Such thinking was once dominant in Anglo-Saxon philosophy schools but the great expansion of tertiary education in recent decades has meant that many less rigorous thinkers have been employed as philosophers, some even being third-rate enough to find enlightenment in the words of an obsolete economist called Karl Marx. So philosophy schools are now replete with people who seem to think they are being profound when they say: “There is no such thing as right and wrong” or “There are many realities”. To an Anglo-Saxon empiricist, such statements are simply confused.

Such confused thinking is usually described (rather fancifully) these days as “postmodernism” but for historical purposes it is probably best subsumed under the broad category of “existentialism” — and there were many prominent existentialist thinkers in the first half of the 20th century, particularly in Germany. And many existentialist thinkers at that time were sympathetic to National Socialism (Nazism), just as their counterparts today are solidly in favour of all sorts of Leftist thinking. So existentialist thinking and Leftism have always been intimately associated among many who call themselves philosophers. And it should therefore be no surprise that prewar existentialists sound very profound to existentialists today.

The Nazi connection is however embarrassing. Heidegger, Carl Schmitt, DeMan and others sound very good and wise and profound to Leftist philosophers today so how do you cope with the Nazi connection? Easy: In the traditional Leftist way of dealing with all inconvenient facts — by ignoring it.

One of the holier of today’s existentialists has however recently upset the applecart by pointing out that the great god Heidegger was a Nazi and calling for all Heidegger’s thinking to be denounced and renounced. Leftists are not letting go of such an inspiring (to them) figure as Heidegger, however. What Heidegger says is central to what they say, so to denounce Heidegger would be to denounce most of their own thinking. And there the matter rests at the moment. A small excerpt from a NYT story about the matter below. That Nazi thinking is one subset of socialist thinking is, of course, never acknowledged:

For decades the German philosopher Martin Heidegger has been the subject of passionate debate. His critique of Western thought and technology has penetrated deeply into architecture, psychology and literary theory and inspired some of the most influential intellectual movements of the 20th century. Yet he was also a fervent Nazi.

Now a soon-to-be published book in English has revived the long-running debate about whether the man can be separated from his philosophy. Drawing on new evidence, the author, Emmanuel Faye, argues fascist and racist ideas are so woven into the fabric of Heidegger’s theories that they no longer deserve to be called philosophy. As a result Mr. Faye declares, Heidegger’s works and the many fields built on them need to be re-examined lest they spread sinister ideas as dangerous to modern thought as “the Nazi movement was to the physical existence of the exterminated peoples.”

First published in France in 2005, the book, “Heidegger: The Introduction of Nazism Into Philosophy,” calls on philosophy professors to treat Heidegger’s writings like hate speech. Libraries, too, should stop classifying Heidegger’s collected works (which have been sanitized and abridged by his family) as philosophy and instead include them under the history of Nazism. These measures would function as a warning label, like a skull-and-crossbones on a bottle of poison, to prevent the careless spread of his most odious ideas, which Mr. Faye lists as the exaltation of the state over the individual, the impossibility of morality, anti-humanism and racial purity.

The book is the most radical attack yet on Heidegger (1889-1976) and would upend the philosophical field’s treatment of his work in the United States, and even more so in France, where Heidegger has frequently been required reading for an advanced degree. Mr. Faye, an associate professor at the University of Paris, Nanterre, not only wants to drum Heidegger from the ranks of philosophers, he wants to challenge his colleagues to rethink the very purpose of philosophy and its relationship to ethics.

At the same time scholars in disciplines as far flung as poetry and psychoanalysis would be obliged to reconsider their use of Heidegger’s ideas. Although Mr. Faye talks about the close connection between Heidegger and current right-wing extremist politics, left-wing intellectuals have more frequently been inspired by his ideas. Existentialism and postmodernism as well as attendant attacks on colonialism, atomic weapons, ecological ruin and universal notions of morality are all based on his critique of the Western cultural tradition and reason.

I go into some detail about the confusions of “postmodernist” thinking here

(For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, DISSECTING LEFTISM, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, IMMIGRATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, EYE ON BRITAIN and Paralipomena . List of backup or “mirror” sites here or here — for readers in China or for everyone when blogspot is “down” or failing to update. My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here.)

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

For most of the last century, the West faced real enemies: totalitarian, aggressive, armed to the teeth. Between 1918 and 1989, it was possible to believe that liberal democracy was a parenthesis in history, destined to be undone by revolution, ground under by jackboots, or burned like chaff in the fire of the atom bomb.

Twenty years ago today, this threat disappeared. An East German functionary named Günther Schabowski threw open his country’s border crossings, and by nightfall the youth of Germany were dancing atop the Berlin Wall, taking hammers to its graffiti-scarred facade. It was Nov. 9, 1989. The cold war was finished.

Bark Bark Woof Woof actually has a pretty good summation of this

So perhaps the reason we’re not making a bigger deal out of the anniversary of the opening of the Berlin Wall is because it did not come after a brutal and bloody struggle. No shots were fired; after weeks of peaceful protests without repression from the state — a sign of impending capitulation itself — an East German bureaucrat mistakenly announced the lifting of visa requirements and the dreaded VoPos of East Germany stood meekly aside as the Trabants trundled through Checkpoint Charlie to the rhythm of rock music and dancing teenagers. What had been the stuff of James Bond and John Le Carre became Woodstock.

Still, BBWW failed to mention Reagan’s contribution to this. Without his economic war, disguised as a military one, we would not have seen what occurred on 11/9/89. Back to Ross

There will be speeches and celebrations to mark this anniversary, but not as many as the day deserves. (Barack Obama couldn’t even fit a visit to Berlin into his schedule.) By rights, the Ninth of November should be a holiday across the Western world, celebrated with the kind of pomp and spectacle reserved for our own Independence Day.

A nice little shot at Obama. I understand him not wanting to go. His writings showed that he had no clue what Reagan was doing, and, seriously, Obama has more in common with the Soviet leaders of that day than with strong American leaders willing to stand up for Freedom around the world at all costs. Plus, it would be difficult to turn the event into one about The One.

Never has liberation come to so many people all at once — to Eastern Europe’s millions, released from decades of bondage; to the world, freed from the shadow of nuclear Armageddon; and to the democratic West, victorious after a century of ideological struggle.

Thank you, Ronald Reagan!

Meanwhile, our domestic politics are shot through with antitotalitarian obsessions, even as real totalitarianism recedes in history’s rear-view mirror. Plenty of liberals were convinced that a vote for George W. Bush was a vote for theocracy or fascism. Too many conservatives are persuaded that Barack Obama’s liberalism is a step removed from Leninism.

Plenty? How about a majority of them, unhinged, constantly comparing Bush to Hitler, thinking that Bush was personally placing bugs in their homes and cars, spying on them, building detention centers for liberals, that he would not leave the White House on January 20th, 2009, but would stay as a dictator…..you know the whole thing.

Obama could never achieve Leninism, and doesn’t match up. He doesn’t have the leadership skills, nor the will power to make the tough decisions. He just floats from one PC to another, sprinkling campaign stops in between. But, he has way more in common with Lenin’s view points than with American viewpoints.

Problem being, totalitarianism is not dead and gone. Islamists exist, and their movement is growing. Is it as dangerous right now as the Soviet Union? Not even close. But, all it takes is people looking away, wishing the problem didn’t exist, treating it strictly like we can use RICO statues against it, for it to grow.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

The worst thing that you or I can do for the planet is to have children. If they behave as the average person in the rich world does now, they will emit some 11 tonnes of CO2 every year of their lives. In their turn, they are likely to have more carbon-emitting children who will make an even bigger mess. If Britain is to meet the government’s target of an 80% reduction in our emissions by 2050, we need to start reversing our rising rate of population growth immediately.

All children are bad, but Western children are particularly bad, because according to the Gaiaist religion,

the poorer you are, the less carbon you emit. By today’s standards, a cull of Australians or Americans would be at least 60 times as productive as one of Bangladeshis. …one less British child would permit some 30 women in sub-Saharan Africa to have a baby and still leave the planet a cleaner place.

As usual, the role model for liberals is communist China, which is praised for reducing its population by hundreds of millions by dictating to parents that they can only have one child — a policy that often results in infanticide for baby girls.

If communism and Nazism could leave tens of millions dead, what will be the death toll if the evil freaks driving the environmentalism movement get the leverage to inflict their anti-Western and anti-human fantasies?

In the US, we already have a Science Czar who has advocated putting sterilants in the water supply. Why not use poison instead? After all, it may only be a matter of years before global warming inconveniences the polar bears unless the human race is reduced to a few barefoot peasants cowering before their socialist overlords.

Hat tip: The Blogprof. Cross-posted at Moonbattery.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

My friend Ken Marrero over at Blue Collar Muse has posted an interesting if not entirely infuriating story about GOP officials coming down on other officials and certain county employees for having the gall to talk to those eeeevil Arizona bloggers that have been doggedly reporting the corruption stories of county officials.

GOP officials of Maricopa County have been in a bit of trouble recently having been accused of wasteful spending, power grabs and criminal investigations. Marrero even notes that there is a Twitter feed used to needle these officials called CorruptAZSupes.

The barbs have been coming fast and furious and County Manager David Smith has decided to try and stop the bleeding. So, did Smith decide to clean up the Supervisor’s office? Nope. He’s decided to attack Republicans that have talked to the press and the bloggers. Classic shooting the messenger mistake.

Smith sent a letter to the County Attorney’s office demanding to know who had relationships with bloggers – or else! They even specifically demand to know about activity that might have taken place on an employee’s personal time and their personal computers! Specifically named in the letter is Michael Scerbo, the County Attorney PIO, who is SUPPOSED to be in touch with the media! While there are some traditional media outlets mentioned, blogs are specifically targeted. The Sonoran Alliance, The Cactus Alliance and Intellectual Conservative Arizona are all named in the letter as being eeeeeeevil bloggers that bad County Attorney employees shouldn’t have anything to do with.

This is akin to a digital witch hunt, a modern day, electronic HUAC. Are you now, or have you ever been a member of a blog?

Catch this nonsense as contained in the letter being circulated by Smith:

Have you, whether under your name, some form of pseudonym, or anonymously, ever posted a blog, note or other communication on the internet concerning Maricopa County, any of its affiliated constituents (as defined in the Ethical Rules)?

Within the last six months, have you communicated with any person, site or entity listed below concerning the entities of individuals set forth in question 1 (a list of persons and blogs follows)

Seriously? The County Manager of Maricopa County imagines he has the power and right to force individuals to report to him what blogs they’ve communicated with and with whom they are in personal, private communications?

Now, certainly there are rules regarding what information may be communicated by officials. There are absolutely ethical rules and limits on some information. Every lawyer knows his ethical limitations and rules. but this letter seems to me to go way too far and verges on a fascist sort of demand upon county employees.

Anyway, it is interesting that Smith’s first impulse is to attack the bloggers instead of clean up the corruption of his office.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

The U.S. military is not just fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, America’s most renowned investigative journalist says.

The army is also “in a war against the White House — and they feel they have [President] Obama boxed in,” Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Seymour Hersh told several hundred people in Duke University’s Page Auditorium on Tuesday night. “They think he’s weak and the wrong color. Yes, there’s racism in the Pentagon. We may not like to think that, but it’s true and we all know it.”

In a speech on Obama’s foreign policy, Hersh, who uncovered the My Lai massacre during the Vietnam War and torture at Abu Ghraib prison during the Iraqi war, said many military leaders want Obama to fail.

“A lot of people in the Pentagon would like to see him get into trouble,” he said. By leaking information that the commanding officer in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, says the war would be lost without an additional 40,000 American troops, top brass have put Obama in a no-win situation, Hersh contended.

“If he gives them the extra troops they’re asking for, he loses politically,” Hersh said. “And if he doesn’t give them the troops, he also loses politically.”

Got that? The military is waging war on Barry. Intentionally. However, I would think, based on Obama’s numerous campaign talking points about increasing troop strength by several brigades would be a win, politically. But, it is a shame that the Left has to think about war in terms of what is politically best, rather than what is best to win. Of course, politics is life for the Left.

Anyhow, this article brought on some interesting comments from the Reality Based Community

• I’ve never been very comfortable with Gates in Obama’s administration. He doesn’t do anything really crazy to to get attention (and I sleep better knowing that Mr. Ding “Don” Rumsfield is out of the picture)…but, any Bush holdover, especially in Defense, is dangerous. I hope Hersch is over-reacting, but if he isn’t, I hope Obama’s got a plan to deal with all of these guys, at once. (don’t worry, I’m sure Obama has plenty of plans to deal with American’s who disagree with him. None to deal with threats to America, though)
• The Pentagon is hopelessly infested with neocons and Christian fanatics……who believe they’re in a “crusade” against Islam. (translation: too many Joooooooo lovers and non-Muslim religious folks)
• I agree. They are dangerous fanatics. (but, Islamic terrorists are “freedom fighters“)
• This is much of the problem. They can’t think outside the ‘end times’ box. (I guess they are all “fundies,” as well)
• Here we see the real enemy of our nation – once again the enemy within - the military industrial organization – the military and the corporations. POWER. (got that? The military, established by the Constitution, is the enemy)
• I’d start by reassigning McChrystal. That was a punk move by him. Obama needs to let those boys know that he’s in charge. (I thought Rahm Emanual and David Axelrod were in charge)
• Have you seen him, heard him talk? He’s an a**hole, bitter and dictatorial. (Is the DUmmy talking about McChrystal, or Barry?)
• He should be replaced on principle.These are not zealots but patriots fighting invaders. (Told ya! The Islamists are patriots, the US military is the bad guy)
• I’m sorry to say that I cannot respect military brass. The military seems to be corporate – evangelical – bigoted – and many have not grown up enough to treat women of the nations they are invading and occupying like humans – as well as our own – their co-military female soldiers. (DU moonbattery wrapped up in one nice, neat ball)

You just knew that, at some point, this thread had to move from “barking moonbat” to “bat sh*t crazy,” right? Here we go!

Red Cloud: Line up those who oppose their President and shoot them. Pre Pinochet thinking here. Their job is to do or die, not to become the Pentagon Propaganda machine (no comment necessary)

Wetzelbill: They flat refused to snatch terrorists when Clinton was president They did it several times. I think even The Weekly Standard wrote about that before. Richard Clarke discusses this in his book, Against All Enemies. There are people in the military status quo who will go along with any harebrained GOP scheme yet fight tooth and nail against anything that a Dem president wants. That’s just how it is. (huh? Now they are blaming the military for Clinton not accepting Osama on a platter three times?)

Greengestalt: How ’bout using force?…… And I’d just PURGE the NeoCON and “Dominionist” plants overnight. All of them, dishonorably discharged, no leave, no pay, no medical, no disability. I’d have the media, on threat of “Abuse of the Patriot act” quickly throw together made for TV movies that show them as child raping, “Non-Christian troop” fragging, psychopathic Nazis and take a few (quite a few, actually) examples of them harassing and threatening other troops and make sure those are played to ‘balance’ if they ever manage to get on the news about that. That way they’d be a huge burden on the “Religious Right”, while the rest of the real army could be repaired and mobilized for peaceful (non-armed) civilian public works projects.

I’d want to cut defense spending by 2/3, with 1/3 going to paying the debt, 1/3 to infrastructure. Laid off troops would become public servants in the new mass-transit systems. Due to all the enemies America has earned we’d need a small but still top trained army and a small nuclear ‘deterrent’, and sadly that would be the remaining 1/3. Basically, enough to defend the homeland, launch a limited “Precision Strike” if we decide to and the “MAD” option but in a smaller state.

But don’t say that the Left hates the military.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

The Justice Department’s ruling, which affects races for City Council and mayor, went so far as to say partisan elections are needed so that black voters can elect their “candidates of choice” – identified by the department as those who are Democrats and almost exclusively black.

The department ruled that white voters in Kinston will vote for blacks only if they are Democrats and that therefore the city cannot get rid of party affiliations for local elections because that would violate black voters’ right to elect the candidates they want.

Several federal and local politicians would like the city to challenge the decision in court. They say voter apathy is the largest barrier to black voters’ election of candidates they prefer and that the Justice Department has gone too far in trying to influence election results here. Stephen LaRoque, a former Republican state lawmaker who led the drive to end partisan local elections, called the Justice Department’s decision “racial as well as partisan.” “On top of that, you have an unelected bureaucrat in Washington, D.C., overturning a valid election,” he said. “That is un-American.”

The decision, made by the same Justice official who ordered the dismissal of a voting rights case against members of the New Black Panther Party in Philadelphia, has irritated other locals as well. They bristle at federal interference in this city of nearly 23,000 people, two-thirds of whom are black.

In interviews in sleepy downtown Kinston – a place best known as a road sign on the way to the Carolina beaches – residents said partisan voting is largely unimportant because people are personally acquainted with their elected officials and are familiar with their views.

More here

Posted by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.). For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. To keep up with attacks on free speech see TONGUE-TIED. Also, don’t forget your daily roundup of pro-environment but anti-Greenie news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH . Email me here

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

If CBS News has it right, the majority of in-home healthcare workers in Illinois voted not to join a union despite the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and Governor Quinn’s best efforts to force the issue.

Earlier in the year, Governor Quinn signed Executive Order 09-15 that gave away the private information of every in-home healthcare worker in the state to several unions so that they might begin a campaign to cajole these workers into joining a union by calling them on the phone and visiting them at their homes.

In-home healthcare workers receive a stipend from the state in order to help them care for developmentally disabled or medically at risk family members.

Quinn’s EO gave these unions the right to fight over these in-home workers. The workers were asked to vote this week on whether they wanted to join the American Federation of State, County of Municipal Employees (AFSCME) or the SEIU, but more than half voted not to join any union at all, the third choice on the ballot.

Quinn planned to take away some of the money these workers received from the state and hand it to the unions as “dues” whether the workers agreed to join the union or not. It is not known if Quinn plans to carry through with this plan now that the majority of these workers turned down union representation.

If Illinois goes the route of several other states, the Governor will just declare these workers in a union no matter what they voted to do and begin taking their money for dues regardless. This is the sneaky route being taken in several states across the nation to unionizing millions of workers that neither are aware of, nor want union representation. It is also little else but a direct transfer of state money to union coffers.

Whatever the future holds for unionizing in-home healthcare workers in Illinois, this voting down of union interference in their lives is a first, but likely temporary, victory. Only political pressure against these unions can prevent further interference in the lives of Illinois’ in-home healthcare workers.

The nature of the intertwined association between government and ACORN is why we ask that you join us and Say NO to ACORN.

Sign the petition and tell Governor Quinn that you want a real investigation to end corruption for good.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

President Obama mounted a frontal assault on the insurance industry on Saturday, accusing it of airing “deceptive and dishonest ads” to derail his health care legislation and threatening to strip the industry of its longstanding exemption from federal anti-trust laws.

In unusually harsh terms, Mr. Obama cast insurance companies as obstacles to change interested only in preserving their own “profits and bonuses” and willing to “bend the truth or break it” to stop his drive to remake the nation’s health care system. The president used his weekly radio and Internet address to push back against industry assertions that legislation will drive up premiums.

“It’s smoke and mirrors,” Mr. Obama said. “It’s bogus. And it’s all too familiar. Every time we get close to passing reform, the insurance companies produce these phony studies as a prescription and say, ‘Take one of these, and call us in a decade.’ Well, not this time.”

There’s your president, folks, the guy who put his hand on a Bible and swore that he “will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Twice. I suppose his actual ability is rather low. And, apparently, so is his memory about that pesky 1st Amendment thingamabobbie about Free Speech and the restrictions on government on taking revenge on people who criticize the government he supposedly taught at the college level.

So far, Obama has trashed private citizens and groups after private citizens and groups, and now he has delved into full on threats in order to silence his critics. What was that talking point about Bush trashing the Constitution?

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

The most revelatory passage in the so-called “plain English” version of the health care bill that the Senate Finance Committee approved on Tuesday (without ever drafting the actual legislative language) says that in the future Americans will be offered the convenience of getting their health insurance at the Department of Motor Vehicles.

This is no joke. If this bill becomes law, it will be the duty of the U.S. secretary of health and human services or the state governments overseeing federally mandated health-insurance exchanges to ensure that you can get your health insurance at the DMV. …

What will the DMV and health care have in common if this bill is enacted? Government will control both.

Whether Big Government nationalizes medical insurance Hugo Chavez style with the “public option,” or uses taxes, subsidies, and regulations to effect the same purpose, is like distinguishing between communism and fascism. Under either system, progressive bureaucrats have a foot on your throat.

An employer that decides not to provide health insurance for its workers will be required to pay a fee to the government for each of its workers that receives a federal subsidy. But the total paid to the government by any employer will be capped at $400 times the total number of that employer’s workers.

Even though this fee will not be tax deductible, it will be far cheaper for a business to pay the government $400 per worker than to pay a private insurance company thousands per worker for an insurance plan.

The Finance Committee has created an irresistible incentive for American businesses to drop their workers off at the DMV where they can enroll in government-funded, government-approved, government-regulated health insurance plans.

But technically, there will be a “choice.” Cass Sunstein, Obama’s lunatic Regulatory Czar, calls this “nudging.” Others would call it coercion.

On a tip from Anonymous Countermoonbat. Cross-posted at Moonbattery.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

Now they have an enemy.

For months, President Obama and his administration waged their fight for a health-care overhaul without a clear opponent, even courting the industry executives and interest groups that helped kill reform efforts 15 years ago.

TEA Parties. Demonstrations. Townhalls. Eh, maybe the WP doesn’t want to call private citizens Obama enemies. Instead, they point out that the Obama admin is going to use a different set of private citizens as enemies.

But attacks on the leading Democratic reform plan this week by the insurance lobby left little doubt that two of the most powerful institutions involved in the debate — the White House and the nation’s insurance companies — have abandoned any real hope of forging a compromise. What was a tenuous truce has turned quickly into an all-out battle, with both sides ratcheting up the hostilities.

Damned that pesky First Amendment! How dared they speak out! Or, from the Obama admin position, to hell with the First Amendment.

“The insurance industry has decided to lead the charge against health reform, and everyone recognizes their motives: profits,” said White House deputy communications director Dan Pfeiffer. “We are going to make sure they can’t sink this effort at the last minute.”

Pfeiffer castigated the industry for releasing a report Monday that concluded that the finance panel’s bill would increase costs for consumers. “They made themselves a very good foil,” he said.

In other words, “we will add Big Insurance to our long list of enemies who happen to be private citizens engaged in Constitutionally protected Free Speech.”

OK, it’s October. Dubya is long gone (except when the Obama admin needs a ready excuse for why they are complete failures.) But, hey, does anyone remember Bush or his admin going after private citizens like this? Or, was he cordial and reflective? Personally, I remember when he castigated Cindy Sheehan for…..oh, wait, nope, he was very nice to her. And then there was the time he went off on Code Pink…..sorry, wrong group. How about those anti-Iraq war folks? Remember the time he insulted……darn, nothing there, either.

Look, there are certainly issues within the health insurance industry, there is no doubt about that. But, there are lots of problems with lots of other industries, as well. And LOTS of problems within federal government agencies. Perhaps Obama and the Donkeys should work on making federal agencies actually user friendly, cost effective, and productive, before they point the finger. Heck, anyone ever try and fill out an on-line I-9? Do you know what a pain in the behind that is? (If you haven’t, trust me, they are a pain. Site is slow, information gets lost, if you do not do it perfect, you have to start again, it doesn’t always save. Then they lose it and whine at you a year later.)

Anyhow, the Founders must be rolling in their graves, seeing a US President go after any and every private entity that crosses them.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post