|
|
|
Comfort before honour I can only shake my head at this kind of stuff. Jason Soon (who else?) likes the fact that capitalism has “tamed our desire” for honour by “corrupting us with a taste for comfort and luxury”. Mr Soon thinks it’s much safer to live next to “greedy but rationally self-interested Homo Oeconomicus” rather than dangerous men of honour like “jihadis, samurais, fanatics and Crusaders.” Two things spring to mind when reading this. First, Jason Soon is so denatured as a man that he has never felt what masculine honour really is. Otherwise he would never describe it in such negative and caricatured terms. He talks about it as an outsider. Second, the item is a good example of what is sometimes called “the liberalism of fear”. This is the idea that the world is such a brutal, violent place that even well-brought up members of our own tribe are likely to physically harm us. The point of politics is therefore to “disarm” and render harmless everyone around us. Better, in this view, to “tame” the stronger impulses in men and redirect them to more harmless, if inconsequential, things. Not all liberals emphasise this “liberalism of fear” but it is strongly evident in some of the founding texts of liberalism. Comments:2
Posted by Jason Soon on Mon, 16 May 2005 11:27 | # In addition I should note that I wasn’t the one making a caricature of honour but the writer being criticised who was expressing admiration for jihadis, or at least an extremely distorted aspect of the ‘honour’ they exhibit. Of course I was criticising the sort of honour exhibited by those groups but there was no implication that a broader definition of honour would fall under my crticism. 3
Posted by Jason Soon on Mon, 16 May 2005 11:53 | # Incidentally I’m surprised you’d take exception to such an innocuous piece though should I be? There are bourgeois notions of honour that are admirable - civility, truth telling, keeping one’s word, taking responsibility for one’s actions. is all this not exciting enough for you, Mark? Majority Rights having a soft spot for primitive, barbatic pre-enlightenment cultures - should I be surprised? Is it the soft spot of Southern Scotch-Irish Prole values for such cultures against the Yankee Bourgeois culture (which is essentially one form of my preferred value system)? 4
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 16 May 2005 12:02 | # It is important to make distinctions here. The quiet and un-self-conscious honour that attaches naturally to a virtuous man is quite distinct from the noisy and triumphalist, grasping claim to glory one sees in so many walks of life. Is and ought are not at all the same, here or anywhere. Likewise, a modest and decent life lived in service to those one loves may be highly honourable. But a consumerised, fish-eyed, blind-selfish existence lived according to the gaudy promptings of a liberal and capitalist society, replete with MTV miscegeny and well-stocked shelves in the mall, will never be. Honour has its value for Man. The eggregious pursuit of it and the eggregious lack of it are likewise an inadequate estate. 5
Posted by Phil Peterson on Mon, 16 May 2005 12:49 | # god knows what he’s doing on a blog among jihadi sympathisers Indeeed. We get up in the morning at 4 AM and scream “Allah-o-Akbar”. This is followed by a morning meeting of the blog writers with econiums to Osama. Isn’t that right Guessedworker? 6
Posted by Phil Peterson on Mon, 16 May 2005 12:52 | # I find it amusing that chicken-hawks like Jason Soon talk about concepts of honour as related to “Jiahdist sympathisers” while engaging in endless prattle about “global democratic revolution”. That revolution is of course to be carried out by the very Scotch-Irish “proles” he disdains (by dying on the streets of Iraq, for instance) while our enlightened chicken-hawks enjoy the spectacle on television and then lecture us about the “proles”. 9
Posted by Phil Peterson on Mon, 16 May 2005 13:06 | # Majority Rights having a soft spot for primitive, barbatic pre-enlightenment cultures Such as the culture of the Roman republic, that of the classical Greek city states, the culture of (what is now) Italy during the Renaissance, for instance? Yep. We are unreconstructed barbarians out here. No question. 10
Posted by Phil Peterson on Mon, 16 May 2005 13:12 | # Here is an excellent article on the barbaric pre-enlightenment culture of the Middle Ages. 11
Posted by Mark Richardson on Mon, 16 May 2005 13:14 | # Were the people who built Bruges barbarians? (Het spijt me, Brugge.) See here, here or here (especially the Markt Rondzicht). 12
Posted by Phil Peterson on Mon, 16 May 2005 13:27 | # Speaking of which, what art produced in the 20th century compares with the works of a Raphael or a Michelangelo, what literature from the 20th century compares with the writings of a Shakespeare, what architecture in our time compares to the architecture of the Ancient Greeks, the Romans or even the exquisite and extrordinary works of the churches built in the middle ages? To posit Muslim savages and the self-obsessed MTV hedonism of late capitalism as the only two alternatives in life is to demonstrate a truly breathtaking ignorance of history. 13
Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 16 May 2005 13:35 | # Honor is moral territory. If you are dishonored you lose your moral territory, ie: your moral authority within a particular territory. Capitalism doesn’t entirely dispense with morality or with moral territory—indeed the word “honor” has its own definition within capitalism, as in “he honored his debt to his lender”. Capitalism’s morals have to do with property rights. Capitalism has territory. One of the chief “sins” of Marxism was to attack property rights. Civilization might easily have gone up in flames over this notion of “honor” during the cold war. 15
Posted by Phil Peterson on Mon, 16 May 2005 13:41 | # More from the barbaric pre-enlightenment cultures….....
19
Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 16 May 2005 13:50 | # For my opinion of guys like Jason Soon, you might like to read an article I wrote titled “Tax Wealth’s Avoidance of Combat” that got voted to publication by a major collaborative content website. 22
Posted by Mark Richardson on Mon, 16 May 2005 14:12 | # Neuschwanstein is by dates alone post-Enlightenment (mid to late nineteenth century) though inspired by earlier cultural traditions. (Though I doubt the court of Ludwig could really be described as representing an Enlightenment culture.) BTW great pictures Phil - I especially like the stained glass - I haven’t seen this one before. 23
Posted by Phil Peterson on Mon, 16 May 2005 14:15 | # Mark, Yes, thanks for the clarification (I should have actually put that in a caption below it). Its true that the actual date of construction is post-enlightenment but the style and the architecture predates the enlightenment. 24
Posted by Jason Soon on Mon, 16 May 2005 14:18 | # er, phil Peterson I’m not sure in what sense I’m a chickenhawk as I opposed the war on Iraq. Afghanistan is another matter and guess what, I’m happy to use daisycutters where possible. generally I am opposed to getting involved unnecessarily in wars. 25
Posted by Phil Peterson on Mon, 16 May 2005 14:20 | # The stained glass image is from St. Peters Basilica. 26
Posted by Phil Peterson on Mon, 16 May 2005 14:30 | # Jason Soon, you once stated at your site: In the meantime we hasten the coming of that day by enhancing our soft power by (1) Westernising every corner of the globe through trade and cultural imperialism I may have misread the meaning of that to imply that you meant use of military force to accomplish this “global westernization project”. And if I have misread that, then I do stand corrected. Please could you elaborate on the meaning of “cultural imperialism” and what this involves? Afghanistan is another matter and guess what, I’m happy to use daisycutters where possible. Are there no Scotch-Irish “proles” fighting in Afghanistan? 27
Posted by Stuka on Mon, 16 May 2005 14:42 | # An agenda consisting of television sitcoms, NBA hero worship, MTV, rap music, and fast food could hardly be called “culture.” 28
Posted by Phil Peterson on Mon, 16 May 2005 14:45 | # Eloquent messengers of a superior culture…....(our regular readers will forgive me for posting these ghastly images)
40
Posted by Mark Richardson on Mon, 16 May 2005 15:03 | # Phil, have you got something against gangsta rap? 42
Posted by Evil Anglo on Mon, 16 May 2005 15:45 | # From a western liberal worldview,the only real threat is the articulation of a white cultural identity(think the Australian Government officially scrapping the term ‘anglo-celtic’ years ago,and every Tom,Dick and Harry liberal denying its existence ever since). Scallywag jihadis make a good strawman though.Linking their traditions with all tradition is even better. 44
Posted by Phil Peterson on Mon, 16 May 2005 15:54 | # Scallywag jihadis make a good strawman though They are very useful. I had a post on it some time back. You can access that here. 45
Posted by Kubilai on Mon, 16 May 2005 15:59 | # Phil, PHIL! Enough of the cultural enrichment! I prefer to stay uncultured and unenlightened. I bought myself these nifty new gloves that keep my knuckles from getting scraped as they drag along the pavement. 46
Posted by Jason Soon on Mon, 16 May 2005 16:07 | # ‘Cultural imperialism’ = the exercise of soft power. I have stated many times on my blog my opposition to the war. It is why I am generally not classified as a RWDB in the Australian blogosphere. Anyway I’m not an American. You guys do what you want to do. As for your references to gangsta rap, I have never seen a group more alienated from contemporary society. What about Miles Davis, Charles Mingus, John Coltrane, Duke Ellington, Chet Baker, Keith Jarrett, etc? Jazz - Amerca’s greatest art form, perhaps the greatest in the world. But of course it was founded by blacks so I suppose you won’t like it. Stay in your cocoons, guys, while the world passes you by. 47
Posted by Geoff Beck on Mon, 16 May 2005 16:13 | # > What about Miles Davis, Charles Mingus, John Coltrane, Duke Ellington, Chet Baker, Keith Jarrett, etc? Jazz I think you’ve been watching too much government television programming. Yes, these folks are the darlings of the official media. Let’s see how many on that list died of herion addiction? Two? How many were herion addicts? 48
Posted by Phil Peterson on Mon, 16 May 2005 16:17 | # ‘Cultural imperialism’ = the exercise of soft power. What is this soft power? As for your references to gangsta rap, I have never seen a group more alienated from contemporary society. One wouldn’t guess that watching a 5 minute cross section of MTV…......and he says we live in a cocoon…..... What about Miles Davis, Charles Mingus, John Coltrane, Duke Ellington, Chet Baker, Keith Jarrett, etc? As opposed to Tchaikovsky, Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Brahms, Chopin, Handel? Oh I forgot: Jazz - Amerca’s greatest art form, perhaps the greatest in the world. Jazz as the greatest art form in the world? LMAO. Stay in your cocoons, guys, while the world passes you by. One wouldn’t guess that looking at the phenomenal increase in race realists in the US, Europe and elsewhere or the phenomenal increase in the number of nationalist parties in Europe. But then if by the “world” you mean the world of rootless hedonist cosmopolitans, then we don’t really care if it passes us by. We have better things to waste our time on. 49
Posted by Geoff Beck on Mon, 16 May 2005 16:21 | # > Cocoons? I’m in this battle to win, not place second. 50
Posted by Kubilai on Mon, 16 May 2005 16:28 | # As for your references to gangsta rap, I have never seen a group more alienated from contemporary society. What about Miles Davis, Charles Mingus, John Coltrane, Duke Ellington, Chet Baker, Keith Jarrett, etc? Jazz - Amerca’s greatest art form, perhaps the greatest in the world. But of course it was founded by blacks so I suppose you won’t like it. - Soon The greatest art form? In the world?? LOL Dear Jason, you aren’t one to reach for hyperbole are you? Some here may like Jazz, I on the other hand absolutely hate it. What can one say of a form of music that has its roots in African ‘black work songs, field shouts, sorrow songs, hymns, and spirituals’. Not friggen much. I would prefer the ecstasy of having a cheese grater rubbed against my head at…ohh…let’s say 78 rpms over having to listen to any Jazz tune. But that’s just me, Jason. As one determinent of the quality of music is how it stands the test of time. When you have music that is nearly 400 years old and is played and enjoyed by millions, including people in CHINA, Jason; to me it signifies a type of genius that is without peers. THAT music is the greatest art form. NOT Jazz. 51
Posted by Phil Peterson on Mon, 16 May 2005 16:37 | # Jazz - Amerca’s greatest art form, perhaps the greatest in the world. That has to count as one of the best howlers I ever heard. No question. 52
Posted by Geoff Beck on Mon, 16 May 2005 17:52 | # I do have to confess, American contributions to Arts have been rather paltry. This subject has been discussed in Murray’s <u>Human Accomplishment</u>. 53
Posted by Phil Peterson on Mon, 16 May 2005 18:01 | # Geoff, Does Murray credit Jazz for being the greatest art form ever created? 54
Posted by Geoff Beck on Mon, 16 May 2005 18:11 | # No, as I recall. Futhermore, he questions whether any serious work in the Arts and Sciences has been accomplished post 1950. Interestingly, Hoppe also asserts that same thing. 55
Posted by Phil Peterson on Mon, 16 May 2005 18:50 | # Decline in the arts is less a function of America and more a function of the way democracy works. Alexis de Tocqueville noted in his seminal work that democracy tended to destroy “high taste”. He says:
If you scan the world, the arts are in the pits everywhere, not just in America. Contemporary British “pop” culture is unutterably awful, for example. This observation was made in the most remarkable commentary on contemporary culture in Bloom’s “Closing of the American Mind”. In the chapter titled “Music”, he wrote:
56
Posted by Phil Peterson on Mon, 16 May 2005 18:56 | # I should add: In the past (going way back) American music may not have been high taste but it was decent (if plain). Country Music was not high taste but it was decent tracing itself to the Anglo-Celtic folk traditions America’s early settlers brought with them. The change occurs with the coming of negro influence in Music. The decency died and then the music that replaced it degenerated to such a degree that music has become unspeakable in our time (if one could call it music). In Europe, Music could have been divided into high taste (Classical Music for example) and average but decent taste (different kinds of native folk music). But this goes back a century. Today we have nothing. The folk is gone, the great music is now a relic of an era and what we have is a cesspool of “popular culture” so atrocious that no man with good taste and sense could ever tolerate it. And, we have the power of technology combining with the profit motive of the large corporation to churn out the lethal garbage with the efficiency of an assembly line. 57
Posted by Geoff Beck on Mon, 16 May 2005 19:30 | # Right, and it is just this mediocrity I want break-out from - democratic totalitarianism. 58
Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 16 May 2005 19:53 | # Jason, What should be the rate paid by global corporations for maintaining and promoting international human traffic? Not everyone wants to buy into this global panmixia where ecosystem boundaries are violated by modern technology. It is a form of pollution just as surely as DDT or SO2. They are placing the rest of us at risk by promoting this traffic and I would just like to know how much you think they should be paying to compensate us for the risk of things like pandemics, uncontrolled proliferation of free-rider cultures, etc? Or don’t you want to talk about the fact that your precious “capitalists” are being subsidized, like a bunch of fat welfare queens? 59
Posted by Anglo Devil on Mon, 16 May 2005 20:10 | # Odin Lives Radio Good neoclassical/folkish(traditionalist,not Hippy type folk) music to be found there in their archives. If you dont mind a bit of Valhalla type heathen chat in between songs its a good place to seek out new music. 60
Posted by Svigor on Mon, 16 May 2005 20:32 | # The stained glass image is from St. Peters Basilica. The one of the Madonna and Child? It’s exquisite, thanks for posting that. 61
Posted by Anglo Devil on Mon, 16 May 2005 20:32 | # I do have to confess, American contributions to Arts have been rather paltry. Late 19th/early 20th century American literature was an outstanding contribution to the arts. 62
Posted by Phil Peterson on Mon, 16 May 2005 20:59 | # Svigor, I think that is the work of Michelangelo. But I am not sure. I should add that the random pictures I have posted barely scratches the surface of European accomplishment before the enlightenment. Barely scratches it. I have written almost nothing of the great ancient greek philosophers, statesmen, soldiers, of the great Roman craftsmen, the great writers of the Republic and the Empire, the architecture of Gothic churches….......I could keep talking for a year. Its an enormous subject in its own right. 63
Posted by Phil Peterson on Mon, 16 May 2005 21:20 | # Incidentally, I have added more pictures above (and not in the rich 20th century culture section I might add; just to reassure Kubilai 64
Posted by John S Bolton on Tue, 17 May 2005 00:56 | # Murray’s Human Accomplishment, page 284, gives the numbers relevant to the contributions as between races. One could look also at the percentage who might be called mixed race in Murray’s inventories, which could hardly be more than one in a thousand. McEvedy and Jones’ atlas of world population history gives an estimate of the mestizo and mulatto percentage of the western hemisphere, of around 200 million. Add on 100 million in the rest of the world, unless this is excessive. The expected perecentage is then 5%, compared to 1/1000 in Murray’s lists of those who made the cutoff values. This is an underrepresentation of fifty-fold! how is it that heterosis does not apply to intellectual vigor at the top levels? 65
Posted by Stuka on Tue, 17 May 2005 04:11 | # Jason Soon wrote: Stay in your cocoons, guys, while the world passes you by. I think I will stay put, thank you very much, as the world passes me by heading straight for the nearest cliff. BTW, is “Soon” Asian? 66
Posted by Phil Peterson on Tue, 17 May 2005 09:47 | # BTW, is “Soon” Asian? I believe Jason is ethnically Chinese living in Australia though he was at the London School of Economics for a short while. 67
Posted by John Ray on Tue, 17 May 2005 14:57 | # As a devotee of Bach and Mozart, I find all this talk about Jazz as mystifying as talk about honour. Both seem primitive to me. I go for ethics rather than honour 68
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 17 May 2005 15:10 | # John, The possession of moral principle is a condition for moral worth, to which honour may be ascribed. You are correct to “go” for moral principle. In fact, that is about all one should go for, as I not very successfully said in my first comment on this thread. Without moral justification, the eggregious pursuit of honour as an end in itself is empty and self-defeating. 69
Posted by Mark Richardson on Wed, 18 May 2005 10:02 | # Were the men who did not want to dishonour themselves by taking lifeboat places from women and children on the Titanic primitive? Would “ethics” have been enough to convince them to do likewise? 70
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 18 May 2005 11:38 | # Interesting question, Mark. But their sense of honour might have been seasoned by ethnic altruism. Terrible to contemplate, no doubt ... but would they have given up their places for an African woman or child? 71
Posted by Phil Peterson on Wed, 18 May 2005 15:23 | # I go for ethics rather than honour John, did the gallant men who fought for this country against all enemies for centuries do so because being conquered or losing abattle would have been “unethical”? 72
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 18 May 2005 16:13 | # Phil, Ultimately, contemplation of honour lost or gained by one or another action is vanity. A man of principle ought to be indifferent to himself in that regard. He would devote himself purely to the object of his service. 73
Posted by Phil Peterson on Wed, 18 May 2005 16:29 | # Guessedworker, Yes the example of the soldiers was probably not the most accurate or the best. Nevertheless, one could argue that shirking a duty towards one’s country to serve in a time of war would be dishonourable not “unethical”. Vanity as we see it today is a democratic phenomenon. It is a bourgeoise phenomenon shorn of even the pretense of old bourgeoise virtue and restraint. I submit, this has almost no connection with honour as properly understood. Concepts of honour have usually existed within an aristocratic framework. Alexis de Tocqueville analyses the place honour has in democratic society. Fascinating to read. 74
Posted by Phil Peterson on Wed, 18 May 2005 16:35 | # I should add: A soldier who is willing to die in the field of battle or at least takes that risk does not do that for the purpose of personal vanity. Opening a new charity and presenting oneself as a saint can be a form of feeding one’s vanity. But not taking the risk of losing your life in the field of battle. Only a certain conception of national honour could make someone do that. 75
Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 18 May 2005 16:59 | # Phil, This is a subject that arose with medieval knighthood. Chivalry was the practise of virtue through a life, though non-religious in the devotional sense and peppered with the deeds and dangers of battle, lived in faith, humility and service to God and sovereign. A better word and more pure concept that “honour” to describe the chivalrous knight unflinching in mortal combat would be “grace”. I find the subject of honour to be tinged with self-regard, however much one attempts to refine it. Perhaps I am too much of a romantic. 76
Posted by ben tillman on Wed, 18 May 2005 17:52 | # I find the subject of honour to be tinged with self-regard…. Yes, you do have a point. 77
Posted by Mark Richardson on Wed, 18 May 2005 22:45 | # If we lived in a traditional society in which the masculine impulse toward honour and pride was still strong, then I’d accept Guessedworker’s advice that we should emphasise humility and service as a way to temper the excesses of such qualities. But we don’t. There are now so many spiritless, unmasculine, peasant like men out there that it’s not a question of tempering a quality grown too self-vaunting. I’d like now to see more men who display that stubborn masculine pride, the pride which does not want to be beaten, as well as the masculine honour which clings equally stubbornly to the idea that there are standards we must uphold if we don’t want to be shamed in the eyes of society and in our own sense of who we are as men. An innately proud, honourable man who dedicates himself to serve a higher cause with humility: this is closer, I think, to the bundle of instincts and virtues which together form the better kind of man. Post a comment:
Next entry: The Queen reads from the pixie’s script
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement not implied. Immigration
Islamist Threat
Anti-white Media Networks Audio/Video
Crime
Economics
Education General
Historical Re-Evaluation Controlled Opposition
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Europeans in Africa
Of Note MR Central & News— CENTRAL— An Ancient Race In The Myths Of Time by James Bowery on Wednesday, 21 August 2024 15:26. (View) Slaying The Dragon by James Bowery on Monday, 05 August 2024 15:32. (View) The legacy of Southport by Guessedworker on Friday, 02 August 2024 07:34. (View) Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) — NEWS — Farage only goes down on one knee. by Guessedworker on Saturday, 29 June 2024 06:55. (View) |
Posted by Jason Soon on Mon, 16 May 2005 11:23 | #
I did also say it was a false dichotomy, Mark. I was making a rhetorical point in order to illustrate the taming influence of capitalism. It’s not a particularly original argument and has been made before by Nietzsche (though of course he lamented it), the philosophers of the Enlightenment and Keynes, among others.