I question whether a total, global order, of the kind that people call civilization, is necessary or desirable. That is, whether it is worthwhile to forcibly "unify" every corner of the globe and every human under one common system of administration and one common set of values, to which everything else about them can be reduced for exchange; or whether communities should fashion and uphold their own values as they emerge from their conditions, answerable to no outside commandment save the extension of hospitality. The first is the authoritarian, liberal capitalist way, and that includes left, right, neo, and every other liberalism. The second is a less formal, more local, lower-overhead way of living and relating.
I like your thought process and have thought along those lines a lot. I’d love to see it happen and have come to the conclusion that if we were to become more matrilineal, more nurturing, with an economy closer to “giving” than “getting”, and social support through the economic system, and smaller local councils of governance, (and free health spa’s with meditation guidance), we could pull together a pretty nice little cooperative. Those who still wanted to march around in Uniforms and shoot things could be formed into local WPA’s and anybody could join them as a gift to their society. I’d join one and I’m 78. I could help set up and instruct in one of those old “go’ment” school buildings that need tearing down, until we develop a decent educational policy. Shit like that. Basically join our citizenry.
Cultures and polities create myths for functional purposes, such as to keep people attached to them. Bourgeois capitalist culture created that one about the barbarians and the indivious value of the state. Please read _The Dawn of Everything_ before presenting myths as fact.
The only myth is that competition and everyone fending for themselves will lead to a greater good. That is the Myth the Bourgeois capitalists have brainwashed the American masses with.
Ultimately, at least if we are being honest with ourselves, truth itself is a myth, that label we paste on the myth we like the most. Notice how that is distinct from neoliberal epistemology, where truth is determined by a market process, or any religion, which simply asserts its unique truth a priori and leaves its followers to adjust the world to the image, reliably failing for a number of fairly predictable reasons.
The myth of order is commonly used to rationalize class systems. Its theme is usually a variation of humans perceiving a void or "chaos" and imposing form on their particular perception of it, whose continuation depends on a non-productive priest class riding on laborers. And every culture also comes with some bizarre threat of apocalypse when we stop playing along. Well, I thought that was why we were all on Caitlin's Newsletter? I thought we were all about lifting veils and maybe burning a few of them?
Anyway, that is barely the little ridge of dirt around the rabbit hole of social science and philosophy. What I'm talking about is way beyond left capitalism vs. right capitalism, Catholicism vs. Protestantism false alternative. I'll leave you with an ancient quote whose origin escapes me at this late hour:
As well everyone should, because liberal nihilism is a terrible ideology, but that isn't the only alternative to totalitarianism (the idea that everything can and should be weighed in moral terms) and the Great Chain of Being (the idea that everyone is nominally submissive to a master). I assure you, Ayn Rand loved her false gods and true masters. I partake of neither and view those who need others to have them with great suspicion.
I question whether a total, global order, of the kind that people call civilization, is necessary or desirable. That is, whether it is worthwhile to forcibly "unify" every corner of the globe and every human under one common system of administration and one common set of values, to which everything else about them can be reduced for exchange; or whether communities should fashion and uphold their own values as they emerge from their conditions, answerable to no outside commandment save the extension of hospitality. The first is the authoritarian, liberal capitalist way, and that includes left, right, neo, and every other liberalism. The second is a less formal, more local, lower-overhead way of living and relating.
I like your thought process and have thought along those lines a lot. I’d love to see it happen and have come to the conclusion that if we were to become more matrilineal, more nurturing, with an economy closer to “giving” than “getting”, and social support through the economic system, and smaller local councils of governance, (and free health spa’s with meditation guidance), we could pull together a pretty nice little cooperative. Those who still wanted to march around in Uniforms and shoot things could be formed into local WPA’s and anybody could join them as a gift to their society. I’d join one and I’m 78. I could help set up and instruct in one of those old “go’ment” school buildings that need tearing down, until we develop a decent educational policy. Shit like that. Basically join our citizenry.
Your idea was already tried by Barbarians. They didn't last long.
Cultures and polities create myths for functional purposes, such as to keep people attached to them. Bourgeois capitalist culture created that one about the barbarians and the indivious value of the state. Please read _The Dawn of Everything_ before presenting myths as fact.
The only myth is that competition and everyone fending for themselves will lead to a greater good. That is the Myth the Bourgeois capitalists have brainwashed the American masses with.
Ultimately, at least if we are being honest with ourselves, truth itself is a myth, that label we paste on the myth we like the most. Notice how that is distinct from neoliberal epistemology, where truth is determined by a market process, or any religion, which simply asserts its unique truth a priori and leaves its followers to adjust the world to the image, reliably failing for a number of fairly predictable reasons.
The myth of order is commonly used to rationalize class systems. Its theme is usually a variation of humans perceiving a void or "chaos" and imposing form on their particular perception of it, whose continuation depends on a non-productive priest class riding on laborers. And every culture also comes with some bizarre threat of apocalypse when we stop playing along. Well, I thought that was why we were all on Caitlin's Newsletter? I thought we were all about lifting veils and maybe burning a few of them?
Anyway, that is barely the little ridge of dirt around the rabbit hole of social science and philosophy. What I'm talking about is way beyond left capitalism vs. right capitalism, Catholicism vs. Protestantism false alternative. I'll leave you with an ancient quote whose origin escapes me at this late hour:
The man who knows no stories is ignorant.
The man who knows many stories is wise.
The man who knows one story is dangerous.
Beware of the one book person.
I would add: beware of Ayn Rand nutjobs.
As well everyone should, because liberal nihilism is a terrible ideology, but that isn't the only alternative to totalitarianism (the idea that everything can and should be weighed in moral terms) and the Great Chain of Being (the idea that everyone is nominally submissive to a master). I assure you, Ayn Rand loved her false gods and true masters. I partake of neither and view those who need others to have them with great suspicion.