptiness of a few provinces invaded by the enemy. Here is the bottom of things, which shows that one must practice the greatest economy to have the last écu[5] in one’s pocket when one negotiates the peace.

Frederick argues that a substantial budget surplus is justified economically because Prussia had a trade surplus twice as big, thus money was still entering circulation. This surplus, which the Germans do seem to have a knack for, was achieved thanks to “establishing many manufactures, and especially with the help of Silesia.” Frederick emphasizes the need for the most careful monitoring of public spending:

This is why one must not lose sight of manufactures: though them, this [trade] balance can still be increased in our current possession by some hundred thousand écus. But what is important above all is to conserve the good order now established in  the management of public monies and the supervision of all funds; without which the people pays very much, and the sovereign is robbed.

Thanks to this thriftiness, Prussia then had enough money for four military campaigns and enough grain for three, including purchases from Poland.

zvezda-zv-8071.jpg

Military Affairs: Preparedness & Honor

Frederick’s description of the Prussian army is worth quoting at length. He argues that Prussia’s militarization is warranted given her insecure geographical position and the size of her neighbors. The Prussian army, based (after the conquest of Silesia) on a country of 5.2 million, was by no means large compared to its neighbors’. Frederick argues then that Prussia can only distinguish itself militarily by the quality and discipline of its armed forces. The commander-in-chief himself must personally give the example “or all is lost” for the little country. Frederick strikes a decidedly conservative note, arguing that if aristocratic officers should prove inadequate, “the recourse to commoners, would be the first step towards the decline and fall of the army.”

ON THE ARMY.

The situation of this State forces us to maintain many troops, because our neighbors are Austria, Russia, France, and Sweden. The war-footing numbers 220,000 men, including the freelance battalions and the increase in cavalry. From this number we will be able to campaign with 180,000 men; but as soon as we need to form three armies, it becomes quite apparent that we do not have many compared to our neighbors. I believe that discipline must remain on the current footing, as must the introduced reforms, unless war should change, because then one may only side with adapting to circumstances and to change with them; but to equal our enemies or surpass them, one needs to do so through order and discipline, to encourage the officers to distinguish themselves, so that a noble emulation encourages them to surpass the enemies they must fight. If the sovereign does not himself get involved in military affairs, if he does not give the example, all is lost.  If one prefers courtly layabouts [fainéants de cour] to military affairs, one will see that the entire world will prefer this laziness to the strenuous military profession, and then, instead of our officers being nobles, we will have to have recourse to the commoners, which would be the first step towards the decline [décadence] and fall of the army. We have at present only 70 citizens[6] per company; one must not stray from this principle, to husband the country, which, by the increase in population, will be able to furnish resources or recruits, if war makes it necessary. [. . .] Our population counts 5.2 million souls, of which about 90,000 are soldiers. This proportion may suffice; but one must not take from the cantons more than 840 for each infantry regime and 400 for each cavalry regiment.

Foreign Policy: The Art of Opportunity

Frederick then writes very cogently on foreign policy under the heading “la politique.” This puts the Prussian military theorist Carl von Clausewitz’s later famous definition of war as “politics by other means” in an interesting light. In his great work On War, Clausewitz rarely discusses politics as such but it seems he too supported the primacy of foreign policy, which is to say the overriding interest of the state in maintaining its own existence and security, over liberal and constitutional niceties.[7]

Frederick clearly takes an unsentimental view of international relations as Realpolitik. The goal is to ensure the security of the state, this means: maintaining good relations and an alliance with the state which can most harm us (in this case Russia), acquiring more secure borders (by annexing Saxony as buffer territory), and being ever-prepared so as to be able to seize any unforeseeable opportunities to reach this goal. Frederick emphasizes caution however: given the country’s limited resources, war should only be pursued if there really is something to be gained, one must not overextend one’s territory to indefensible borders, and one must use both modesty and secrecy so as to not disturb the European balance of power and stoke general hostility against us.

ON POLITICS.

One of the first principles of politics is to work to ally oneself with whoever among our neighbors can inflict the most dangerous blows against the State. It is for this reason that we are allied with Russia, because it frees up our back concerning Prussia,[8] and that, as long as this relationship lasts, we have need not fear that Sweden will dare to attack in Pomerania. The times may change, the strangeness of circumstances can force us to take other commitments; but never will we find with the other powers the equivalent of the advantages that we find with Russia. The French troops are worth nothing, and the French are used to only feebly assisting their allies; and the English, made for paying subsidies, sacrifice their allies, to the peace, to favor their own interests. I do not speak of the house of Austria, with which it seems almost impossible to form solid bonds. Concerning the political prospects for acquisitions appropriate for this monarchy, the States of Saxony are indisputably those which would be the most appropriate, by rounding it off and forming a barrier by the mountains which separate Saxony from Bohemia, and which would need to be fortified. It is difficult to foresee how this acquisition could be made. The surest way would be to conquer Bohemia and Moravia, and to trade them for Saxony; or finally that this could be done by other trades either of the Rhenish possessions, adding Juliers or Berg, or by any other way that it could be done. This acquisition is an indispensable necessity to give this State the consistency which it lacks. For, as soon as we are at war, the enemy can march directly to Berlin without finding the slightest opposition on his path. I do not speak of the rights of succession in the countries of Ansbach, Juliers and Berg, and Mecklenburg, because these claims are known, and one must wait for their occurrence. As the State is not rich, we must take care above all else to not get involved in wars where there is nothing to be gained, because one exhausts oneself at a pure loss, and when a good opportunity follows, one cannot take advantage of it. All distant acquisitions are a burden to a State. A village on the border is worth more than a principality 60 leagues away. It is a necessary measure to hide as much as possible these schemes of ambition, and, if one can, to awaken Europe’s envy against other powers, on the occasion of which one strikes one’s blow. This can occur, and the house of Austria, whose ambition goes unconcealed, will needlessly attract the envy and jealousy of the great powers. Secrecy is an essential virtue for politics as well as for the art of war.

preugren.jpgI note with amusement the statements on the value of a Russian alliance, the unreliability of a French guarantee, and the perfidy of Albion, observations which would no doubt resonate with many people in later centuries. Plus ça change !

Frederick briefly discusses the laws of Prussia [2], describing them as “fairly wisely made.” He argues no changes are needed, but that there must be regular visits to provincial courts to punish malfeasance, for “the parties and the lawyers work to elude the best laws.” There should also be a review every 20 years to ensure the appeals process is not abused through endless trials. These highlight the importance of regular, mindful care for one’s state.

Harmonious Government: All Branches Working Towards the Same Goal

Frederick then discusses finances, the military, and foreign policy as forming the coherent whole which government must be. He again emphasizes frugality and a healthy war chest:

TOTAL COMBINATION OF GOVERNMENT.

Given that the country is poor, and has no resources, it is necessary for the sovereign to always have a well-furnished treasury, to bear at least a few campaigns. The only resources which he may find when in need consist of a loan of 5 million from the Landschaft [a bank decreed by Frederick, made up of noblemen, allowing the state to borrow from the Prussian population itself], and about 4 million which he can draw from the bank; but that is all.

Public money, he says, should be spent on various development projects such as fortresses, manufactures, or infrastructure “in order to make the State’s constitution more solid.”

The sovereign should then be frugal with his subjects’ blood and treasure. He must himself be an example of rectitude, or his subjects will also become wasteful. Frederick emphasizes “especially” the maintenance of good morals, which can only be achieved if the power of money is kept in check. It must be impossible for the wealthy to buy honors, as they do in France. Frederick advocates a muscular natalism in order to produce more citizens and soldiers:

These reasons which I have just put forward demand that this country’s sovereign be economical and a man who maintains the greatest order in his affairs. An equally valid reason as the first is also joined to this: it is that if he gives the example of profusion, his subjects, who are poor, want to imitate him, and ruin themselves. One must especially, to support manners, grant distinctions only according to merit and not for wealth; the poor observation of this principle in France has meant the loss of the of the nation’s manners, which previously knew only the path of honor to achieve glory, and which believes at present that it is enough to be rich to be honored. As the wars are an abyss into which men fall, one must be watchful that this country be as peopled as possible, from which another good results, which is that the countryside is better cultivated and landowners are more at ease.

Frederick denies the utility of a navy for Prussia for this would divide the country’s efforts and anyway be too small to be useful. Instead, one should concentrate one’s efforts on the most decisive point, in this case the army:

I do not believe that this country should ever be persuaded to form a military navy. Here are the reasons. There are in Europe great navies, that is: that of England, those of France, Spain, Denmark, and Russia. Never will we be able to equal them; hence, with a few ships, remaining always inferior to other nations, the expense would be useless. Add to this that, to maintain a fleet, the money this would cost would force us to reform land troops, that this country is not sufficiently populated to provide recruits for the army and sailors for ships, and finally, that sea battles are rarely decisive; from which I conclude that it is better to have the best army in Europe than the worst fleet of the maritime powers.

Frederick argues that policy must “look as far as possible into the future” but recognizes that unforeseen circumstances will always arise. As such, the best one can do is to be ever-prepared so as to be able seize opportunities. Interestingly, Frederick explicitly affirms that political control of the military must serve to radicalize warfare to ensure it reaches the given political objectives: “War itself must be conducted according the principles of policy, to inflict the bloodiest blows against one’s enemies.” Frederick advises great enterprises, even if these are risky, rather than wars for trifling objectives:

Policy must look ahead as far as possible into the future, and judge the circumstances of Europe, either to form alliances, or to counter the projects of one’s enemies. One must not believe that it can bring about events; but when these present themselves, it must seize them to take advantage of them. That is why finances must be in order. It is for this reason that there must be money saved up, so that the government is ready to act as soon as political reasons indicate the moment. War itself must be conducted according the principles of policy, to inflict the bloodiest blows against one’s enemies. It was according to these principles which prince Eugene [of Savoy, an Austrian commander] acted, he who made his name immortal by the march and the battle of Turin, by those of Höchstädt and of Belgrade. These great projects of the campaign do not all succeed; but when they are vast, there always results more advantages than by these little projects where one limits oneself to taking an insignificant town [bicoque] on the border. That is how the count [Maurice] of Saxony [a French commander] gave battle at Rocoux to be able to execute the winter according to his designs upon Brussels, which succeeded.

potsdam___sanssouci_park_by_pingallery-d3jniwc.jpg

Frederick stresses that foreign policy, the military, and finances must form a coherent whole. Otherwise they are vain, as in the case of France, which as Europe’s largest state could afford to become flabby and incoherent. Prussia did not have this luxury:

It is obvious that, from all that I have just said, that policy, the military, and finances are branches which are so tightly bound together, that they cannot be separated. One must carry them out all at once, and by their combination, subject to the rules of good policy, there results the greatest advantages for the State. In France, there is a king which manages each branch separately. There is a minister who presides, either to finances, to war, or to foreign affairs. But the rallying point is lacking, and these branches, not being united, diverge, and the ministers are each busy with only the details of their department, without anyone uniting the objects of their works to one fixed goal. If such a thing happened in this State [Prussia], it would be lost, because great monarchies go on despite excesses, and support themselves by their weight and intrinsic strength, and small States are soon crushed, if all in them is not strength, life, and vigor.

Frederick concludes that a small and insecure state such as Prussia must always be led by a watchful prince:

Here are a few reflections and my ideas on the government of this country, which, so long as it has not taken greater consistency and better borders, must be governed by princes who are always watchful, ears pricked, to observe their neighbors, ready to defend themselves from one day to the next against the pernicious projects of their enemies.

Conclusion: Power Through Will

Of Western and European states today, only the United States of America and the Russian Federation can be considered even moderately “big” in a world in which we face China’s 1.4 billion, India’s 1.25 billion, and, in another mode, the endless hordes to come from an Africa destined to number 4 billion this century [3]. Furthermore, any European-American successor states to the current U.S.A. would likely number around 150 million. Frederick’s directives for maximizing the power of small states through a frugal and martial government, characterized above all by a coherent will, are then very relevant to us.

The Greater-European World is made up dozens of states, each of which could, under enlightened leadership, work for the salvation of our people. The means of a small state are necessarily modest, but let no one say that these are worthless. Prussia began as a small enterprise. But by the luck of having successive great princes, a political “germ-cell” was set, the logic of which was favorable to growth, turning a minor principality of 2 million into a Great Power of 5 million, and then into a united Germany preeminent on the Continent, fit for two awesome bids for regional hegemony. The example of Prussia shows that even small states, when armed with unity and will, can maximize their potential and, when the stars align, achieve wonders.

Times have changed since Frederick’s. We, for the most part, do not need to be so mindful of military security as in the past. Indeed, most traditional military conflict in our lands, lamentably, is intra-European. The inherent disorganization of the Third World, nuclear weapons, and the diminishing returns of military occupation in the modern era mean that there are few conventional threats to our security.[9] The Western World’s conflicts with the Arab nations and Iran, far from being motivated by any objective threat, have largely been driven by a hypertrophied U.S. imperial establishment and the malignant influence of the Israel Lobby in Washington, Paris, and London.

The lasting insight in Frederick’s Report on the Prussian Government is the need for a coherent will: that government should concentrate on its core objectives, that all the parts work in harmony towards this, and that this will be steadily maintained over long periods of time. Frederick’s goal was the security of his state and as such he concentrated on maximizing military capability and constant readiness to seize opportunities in foreign affairs. Other objectives may be served by these Prussian virtues: constant mindfulness, frugality, preparation, and setting a good example for one’s citizens.

Frederick emphasizes the importance in politics of encouraging family-formation and maintaining public morals, which is to say shape the society’s culture and enforce positive social norms. The nation and state must always be carefully tended and cultivated that it, like a beautiful garden, flourish and grow. Frederick organized his entire state towards the goal of military power and security. Perhaps we may say that the endangered Europeans of today must similarly organize their states, through systematic cultural and population policies, towards the goals of demographic expansion, genetic quality, and unity within our great family of nations.[10]

Frederick’s patriotic prince can in our times seem something like an alien. We have grown used to living under governments dedicated above all to individual caprice and equalizing victimhood. Our people are so demoralized, that even the idea that our men and women, especially the best of them, should be expected and encouraged to raise children is considered outright offensive by many. Frederick shows that such misguided doctrines do not favor national survival.

We are used to “politics” meaning only more-or-less loathed electoral politicians winning office by publicly pandering to the mob’s bottomless appetite for consumerism and narrow sectional interests, while actually serving the hostile, increasingly post-national oligarchs who finance their political parties and control the mass media who significantly determine the public’s views. In Frederick’s time, the manners of the average citizen, be he farmer, burgher, or nobleman, were shaped by a hard life, national laws, and a state church. Today, besides the general slouching, the education of the youth and the public at large is largely left, to a small, rootless international clique of media moguls, from Carlos Slim and Rupert Murdoch, to Michael Eisner and Sumner Redstone. These men pursue their particular financial, ideological, and ethnic[11] interests, rather than the national good.

This is not inevitable however. At the close of Frederick’s reign, the population of Prussia approached that of England. The two countries in later centuries would enjoy similar rises in power and greatness. We may say that Anglo-America is what northern Europeans tend to when plenty and security afford them the luxury of individualism and egalitarianism. Prussia is what northern Europeans tend to when, driven by poverty and insecurity, they must organize and discipline themselves for collective survival.

The European peoples, we can be sure, will suffer ever-greater insecurity in the twenty-first century with their dwindling numbers, their swamping by outsiders, and the rise of Asia and Africa. By this suffering, the Europeans will painfully learn from their mistakes and again know the true worth of things. No doubt, we will see Prussians again.

In the twentieth century, the logic of Europe and the West had been one of unbridled expansion. From a small appendage of Eurasia, we burst forth and conquered virtually the entire world and multiplied to become a full third of humanity. Since the catastrophic world wars, we have been in headlong decline and, in time, we will have lost not merely our empires, but of even our own historic homelands. By the end of this century, we will be lucky if we still make up 5 percent of humanity. We must arrest our decline by again establishing, by will and discipline, a logic of expansion. The Great King provides us with a powerful model. Every European nation must play its part.

grabfriedrich.jpg

Notes

1. As published in Johann Preuss (ed.), Œuvres de Frédéric le Grand, vol. 9 (Berlin: Royal Printer, 1848), pp. 209-220. http://friedrich.uni-trier.de/fr/oeuvres/9/toc/ [4]

2. On the recurring controversy concerning pan-European political unity: small states’ options and character are indeed, in the long run, generally determined by great geopolitical blocs and empires, often of a continental scale. But it is also true that the larger a polity is, the less cohesive and coherent it is likely to be. In any event, one must not confuse a unitary empire with a multinational and multistatal confederation. The latter is necessarily prone to impotence as each state holds a de facto and/or de jure veto and each nation does not identify with the others. Thus, while a confederation may be a useful thing, one should not place exaggerated hopes in it or believe this to be the critical locus of politics. The locus of politics is always the actual sovereign. Nationalists understand the sovereign acting through the nation-state: mass consciousness is only possible in a nation; political action is only possible through a state. An empire may or may not be preferable, but that is always founded through the spilling of blood, never by signing bits of paper. For the truth of this, I refer you to the history of the United States before Lincoln, of the German Confederation before Bismarck, of Austria-Hungary, Canada, Belgium, and the European Union. (Concerning the latter two, there has been amusing example of paralysis in recent weeks as the region of Wallonia vetoed Belgian support for a major EU-Canada free trade agreement. Thus multinational polities were leading to vetocracy squared: Wallonia vetoed Belgian policy, and Belgium vetoed EU policy. And yet, one finds a thousand people in the political mainstream who believe the permanently paralyzed EU is the primary answer to European decline . . .) I also, again, direct you the very eloquent statements explicating these matters in De Gaulle’s press conferences and Hitler’s Second Book.

3. That it remained unpublished during his lifetime is unsurprising: Frederick is quite frank about his coveting neighboring Saxony in order have more buffer territory on his vulnerable southern border. These ambitions, he insisted, had to remain secret. Prussia would indeed acquire 40 percent of Saxon territory at the Congress of Vienna in 1815.

4. I would add that finance and culture can be said to make up an entire society’s nervous system. Which begs the question: what does it mean if a particular ethnic group, especially if hostile to the majority, achieves commanding influence in a society’s financial and cultural institutions?

In the natural world, the principles and examples [5] from which should always be in our minds, we observe Ophiocordyceps unilateralis, a parasitic fungus able to hijack ants’ behavioural system and turn them into “zombie ants.” According to Wikipedia:

Infected hosts leave their canopy nests and foraging trails for the forest floor, an area with a temperature and humidity suitable for fungal growth; they then use their mandibles to affix themselves to a major vein on the underside of a leaf, where the host remains until its eventual death. The process leading to mortality takes 4–10 days, and includes a reproductive stage where fruiting bodies grow from the ant’s head, rupturing to release the fungus’s spores.

5. An archaic French currency.

6. Presumably Bürger commoners.

7. Certainly, the continued existence of the state is a sine qua non of any policy, but we as nationalists add: policy must serve the existence and cultivation of the people from which the state derives.

8. Here, presumably meaning East Prussia.

9. There are exceptions obviously: Turkey is a threat to Greece, and China is a threat to Russia. In the long term, we also cannot exclude that Africa’s population explosion will eventually form a conventional military threat. What would a Spain reduced to aged pensioners and effeminate young leftists be able to oppose to a few million Islamized Africans led marching upon Europe, no doubt led, according to their genius, by a new Mahdi or General Butt Naked?

10. I observe one prominent “willful state” active in the world today: the Jewish State of Israel. This country has, through a cross-partisan political and social consensus, consistently pursued policies of demographic and territorial expansion, for the security and power of the Jewish people and against the Arabs, whom Orthodox Jewish consider subhuman. The Jews’ fertility rate in Israel is now well above replacement with over 3 children per woman, equaling the Arab rate. (Admittedly, Israel has been successful in large part thanks to its diplomatic and financial parasitism upon the Western nations, to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of European lives, through the tireless efforts of the Jewish-Zionist lobby. But that is but another example successful ethnic activism, only possible because we are not yet ethnically organized.)

11. Unless, obviously, they are of European descent . . .

Article printed from Counter-Currents Publishing: http://www.counter-currents.com

URL to article: http://www.counter-currents.com/2016/11/the-willful-state/

URLs in this post:

[1] Image: http://www.counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Frederick_the_Great_after_the_Battle_of_Kolin_by_Julius_Schrader.jpg

[2] the laws of Prussia: http://www.counter-currents.com/2016/11/enlightened-patriarchy-part-1/

[3] an Africa destined to number 4 billion this century: http://www.unz.com/isteve/the-worlds-most-important-graph/

[4] http://friedrich.uni-trier.de/fr/oeuvres/9/toc/: http://friedrich.uni-trier.de/fr/oeuvres/9/toc/

[5] examples: https://twitter.com/natureisscary

 

lundi, 21 novembre 2016

Wyndham Lewis, Ernst Jünger & Italian Futurism - Paul Bingham

Lewis-Wyndham-Red-Duet-1914.jpg

Wyndham Lewis, Ernst Jünger & Italian Futurism - Paul Bingham

Robert Stark and co-host Alex von Goldstein talk to Paul Bingham. This show is a continuation of our discussion about Aleister Crowley and Aristocratic Individualism



Topics include:

How Wyndham Lewis, Ernst Jünger, Aleister Crowley, and the Italian Futurist, were individuals who existed outside the liberal reactionary/traditionalist paradigm, and viewed the world in a realist way unbiased by ideology
The cult of Positivism
Italian Futurism, how it was marginalized due to it’s ties to Mussolini, but made a major impact on the arts
How Ayn Rand was influenced by Italian Futurism
Robert Stark’s talk with Rabbit about Italian Futurism
Wynham Lewis’s Vorticist movement, his magazine Blast, and his Rebel Art Centre
The philosophy of the Vortex, which views everything as energy constantly in motion
The rivalry between Italian Futurist Filippo Marinetti and Wyndham Lewis, and how Lewis critiqued Italian Futurism for putting to much emphasis on technology
Wynham Lewis’s The Art of Being Ruled, which made the case that the artist was the best to rule, and that capitalism and liberal democracy suppressed genuine cultural elites
How the book addresses Transsexualism, and anthropological findings on the Third Sex
Kerry Bolton’s essay on Wyndham Lewis
Lewis’s relationship with fascism, how he published the book Hitler (1931), which presented Adolf Hitler as a “man of peace,” but latter wrote an attack on antisemitism: The Jews, are they human?( 1939)
The influence of war and violence on Italian Futurism
The Manifesto of Futurism
The Futurist Cookbook
Futurism is about testing what works, and rejecting traditions that don’t work
The futurist believed that every generation should create their own city, and futurist Antonio Sant’Elia’s Plan for Città Nuova (“New City”)
Paul worked on a book that was never published, “The Motor City and the Zombie Apocalypse,” about how the motor city is incompatible with human nature
The effects of global technological materialism on culture, and how technology needs the right people and culture to work
Jean Baudrillard point that the Italians have the best symbiosis between culture and technological progress
The Transhumanist concept of Cybernetics, which is rewiring the brain, and how the futurist used poetry as a precursor to cybernetics
Paul’s point that futurist movements such as cyberpunk, and Neoreaction are more focused on Live action role-playing, but are not serious about pushing the limits
The intellectual and transcendental value of LSD and DMT, Ernst Jünger’s experimentation with acid, but they are only effective if the right people use them
Paul’s point that the only real futurist are underground, and experimenting in third world countries
Aristocratic individualism, and Paul’s opinion that Ernst Jünger is the best example, and Jünger’s concept of the Anarch
Ernst Jünger’s science fiction novel The Glass Bees
Ernst Jünger’s “The Worker”

mercredi, 16 novembre 2016

Enlightened Patriarchy: Frederick the Great’s Principles of Lawmaking

friedII.jpg

Enlightened Patriarchy:
Frederick the Great’s Principles of Lawmaking

Perhaps the most impressive Western tradition of statecraft, at least in the modern era, is that of Prussia. To be sure, the liberal-democratic tradition launched by the United States [2] and France is formidable, and it is not without reason that it today dominates our world. But the greatness of America and France also relied upon a prosaic factor: sheer demographic and geographic size. Little Prussia in contrast accomplished feats with absolutely miserable resources, raising herself up among the great powers and founding the German nation-state through sheer force of will. The Prussian “authoritarian” tradition, with its emphasis on hierarchy, community, and martial prowess, is then a useful counterpoise to the liberal-democratic one we take for granted today. Clausewitz and Carl Schmitt must be read beside Jefferson and Tocqueville [3].[1]

The most illustrious of all the Prussian leaders was Frederick the Great, a great political reformer and military commander who also cultivated a reputation as a philosophical thinker in his own right. Given how rare it is for generals and politicians to be particularly thoughtful, Frederick the Great merits all the more to be read by young Westerners in search of their heritage and a usable past. I propose then a reading of some of Frederick’s quite substantial philosophical and political writings.

Frederick’s Dissertation on the Reasons to Establish or Abrogate the Laws (Dissertation sur les raisons d’établir ou d’abroger les lois, 1750),[2] written after a decade in power and the hard-won conquest of Silesia, is admirably clear in its writing (how rare that can be!) and showcases wide reading and historical knowledge.[3] Many of Frederick’s themes and arguments retain all their relevance to this day. As this text is apparently unavailable in English, I will quote from it at length.[4] Unusually for a reigning monarch, the Dissertation was made public, thus showcasing the King’s philosophical credentials and stirring European debate.

Frederick’s ideal government is an enlightened patriarchy. He notes that “family fathers” have played an enormous role in the law throughout history, both as lawmakers and as legal masters of the household. For Frederick, the laws should serve to shape custom and enforce public morals, with the interests of the community overriding those of individuals. But this firm law must also be humane, rational, and moderate. Social conventions should be examined in this light and reformed accordingly. Frederick concludes with two proposals as examples: ending the stigma of bastardy, so as to prevent illegal abortions leading to the deaths of both the bastard and the mother, and a pan-European ban on dueling, the latter often causing the death of valuable citizens.

To know how to make laws, the practical Frederick advises looking to history:

Those who wish to acquire an exact knowledge of the way in which the laws must be established and abrogated can only look to history. We see there that all nations have had particular laws, that these laws were established in succession, and that much time has always been necessary for men to reach something reasonable. We see there that the legislators whose laws have lasted the longest are those who had as their goal public happiness, and who best knew the genius of the people whose government they regulated.

According to Frederick then, history teaches that the establishment of good laws requires patience, public-spiritedness, and harmony with “the genius of people,” which might also be termed national character. He shows an optimistic faith in reason typical of the Enlightenment: men require time to establish good laws, but once reached, these tend to spread. This accounts for the pervasiveness of Roman law: “These laws were found to be so admirable that after the destruction of the empire, they were embraced by the most civilized peoples.”

Frederick’s Dissertation provides a fairly impressive overview of the evolution of law from ancient to modern times, covering the Ancient Egyptians, Greeks, Romans and the modern European nations of England, France, and Germany. He draws from numerous sources, mentioned in the marginalia, including Herodotus, Plutarch, Livy, Cicero, and Tacitus for the Ancients and mainly French historians for the Moderns.

Frederick’s highlights from this enormous historical period are obviously not disinterested. These generally could be considered to subtly reinforce his position as an “enlightened despot” and pragmatic reformer, particularly interested in maximizing his state’s population and military power. In addition to “family fathers,” Frederick places a strong emphasis on the role of religion and, interestingly, usury in the development of the law. Hence, he expounds at length on Sparta, a martial state to which Prussia was often compared:

Lycurgus, king of Lacedaemon, used the laws of Minos, to which he added some of Osiris, which he collected himself from a journey he made to Egypt; he banished gold from his republic, silver, all sorts of currencies, and superfluous arts; he equally shared lands among the citizens.

This legislator, who intended to shape warriors, did not want any sort of passion to weaken their courage; he allowed for this effect the community of wives among citizens, which peopled the State, without excessively attaching private citizens to the sweet and tender bonds of marriage; all children were raised at public expense. When parents could prove that their children were born unhealthy, they were permitted to kill them. Lycurgus believed that a man who was not fit to bear arms did not deserve to live.

He ruled that helots, a kind of slave, would cultivate the soils, and that the Spartans would only busy themselves with the exercises which would render them fit for war.

The youth of both sexes wrestled; they exercised completely naked, in the public square.

Meals were regulated, where, without distinction of orders, all citizens ate together.

It was forbidden for foreigners to stay in Sparta, in order that their manners not corrupt those which Lycurgus had introduced.

Incompetent thieves were punished. Lycurgus had the intention of forming a military republic, and he succeeded in this.

The Aim of Law: Good Manners & Public Safety

csm_6.5_2dd71daf9a.jpgFrederick asserts that laws should aim to promote “[g]ood manners and public safety.” He is enormously concerned with civil peace, saying French chancellor Michel de l’Hôpital’s efforts to increase tolerance and defuse tensions between Catholics and Protestants during the Wars of Religion “worked for the salvation of the fatherland.” Laws may deal with politics (government), manners (criminal), and civil matters (contracts, usury).

But for Frederick, laws do not merely have the negative goal of suppressing crime and instability, but also the positive one of fostering good habits. Hence the laws have an important cultural role. He says “the laws are dikes against the overflowing of vices, they must be made respected by the terror of punishments,” but these should also be humane. The sovereign must protect “the majesty of the laws” if these are to have any power. This sometimes fails. Under the Roman Republic “the corruption of manners . . . led to an endless multiplication of laws.”

Frederick cites the Twelve Tablets of Rome, inspired by Solon, among the best laws. These had notably legalized posthumous recognition of children (in cases where the alleged father died before birth) and divorce: “These laws, so equitable and so just, restrained citizens’ freedom only in the cases when their abuse of it could harm the calm of families and the security of the republic.”

However, in judging what individual liberty and equal rights citizens should have, Frederick stresses that the aim must always be the public good. Many restrictions on individual liberty and “discriminations” against classes of citizens might at first appear unjust, but are actually upon closer examination found to serve the general welfare. Frederick cites the German practice of primogeniture in this regard:

Whoever has bothered to the examine the laws with a philosophical spirit will have no doubt found many which at first appear contrary to natural equity, and which however are not so. I content myself with citing the right of primogeniture. It seems that nothing is more just than sharing the paternal estate equally among all children. However experience proves that the most powerful inheritances, subdivided into many parts, reduce over time opulent families to indigence; which has led father preferring to disinherit their younger sons rather than prepare their house for a guaranteed decadence. And for the same reason, laws which appear bothersome and harsh with certain individuals are not less wise, so long as they tend towards the entire society’s advantage; this is a whole to which the enlightened legislator will constantly sacrifice the parts.

Thus, discrimination against younger sons, while unfair for those concerned, can be justified by its strengthening of the continuity of the family house. (I note in passing that some have claimed this passing on of the family household to  the first-born son has contributed to the strong German tradition of family businesses [the famous Mittelstand]. Conversely, the French Revolution’s egalitarian law of succession overrode the father’s will and equally distributed property among sons. Thus, estates tended to disintegrate over time. Some have blamed the catastrophic and lasting decline of French fertility in this period on these provisions, bourgeois fathers seeking to reduce their offspring to maintain their households.)

Certainly the American and French revolutionaries would not deny the importance of the general welfare, but Frederick is more explicit: the public good must come before the individual interest and narrow “rights.” In this he echoes the wisdom of classical philosophy, as when the Roman emperor and Stoic philosopher Marcus Aurelius [4] wrote: “What brings no benefit to the hive brings none to the bee. [. . .] What causes no harm to the city causes no harm to the citizen.”

koenigueberall.jpg

Patriarchy: A Realistic Ideal

Frederick ascribes an enormous role to the père de famille, the family father, both in the historical foundation of law and in establishing good laws in the present. He begins his historical account as follows:

It seems probably that family fathers were the first legislators: the need to establish order in their houses no doubt forced them to make domestic laws. Since these first times, and when men began to assemble in cities, the laws of these particular jurisdictions were found to be inadequate for a more numerous society. [. . .]

Disorders accrued in the cities, news vices were born, and the family fathers, as those with the greatest interest in repressing them, agreed, for their security, to oppose this excess.

Towards his conclusion, Frederick presents patriarchy as one of the best forms of government given humanity’s imperfect nature. He describes first a utopia in which government and laws would perfectly regulate society like clockwork:

A body of perfect laws would be the masterpiece of the human spirit concerning the government’s policy: one would observe there a unity of plan and rules so exact and proportioned, that a State driven by these laws would resemble a watch, whose springs have been made for one same goal; one would find there a deep knowledge of the human heart and the genius of the nation; punishments would be tempered, so that by maintained good manners, they would be neither light nor harsh, clear and precise rulings would never lead to legal dispute; they would consist in an exquisite choice of all that has been best in civil laws, and in an ingenious and simple application of these laws to the customs of the nation; all would be foreseen, all would be combined, and nothing would be subject to inconveniences: but perfect things do not pertain to humanity.

Human beings being imperfect, Frederick instead offers patriarchy as a realistic regime. Under patriarchy, the government’s public-spiritedness is ensured by a sense of family belonging with the people:

The peoples would have reason to be satisfied, if legislators placed themselves in their regard in the same mental dispositions of these family fathers who gave the first laws: they loved their children; the maxims they prescribed had as their goal only the happiness of their family.

This perspective largely resonates with evolutionary psychology’s later view that feelings of kinship enable in-group altruism and more generally on the centrality of family to human psychology.

Frederick highlights numerous examples throughout history of the importance of the father in law: parricide was so unthinkable to Solon he made no mention of it in his laws, while the Romans made the mere intention of parricide punishable by death. This did not mean the father should enjoy unlimited and tyrannical power, as Frederick also writes:

No laws revolts humanity more than this right of life and death which fathers had over their children in Sparta and Rome. In Greece, a father who was too poor to provide for the needs of a too numerous family allowed the children born in excess to perish; in Sparta and in Rome, if a child came to the world poorly-shaped, this sufficiently authorized the father to deprive him of his life.

It is worth observing here that if the killing of infants was not for an arbitrary individual purpose such as a father’s whim, but rather for a rational public purpose such as eugenics, this might meet Frederick’s criteria for a good law, given his previous assertion of the public good over individual interest.

friedrich_II.jpgFrederick’s advocacy of paternal authority is all the more poignant and significant in that his own father, Frederick-William, also known as the Soldier King, had been a harsh one. Frederick-William had often beaten his son and executed before Frederick’s eyes his youthful best friend (and possible lover), Hans von Katte, for “desertion.”

Undivided Authority

Frederick’s apology of patriarchy fits well with his arguing that the sovereign should enjoy undivided authority, free notably from parliaments. This enabled the sovereign to concentrate without distraction and formulate coherent laws. Coming from an absolute monarch, this was obviously not a disinterested position, but it was forcefully argued. Frederick stresses the dissensions between Senate and people which paralyzed the Roman Republic and writes on England:

Although England has many wise laws, it is perhaps the European country where they are the least in effect. Rapin Thoyras [a French historian] remarks very well that, by a vice of government, the power of the King is constantly in opposition to that of the parliament; that they watch each other, either to conserve their authority, or to extend it; which distracts the King and the representatives of the nation from the care which they should expend to maintain justice; and this turbulent and stormy government changes endlessly its laws by acts of parliament, according to whether the current situation and events forces it to do so; hence It follows that England is in the situation of more requiring reform of its jurisprudence than any other kingdom.

Frederick argues elsewhere that laws made by different authors will tend to contradict one another and be incoherent:

When in a State the laws are not assembled in a single body, there must be some who contradict each other; as they are the work of different legislators who did not work on the same scheme, they will lack unity which is so essential and so necessary to all important things.

He notes that nothing is worse for respect for the laws than internal contradiction. Hence, Frederick strongly argues for legal codification, citing many examples, from Justinian through Alfred the Great to Louis IX of France.

Frederick then explicitly rejects any doctrine of divided sovereignty or separation between executive and legislative authority, as found in the writings of Montesquieu and the American Constitution. No doubt Frederick would not be surprised by the often vague and incoherent texts produced by divided sovereigns, whether the representatives in the U.S. Congress or the heads of state of European summits.

To be continued . . .

Notes

1. My ability to directly study the Prussian tradition is sharply limited by my very inadequate knowledge of German. Concerning Frederick however, I am fortunate, as a blessed son of France, for the Great King wrote overwhelmingly in French. This reflected the preeminence of French as the European lingua franca of the eighteenth century and Frederick’s enthusiastic embrace of the French Enlightenment, or les Lumières. On other benefits of learning the French language, see Guillaume Durocher, “Learning French with Jean-Marie Le Pen,” [5] Counter-Currents, November 20, 2015.

2. As published in Johann Preuss, Œuvres de Frédéric le Grand, vol. 9 (Berlin: Royal Printer, 1848). http://friedrich.uni-trier.de/fr/oeuvres/9/toc/ [6]

3. Montesquieu is a possible but uncertain influence. Frederick makes clear in a letter that he had read Montesquieu’s Considerations on the Greatness and Decadence of the Romans. However, there is no mention of the French writer’s more famous Spirit of the Laws, which were published around the same time as the Dissertation’s writing.  There is confirmation that Frederick read the Spirit of the Laws afterwards. Anne Baillot and Brunhilde Wehinger note a number of parallels: on the law as representing the progressive development of human reason (Montesquieu: “The law, in general, is human reason.”), on the need to adapt law to “national genius” and circumstances, on a gentle approach to abortion, and in supporting the ban of torture. Anne Baillot and Brunilde Wehinger, “Frédéric II, Roi-philosophe et législateur,” HAL.archive-ouvertes.fr (2013). https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00788671/document [7]

4. Frederick’s works appears to be largely unavailable online in English. French and German versions of his complete works are available in scanned and text formats from the University of Trier. However, these are only available page-by-page rather than by chapter or book, which make referencing somewhat obnoxious.

Article printed from Counter-Currents Publishing: http://www.counter-currents.com

URL to article: http://www.counter-currents.com/2016/11/enlightened-patriarchy-part-1/

URLs in this post:

[1] Image: http://www.counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Friedrich_ii_campenhausen.jpg

[2] the United States: http://www.counter-currents.com/2016/07/the-eternal-anglo-1/

[3] Tocqueville: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2016/07/tocquevilles-patriotic-republic-nationalist-themes-in-democracy-in-america-part-1/

[4] Marcus Aurelius: http://www.counter-currents.com/2016/09/the-prayers-of-marcus-aurelius/

[5] “Learning French with Jean-Marie Le Pen,”: http://www.counter-currents.com/2015/11/learning-french-with-jean-marie-le-pen/

[6] http://friedrich.uni-trier.de/fr/oeuvres/9/toc/: http://friedrich.uni-trier.de/fr/oeuvres/9/toc/

[7] https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00788671/document: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00788671/document

Enlightened Patriarchy:
Frederick the Great’s Principles of Lawmaking

Part 2

Moderation & Humaneness

Fried2-post.jpgThe sovereign has authority but, as with the father, this must be deserved. Frederick notes dispassionately that Publicola, one of the founders of the Roman Republic, had legalized tyrannicide. The laws must be fair and appropriate to the nation concerned, otherwise they will be soon be abolished and the people will revolt:

The legislators who establish laws in monarchies are typically themselves sovereign: if their laws are gentle and equitable, they will maintain themselves by their own accord, all individuals find their advantage in them; if they are harsh and tyrannical, they will soon be abolished, because they need to be maintained by violence, and the tyrant is alone against an entire people who only the desire to eliminate them.

Frederick argues that excessively harsh laws anyway cannot last. Draco, the first lawmaker of Athens, saw his notoriously tough legislation soon abrogated by Solon’s.

Frederick argues:  “Natural equity wishes that there be proportion between crime and punishment.” Punishment should take circumstances into account for “[t]here is an infinity between the destiny of a rich man and of an impoverished one.” Frederick claims that for a poor thief to steal a rich man’s gold watch was no great crime.

Frederick proposes a middle way between laxness and severity. He notes that the Ancient Egyptians did not punish thieves — the victims were legally allowed to rebuy their lost property from the thieves — a measure which was “the means of making thieves out of all Egyptians.”

In contrast, “[t]he French laws are of a terrible rigor,” for these prescribed the execution of domestic thieves so as to prevent the spread of their “seed.” Frederick claimed Prussia, by not executing nonviolent domestic thieves, had found the right balance:  “Prussian jurisprudence has found a temperament between the laxity of Egypt’s and the severity of France’s.” At the same time, he affirms harshness for the most evil crimes “so that the punishment is always in step with the crime.”

These considerations on humaneness were also linked to the abolition of torture. Frederick expresses revulsion for the practice of trial by ordeal in England and of “la question” (the seeking of confessions under torture) in France. Frederick banned torture in Prussia on his third day on the throne. He did so on the grounds that tolerance to pain was not necessarily correlated with virtue and that citizens should not be forced to incriminate themselves. This ban “caused a sensation in Europe” and put Prussia “at the vanguard of modernity.”[1]

With perhaps excessive rhetorical flourish, Frederick claimed to be taking “the side of humanity against a custom shameful to all Christians and civilized peoples, and, I dare to add, a custom as cruel as it is useless. [. . .] It would be better to forgive twenty guilty people than to sacrifice an innocent. [. . .] The question in Prussia was abolished eight years ago [. . .] we are certain to not confuse the innocent and the guilty, and justice is delivered no less.”

Other examples of humaneness are Frederick’s abolition of the Hurenstafe (the “Whores’ Punishment” instituted by his father, meaning execution by tying the woman in a bag and drowning her in a river) and a ban on hiding unwanted pregnancies and killing unwanted infants.

Frederick provides quite a long narration on the development of the laws and rights of Englishmen, including the Magna Carta, habeas corpus, and trial by jury: “the nation still conserves this privilege.”

Usury & Inequality

Frederick ascribes considerable importance to economic inequality and to the evil of usury in the history of the laws. He writes: “nothing makes more odious differences of condition than the tyranny which the rich exert with impunity over the miserable.” To this end, Frederick put limits on the ability to appeal, for prior to this those of means could appeal decisions in Prussia’s various courts almost endlessly.

Fried2-Karte.jpg

Frederick identifies usury, with the related self-reinforcing accumulation of wealth by an oligarchy, as a major cause of revolution throughout history, accounting for much social unrest in Athens and Rome. He even calls striking the right balance between lenders and debtors “the philosopher’s stone of jurisprudence”:

The laws concerning debtors are indisputably those which require the most circumspection and prudence on the part of those who publish them. If these laws favor creditors, debtors’ conditions become too difficult; an unfortunate accident can forever ruin their fortune. If, on the contrary, this law is to advantageous to them, it alters public confidence, by denying contracts which are founded on good faith.

This happy medium which, while upholding the validity of contracts, does not oppress insolvent debtors, seems to me to be the philosopher’s stone of jurisprudence.

It seems to me that wealth has a tendency to self-accumulate in a self-reinforcing fashion, as Marx famously analyzed. This is especially when these wealthy elites, which are typically cognitive/clannish cliques, capture the state. Then, the correction may only be achieved by a social revolution, whether enlightened or egalitarian.

National Genius

Though laws are fashioned by universal reason, they must be tailored to local circumstances, namely a nation’s geographical, political, and cultural character. Frederick stresses on several occasions that the laws must respect the “national genius” of the governed, what we might call national character:

We observe again, by examining the conduct of wise legislators, that the laws must be adapted to the kind of government and to the genius of the nation which must receive them; that the best legislators have had as their goal public felicity; and that in general all laws which are most in line with natural equity, with a few exceptions, are the best.

As Lycurgus found an ambitious people, he gave them laws more suited to making warriors than citizens; and if he banished gold from his republic, it was because interest is of all vices that most opposed to glory.

Solon himself said that he did not give the Athenians the most perfect laws, but the best laws they were capable of receiving.

Frederick then does not advocate a naïve universalism sometimes associated with the Enlightenment, but adaptation to national character. Solon’s laws differed from Lycurgus’ also in accordance with their maritime position, propitious for commerce.

Friedrich_II_in_der_Schlacht_bei_Zorndorf_Copy_after_Carl_Röchling.jpg

Conversely, Frederick asserts: “The laws indeed must accord with the genius of nations, or one must not hope for them to last.” To ignore national character is to build laws upon weak foundations, leading to their dissolution. Frederick cites the early Romans as an example of a democratic people, who hence rejected regimes dominated by the king or the propertied classes.

Frederick also argues that laws should be harsher for less civil nations, which are often less developed ones: “It finally seems to me that, among nations who have barely emerged from barbarism, the legislators must be severe; that, among civilized peoples, whose manners are gentle, one needs human legislators.”

This adaptation of laws to local political and cultural character naturally suits sovereigns such as Frederick, who can thus justify their independent particular choices while respecting those of others, contrasting with the ideology of intolerant world-empires, who claim universal jurisdiction.

Against Bad Laws & Lawyering

Frederick makes a number of general comments on avoiding bad laws. The laws must not be vague, for this leads to insincere, hair-splitting legal debate (“la chicane”) and judges must then “have recourse to the intention of the legislator.” Frederick argues that “The skillful legislator does not overload the public with superfluous laws.” An excess of laws leads to confusion and contradiction: “Few wise laws make the people happy.”[2] Laws should be replaced when these are “contrary to public happiness and natural equity, when they are enounced in vague and obscure terms, and finally when they imply contradiction.”

Frederick repeatedly attacks the use of rhetoric by lawyers, including Cicero, seeking to emotionally manipulate judges rather than stick to fact and logic. Frederick expresses considerable pride that his grand chancellor, Samuel von Cocceji, had legally banned rhetoric (I leave aside whether this measure was effective):

Prussia has followed this Greek custom, and if the dangerous refinements of eloquence are banned from pleas, this is thanks to the grand chancellor, whose integrity, understanding, and indefatigable activity would have done justice to the Greek and Roman republics, in the times when these were the most fecund in great men.

Questioning Convention: The Case of Aborted Bastards

Quite in keeping with a tradition of philosophy founded by Socrates, Frederick urges the questioning of convention in the formulation of the laws. Custom should be examined in the light of reason and reformed according to the public good. He notes that bad civil laws are often kept by a kind of inertia “to not shock the prejudices of the nation” and “purely because of their antiquity.”

Frederick did not however advocate an indiscriminate contempt for convention. On the contrary, he advises caution for men are “in the majority, animals of custom” therefore “it could be dangerous to touch them [customs],” for this may lead to more confusion than good. Frederick then advises a pragmatic and reasonable approach to tradition.

A large number of the historical events cited by Frederick seem to refer to this sort of approach, particularly with regard to warfare and natalism. The martial Spartans allowed men and women to train and wrestle together naked. Solon allowed women to remarry if their husbands were impotent. The Romans, at various times, passed laws subsidizing having of three children, recognizing posthumous children (when the father died before birth), and legalizing divorce.

Fried2-verw.jpg

There is also a hint of Frederick’s contempt for Christian dogma as when he recounts of Romulus, the legendary founder of Rome:

He wanted the kings to have a sovereign authority in matters of justice and religion; he had no belief in fables ascribed to the gods; that we have for them holy and religious sentiments, attributing nothing dishonest to their blessed natures.

This too is quite in line with Plato’s Socrates, so eager to revise or suppress inherited myths and poems when these show the gods in an impious and irrational light. Frederick adds that Romulus considered the very walls of Rome to be “sacred,” the violation of which was the pretext for killing his brother Remus. This may be taken as a metaphor for the security of the city being a supreme religious imperative, overriding even the closest family ties.

Frederick provides a practical example of questioning convention with the case of the illegality of abortion, which was often punished by death. He considers this practice as barbaric as the Spartan and Roman fathers’ right to kill their children. In fact, Frederick does not argue for the legalization of abortion, but rather the elimination of the most common cause of abortion, which is the stigma of bastardy:

Is there not something quite harsh in the way which we punish abortions? God forbid that I would excuse the dreadful action of these Medeas who, cruel to themselves and to the voice of blood, suffocate the future race, if I dare to express myself so, without letting it see the day! But let the reader strip himself of all prejudices of custom, and let him deign to lend some attention to the reflections which I will present him.

Do not the laws attach a degree of infamy to secret childbirths? A girl born with a too gentle temperament, deceived by the promises of a scoundrel, does she not find herself, in consequence of her credulity, in the situation of having to choose between the loss of her honor and that of the unfortunate fruit which she has conceived? Is it not the fault of the laws to put her in such a violent situation? And does not the severity of judges deprive the State of two subjects at once, the runt who has perished, and the mother, who could abundantly repair the loss by a legitimate propagation? One responds to this that there are homes for orphan children. I know they save an infinity of bastards; but would it not be better to cut the evil by its roots, and conserve so many poor creatures who miserably perish, by abolishing the blemishes attached to consequence of an imprudent and flighty love?

Frederick then wished to prevent the abortion of bastards and the execution of their mothers, that manners be gentler and his state more populous.

Towards European Law?: The Case of Duels

Frederick’s second example of questioning convention is the practice of duels. Here, he notes that laws against dueling are often ineffective because of the contrary social stigma of those who reject them. A nobleman rejecting a duel is considered unmanly while a soldier may well lose employment by his loss of reputation. Thus, monarchs as powerful as Louis XIV of France and Frederick-William (Frederick’s father, also known as the Soldier King), had failed to eliminate the practice, as “duels changed their name.”

Frederick advises as the only solution the punishing of duelers following a mutual agreement among European countries to not grant asylum to the guilty:

If all the princes of Europe do not assemble in a congress, and do not agree among themselves to attach dishonor to those who, despite their rulings, attempt to slaughter each other in single combat, if, I say, they do not agree to refuse all asylum to this kind of killer, and to punish severely those who insult their peers, either in speech, or in writing, or by ways of deed, there will be no end to duels.

Let me not be accused of having inherited the visions of the abbot [Charles-Irénée Castel] de Saint-Pierre [a French writer who had imagined a world without war]: I see nothing impossible in individuals submitting their quarrels to the decision of judges, just as they submit the disagreements which decide their fortunes; and by what reason would princes not assemble in a congress for the good of humanity, after having held so many on subjects of lesser importance? I return to this, and I dare to assure that this is the only way to abolish in Europe this inappropriate point of honor, which has cost the lives of so many honest people whose fatherlands could have expected great services from.

Here again, Frederick wishes to save lives which could serve the nation. The assembly of European princes to establish common norms is an interesting prefiguring of the later bourgeois states’ exponential practice of negotiating European norms in various treaties. We cannot say that Frederick is advocating “European law” per se because he does not suggest the establishment of a purported suprastatal enforcer (e.g., a court).

Frederick reflects typical Enlightenment optimism:

To imagine that men are all demons, and to rail against them with cruelty, is the vision of ferocious misanthrope; to suppose that men are all angels, and to give up the reigns to them, is the dream of an imbecilic Capuchin monk; to believe that they are neither all good nor all bad, to reward good actions beyond their worth, to punish bad actions less than what they deserve, to have indulgence for their weaknesses and humanity for all, that is how a reasonable man must act.

Conclusion

As expressed in the Dissertation, Frederick the Great’s thoughts on lawmaking are striking for their modernity. One can certainly identify signs prefiguring our current troubles. His public circumspection and private contempt for organized religion is no doubt a forerunner a certain agnosticism culminating in nihilism. Frederick’s pleas for a humane approach, while understandable in those still-brutal days (try reading about premodern crime and punishment without flinching), can be taken to a demagogic excess.

However, Frederick is careful to always make his argument with reference to the public good: humaneness and innovation are interesting to explore, but if these clash with the general welfare, the latter must always prevail. Our time is one of individualism and egalitarianism, a time when laws are largely judged by whether they grant free caprice and “equal rights” to individuals. Frederick in contrast provides powerful arguments in favor of laws established by paternal authority for the well-being of the community as a whole and for the promotion of good socio-cultural norms.

Frederick furthermore argues forcefully for a pragmatic and rational approach to lawmaking. One should not be impious or contemptuous of custom for its own sake, but one should be willing to rationally examine and reform custom in light of the public good. Outside of utopias, Frederick saw enlightened patriarchy as perhaps the best possible form of government. The great philosopher Schopenhauer [2] would later concur with this assessment, seeing an autocratic and benevolent “national father” as the form of rule most suited to an imperfect mankind.

Frederick was opposed to a crude universalism and cognizant of the need to adapt legislation to national characteristics. At the same time, he saw himself as participating in a genuinely pan-European intellectual culture and on occasion advocated for joint solutions among the princes of Europe. Frederick the Great’s principles of lawmaking then retain all their relevance for European patriots today.

Friedrich-II-preussen-grabplatte.jpg

Notes

1. Baillot and Wehinger, “Frédéric II, Roi-philosophe et législateur,” 13.

2. Frederick seems to have failed to implement the legal simplification he advocated. His Codex Fridericiani, which was worked upon during this period and sought to simplify Prussia’s plethora of laws stemming from innumerable traditions and jurisdictions,  was apparently enormous and unwieldy. Frederick writes that in Germany: “there is no circle, no principality, no matter how small, which does not have a different customary law; and these rights, through the length of time, have acquired force of law.”

Article printed from Counter-Currents Publishing: http://www.counter-currents.com

URL to article: http://www.counter-currents.com/2016/11/enlightened-patriarchy-part-2/

URLs in this post:

[1] Image: http://www.counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/FrederickBerlinCrop.jpg

[2] great philosopher Schopenhauer: http://www.counter-currents.com/2016/03/schopenhauers-critique-of-democracy/

[3] Image: http://www.counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Laws.png

mardi, 08 novembre 2016

Historiker: Deutschland droht Staatszerfall

baberow.jpg

Historiker: Deutschland droht Staatszerfall

Ex: http://www.mmnews.de

Das Wertesystem der Kanzlerin, die Folgen der Flüchtlingspolitik, die Erosion des staatlichen Gewaltmonopols - wie geht es weiter in Deutschland? Historiker Prof. Baberowski im Gespräch mit Joachim Steinhöfel.

„Herr Professor Baberowski, wenn man sie fragt: ‚Für welche drei Dinge steht Angela Merkel als Politikerin ohne Wenn und Aber ein?‘ Was fällt Ihnen dazu ein?“ Die Antwort sollte jeder gehört haben!

Joachim Steinhöfel im Gespräch mit dem Historiker Prof. Dr. Jörg Baberowski über Merkel, die Folgen der Flüchtlingspolitik und die Erosion des staatlichen Gewaltmonopols.

Baberowski glaubt nicht, das sich an der Flüchtlimgspolitik der Regierung etwas ändert. Wenn jedoch in den nächsten Jahren nichts passiert, dann wird es laut Baberowski nicht nur zu einer Staatskrise sondern zu einem Staatszerfall kommen.

 

 

dimanche, 06 novembre 2016

World Religion of the Future

World War II was not a struggle between nationalism and globalism. It was a battle between conflicting visions of world order: a deracinating, soulless global marketplace vs. an Indo-European planetary hegemony based on a future pan-Aryan religion. At least, that is how the leader of the Kyoto School saw it.

tomo.jpgDespite his claim that the cultural crisis brought on by worldwide technological advancement could not be solved by a wholesale adoption of Eastern traditions such as Zen Buddhism, Martin Heidegger engaged in many conversations with… Japanese scholars throughout his philosophical career. His first and perhaps most significant encounter with the East took place as early as 1919, eight years before the publication of Being and Time. After having attended Heidegger’s 1918 lectures, one of his Japanese students, Tomonobu Imamichi, introduced Heidegger to the concept of “being in the world.” In The Book of Tea (1906), Tomonobu’s teacher, Okakura Kakuzo had used these words to describe an aspect of Zhuangzi’s spiritual vision.

tea03864558-us-300.jpgThe Book of Tea uses the tea ceremony to explore the wabi-sabi aesthetic experience cultivated in Japanese Zen arts and crafts. The early German translation of The Book of Tea uses the words das-in-der-Welt-sein, which, via Imamichi, found their way into the heart and soul of Heidegger’s 1927 magnum opus. Interestingly, Heidegger’s philosophical career not only begins under Japanese influence, it also ends with it. One of the essays in his last work On the Way to Language is “A Dialogue on Language” between “a Japanese and an inquirer” who remain significantly unnamed

In his “Introduction to Heideggerian Existentialism”, Leo Strauss makes much of Heidegger’s ‘Eastern’ response to the crisis of world-enframing technology in the absence of a genuine global society. Strauss observes that modern technology is forcing the material conditions of a World Society upon us, without a common world culture as its basis. It is the unification of mankind on the basis of the lowest common denominator. This leads to “lonely crowds” suffering from a pervasive sense of alienation and anomie. Furthermore, Strauss recognizes that no genuine culture in the world has ever arisen without a religious basis, without addressing man’s need for something noble and great beyond himself. So the world society, being wrought largely as a consequence of apparently valueless technological forces, is ironically one in need, not merely of a universal ethics, but of one world religion. The world religion must emerge out of the deepest reflection on the crisis of cultural relativism, and on the essence of the technological forces bringing it about:

[Heidegger] called it the “night of the world.” It means indeed, as Marx had predicted, the victory of an ever more completely urbanized, ever more completely technological West over the whole planet – complete leveling and uniformity… unity of the human race on the lowest level, complete emptiness of life… How can there be hope? Fundamentally, because there is something in man which cannot be satisfied by the world society: the desire for the genuine, for the noble, for the great. The desire has expressed itself in man’s ideals, but all previous ideals have proved to be related to societies which were not world societies. The old ideals will not enable man to overcome the power, to weaken the power, of technology. We may also say: a world society can be human only if there is a world culture, a culture genuinely uniting all men. But there never has been a high culture without a religious basis: the world society can be human only if all men are genuinely united by a world religion.

Explicating Heidegger, Strauss explains that in order for it to be possible to overcome technology, which is not at all the same as rejecting it, there must be a sphere of thought or contemplation beyond the rationalism developed by the Greeks and forwarded in Western science and technology. This must be an understanding of the world from behind or beneath the will to mathematize all beings with a view to instrumental manipulation of them on demand (bestand). It must understand the difference between Being and beings, and that Being is no-thing that can be mastered. The to be which is always as present at hand, is taken by Rationalism as the standard of being – that which really is, is always present, available, accessible. Instead, Strauss thinks that: “a more adequate understanding of being is intimated by the assertion that to be means to be elusive or to be a mystery.” Strauss claims that “this is the Eastern understanding of Being” and he adds that: “We can hope beyond technological world society, we can hope for a genuine world society, only if we become capable of learning from the East… Heidegger is the only man who has an inkling of the dimensions of the problem of a world society.”

nishida001-7a112.jpg…The thinkers of the Kyoto School of Philosophy were in favor of the war and have been collectively referred to as the “philosophers of nothingness”. Some of them had a constructive vision of how the Buddhist understanding of the void could complement the techno-scientific thinking of the West in order to bring about a new global civilization. Key figures among them, such as Nishida Kitaro, were students of Heidegger as early as the 1920s, and like Heidegger they saw the world war as the means to bring about a global culture that would ground techno-scientific development in a spirituality transcending insular and traditional values.

Remember that the Indian caste system that Nietzsche so admired, and that was based on regimented and hierarchically stratified class divisions, was a function of the Aryan conquest of the native Dravidian population of India. This origin is reflected in the Sanskrit name for the “caste” of the caste system, varna, which literally means “color” so that it was once a color-coding system. The four classes were: the Brahmins – the Vedic priests or scholars (including those who engaged in various proto-scientific practices); the Kshatriyas – the caste of knightly warriors, including feudal lords as chief amongst them; the Vaishyas – the business class, including both farmers and various types of merchants; and the Shudras – menial laborers, usually involved in undignified or hard labor. Finally, there were also “outcaste untouchables” that were relegated to an inhumanly low status. “Prince” Siddhartha Gotama belonged to the Kshatriya class.

The Buddha was a light-skinned blue eyed Aryan whose father was a feudal lord and who was expected to become a knight. In his late writings, Nishida Kitaro explains how it is that “Indian culture”, from which Japan inherited Buddhism (including the symbol of the swastika that is ubiquitous at Japanese temples) and which shares the Aryan or ‘Indo-European’ ethnic roots of European culture, “has evolved as an opposite pole to modern European culture… and may thereby be able to contribute to a global modern culture from its own vantage point.” What is the “global modern culture” that Nishida envisions?

Well, he certainly views it as having a religious basis and he thinks that the world war during which he is writing is a means to achieving it: “And does not the spirit of modern times seek a religion of infinite compassion rather than that of the Lord of ten thousand hosts? It demands reflection in the spirit of Buddhist compassion. This is the spirit which says that the present world war must be for the sake of negating world wars, for the sake of eternal peace.” In every true religion the divine is an absolute love that embraces its opposite, to the extent of even becoming Satan, and this is the meaning of the concept of upaya or shrewdly bringing to bear “skillful means” in Mahayana Buddhism so that “the miracles” of “this world may be said to be… the Buddha’s expedient means.” This all-embracing character of the divine, as that which encompasses what one would take to be its opposite, “is the basic reason why we are beings who can be compassionate to others and who can experience the compassion of others. Compassion always signifies that opposites are one in the dynamic reciprocity of their own contradictory identity.”

A God who is the Lord (Dominus) in the sense of an ultimately transcendent substance cannot be a truly creative God. Creation ex nihilo would be both arbitrary and superfluous; it must be out of love that God or Buddha creatively manifests the world from out of its own self-negation. Nishida believes that the school of Prajnaparamita thought in Mahayana Buddhism, established by Nagarjuna, has a deeper and more adequate understanding of this than pantheistic Western thinkers of dialectical synthesis, such as the Hegelians, who remain within the realm of reason even in their negative theologies. Nishida nevertheless refers to his ontology of the absolute’s self-expression and transformation as “Trinitarian” and compares it to Neo-Platonic thought.

However, Neo-Platonism and all pagan western thought falls short insofar as it fails to see Satan or “absolute evil” as an aspect of God. He adds: “The absolute God must include absolute negation within himself, and must be the God who descends into ultimate evil. The highest form must be one that transforms the lowest matter into itself. Absolute agape must reach even to the absolutely evil man. This is again the paradox of God: God is hidden even within the heart of the absolutely evil man. A God who merely judges the good and the bad is not truly absolute.” In passages such as these we see that Shunyata (in Sanskrit, Mu in Japanese) is not the Nothing of Descartes at all. Quite to the contrary of serving as an entirely distinct polar opposite of a Perfect Being that would exonerate the latter from being the source of any imperfection, this Nothingness is an inner dynamic tension within Being – as expressed in the spectral incompleteness and interdependent interpenetration of all beings. The battle between God and Nothingness in the heart of man, the “dynamic equilibrium” between “is” and “is not”, may be paradoxical but it is also the existential ‘ground’ of the volitional person. “Radical evil” lies ineradicably at the root of our freedom. We are always already “both satanic and divine.” Nishida claims that the Buddha – or any other conception of divinity – outside of one’s own existential potentiality is not the true Buddha:

Only in this existential experience of religious remorse does the self encounter what Rudolf Otto calls the numinous. Subjectively speaking, the encounter is a deep reflection upon the existential depths of the self itself; and as the Buddhists say, it means to see our essential nature, to see the true self. In Buddhism, this seeing means, not to see Buddha objectively outside, but to see into the bottomless depths of one’s own soul. If we see God externally, it is merely magic. …Illusion is the fountainhead of all evil. Illusion arises when we conceive of the objectified self as the true self. The source of illusion is in seeing the self in terms of object logic. It is for this reason that Mahayana Buddhism says that we are saved through enlightenment. But this enlightenment is generally misunderstood. For it does not mean to see anything objectively… It is rather an ultimate seeing of the bottomless nothingness of the self that is simultaneously a seeing of the fountainhead of sin and evil.

In this Zen injunction to kill any conception of a Buddha outside oneself, Nishida does not deny the cycle of birth and death or samsara as an empirical or phenomenological fact, he simply insists that the truly religious consciousness is one that has recognized the identity of samsara and nirvana. On his terms, and according to the sages of the esoteric Buddhist tradition, nirvana does not mean to attain some state distinct from and after samsara but to recognize that in every moment of the cycle of reincarnation the perfection beyond the impurity of karma is already present. This does not mean that the self “transcends its own historical actuality – it does not transcend its own karma – but rather that it realizes the bottomless bottom of its own karma.”

statue-buddha_118786_pgbighd.jpg

This relatively late Mahayanist view is anathema to the teaching of Siddhartha Gotama and the early Indian Buddhism founded on it. According to the Buddha Dharma, just as there are physical, biological, and psychological laws operative in the cosmos, there is also an ethical law. The law of karma is a lawful relationship between one’s actions, including verbal and unspoken mental acts that express one’s volition (cetana), and both the realm within which one is reborn as well as the conditions of life that one experiences within this realm. The ethical quality of one’s volition is supposed to resonate with the qualitative character of a certain realm of existence, and to tune into this realm, as it were, as a consequence of being on the same wavelength. Within these more general parameters what one experiences within a given realm of existence is conditioned by one’s actions both within the present life and in past lives. The fundamental presupposition here is that even if an action or intention does not appear to bear fruit (phala) presently, it reverberates in ways that one may remain unconscious of until it finally yields some tangible results (vipaka) – possibly later in one’s present life, but perhaps not until a future life.

While psychological research in the wake of the coming spectral revolution in Science might validate certain classes of phenomena associated with Buddhism as genuine natural phenomena, it is likely to reveal significant Buddhist misunderstandings of these very same phenomena and to profoundly challenge Buddhist codes of ethics. This is the case with the Reincarnation research of the late Dr. Ian Stevenson… What would disturb Buddhists most about Stevenson’s apparent validation of one of the central tenants of their religion is that the ethical idea of karma is untenable in light of his scientific research into the reality of Reincarnation as a natural phenomenon. What Stevenson found is that a person’s strong psychic impression of localized bodily injury at the time of a violent death or terrible accident, could affect fetal development of the body to be subsequently inhabited by that person to produce a birthmark or birth defect corresponding to the site of injury and even the shape or type of injury. In other words there are many cases of the following type: an innocent person is attacked and has his arm hacked off by a murderer and while the victim is reborn with that arm badly deformed, the murderer not only gets away scot free in his present incarnation, he also does not suffer any apparent ill effects in his subsequent incarnation.

Nirvana is the goal of the path, the aim of the Buddha Dharma. Yet, it is the most obscure element of Gotama’s teachings and, unlike karma, meditation, and the moral disciplines, it is one of the ideas most unique to his understanding of the Dharma as compared to the various pre-Buddhist forms of Sanatana Dharma (aka. ‘Hinduism). It is referred to at times as an element or a state, a state of supreme bliss, and yet it is supposed to be beyond any conditioned state, whether painful or even pleasurable. At times Siddhartha discusses Nirvana as if it were attainable amidst the present life and at other times it seems like a total annihilation that a perfectly enlightened person can pass into upon the disintegration of what will be his final body. What, then, is the difference between this annihilation and the so-called “annihilationism” that is one of the wrong views most destructive of an ethical life? Is the Buddha Dharma, in its original form, essentially a grand doctrine of suicide? Does it opt out of actual suicide because it will not do any good, since the underlying tendencies of the psyche are still active and will reorganize around a new physical aggregate, so that suicide can only be truly successful by unbinding the threads of this psyche – by disintegrating the soul?

nirv774x500.jpg

Nirvana means “snuffing out” or “blowing out”, as in putting out a flame or fire. Orthodox Buddhists of the Theravada tradition most directly descended from the teachings of Gotama suggest that the answer to the perplexing question as to who attains Nirvana and where he attains it, namely as to whether a Buddha or arahant exists in Nirvana after death or is annihilated and passes into nothingness, can be simply answered by saying that the perfectly enlightened person simply “goes out” or is “put out.” He was a flame burning with the fire of life, but this fire of ceaseless suffering has been put out. Phew! Can there be a more pessimistic and nihilistic view of life? At least the man who actually commits suicide affirms a life that would be worth living by comparison to his own, which he judges intolerable only as compared to some ideal. He would also be affirming a sense of history wherein the future can be meaningfully different from any past epoch, an understanding of time that warrants a historical struggle – even if not one that he can personally bear to participate in here and now. It is above all in Japan where this early Buddhist nihilism gave way to the world-historical ethos of the fiery forge.

Nishida draws a distinction between physical, biological, and historical life. The teleological irreversibility of time in the course of organic development is key to his distinction between the first two. Whereas the world of biological life forms remains partially spatial and material, in the human world time negates space and the spatialized chronological ‘time’ relevant to inorganic physics. As Nishida puts it: “We can even say that there is no death for a merely biological being. For death entails that a self enter into eternal nothingness. It is because a self enters into eternal nothingness that it is historically irrepeatable, unique, and individual.” Only in the face of this “eternal death” qua nothingness is genuine individuation possible and only the real individual becomes agitated by the religious question. A being who carries out its moral duty for duty’s sake, in other words out of adherence to what Kant frames as the categorical imperative, would have no individuality; religion can have no meaning for such an abstract subject without any concrete will. Groundless nothingness (Shunyata) is the unstable and ghostly horizon of one’s finite existence, and existential awareness of this ultimate and inescapable negation of one’s self is not a merely noetic reflection.

Nishida approvingly attributes to Fyodor Dostoyevsky the “standpoint of freedom” which holds that: “There is nothing at all that determines the self at the very ground of the self.” From the vantage point of his own time, Nishida sees the spirit of Dostoyevsky as the closest point of contact between Japanese spirituality and the West. He admonishes the Japanese for having remained too insular and that the spiritual sense for the ordinary and everyday that Japan shares with Dostoyevsky has hitherto been too superficial. “At this juncture,” he says, “it must come to possess an acute Dostoievskian spirit in an eschatological sense, as the Japanese spirit participating in world history.” Nishida hopes that “in this way” the hybridized Japanese civilization “can become a point of departure for a new global culture.” Nishida sees the way that the Yahweh “folk religion of the Jewish race” evolved into a world religion, and one that served as the basis for a medieval European culture that he clearly admires, as a model for a potential globalizing evolution of Japanese tradition. The “scientific” secularization characteristic of modern Western civilization, wherein “old worlds lose their specific traditions”, is a necessary phase in the formation of “a global humanity.” It is, in a dialectical sense, a negatively determinative moment in “the world’s transformation.” However, it must be recognized that “science is also a form of culture” and that “the world of science may also be said to be religious.” The failure to recognize this has been chiefly responsible for the fact that “such a thing as the decline and fall of the West has been proclaimed.”

kitaro-nishida-53-14-14.jpg

Dostoyevsky diagnosed the causes of this decline perspicaciously in Notes From Underground (1864), which is widely considered the first existentialist novel. It is a response to the situation of the Cartesian ego, which… is sadistically enmeshed in murderous machinery over which he takes himself to have no control. The underground man is crippled by his hyperconsciousness. He is unlike the common man of action insofar as he can trace all effects back to ever receding causes such that, for example, he is incapable of mistaking vengeance for justice, since the would-be target of a retributive act is not ultimately responsible for it. He is also unlike people who are cruel only out of stupidity, because he cannot even stop at the egoistic passions that they take to be primary causes. Under a more intensely rational scrutiny, comprehending these passions also dissolves them as any solid basis for action. The underground man challenges the claim that other materialistic rationalists make, to the effect that a person cannot but act in such a way as is to his advantage.

nishesp.jpgDostoevsky asks us to suppose that we were able to arrive at a formulation of the laws of nature, including biological and psychological laws, so precise that we could calculate, in every case, what a man will do by knowing what is at that moment to his advantage – not as an individual – but as an organism that microcosmically expresses the survivalist egoism of Nature. A man who became aware of this calculation would spitefully do something else, anything else, just to prove that he was not “a piano key” or an “organ pedal” whose thoughts and passions could in principle be encompassed by a formula, tabulated, and predicted according to statistical probability. Dostoevsky equates the sum total of any comprehensive formula for the laws of nature, of the kind that physicists today are still searching for under the rubric of a theory of everything, with “an endlessly recurring zero” because it nullifies meaningful action.

The underground man would act contrary to his advantage, he would humiliatingly sacrifice himself to others, to be beaten and brutalized, to be impoverished through impossible generosity, and in every other way to fail and suffer in life just so as to demonstrate that life “is not simply extracting square roots.” On the one hand, he knows that “two times two makes four”, in other words the laws of nature cannot be changed and so “there is nothing left for you to do or to understand.” On the other hand, he has a painful awareness that “Consciousness… is infinitely superior to two times two makes four.” The underground man decides that “if you stick to consciousness, even though you attain the same result, you can at least flog yourself at times, and that will, at any rate, liven you up. It may be reactionary, but corporal punishment is still better than nothing.”

If “natural science and mathematics” were able to prove to him that even this reaction were predictable in accordance with some “mathematical formula”, he “would purposely go mad in order to be rid of reason” and moreover, he would try to hurl the whole of the world into an abyss of “chaos and darkness and curses.” This is what the underground man is referring to when he admits:

The long and the short of it is, gentlemen, that it is better to do nothing! Better conscious inertia! And so hurrah for underground! …But after all, even now I am lying! I am lying because I know myself as surely as two times two makes four, that it is not at all underground that is better, but something different, quite different, for which I long but which I cannot find! Damn underground!

Nishida is in search of what the underground man could not find as a cure to the mechanistic materialism dominating science under the Cartesian paradigm, but what he believed that Dostoevsky himself did find – albeit in an overly Judeo-Christian form that would benefit from a deconstructive encounter with the abyssal void of Zen.

Consciousness always consists of both an extending out over oneself as one’s world and a determination of oneself by that world, so that ‘subjectivity’ and ‘objectivity’ are abstractions of a creative world-forming process that one can intuit in the abyssal or groundless inner depths of the self prior to the interpretation of it as an ego. Nishida thinks “discovery in the scientific domain exemplifies the same point”, namely “seeing by becoming things and hearing by becoming things.” Nishida goes so far as to proclaim the ontological priority of the religious form of life over both scientific practice and social mores: “Both science and morality have their basis in the religious form of life.” Nishida later repeats this point with respect to scientific practice: “Active intuition is fundamental even for science. Science itself is grounded in the fact that we see by becoming things and hear by becoming things. Active intuition refers to that standpoint which Dogen characterizes as achieving enlightenment ‘by all things advancing.’” According to Nishida, the religious form of life is more fundamental than scientific cognition and the knowledge gained by means of it; the quest for scientific knowledge is a mode of the essentially religious character of our existence:

I hold that even scientific cognition is grounded in this structure of spirituality. Scientific knowledge cannot be grounded in the standpoint of the merely abstract conscious self. As I have said in another place, it rather derives from the standpoint of the embodied self’s own self-awareness. And therefore, as a fundamental fact of human life, the religious form of life is not the exclusive possession of special individuals. The religious mind is present in everyone. One who does not notice this cannot be a philosopher.

Nishida proclaims that, “A new cultural direction has now to be sought. A new mankind must be born… a new global culture.” Although Nishida admits that “the new age must primarily be scientific”, he sees a radicalization of the immanent view of divinity in Dostoyevsky and Russian mysticism in general through an encounter with Japanese Buddhism as playing a key role in defining “the religion of the future.” Yet the Buddhism that contributes to the formation of the religion of the new age, the religion of the global culture, must transcend the racial character of the Japanese: “From the perspective of present-day global history, it will perhaps be Buddhism that contributes to the formation of the new historical age. But if it too is only the conventional Buddhism of bygone days, it will merely be a relic of the past. The universal religions, insofar as they are already crystallized, have distinctive features corresponding to the times and places of the races that formed them.” It is inevitable that our ethos reflects a national character, but “the nation does not save our souls.” A true nation or civilization must be based on a world religion, and not the other way around.

The has been an excerpt from “Kill A Buddha On The Way,” the tenth chapter of Prometheus and Atlas (Arktos, 2016).

Right On Radio: #8 – The Promethean Destiny of Man with Jason Reza Jorjani

PAjrj.jpg

Prometheus and Atlas

In Prometheus & Atlas, Dr. Jorjani endeavors to deconstruct the nihilistic materialism and rootless rationalism of the modern West by showing how it was grounded on a dishonest suppression of the spectral and why it has a parasitic relationship with Abrahamic religious fundamentalism. Rejecting the marginalization of ESP and psychokinesis as “paranormal,” Prometheus & Atlas […]

Price: $36.50

jeudi, 03 novembre 2016

Die Manipulation der Massenmedien

die-kunst-der-gehirnwc3a4sche.jpg

Die Manipulation der Massenmedien

 

Eine Podiumsdiskussion mit Rico Albrecht, Daniele Ganser, Michael Friedrich Vogt, Wojna und Thomas Cassan: zum Thema "Manipulation der Massenmedien" in Lustenau.

Am 17.06.2016 waren Dr. Michael Friedrich Vogt, Dr. Daniele Ganser und Rico Albrecht Lustenau. Der fünfte Gast auf der Bühne ist Wojna von der "Bandbreite" http://www.diebandbreite.de/

Am Ende der Impulsvorträge gab es eine kurze, aber recht interessante Podiumsdiskussion zum Thema Manipulation der Massenmedien.

Diskutiert werden beispielsweise Feindbilder die die Mainstremmedien im kollektiven Bewußtsein erfolgreich installieren, die Mechanismen von Trennung und Spaltung, die Destabilisierung Europas mittels der Migrationswaffe und die Machtelite.

Die Podiumsdiskussion widmet sich aber auch den Lösungen zu, also konkreten Vorschlägen und Möglichkeiten was jeder einzelne tun kann.

Veranstalter war die Gruppe "Die Vorarlberger".

http://www.dievorarlberger.at/
"Die Vorarlberger - Verein zur Förderung der Bewusstseinsbildung"
Lachenmahd 17a
A-6850 Dornbirn
info@dievorarlberger.at
Telefon: +43 (0)660 78 22 377

Carl Schmitt is Right: Liberal Nations Have Open Borders Because They Have No Concept of the Political

cs-5808834-8659845.jpg

Carl Schmitt is Right:
Liberal Nations Have Open Borders Because They Have No Concept of the Political

Before World War II liberal rights were understood among Western states in a libertarian and ethno-nationalistic way. Freedom of association, for example, was understood to include the right to refuse to associate with certain members of certain ethnic groups, even the right to discriminate in employment practices. This racial liberalism was still institutionalized right up until the 1960s. The settler nations of Australia, Canada, United States, and New Zealand enjoyed admission and naturalization policies based on race and culture, intended to keep these nations “White.”

This liberal racial ethos was socially accepted with a good conscience throughout Western society. As Robert H. Jackson has observed:

Before the war prevailing public opinion within Western states — including democratic states — did not condemn racial discrimination in domestic social and political life. Nor did it question the ideas and institutions of colonialism. In the minds of most Europeans, equality and democracy could not yet be extended successfully to non-Europeans. In other words, these ideas were not yet considered to be universal human rights divorced from any particular civilization or culture. Indeed, for a century or more race had been widely employed as a concept to explain the scientific and technological achievements of Europeans as compared to non-Europeans and to justify not only racial discrimination within Western states but also Western domination of non-western peoples. Racial distinctions thus served as a brake on the extension of democratic rights to people of non European descent within Western countries as well as in Western colonies. [Robert H. Jackson, “The Weight of Ideas in Decolonization: Normative Change in International Relations,” In Ideas and Foreign Policy: Beliefs, Institutions and Political Change, ed. Goldstein and Keohane, Cornell University Press, 1993, p. 135]

Even in the case of denazified Germany, governments after 1945 endorsed, as a matter of common sense, and well into the 1970s, an ethnic conception of German nationality, accepting migrants only as temporary “guest workers” on the grounds that Germany was “not an immigrant country.” European nations took for granted the ethnic cohesion of their cultures and the necessity of barring the entry and incorporation of people from different cultures categorized as a threat to the “national character.”

Why, then, did the entire Western liberal establishment came to the view that European ethnocentrism was fundamentally at odds with liberal principles a few decades after WWII?

I argued in a paper posted at CEC over a month ago (which I have withdrawn because it was flawed) that a new set of norms (human rights, civic nationalism, race is a construct) with an in-built tendency for further radicalization suddenly came to take a firm hold over Western liberal nations in response to the Nazi experience, and that once these norms were accepted, and actions were taken to implement them institutionally, they came to “entrap” Westerners within a spiral that would push them into ever more radical policies that would eventually create a situation in which Western nations would come to be envisioned as places always intended to be progressing toward a future utopia in which multiple races would co-exist in a state of harmony.

Carl Schmitt

Was there something within the racialist liberalism of the pre-WW II era that made it susceptible to the promulgation of these norms and their rapid radicalization thereafter? Why did Western leaders succumbed to the radicalization of these norms so easily? The answer may be found in Carl Schmitt’s argument [2] that liberal states lack a strong concept of the political. I take this to mean that liberals leaders have an inherent weakness as political beings due to their inability to think of their nation states as a collectivity of people laying sovereignty claim over a territory that distinguishes between friends and enemies, who can belong and who cannot belong in the territory. Liberals believe that their nation states are associations formed by individuals for the purpose of ensuring their natural right to life, liberty, and happiness. They have an imaginary view of their liberal states as associations created by isolated individuals reaching a covenant, a contract or agreement, amongst themselves in abstraction from any prior community. They have a predilection to whitewash the fact that their liberal states, like all states, were forcibly created by a people with a common language, heritage, racial characteristics, religious traditions, and a sense of territorial acquisition involving the derogation of out-groups.

cs-r-gehoert-bei-chinesischen.jpgFor this reason, in the words of Carl Schmitt, liberals have an undeveloped sense of the political, an inability to think of themselves as members of a political entity that was created with a clear sense of who can belong and who cannot belong in the community. Having a concept of the political presupposes a people with a strong sense of who can be part of their political community, who can be friends of the community and who cannot be because they pose a threat to the existence and the norms of the community.

Liberals tend to deny that man is by nature a social animal, a member of a collective. They think that humans are all alike as individuals in wanting states that afford them with the legal framework that individuals need in the pursuit of liberty and happiness. They hold a conception of human nature according to which humans can avoid deadly conflict through a liberal state which gives everyone the possibility to improve themselves and society through market competition, technological innovation, and humanitarian works, creating an atmosphere in which political differences can be resolved through peaceful consensus by way of open deliberation.

They don’t want to admit openly that all liberal states were created violently by a people with a sense of peoplehood laying sovereign rights over an exclusive territory against other people competing for the same territory. They don’t want to admit that the members of the competing outgroups are potential enemies rather than abstract individuals seeking a universal state that guarantees happiness and security for all regardless of racial and religious identity. Humans are social animals with a natural impulse to identify themselves collectively in terms of ethnic, cultural and racial markers. But today Europeans have wrongly attributed their unique inclination for states with liberal constitutions to non-Europeans. They have forgotten that liberal states were created by a particular people with a particular individualist heritage, beliefs, and religious orientations. They don’t realize that their individualist heritage was made possible within the context of states or territories acquired through force to the exclusion of competitors. They don’t realize that a liberal state if it is to remain liberal must act collectively against the inclusion of non-Europeans with their own in-group ambitions.

Hegel, Hobbes, and Schmitt

But I think that Schmitt should be complemented with Hegel’s appropriation of the ancient Greek concept of “spiritedness.” Our sense of honor comes from our status within our ethnocultural group in our struggle for survival and competition with other groups [4]. This is the source of what the ancient Greeks called “spiritedness,” that is a part of the soul comprising, in Plato’s philosophy, pride, indignation, shame, and the need for recognition. Plato believed that the human soul consisted of three parts:

  1. a physically desiring part that drives humans to seek to satisfy their appetites for food, comfort, and sensual pleasure;
  2. a reasoning part that allows humans to calculate the best way to get the things they desire; and
  3. a “spirited” part that drives humans to seek honor and renown amongst their people.

Liberal theory developed in reaction to the destructive tendency inbuilt into the spirited part which was exemplified with brutal intensity during the Thirty Years War (1618-1648) and English Civil War 1642-1651). Thomas Hobbes devalued the spirited part of man as just another appetite for power, for riches, and adulation. At the same time, he understood that this appetite was different from the mere natural appetites for food and sensual pleasure, in that they were insatiable and conflict-oriented.

State of nature according to Hobbes

Hobbes emphasized the destructive rather than the heroic character of this aspect of human nature. In the state of nature men are in constant competition with other men for riches and honor, and so enmity is a permanent condition of the state of nature, killing, subduing, and supplanting competitors. However, Hobbes believed that other aspects of human nature, namely, the instinct for self-preservation, fear of death and desire for “commodious living,” were more powerful passions among humans, and that it was these passions, the fear of death in particular, which eventually led men to agree to create a strong central authority that would end the war of competing megalomaniacs, and maintain the peace by monopolizing the means of violence and agreeing to ensure the secure pursuit of commodious living by all. The “insatiable desire and ambition of man” for power and adulation would henceforth be relegated to the international sphere.

But by the second half of the seventeenth century Hobbes’s extreme pessimism about human nature gradually gave way to more moderate accounts in which economic self interest in the market place, love of money, as calculated and contained by reason, would come to be seen as the main passion of humans. The ideal of the spirited hero striving for honor and glory was thoroughly demeaned if not denounced as foolish. By the eighteenth century money making was viewed less as avaricious or selfish and more as a peaceful passion that improves peoples’ manners and “makes for all the gentleness of life.” As Montesquieu worded it, “wherever there is commerce, there the ways of men are gentle.” Commerce, it was indeed anticipated, would soften the barbaric ways of human nature, their atavistic passions for glorious warfare, transforming competition into a peaceful endeavour conducted by reasonable men who stood to gain more from trade than the violent usurpation of other’s peoples property.

hobbes.jpgEventually, liberals came to believe that commerce would, in the words expressed by the Scottish thinker William Robertson in 1769, “wear off those prejudices which maintain distinction and animosity between nations.” By the nineteenth century liberals were not as persuaded by Hobbes’s view that the state of nature would continue permanently in the international relationships between nations. They replaced his pessimistic argument about human nature with a progressive optimism about how humans could be socialized to overcome their turbulent passions and aggressive instincts as they were softened through affluence and greater economic opportunities. With continuous improvements in the standard of living, technology and social organization, there would be no conflicts that could not be resolved through peaceful deliberation and political compromise.

The result of this new image of man and political relations, according to Schmitt, was a failure on the part of liberal nations to understand that what makes a community viable as a political association with sovereign control over a territory is its ability to distinguish between friends and enemies, which is based on the ability to grasp the permanent reality that Hobbes understood about the nature of man, which is that humans (the ones with the strongest passions) have an insatiable craving for power, a passion that can be held in check inside a nation state with a strong Leviathan ruler, but which remains a reality in the relationship between nations. But, whereas for Hobbes the state of nature is a war between individuals; for Schmitt one can speak of a state of war between nations as well as between groups within a nation. Friends and enemies are always groupings of people. In our time of mass multicultural immigration we can see clearly how enemy groups can be formed inside a national collectivity, groups seeking to undermine the values and the ethnic character of the national group. Therefore, to have a concept of the political is to be aware, in our multicultural age, of the possibility that enemy outgroups can emerge within our liberal nations states; it is to be aware that not all humans are equally individualistic, but far more ethnocentric than Europeans, and that a polity which welcomes millions of individuals from collectivist cultures, with a human nature driven by the passions for power and for recognition, constitute a very dangerous situation.

It was Hegel, rather than Hobbes, who spoke of the pursuit of honor instead of the pursuit of riches or power for its own sake, as the spirited part of human nature, which is about seeking recognition from others, a deeply felt desire among men to be conferred rightful honor by their peers. We can bring this Hegelian insight into Schmitt to argue that the spirited part of the soul is intimately tied to one’s sense of belonging to a political community with ethno-cultural markers. Without this spirited part members of a community eventually lose their sense of collective pride, honor, and will to survive as a political people. It is important to understand that honor is all about concern for one’s reputation within the context of a group. It is a matter of honor for immigrants, the males in the group, to affirm their heritage regardless of how successful they may be economically. Immigrants arriving in large numbers are naturally inclined to establish their own ethnic groupings within Western nations rather than disaggregate into individual units, contrary to what liberal theory says.

Non-White ethnic groupings stand as “the other,” “the stranger,” to use Schmitt’s words, in relation to nations where Europeans still constitute the majority. The friend-enemy distinction, certainly “the Us versus Them” distinction, can be applied to the relation between non-White ethnic groupings and European national groupings in the degree to which the collective actions of non-European groups negates the heritage and overall way of life of the majority European population. Ethnic groupings that negate the way of life of European liberal nations must be repulsed if European nations are to preserve their “own form of existence.” To be cognizant of this reality is what it means to have a concept of the political in our current age of mass immigration. It does not mean that alien groupings are posing an immediate physical threat. Enemy groupings may also emerge as a major force through sheer demographic growth in a seemingly peaceful atmosphere, leading to all sorts of differences over voting patterns, accumulation of wealth and resources, ethnic hierarchies, divergent customs and religious practices, that become so pervasive that they come to threaten the way of life of the founding peoples, polarizing the nation into US versus Them.

The Leftist Interpretation of Schmitt is Wrong

But don’t Western liberals have enemies? Don’t they believe, at least many Republicans, that Islamic radicals, and nations openly opposed to “Western values,” are enemies of liberalism, against whom military violence may be used when necessary, even if Republicans negate the political in the sense that they want to bring about a situation in which humans define themselves as economic agents, or as moral crusaders dedicated to “democratic” causes? Don’t multicultural liberals believe that opponents of multiculturalism and mass immigration in Western countries are “deplorable” people who must be totally marginalized as enemies of humanity?

Academics on the left have indeed appropriated Schmitt to argue that right wing liberals have not negated the political but simply produced a highly effective smokescream over the West’s ambition to impose an American-led corporate order in the world nicely wrapped with human rights for everyone. They see Schmitt as someone who can teach us how to remove the smokescream of “democracy,” “human rights,” and “economic liberty” from Western hegemony, exposing the true power-seeking intentions behind the corporate liberal elites.

It seems to me that this appropriation of Schmitt is seriously flawed. Of course, Schmitt did not say that liberal nations as such are utterly devoid of any political existence, and of a concept of the political, since the very existence of a state supposes a sovereign right over a territory. A complete denial of the political would amount to a denial of the existence of one’s state. It is also true that for Schmitt “what has occurred [in liberal nations] is that economics has become political” in the enormous power that capitalist firms have, and in the way liberal states seek to augment, through non-economic means, their market share across the world. More than this, Schmitt emphasized how liberal states have “intensified” the enemy-friend distinction by ostracizing as enemies any state or political group disagreeing with their conception of humanity and conceptualizing liberal aggression against illiberal nations as final wars to end all wars.

There is no question, however, that Schmitt’s central thesis is that liberalism has no concept of the political and that it lacks a capacity to understand the friend-enemy distinction. Liberals believe that the “angelic” side of humans can manifest itself through proper liberal socialization, and that once individuals practice a politics of consensus-seeking and tolerance of differences, both inside their nations and in their relationships with other liberal nations, they will learn to avoid war and instead promote peaceful trade and cultural exchanges through commercial contracts, treaties, and diplomacy. Even though liberal states have not been able to “elude the political,” they have yet to develop theories of the political which apprehend this sphere of human life in terms of its defining aspect, the friend-enemy distinction. Rather, liberal theorists are inclined to think of the state as one pressure group among a plurality of political groups all of which lack a concept of the political in thinking that differences between groups can be handled through institutions that obtain consensus by means of neutral procedures and rational deliberation.

cs-cp1378163873.jpgThe negation of the political is necessarily implicit in the liberal notion that humans can be defined as individuals with natural rights. It is implicit in the liberal aspiration to create a world in which groups and nations interact through peaceful economic exchanges and consensual politics, and in which, accordingly, the enemy-friend distinction and the possibility of violence between groups is renounced. The negation of the political is implicit in the liberal notion of “humanity.” The goal of liberalism is to get rid of the political, to create societies in which humans see themselves as members of a human community dedicated to the pursuit of security, comfort and happiness. Therefore, we can argue with Schmitt that liberals have ceased to understand the political insomuch as liberal nations and liberal groups have renounced the friend-enemy distinction and the possibility of violence, under the assumption that human groups are not inherently dangerous to each other, but can be socialized gradually to become members of a friendly “humanity” which no longer values the honor of belonging to a group that affirms ethno-cultural existential differences. This is why Schmitt observes that liberal theorists lack a concept of the political, since the political presupposes a view of humans organized in groupings affirming themselves as “existentially different.”

Thus, using Schmitt, we can argue that while Western liberal states had strong ethnic markers before WWII/1960s, with immigration policies excluding ethnic groupings deemed to be an existential threat to their “national character,” they were nevertheless highly susceptible to the enactment of norms promoting the idea of civic identity, renouncing the notion that races are real, romanticizing Third World peoples as liberators, and believing that all liberal rights should be extended to all humans regardless of nationality, because they lacked a concept of the political. The racial or ethnocentric liberalism that prevailed in the West, collectivist as it remained in this respect, was encased within a liberal worldview according to which, to use the words of Schmitt, “trade and industry, technological perfection, freedom, and rationalization . . . are essentially peaceful [and . . .] must necessarily replace the age of wars.”

They believed that their European societies were associations of individuals enjoying the right to life and liberty. The experience of WWII led liberals to the conclusion that the bourgeois revolutions of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, which had finished feudal militarism, and which then led the Allies to fight a world war against the new militarism of fascism, were still “unfinished revolutions.” The liberal bourgeois nations were still not liberal enough, in their division and ranking of individuals along ethnic lines, with many individuals not enjoying the same rights that were “naturally” theirs. The project of the Enlightenment, “the universalist spirit of the political Enlightenment,” in the words of Jürgen Habermas, was not yet completed.

What Western liberals in the 1960s, the ones who dismantled immigration laws that discriminated against non-Whites, and introduce the notion that multiple cultures could co-exist within the same state, did not realize was that their sense of racial identity was the one collectivist norm still holding their liberal nations safely under the concept of the political. Once this last bastion of collectivism was deconstructed, liberal nations would be caught up within a spiral of radicalization wherein liberal nations would find it ever more difficult to decide which racial groups may constitute a threat to their national character, and which groups may be already lurking within their nations ready to play the political with open reigns, ready to promote their own ethnic interests; in fact, ready to play up the universal language of liberalism, against ethnocentric Europeans, so as to promote their own collectivist interests.

Source: http://www.eurocanadian.ca/2016/10/carl-schmitt-liberal-n... [6]

Article printed from Counter-Currents Publishing: http://www.counter-currents.com

URL to article: http://www.counter-currents.com/2016/10/carl-schmitt-is-right/

URLs in this post:

[1] Image: http://www.counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/carlschmitt.jpg

[2] Carl Schmitt’s argument: http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/C/bo5458073.html

[3] Image: http://www.counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/SchmittQuote.jpg

[4] in our struggle for survival and competition with other groups: https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/0985452307/ref=as_li_tf_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=15121&creative=330641&creativeASIN=0985452307&linkCode=as2&tag=counofeurocan-20

[5] Image: http://www.counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/State-of-nature-Hobbes.jpg

[6] http://www.eurocanadian.ca/2016/10/carl-schmitt-liberal-nations-have-open-borders-because-they-have-no-concept-of-the-political.html: http://www.eurocanadian.ca/2016/10/carl-schmitt-liberal-nations-have-open-borders-because-they-have-no-concept-of-the-political.html

mercredi, 02 novembre 2016

Presseschau - November 2016

 

lundi, 31 octobre 2016

A LIRE : Le Questionnaire, d’Ernst von Salomon

Ernst-von-Salomon.jpg

A LIRE : Le Questionnaire, d’Ernst von Salomon

Ex: http://www.theatrum-belli.com

Le célèbre auteur des Réprouvés, cadet prussien qui racontera sa perception presque romantique de l’histoire des corps-francs d’après-guerre et du terrorisme des groupuscules nationalistes, a également publié en 1951 un livre fameux, Le Questionnaire, que Gallimard a la bonne idée de rééditer.

Questionnaire.jpgL’architecture générale du livre s’appuie sur les quelques 130 questions auxquelles les Américains demandèrent aux Allemands de répondre en 1945 afin d’organiser la dénazification du pays, mais en les détournant souvent et prenant à de nombreuses reprises le contre-pied des attentes des vainqueurs. A bien des égards, le livre est ainsi non seulement à contre-courant de la doxa habituelle, mais camoufle également bien des aspects d’une réalité que l’Allemagne de la fin des années 1940 refusait de reconnaître : « Ma conscience devenue très sensible me fait craindre de participer à un acte capable, dans ces circonstances incontrôlables, de nuire sur l’ordre de puissances étrangères à un pays et à un peuple dont je suis irrévocablement ». Certaines questions font l’objet de longs développements, mais presque systématiquement un humour grinçant y est présent, comme lorsqu’il s’agit simplement d’indiquer son lieu de naissance : « Je découvre avec étonnement que, grâce à mon lieu de naissance (Kiel), je peux me considérer comme un homme nordique, et l’idée qu’en comparaison avec ma situation les New-Yorkais doivent passer pour des Méridionaux pleins de tempérament m’amuse beaucoup ». Et à la même question, à propos des manifestations des SA dans la ville avant la prise du pouvoir par les nazis : « Certes, la couleur de leurs uniformes était affreuse, mais on ne regarde pas l’habit d’un homme, on regarde son coeur. On ne savait pas au juste ce que ces gens-là voulaient. Du moins semblaient-ils le vouloir avec fermeté … Ils avaient de l’élan, on était bien obligé de le reconnaître, et ils étaient merveilleusement organisés. Voilà ce qu’il nous fallait : élan et organisation ». Au fil des pages, il revient à plusieurs reprises sur son attachement à la Prusse traditionnelle, retrace l’histoire de sa famille, développe ses relations compliquées avec les religions et les Eglises, évoque des liens avec de nombreuses personnes juives (dont sa femme), donne de longues précisions sur ses motivations à l’époque de l’assassinat de Rathenau, sur son procès ultérieur et sur son séjour en prison. Suivant le fil des questions posées, il détaille son éducation, son cursus scolaire, son engagement dans les mouvements subversifs « secrets », retrace ses activités professionnelles successives avec un détachement qui parfois peu surprendre mais correspond à l’humour un peu grinçant qui irrigue le texte, comme lorsqu’il parle de son éditeur et ami Rowohlt. Il revient bien sûr longuement sur les corps francs entre 1919 et 1923, sur l’impossibilité à laquelle il se heurte au début de la Seconde guerre mondiale pour faire accepter son engagement volontaire, tout en racontant qu’il avait obtenu en 1919 la plus haute de ses neuf décorations en ayant rapporté à son commandant… « un pot de crème fraîche. Il avait tellement envie de manger un poulet à la crème ! ». Toujours ce côté décalé, ce deuxième degré que les Américains n’ont probablement pas compris. La première rencontre avec Hitler, le putsch de 1923, la place des élites bavaroises et leurs rapports avec l’armée de von Seeckt, la propagande électorale à la fin des années 1920, et après l’arrivée au pouvoir du NSDAP les actions (et les doutes) des associations d’anciens combattants et de la SA, sont autant de thèmes abordés au fil des pages, toujours en se présentant et en montrant la situation de l’époque avec détachement, presque éloignement, tout en étant semble-t-il hostile sur le fond et désabusé dans la forme. Les propos qu’il tient au sujet de la nuit des longs couteaux sont parfois étonnants, mais finalement « dans ces circonstances, chaque acte est un crime, la seule chose qui nous reste est l’inaction. C’est en tout cas la seule attitude décente ». Ce n’est finalement qu’en 1944 qu’il lui est demandé de prêter serment au Führer dans le cadre de la montée en puissance du Volkssturm, mais « l’homme qui me demandait le serment exigeait de moi que je défende la patrie. Mais je savais que ce même homme jugeait le peuple allemand indigne de survivre à sa défaite ». Conclusion : défendre la patrie « ne pouvait signifier autre chose que de la préserver de la destruction ». Toujours les paradoxes. Dans la dernière partie, le comportement des Américains vainqueurs est souvent présenté de manière négative, évoque les difficultés quotidiennes dans son petit village de haute Bavière : une façon de presque renvoyer dos-à-dos imbécilité nazie et bêtise alliée… et donc de s’exonérer soi-même.

Au final, un livre qui doit être lu, car au-delà même de ce qu’il raconte de von Salomon et de l’entre-deux-guerres, il est également très éclairant sur la façon dont une partie non négligeable de la population allemande s’est en quelque sorte « auto-protégée » en 1945.

Gallimard, Paris, 2016, 920 pages. 18,50 euros.

Source : Guerres & Conflits

vendredi, 21 octobre 2016

Van Reich tot Republik

Brandenburg-Gate-24946.jpg

Van Reich tot Republik

Sander Carollo interviewt Dirk Rochtus over zijn nieuw boek van Reich tot Republik, te verkrijgen in de betere boekhandel of te bestellen via http://www.doorbraakboeken.be

mardi, 18 octobre 2016

Parteienstaat und Staatsparteien

Parteien-bei-der-Bundestagswahl-2017-Mosaik-bundestagswahl-2017.com_-1.png

Parteienstaat und Staatsparteien

dimanche, 16 octobre 2016

Des communautés alternatives centenaires : Sol Veritas Lux

lebensreform-monte_verita-6.jpg

Des communautés alternatives centenaires : Sol Veritas Lux

Ex: http://rebellion-sre.fr

Les mouvances alternatives des années 1970 à 2010 n’ont rien inventé. A l’aube du 20ème siècle, la modernisation de l’Europe sous les coups de l’industrialisation et du capitalisme faisait naître des expériences culturelles et communautaires très particulières. ( article paru dans le Rébellion 42 de juin 2010 )

Des anarchistes illégalistes, buveurs d’eau et végétariens

En France, les milieux anarchistes individualistes menaient campagne pour une vie saine, avec la nécessité affirmée de suivre une éthique de vie basée sur la lutte contre l’alcoolisme (véritable fléau social qui garantit au Capital la passivité de la classe ouvrière), la promotion de l’alimentation végétarienne, le refus des règles de l’ordre bourgeois et la mise en place d’une éducation populaire émancipatrice.

A Paris, avant la Grande Guerre, des associations et des foyers anarchistes (mais aussi syndicalistes et socialistes révolutionnaires) développent de manière pratique ce mode d’existence qui se veut en dehors du système. C’est une affirmation radicale du refus de « participer » aux règles de la société qui trouve un écho particulier chez les anciens partisans de la « propagande par le fait » (c’est-à-dire les anarchistes qui utilisaient le terrorisme et la « reprise individuelle » comme moyen d’action). Militant révolutionnaire accusé par la police d’être un complice de la « bande à Bonnot », Louis Rimbault (1877-1949) fut une farouche figure de cette mouvance. Léo Malet, le meilleur auteur de polar français, connu ce genre de foyer dans les années 1930 et l’évoque dans les aventures de Nestor Burma, son personnage d’ ancien anar reconverti en détective privé.

monteverita.jpgOmbres et lumières de Monte Verità

En Allemagne, le mouvement de « réforme de la vie » prônait la fuite des villes, le retour à la nature comme solution à la crise causée par le mercantilisme grandissant, le végétarisme, le refus de l’alcool et du tabac, le nudisme, les médecines naturelles (notamment les débuts de l’homéopathie), la liberté sexuelle, le mysticisme et la découvertes des spiritualités orientales.

Cas emblématique, qui à lui seul incarne les richesses et les ambiguïtés de ce genre d’expérience, la colonie de Monte Verità fut fondée par un groupe issus de la bohème bavaroise. Dans le cadre naturel magnifique du Tessin suisse, une petite communauté d’hommes et de femmes s’installe pour fonder une communauté idéale et libre. Le fils d’un industriel belge, Henri Oedenkoven finance les travaux de création d’une sorte de sanatorium végétarien. Sa femme, Ida Hofmann, professeur de piano, wagnérienne et féministe aura un rôle central dans l’expérience.

Il s’agissait de créer ce qui était voulu comme un lieu de renaissance et de régénération, de jeter les fondements d’une « nouvelle vie » hors de la structure corrompue du monde en édification. Vie communautaire, alimentation végétarienne et frugale, séances d’héliothérapie (en quelque sorte des bains de soleil, les « colons » vouaient un véritable culte à l’astre solaire) et de gymnastique : Monte Verità fut une apogée du culte du corps retrouvé. Une compagnie de danse séjourna de manière régulière dans les installations de la communauté.

Très vite, Monte Verità fut un point de rencontre pour des naturistes, des réformateurs sociaux, des militants révolutionnaires (dont beaucoup feront partis des activistes des conseils ouvriers de Bavière après la défaite de 1918), des artistes, des anthroposophes et autres théosophes de toutes les nationalités. Des dissensions se produisirent assez rapidement entre le couple des fondateurs (qui voulait développer l’image de marque de la communauté et créer un centre hôtelier de remise en forme avant l’heure) et la frange la plus radicale de la communauté. Les frères Graser reprochaient les compromis passés avec le système pour faire vivre financièrement le projet. Gusto Graser mènera la fronde et se retira dans une caverne en ermite avec sa femme Jenny Hofmann (sœur d’Ida). Sous l’influence des religions et philosophies orientales, il devient un prophète ambulant d’un panthéisme pacifique. L’écrivain allemand, Hermann Hesse fut très lié à Graser et lui rend hommage dans son œuvre la plus importante, Demian.

MVascona-arton3845.jpgLe choc de la Grande Guerre devait anéantir ses tentatives alternatives, mais d’autres devaient naitre sur les ruines de notre continent. L’expérience révolutionnaire et poétique de Fiume en 1917 sera une autre forme de cette recherche d’une communauté idéale. Mais cela est déjà une autre histoire.

A lire sur le sujet :

Nous avons repris pour l’écriture de cet article la mine d’informations représentée par les deux numéros de la revue (DIS)CONTINUITE. Ces deux volumes contiennent plus de 400 pages chacun de textes du courant anarchiste naturien.

  • Naturiens, végétariens, végétaliens et crudivégétaliens dans le mouvement anarchiste français (1895-1938), juillet 1993, 485 p. 16, 80 euros
  • Communautés, naturiens, végétariens, végétaliens et crudivégétaliens dans le mouvement anarchiste français ; février 1994, 485p. 21,30 euros.

Disponible auprès de François Bochet, Moulin des Chapelles, 87800 Janailhac

Sur les divers dimensions et aspects du culte solaire, nous conseillons vivement la lecture de la revue Solaria. Publication traitant de la solarité autant du côté scientifique que spirituel, elle est une référence dans le domaine. Abonnent : 2 numéros ( un an ): 12€.

Contact : Jean-christophe Mathelin, 7 rue Christian Dewet 75012 Paris

samedi, 15 octobre 2016

Eric Margolis on Germany and France

Angela-Merkel-refugees-Germany-politics-705572.jpg

If You Think the US Has Problems…

Eric Margolis on Germany and France

Europeans, whose male political leaders all seem to have mistresses,  would laugh off Trump’s awkward gropes and the outrage they caused as adolescent. Better gropes than a possible war with Russia over Syria.  But Trump looks like a mastodon stuck in a primeval tar pit, ambushed by Democratic hunters.

Does anyone remember the Democrat’s young god, Jack Kennedy, who used to drag women into the White House linen closet,  smoke a joint, and give them a presidential quickie? Lyndon Johnson’s Texas rough-riding, or Nelson Rockefeller’s too young girlfriends that did him in? 

RefugeeMapGermany2015.jpgBad as things are in the US, they are not much better in Europe. The foolish flight of racist Britain from the European Union has deflated its outrageously inflated pound sterling and spread panic among fat cat bankers and property developers. The last rags of Britain’s imperial pretensions have been ripped away.

Things are so bad right now that the odious Tony Blair, who seduced the wife of his patron, Rupert Murdoch, is trying to slither back into political life.

Here in Germany, Europe’s bulwark, the political ground is shaking. Chancellor Angela Merkel has been a cautious, capable leader. Her courageous admission of 1.1 million Mideast and Afghan refugees was the right thing to do morally but a political disaster for her center-right party.

In fact, Merkel’s long tenure in office may be nearing its end.  Younger Germans are tired of bland ‘Mama Merkel’ and their nation’s kowtowing to Washington. Germany remains in some ways the defeated, occupied nation of 1945.

Many Germans call for stronger government action over the foundering Deutsche Bank. Located here in Frankfurt, this dummkopf bank has lost huge amounts of money and run onto the rocks due to unconstrained greed and managerial ineptitude. Deutsche’s real problem is that it tried to be like a rapacious American bank rather than like a conventional, conservative German bank. How could Germans be so stupid?

The Berlin government will probably have to rescue Deutsche Bank sometime soon, or at least engineer a takeover. It does not help that the US may fine Deutsche up to $14 billion for peddling rotten real estate bonds in the US before 2008. Or that the bank may be in hock for a staggering $46 billion in mysterious derivatives few understand. All this is pure casino capitalism.  Maybe they should rename the bank, Die Bank Trump!

Deutsche Bank’s collapse could bring a Lehmann Brothers-type panic to Europe’s already deeply stressed financial system.

Italian banks are in terrible shape, up to their tortellini in bad debts. Their depositors are likely to be hard hit in any bail-out or bail-in. However, the rule remains: save the banks first, then women and children.

Meanwhile, across the Rhine, France’s political landscape is shaking. The wretched President Holland, who has the charisma of a wet croissant, is now the most unpopular leader since Robespierre – maybe even more so.

Like the US Republican rats abandoning their sinking electoral ship, France’s center-left wants to ditch albatross Holland but can’t find any candidate popular enough to replace him.

Presidential elections are due in April and May, 2017.  The opposition Republicans have a so-so candidate in Nicholas Sarkozy and a good one in Alain Juppé. Sarkozy is still under investigation for taking campaign cash from Libya’s late Muammar Khadaffi – who was bumped off in what looks like a French-engineered murder.

Behind them looms the specter of National Front Leader Marine le Pen.  Her effort to ditch the EU and NATO, kick out the Arabs, and adopt economic nationalism makes her a French version of Trump. But she is a far more adept politician and a gifted speaker.

Like America’s Republican oligarchy facing Trump, France’s political elite trembles before Le Pen. So does the rest of Europe as her radical thinking enflames rightwing parties across the continent. The Front National could replace France’s venerable Socialists as the nation’s second party and main opposition.

Spain is in political paralysis, unable to elect a government.  In Brussels, the EU is trying to reshape its role after Brexit and find a new ‘raison d’etre.’  At least it will no longer put up with British sabotage. It’s what Trump would call ‘a disaster.’

vendredi, 14 octobre 2016

An Update From Germany

polizei164~_v-videowebl.jpg

An Update From Germany

By

Ex: http://www.lewrockwell.com

Germany is smaller than California. Within the last two years, it has allowed in roughly two million Muslim refugees and immigrants, all by fiat. Having no voice in this radical demographic change, many Germans are fuming.

Last year, I wrote from Leipzig that Germany has lost its autonomy and sanity. Teaching at the university, I registered that all my students were openly sympathetic towards Muslim refugees, so I suggested they look harder at their government’s complicity in the US’s endless war against Muslims.

The best way to help Afghans, Iraqis, Libyans and Syrians is to not kill them and destroy their countries, obviously. My students couldn’t quite go there, however, for that would entail them being “anti-American,” a big no-no in their vassal state. In the lobby of my university building, there was a banner admonishing against xenophobia, Islamophobia, homophobia, sexism, anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism.

The biggest taboo in Germany is Israel’s role in this serial destruction, and not just of Muslim but European countries. Badgered for decades with Holocaust guilt, no self-respecting German can bat a dark eyelash in any Jew’s direction. They cannot probe George Soros, for example. Though Germany was being purposely dismantled, my students could not see it.

Yesterday, a Syrian terrorist suspect was taken into custody in Leipzig, only to be found dead by suicide hours later. Of course, it’s a preposterous story. One can expose false flag events and planted stories while acknowledging that real crimes by Muslims are also occurring, however. As with the amplifying tension between blacks and whites in the US, Muslims are being deployed in Europe sow chaos and disunity.

media_xll_8309982.jpg

Millions of young, impoverished young men from cultures that frown on alcohol and the exposure of female flesh are being imported into a country of huge beer steins and nude sunbathing. What can go wrong? A friend of mine in Frankfurt gives us an update:

Things are slowly sliding into chaos. “Refugees” keep pouring in (600,000 so far this year). The Secretary of the Interior proudly announced that last year, only 880,000 refugees came to Germany, not 1.1 million, as was said before. The problem is nobody really knows how many refugees were never registered. The borders were open, they are still open, so people came and just vanished.

A good example: In the summer of 2015, just before the refugee crisis got into high gear, we had the G20 meeting in Munich. It was intensively protected with tens of thousands of policemen in Bavaria. During one week, the police conducted border controls, and guess what? In one week, they “found” 14,000 illegal persons—persons who had secretly sneaked into Germany. That was in only ONE week. They haven’t done that since.

Cities are changing—when you go to the central station of any German town, you see lots and lots and lots of foreign men—Arabs and Blacks etc. In Frankfurt, the police admit that they have lost control of the central station (in regards to the selling of drugs and petty crimes).

In Leipzig, a famous club in Connewitz called Conne Island had to admit that they have a teensy weensy bit of a problem with a new clientele—that women didn’t feel save anymore, that violence erupted on many nights, that women were sexually harassed, etc. Therefore, they increased security measures. Though they really tried hard not to appear racist or anything like that, everybody with two brain cells left knows of whom they were talking about.

But still, we are officially told that there are no problems with increases in violence, theft, rapes, drug pushing, etc. What Germans see is something different. Anger is rising. We have rapes and other incidents on a daily basis.

In Dresden, some German youths threatened Syrian kids with a knife. This was widely condemned by the media. Then some German threw some really big fireworks at a mosque. Interestingly, the press reported this as a “bomb attack”. Now, we had a “bomb attack” when a refugee blew himself up in a crowd with some real explosives, killing himself and wounding 10 people. Though this was a real bomb, we are told that we have to despise and condemn those who put fireworks at the front of a mosque (hurting no one and not destroying really anything—only the wall was blackened).

Yet in regards to the refugee who blew himself up—or his colleague who (luckily) unsuccessfully tried to hack people to death with an axe on a train—nope, he is not to be condemned or despised.

We are constantly told that these Germans who attack refugees, as recently happened in Bautzen in the east of Germany, are “the ugly face of Germany”—something to be ashamed of. Yet we are not told that before some 80 Germans and some 30 refugees in Bautzen got into a fight, that for weeks and weeks the refugees in Bautzen had been getting drunk in public, harassing women, shouting abuses at passers-by, etc.

And we are never, never told that refugees showed the “ugly face of Islam” or whatever when things like in Cologne happened.

The cloak of political correctness is very heavy and thick now, hanging over everything.

A few days ago, a Syrian extremist, member of ISIS, escaped a raid by the police, who tried to get him (he was just planning a—you guess—big bomb attack at an airport), and while he was fleeing, he was caught by three other Syrians, who held him, tied him with a rope and took him to the police.

Schau an—the poor bastard hanged himself in his cell in prison. Funny, how all these terrorists never seem to survive their actions that long. Of course, there are rumors that there is something suspicious about it. We will never know, I guess. The secret services are surely behind some, but not all actions. It’s a mystery—and the one who tries to look into it can’t lead to a happy life, so few dare.

Now the press is full with coverage about the “first Syrian heroes” of Germany. Funnily enough, only nitpickers mention that, according to German law, binding somebody is illegal (German law has some exceptions for people to act in self-defense, but this was no such thing).

A few months ago, three Germans did the same thing. They held an Iraqi who was threatening people in a supermarket with a bottle, tied him to a tree and informed the police. Oh, the condemnation! How could they take the law into their own hands! Shame, shame, shame on them! No tolerance for this!

But here, with these three Syrians doing exactly the same thing, it’s all good. All nice. Heroes. Brave boys. Hurra Hurra und dreimal Hurra!

Really, some people get really frustrated because of all this, some will soon turn to violence, and others are just leaving. We know that especially highly qualified Germans are silently leaving the country, going to Australia, New Zealand, Canada, anywhere else, to escape this change in Germany.

polmunof-20dpa-14916E00AED14FB1-1-.jpg

Because a change it is, and not for the better. It seems somebody high above is hell bent on changing the very fabric of German society. And most people are so busy with making money, looking after the family, etc. that they really do not realize that the dismantling of Germany is well under way.

Okay, we already have parts in cities where the police are losing control and women do not go there alone at night—but no, these are no ghettos. Not yet. And if, as happened in Bonn, a language school has issued a warning to its foreign pupils to not go into certain areas because of the danger of getting mugged or raped there, if the school says it has recorded over 250 incidents of pupils who had had bad experiences in these areas—ah, come on, are you racists or what?!

Yes, we have more and more mosques. There are former Muslims like Sabatina James or Hamed Abdel-Sayed who are criticizing Islam, but they are only fringe figures. When Sabatina James says on the prime time news that child marriages, which are growing in number, are horrible, she is told by our anchorman that not all are horrible. Some are good.

Oh, happy country! Slowly, slowly, streets, cities, the way of life, etc., are changing. Let’s ban pork in Kindergarten—all right. Let’s call the Weihnachtsmarkt (Christmas market) Wintermarkt from now on—in order to not offend anybody. Let’s make separate days in public baths—one for the women, one for the men. And lastly, let’s tell the Germans that sharia is not all that bad—in fact, it perfectly matches our Grundgesetz, the constitution of the Federal Republic!

It is really strange to see all this, Linh. Slowly, slowly, our country is changing before our very eyes. Now—in danger of repeating myself—I do not blame Muslims in general. They are just pawns in a game, as I said before. But one has to be willfully ignorant to not see that this path that we are on is heading towards hatred, violence and (maybe) finally civil war.

My take is that the East Germans will resist it first—maybe they make a putsch or something like it and get out of the Federal Republic. It is possible.

You cannot change the whole fabric of a society and think that everybody will welcome it. The German structure of Germany, its very own culture, would change in such a way, that it wouldn’t be German anymore. It would be something new. Some will resist that, and I guess it will be the East Germans.

As the CIA once stated—by 2020, we should have civil unrest in Europe. I guess we might even start earlier.

Of course, I sometimes wonder WHY the powers that be want the destruction of German, but that is speculation. What counts is the result.

And this is clear: Germany is slowly eroded, changed, morphed into a multicultural society with no roots, where all groups watch each other suspiciously, where the few rich live well in their gated communities, while the rest of the population tries to survive another day. That’s the way.

Still, there is hope because there is something called fate. And I guess (or hope) fate has some surprises for the powers that be. In the very end, things may turn out differently. We’ll see.

This is the way the world ends.

This is the way the world ends.

Not with a bang, but a…… bigger bang. 

dimanche, 09 octobre 2016

Ernst von Salomon révolutionnaire, conservateur, amoureux

evsal-1.jpg

Ernst von Salomon révolutionnaire, conservateur, amoureux

Dans Les Réprouvés (1930), Ernst von Salomon retrace sa folle aventure politique au lendemain de la Grande Guerre. Son personnage littéraire devient emblématique de la Révolution conservatrice allemande et l’ouvrage une prophétie pour les générations perdues. Son enseignement : le nihilisme peut être vaincu par une passion plus vive que les tourments de l’Histoire. Le réprouvé trouve alors son salut dans l’expérience guerrière à laquelle succède l’élévation de l’esprit. 

evsal-3.jpgLes Réprouvés s’ouvre sur une citation de Franz Schauweker : « Dans la vie, le sang et la connaissance doivent coïncider. Alors surgit l’esprit. » Là est toute la leçon de l’œuvre, qui oppose connaissance et expérience et finit par découvrir que ces deux opposés s’attirent inévitablement. Une question se pose alors : faut-il laisser ces deux attractions s’annuler, se percuter, se détruire et avec elles celui qui les éprouve ; ou bien faut-il résoudre la tension dans la création et la réflexion.

Amoureux éperdu d’une Allemagne en lambeaux, éconduit par l’Histoire au soir de la Première Guerre mondiale à laquelle son trop jeune âge l’a empêché de participer, Ernst von Salomon incarne la passion révolutionnaire conservatrice en acte lorsqu’il choisit de s’engager au sein des corps francs pour poursuivre la lutte. Mais si Dominique Venner a pu décrire cette épopée mythique comme une aventure nihiliste, l’obstination déraisonnable de Salomon apparaît comme une authentique quête de sens qui se poursuit tout au long de son parcours de guerrier puis de militant. Malgré le désarroi ambiant et l’absence de but dont certaines têtes brûlées semblent souffrir, le marginal Salomon exprime toujours l’instinct de reconquête d’une nation chérie. À ses yeux, seule la révolution peut redonner à l’Allemagne sa splendeur d’antan, celle pour qui on lui avait appris à mourir.

Révolutionnaire éperdu

Ernst von Salomon a tout juste 16 ans lorsque l’armistice est signé le 11 novembre 1918,  âge des folies, des idées à couper au couteau et des passions qui empêchent la résignation. Si la confusion est le premier sentiment que confesse l’auteur à l’ouverture des Réprouvés, l’espérance lui succède aussitôt et c’est cette tension permanente entre deux penchants contraires qui fait de la lutte acharnée sa raison de vivre. Car la vie de l’auteur, au début de son œuvre, ne semble tenir qu’à la poursuite de son idéal, dont il entrevoit déjà sans doute qu’il est un mirage mais refuse pourtant de l’abandonner. Ainsi confesse-t-il : « Aussi nous étions prêts à agir sous la seule impulsion de nos sentiments ; et il importait peu que l’on pût démontrer par la suite la justesse de nos actes. Ce qui importait c’est qu’en ces jours des actes fussent accomplis. » Ce n’est pas la raison, ce n’est pas l’idée qui guide l’aspirant épris d’Allemagne et vexé par une paix humiliante, mais une rage sentimentale qu’il ne maîtrise pas. De là naît l’instinct révolutionnaire, instinct destructeur par essence qui se donne pour seul objectif de renverser l’ordre établi, y compris l’ordre intérieur, spirituel et moral, de celui qu’il anime. Il s’agit d’éprouver le monde en s’éprouvant soi-même, d’expérimenter avant de prétendre connaître.  

Le mouvement avant toute autre chose, l’action tous azimuts apparaissent comme les seules voies du salut, l’unique conviction de cette génération frustrée étant celle que rien de bon ne pourra surgir de l’ère du parlementarisme et de la bourgeoisie régnante. Peut-être ne le comprend-il pas encore, mais c’est contre l’immobilisme de la pensée systématique, qu’elle soit libérale ou marxiste, qu’il importe de lutter. Et si nous parlons de salut, il ne s’agit pas uniquement d’un salut collectif dans la restauration de la grandeur allemande. La guerre, puis la défaite et les conditions de la paix ont comme détruit moralement l’individu. Le mouvement est donc la condition de la survie de chacun, une tentative vitale de retrouver du sens : « Dans l’attaque nous espérions trouver une délivrance, une suprême exaltation de nos forces ; nous espérions être confirmés dans la conviction d’être à la hauteur de tout destin, nous espérions sentir en nous les véritables valeurs du monde. Nous marchions, nourris par d’autres certitudes que celles qui pouvaient valoir pour notre pays. » Des lignes qui rejoignent celles de La guerre comme expérience intérieure d’Ernst Jünger et montrent à quel point l’esprit de revanche anime les individus et fabrique des guerriers plutôt que des soldats, des hommes affranchis plutôt que des fonctions révocables.

C’est là l’expression d’une folie impatiente, d’une folie amoureuse. Refuser l’immobilisme, sans cesse se mettre en péril comme on se remet en question, c’est le signe de ce que la révolution nationaliste rejette l’amour platonique d’une idée. Parce que la nation tant aimée a été perdue, il convient de la conquérir à nouveau, d’en occuper les frontières comme on épouse les replis, et non pas de la séduire. Pourtant vient un moment où l’acte ne suffit plus à nourrir l’espérance. La violence exalte peut-être autant qu’elle détruit celui qui la subit comme celui qui l’exerce. « Nous avions allumé un bûcher où il n’y avait pas que des objets inanimés qui brûlaient : nos espoirs, nos aspirations y brûlaient aussi, les lois de la bourgeoisie, les valeurs du monde civilisé, tout y brûlait, les derniers restes du vocabulaire et de la croyance aux choses et aux idées de ce temps, tout ce bric-à-brac poussiéreux qui traînait encore dans nos cœurs », avoue l’auteur. L’idéal s’annihile, l’idéaliste tend vers le nihilisme. La fatalité de plus en plus évidente oblige le guerrier à considérer à nouveau ses aspirations, ou à mourir d’avoir consumé tout ce qui habitait son cœur. Pour survivre, il faut projeter de nouveau un idéal, tailler une alternative dans l’étendard terni que l’on brandit encore sans y croire. Le mouvement devient une coquille vide qui ne demande qu’à être remplie par une production de l’esprit, l’expérience est vaine sans la connaissance. Il ne s’agit plus seulement de se mouvoir pour survivre, mais de savoir dans quel sens se mouvoir, et dans quel but. Alors, la passion révolutionnaire, se souvenant qu’elle était née de la réaction, se propose un but conservateur audacieux.

evsal-2.jpg


Intellectuel et violent : le jaillissement de l’esprit

L’enchevêtrement permanent des considérations collectives et individuelles dans l’œuvre en fait un parfait portrait psychologique du révolutionnaire, du militant au sens strict (c’est-à-dire aux méthodes militaires). Mais dans la lutte politique de l’immédiat après-guerre, c’est d’abord le jeune Ernst von Salomon qui se révèle à lui-même, intellectuel et violent, bien plutôt qu’une idée qui avance. À ses débuts, la volonté politique de l’auteur et de ses complices est au mieux une quête, une volonté de retrouver des repères dans le brouillard de la crise ambiante, plus qu’une véritable velléité. Mais si la simple réflexion n’est pas au départ de cette quête, c’est un symptôme de ce que l’idéal allemand de la Révolution conservatrice naissante n’est pas purement philosophique. Il est plus englobant, plus total : c’est une « vision-du-monde » (Weltanschauung) certes imprégnée de philosophie, digérée par l’intellect, mais aussi concrètement éprouvée, viscérale. Cette vision du monde se nourrit autant de la pensée que de la volonté et se livre sous les traits du sentiment en des termes lyriques, oniriques, suggestifs ou allégoriques qui défient les jargons et les découpages conceptuels rationalistes. Style emblématique de la Révolution conservatrice allemande que l’on retrouve aussi bien sous la plume d’Ernst Jünger ou de Carl Schmitt, et qui vise à suggérer, toucher, projeter plutôt qu’à simplement exposer. Car le réprouvé qu’incarne Salomon n’est pas un homme de salon. Il n’éprouve pas non plus la connaissance, chez lui, l’expérience prime. Le ressenti du jeune homme précède sa formation intellectuelle et sa conscience métapolitique. Ce n’est qu’en écrivant qu’il recherche la vérité de valeurs éternelles dans l’extrémité des expériences vécues, pour muer l’expérience en connaissance. Pour la surélever, l’ériger au rang de l’utile et de l’accessible à tous, alors l’œuvre prend son sens. 

On retrouve ici une expression magnifique du paradoxe de la pensée révolutionnaire conservatrice, moderne parmi les anti-modernes en ce qu’elle se propose de retourner la modernité contre elle-même, mais aussi et surtout en ce qu’elle peut sembler accorder la priorité à l’action, l’impulsion naissant du domaine du sensible et non de celui des idées. Ce qui ne s’éprouve pas n’est que tergiversation bourgeoise, comme semble le suggérer l’un des camarades d’Ernst von Salomon à qui l’ouvrage de Walter Ratheneau — assassiné avec la complicité de notre auteur par l’Organisation Consul — intitulé Des choses futures n’inspire que ce commentaire lapidaire : « Tant d’étincelles et si peu de dynamite. » Primat dont le naufrage est admis par Salomon lui-même, lorsqu’il avoue avec dépit que les considérations de la haute politique font des corps francs des idiots utiles au service des intérêts étrangers. Et la volonté d’agir envers et contre tout dans une fuite en avant permanente ne semble épargner que ceux qui, comme lui, se trouvent capables de sublimer l’action par la pensée et en extraire un peu de vérité, éclaircir une vision du monde, se proposer un but. La folie révolutionnaire, pulsion anarchique et déraisonnable, est comme canalisée, équilibrée par l’instinct conservateur qui appelle une plus grande sagesse et un effort de conceptualisation indispensable.

Mais cet équilibre, Salomon ne le trouvera cependant pas, bien qu’il en ait l’intuition, avant sa sortie de prison. Encore trop brûlant, trop extrême dans sa volonté d’agir à tout prix, jusqu’au crime, jusqu’à une damnation qu’il ne semble même pas craindre. Les réprouvés sont des éconduits que la gifle de l’histoire a jetés dans les bras du démon, des marginaux que l’exclusion détruira pour les plus faibles, confortera dans une citadelle assiégée pour les autres. Peu avant sa mort, plus de 40 années après la publication des Réprouvés, il confesse s’être réellement interrogé sur le sens de son action lors de sa seconde détention, après laquelle il épouse pleinement le mouvement de la révolution conservatrice en amorçant pour de bon la « révolution de l’esprit » déjà évoquée et présente en germe dans son oeuvre. C’est-à-dire un travail de redéfinition des concepts, à l’image de celui des encyclopédistes français du XVIIIème siècle, précurseurs présumés de la Révolution française. Mais comme si la tension entre connaissance et expérience était fondamentalement indépassable, l’histoire confrontera ce travail, cette connaissance, à l’expérience du politique et le fera dépérir par le détournement idéologique et politicien du national-socialisme.

samedi, 08 octobre 2016

Zestien hoge Duitse rechters: Merkel breekt grondwet met massa immigratie

merkelrefuguésim.jpg

Zestien hoge Duitse rechters: Merkel breekt grondwet met massa immigratie

In ‘De Staat in de Vluchtelingencrisis’ wordt gesteld dat de bondskanselier een ‘staatsgreep’ heeft gepleegd en zichzelf tot ‘alleenheerser’ heeft gemaakt

‘De regering mag niet de identiteit van het volk, waar zij haar identiteit aan te danken heeft, structureel veranderen’

SPD wil na verkiezingen volgend jaar ultralinkse rood-rood-groene coalitie vormen


Bondskanselier Merkel kan met haar eenzijdige besluiten met recht een nieuwe Reichskanzler worden genoemd, net als haar illustere voorganger Adolf Hitler, die op vergelijkbare wijze stap voor stap de macht van het volk buiten werking stelde.

De almaar aanzwellende kritiek op haar ‘Wir Schaffen Das’ welkomsbeleid wimpelt Angela Merkel tot nu toe af als onbetekenend. Analisten vragen zich af of ze dat blijft doen nu 16 van Duitslands hoogste gerenommeerde rechters in het boek ‘De Staat in de Vluchtelingencrisis’ stellen dat de bondskanselier met haar immigratiebeleid op werkelijk alle punten de Duitse grondwet breekt. ‘Angela Merkel heeft het geldende recht feitelijk buiten werking gesteld,’ staat reeds in het voorwoord. ‘Het volk is de stille getuige van de afbraak van zijn collectieve identiteit,’ en de ‘door de staat gefinancierde media praten enkel de officiële koers na.’

‘Staatsgreep van boven’

Als gezaghebbende Duitse staats- en grondwetrechters, waaronder een rechter die tot het hoogste Grondwettelijke Hof behoort, Angela Merkel beschuldigen van een oneindig lange reeks wetsovertredingen, dan kan niemand meer ontkennen dat er bij onze Oosterburen iets zeer ernstigs gaande is. De opstellers van het boek hebben het zelfs over een ‘coup van boven’, een door de bondskanselier en haar vertrouwelingen zelf gepleegde staatsgreep – misschien wel het allerergste verwijt dat je als regeringsleider door rechters voor de voeten kan worden gegooid.

‘Lawine immigranten zal samenleving mee naar ondergang sleuren’

Met hun vertwijfelende oproep doen staatsrechters zoals professor Peter Huber (Grondwettelijke Hof) en professor Otto Depenheuer (Universiteit Köln) een appel op de elite om ‘nu het nog relatief rustig is’ de wissels voor immigratie om te zetten. Gebeurt dat niet, dan zal de ongecontroleerde ontwikkeling ‘tot een lawine’ uitgroeien die zowel de staat als de samenleving ‘met zich mee zal sleuren’ naar de ondergang, waardoor de rechtstaat totaal zal verdwijnen.

Dat dit geen rechtse complottheorie is, bewijst de regering Merkel met recent aangekondigde maatregelen en acties, zoals het binnenlands willen inzetten van het Duitse leger, de oproep aan alle burgers om een noodvoorraad aan te leggen, en de plannen om mogelijk al spoedig een verbod uit te vaardigen op het gebruik van contant geld.

‘Regering mag identiteit van het volk niet veranderen’

De rechtstaat is volgens de 16 rechters dankzij de migrantencrisis ‘aan het verdampen’, en daar is Angela Merkel de belangrijkste verantwoordelijke voor. ‘Het besluit van de bondskanselier om de grenzen voor iedereen open te houden, heeft geen democratische legitimiteit. De regering mag niet de identiteit van het volk, waar zij haar identiteit aan te danken heeft, structureel veranderen.’

‘Merkel heeft zichzelf tot alleenheerser gemaakt’

‘Nu Merkel zonder het volk te consulteren besluiten heeft gemaakt waarmee zowel de identiteit van het volk als het karakter van de nationale staat van dit volk ernstig wordt beschadigd, heeft ze zichzelf tot alleenheerser gemaakt. Dat is niet verenigbaar met het principe van de soevereiniteit van het volk.’ (1)

Censuur

Auteur en onderzoeksjournalist Udo Ulfkotte vraagt zich hardop af hoelang dit boek in de Duitse winkels zal liggen, aangezien de regering Merkel sinds vorig jaar op steeds hardere en strengere wijze censuur pleegt op alle media, en zelfs al bloggers heeft laten arresteren omdat ze zich openlijk uitspraken tegen haar massale moslim migranteninvasie van Duitsland en Europa.

SPD wil rood-rood-groene coalitie

Dat het bij onze Oosterburen na de verkiezingen van volgend jaar juist nog sneller richting afgrond kan gaan, blijkt uit het feit dat regeringspartij SPD (de Duitse PvdA) gesprekken voert met de Linken en Grünen voor de vorming van een zogeheten ‘rood-rood-groene’ coalitie, bedoeld om het CDU van Merkel buitenspel te zetten (2).

Wij verwachten dat die coalitie geen meerderheid zal behalen, maar alsnog met het CDU zal worden aangevuld, en er dus een ‘zwart-rood-groene’ coalitie ontstaat, die ons continent nog sneller zal islamiseren door het te overspoelen met miljoenen moslims.

Xander

(1) KOPP
(2) Focus

mercredi, 05 octobre 2016

De moderniteit als mislukt experiment

sloterdijkmod.jpg

De moderniteit als mislukt experiment

door Jonathan Van Tongeren

Ex: http://www.novini.nl

De moderne mens leeft in een hiaat, zo oordeelt de Duitse filosoof Peter Sloterdijk. In zijn briljante en tegelijk verontrustende boek ‘De verschrikkelijke kinderen van de nieuwe tijd’ zet hij zich aan het uitmeten van dit hiaat.

Voor Sloterdijk is de moderniteit het gevolg van het hiaat. Als Sloterdijk van hiaat spreekt, dan bedoelt hij het proces van het opbreken van tradities en het afbreken van verwantschappen. Waarlijk modern is derhalve naar zijn overtuiging “dat vanuit het niets het tot dan toe overtuigde leven, dat in de experimenterende omgang met zichzelf het besluit verwerkelijkt, de verschoten traditie door intensieve hypothesen te vervangen.”

slotkinder42435.jpgSloterdijk verbindt dit hiaat ook concrete historische gebeurtenissen vast. Zo heeft in de Franse Revolutie, met haar voorlopige hoogtepunt in de executie van koning Lodewijk XVI op 21 januari 1793, de breuk met alles wat geweest is zijn definitieve manifestatie gevonden.

Sloterdijk trekt vervolgens de lijn van deze breuk en zijn gevolgen door, via Napoleon tot aan de Russische Oktoberrevolutie en de moord op de Romanovs. Zijn oordeel met betrekking tot deze gebeurtenissen kon nauwelijks harder uitvallen: Zonder het hiaat, dus zonder 1789 en 1793, hadden Napoleon noch Stalin een kans gehad.

Het tijdperk van de reparaties

Tegen deze achtergrond mag het niet verwonderen dat Sloterdijk ook geen goed woord over heeft voor de politici van tegenwoordig, die logischerwijze eveneens producten van het hiaat van 1789 zijn. “Waar de moderniteit het tijdperk van de projecten was, bewijst zich de postmoderniteit als het tijdperk van de reparaties. [..] Waar vooruitgang en reactie de leidende begrippen van de 19e eeuw waren, zijn lapwerk en reparatie die van de 21e eeuw. Grotere politiek lijkt nog slechts in de vorm van uitgebreide pechservice mogelijk.”

Maar waarom is dat zo? Waarom kan politiek tegenwoordig niets meer tot stand brengen, maar nog slechts repareren en zodoende noodzakelijkerwijs mank gaan? Het antwoord levert Sloterdijk in de vorm van wat hij ‘de beschavingsdynamische hoofdregel’ noemt: “In het wereldproces na het hiaat worden voortdurend meer energieën los gemaakt dan onder vormen van tot overlevering in staat zijnde beschaving gebonden kunnen worden.”

Deze zin barst van het Sloterdijkiaanse taalgebaar, waarvan we toe moeten geven dat ze niet altijd meteen eenvoudig te begrijpen is. De filosoof slaagt er zo echter in het hele drama van de moderne mens in één zin te condenseren. Het gaat er om dat de moderne mens steeds met meer te maken krijgt dan hij verwerken kan. De moderne mens laat het zodoende vrijwillig afweten.

De breuk met het verleden was immers een vrije keuze van de mens, die hem vandaag de dag steeds vaker op de knieën dwingt: “Alleen de ontkrachting van het verleden [..] bewerkt dat mensen zichzelf vrij moeten ‘uitkiezen’ of ‘uitvinden’. De vrijen zijn niet alleen diegenen die zich van een heer ontdaan hebben. Ze zijn ook diegenen die men zonder verklaring op straat heeft gezet.”

Diegenen die op straat zijn achtergelaten zijn voor Sloterdijk de ‘verschrikkelijke kinderen van de nieuwe tijd’. Falende opvoeding en vrijwillige zelfontaarding van vaders en moeders zijn hiervan voor Sloterdijk overigens niet meer dan een symptoom. Hij bedoelt met de verschrikkelijke kinderen al diegenen die kinderen van hun tijd moeten worden omdat ze zo graag met tradities breken of het zonder klagen accepteren wanneer anderen dat voor hen doen. Wie geen bindingen heeft en geen bindingen erkennen wil, is verloren en moet toegeven aan wat de tijd waarin hij leeft hem opdringt als schema voor denken en handelen.

Als men Sloterdijk volgt in zijn analyse van wat hij in de ondertitel van zijn boek het ‘antigenealogische experiment van de moderniteit’ noemt, dan is dat experiment in ieder opzicht mislukt. Zelfs links, dat in zijn ambities voor experimenteren met de mens het meest gedurfd was, wist volgens Sloterdijk geen enkel succes te boeken. Wel integendeel, links is naar zijn mening de politieke manifestatie van de mislukking om de grootheden ‘partij’ en ‘klasse’ op elkaar af te stemmen.

De vraag die overblijft, is die naar redding; of uitredding uit het experiment van de moderniteit mogelijk is en zo ja hoe. Sloterdijks antwoord kon niet eenduidiger zijn. Wie zich ervoor behoeden wil een kind van zijn tijd te worden, die mag niet toegeven aan hen die de breuk met de traditie tot een onomstotelijk dictum willen verheffen. Want voor het in-de-wereld-zijn is er ook wat Sloterdijk betreft geen alternatief. Ieder mens en dus ook de mens in de nieuwste tijd heeft het echter in de eerste plaats zelf in de hand hoe hij zich in dit bestaan inricht. Deze autonomie zou hij nooit op moeten geven.

N.a.v. Die schrecklichen Kinder der Neuzeit. Über das anti-genealogische Experiment der Moderne (Suhrkamp Verlag, 2014), hardcover, 489 pagina’s. In het Nederlands verschenen als: De verschrikkelijke kinderen van de nieuwe tijd (Uitgeverij Boom, 2015), paperback, 352 pagina’s.

 
 

Presseschau - Oktober 2016

vendredi, 30 septembre 2016

The Characterology of Ludwig Klages

Klages developed a reactionary school of psycho-physical thought. Capable of 'psychoanalyzing' not just individuals, but races and even material structures such as buildings or cities, his work in some ways anticipates and outstrips postmodernism.

Is it possible to imagine a reactionary school of psychology? Jung and Szondi moved in this direction, while Freud is a representative of the dark side of the enlightenment that manifested itself in the early 1900s. His thoughts are pessimistic, but hard to combine with optimistic liberalism and with perennial tradition.

Instead, we find a reactionary psychology when we turn to Ludwig Klages and his so-called characterology. The science of Klages was used, in a modified form, by the German Wehrmacht, but he also influenced feminism with the concept of logocentrism. One of the ironies of history is that the legacy of the antisemitic Klages during the second half of the twentieth Century was mostly transmitted by German-Jewish thinkers such as Walter Benjamin and Wilhelm Reich. Benjamin was especially influenced by Klages, notably in his attempt to “read” architecture and in his studies of intoxication.

Characterology and psychology

… the question is how far the individual peculiarity of the living entity must be made the basis for interpreting every manifestation of life, and what means we possess for an intellectual penetration of individuality as such.
– Klages on the task of characterology

ludwig-2.jpgKlages does not think highly of most psychology. It is based on misunderstandings, it has limited possibilities to describe personalities, and it is not a science of the soul. This means that modern psychology and older wisdom about the soul are strangers to each other. Klages does connect to such wisdom. Among other things, he is interested in the psychological insights of folk-language. People are “seeing red”, they get “high” or “carried away”, and become “blue”. Klages is interesting to read when he studies this area.

The flaws of psychology are caused by it being a child of the modern age, adopting modern values. Klages notes that a renaissance psychologist would have studied a persons capacity to act, a medieval psychologist her faith, and a classical psychologist her ability to be happy. But not the modern psychologist. Klages writes:

Such traits have lost their value for the modern psychologist; they are not even regarded at all, and industry has remained as the only virtue with its satellites, ambition and success – a complex, that is, which the Ancients would never have hesitated to relegate to the lowest of men, to pariahs and to slaves.

Character and psychology

If his nature furnishes the material for the life-tune of the living man, then the material of character may be compared with the musical instrument which serves to translate the tune into sound.
– Klages on material and nature

The task of characterology is the study of personality. According to Klages a personality can be described using the concepts of material, nature and structure. Klages is not an egalitarian. Our material consists of the talents and gifts we have been handed. We are born with different gifts. Our nature is connected to our driving forces and interests, the general direction of our lives. Structure is also called temperament. Klages studies Personal Capacity for Stimulation of Feelings, Personal Capacity for the Stimulation of Will and Personal Capacity for Expression.

Klages insists that his science may be used not only to describe individuals, but also to understand peoples, races, epochs, castes, buildings et cetera. This brings to mind Klages friend Benjamin, and his attempt to interpret buildings and cities. Klages writes that ” in principle all relics of culture admit of interpretation” and “originally every object of apprehension was taken to delimit and delineate a soul”.

Klages is often a rewarding thinker. He explains hysteria with the concept of inhibition. In the modern world the connection of the soul to the body is often so repressed that many people appear to be hysterical. Phantasms, imitation, repetition, and representation abound. Some people never live, but represent most of their lives.

Ego, Soul, and Spirit

…the different species of character can all be traced back to different proportions in which Spirit and Soul are mixed.
– Klages

Klages is well known for his analysis of the conflict between Soul (Seele) and Spirit (Geist). Geist intrudes between the poles of Body and Soul, such that history is an account of the growing domain of Spirit. Klages describes the steps in this process. The connection between Soul and Body is severed, the body is condemned as “sinful”, the Will to Power takes the Place of Soul, and the Machine Man is born. Sometimes the process was primarily economic; those who could not keep up were pushed aside. At other times it has been very bloody (1789, the attack on the Templars, the Russian revolution). The process started with the mythical fall, when man became aware of his mortality and the Ego was born.

According to Klages, Ego is a combination of Soul and Spirit, “a chemical combination having for elements the universal spirit and an eternally particular soul”. Those with a strong Soul experience the world as a series of images. When Spirit grows too strong they are replaced by things (“things are Egos projected into the World”), things to control and manipulate.

Klages mentions four personality types, according to the combinations of Soul and Spirit. Ecstasy and intoxication (Benjamin’s Rausch) have important roles. During ecstasy some people can re-experience the union of Body and Soul. Klages also describes a personality type where Soul is strong and Spirit a servant. He describes intuitive and speculative types (the romantics used the terms night- and day-consciousness). Klages focuses on the night, on dreams and intuition.

ludwig-klages-1.jpgKlages as conservative

According to Klages the modern world is sick, but he is not a typical conservative. He sees Will to Power, as well as the restlessness of capitalism and modern science, as an expression of Spirit. Klages is no friend of Christianity either. Instead he views Life and the ability to experience it as the essential. Related to Soul are such things as love of nature, the home, the motherland, animals, plants, memories, ancestors and the Cosmos.

Klages is opposed to most of what modern liberals appreciate. He is no friend of the “Enlightenment”, of 1789, “progress” or “equality”. He is no feminist, but according to Klages women have historically been closer to Life and men to Spirit. He writes that the intelligence of women is different rather than inferior.

Klages and postmodernism

… the symbol has gone beyond that which it symbolized and thought, operating by symbols, has taken the place of thought operating by units of meaning, or even by concepts. But this is the essence of formalism.
– Klages

In many ways Klages is an early postmodernist, reminding us of Baudrillard. He talks about the growth of formalization, especially in finance and mathematics. Symbols swallow facts in the same way that money replaces value. Combined with his theory of hysteria and phantasm, this is a valuable key to understanding the modern world. All in all there is much of value in Klages and his characterology, especially for the reactionary reader.

vendredi, 23 septembre 2016

Retour sur une élection pas comme les autres à Berlin

berlin-flagge.jpg

Retour sur une élection pas comme les autres à Berlin

par Thomas Ferrier

Ex: http://thomasferrier.hautetfort.com

Les résultats définitifs de l’élection pour le parlement du Land de Berlin accentuent les tendances constatées au moment du sondage sorti des urnes. Avec 21.6%, la SPD perd 6.7 points alors qu’elle était au pouvoir en coalition au niveau de la capitale. Elle paie là son alliance au niveau national avec la CDU dans le cadre de la « grande coalition ». La CDU paie la politique migratoire suicidaire d’Angela Merkel, les électeurs de son camp lui répondant « wir schaffen nicht das » (« nous n’y arriverons pas »). Avec 17.6% des voix et 5.7 points de perte, elle connaît un résultat désastreux, à peine remise de son effondrement dans le Mecklembourg-Poméranie. A eux deux réunis, la grande coalition SPD/CDU n’atteint pas 40% des voix. Cette contre-performance va certainement accentuer la crise entre la CDU et son alliée bavaroise la CSU.

Die Linke (« La gauche ») avec 15.6% des voix progresse de 3.9 points aux dépens de la SPD et en partie de la liste Piraten. Les Verts (Die Grüne) en revanche avec seulement 15.2%, bien que n’étant pas associés au gouvernement, régressent de 2.4 points. Leur laxisme migratoire légendaire a pu les pénaliser légèrement dans cette élection.

C’est l’AFD de Frauke Petry qui avec 14.2% des voix réussit une progression spectaculaire. Annoncée seulement aux alentours de 11.5% en début de soirée, elle atteint au final presque 15%, soit la tendance haute annoncée par les sondages. Berlin-Est notamment a donné à l’AFD des scores plus que significatifs alors que Berlin-Ouest reste davantage « conformiste ». L’AFD sèche tout ce qui est à sa droite, que ce soit la scission ALFA (de Bernd Lucke) qui n’obtient que 0.4% des voix ou l’extrême-droite historique, la NPD obtenant péniblement 0.6%, ayant souffert d’un fort vote utile en faveur de l’AFD, tout comme Pro Deutschland qui tombe à 0,4% des voix (-0,8).

La formation de protection du monde animal Die Partei (« Le Parti ») obtient enfin 2% et les Pirates 1.7% soit une perte sèche de 7.2 points. Après un exploit à l’élection précédente, la formation pirate retourne à son noyau d’origine. Elle a été largement marginalisée par les enjeux locaux et par la montée de l’AFD contre laquelle la gauche radicale semble s’être davantage mobilisée.

Thomas FERRIER (Le Parti des Européens)