Acting-Out Politics

Weblog opens discussion about the psychology of Bushmerican style of behavior.

The metaphoricity of humanistic science is located in the political inclinations and positions of scholars and in political drive itself inside culture. Humanistic sciences cannot and should not try to avoid the orientation of the human being on ultimate reason – human teleological and eschatological drive(s) (HTED). If humanistic science research scholar blocks his/her own political inclinations from influencing his/her work then it will be somebody else’s political agenda what will intervene and control this research. Political inclinations will be always inside the humanistic science research and will trigger its direction.

Like transgression needs an ideology justifying it, ideology needs transgression. The criminals feel that they have the right to commit crime because “they were abused”, or “were victims of injustice”, etc. The same is with group or nation ready to trespass the law (“we have the right to revenge”). We feel justified indignation against those “who hate us”. We become ready to fight, kill, to die. Transgression of law is always transgression for the sake of the “monarch” – monarch, leader, gensec, president, etc. (even if this monarch is our suffering ego unconsciously identified by us with a suffering god, profit, saint, hero, tortured soul). Investigation of any transgression of law or conscience should always look for the monarch inside the transgressor’s unconscious.

For people who believe that nothing is more important than pursuing the ideal of financial power with the prowess of financial profit-making – to be transgressors of the law is honorable. For financial or political transgressors to follow the law is to be subdued by bureaucratic reason, by procedural logic. To transgress the laws of financial behavior it means to prove one’s valor in serving the monarch – the more I challenge the existing regulatory financial laws the better it is for our economy and for my country.

This explains the intensity and the righteousness of neocons’ hate towards the liberal democrats. This hate is not completely materialistic. It is archaically idealistic. To appropriate god as my helper and guard and to consume his mercy is not less predatory than to seize/appropriate resources (the commons) of your own and other countries – “militant free trade rhetoric about prying markets opened with crowbars is redolent of economic warfare.” (Hazel Henderson). The more you kill or torture the more you have proven your dedication to your monarch – for the sake of you I am ready to transgress! Who loves you more – the one who does everything that is allowed for the sake of you or someone who is ready to do criminal things also?

JLG making “Weekend”, 1967

Godard is wrestling with an Angel – trying to overcome his cognitive opponent

Godard is happily enjoying his sudden present – his new (and with new tricks and pranks) camera

Jean-Luc introducing his wife – actress Anne Wiazemsky to Pier Paolo Pasolini who will work with her in his “Theorem” and “Pigpen”

May be, here Jean Luc looks at the future not to understand it better and not to challenge it, but rather to suffer its inevitability

How dedicatedly and how passionately Jean Luc is explaining to Brigit Bardot (who will play the main character in Godard’s “Contempt/Le Mepris”, 1964) the bitter pride which poisons Camille’s soul.

Jean Luc explains the difficulties with the producers and their problems with the film, which he tries to resolve while preparing his “Contempt” for release to the screening in international movie-theaters.

Georges Rouault, “Christ on the Road I”

Here we see Christ with two people whom he explains what they need to hear from him. Christ has stopped with them on the road from a little church, on the way to another parts of the world. Rouault’s way of painting the landscape blurs everything around – we see a world that is unavailable. We the viewers of the painting are able and unable to see it normally. But something in the painting is irresistibly attractive – may be, it is earth itself – thick, solid, substantial, soil made of clay – the living made of clay which is made of paint.

But why to represent Christ so indiscernible, as if, in a dense fog? For us it is so difficult even see him, to identify him visually. Isn’t it usually the artist’s intention to clearly depict the protagonist of the painting, not to hide or mask him – to make him present for viewers – for our minds and souls? Why Rouault didn’t make Christ more understandable for us?

Georges Rouault has a unique, paradoxical painting style while depicting Christ to the audience – he is not only a painter, nor just painterly stylist, but a spiritual teacher who wants to elucidate for us through his style the very perspective which, according to him, can help us be able to perceive Christ as a Human God, not only an extraordinary preacher. It seems that Rouault wants us to grasp Christ not as an over-powerful God, but as a Man with humility – an example of what a human being ought to be.

Rouault knows that we regular people lived and live in an environment where greed for power and wealth, rudeness and egoism enslave us, made us desperately hateful instead of being modest and responsive and caring for one another. We worship weapons, we come to another countries to bribe their elites so we can grab more for ourselves and to dominate other nations. Rouault wants us to get – what Christ is trying to explain to us, and for this purpose he invents his unique painting style to make us see how different our fallen world is from Christ’s aspirations. For Rouault, the spiritual world is on the verge of, as if, disappearing, stopping to exist – we no longer deserve to see it directly.
The “normal” world we live in – abnormal in the Christian sense, is easy for us the fallen people to see, but in Rouault’s painting we can barely recognize Christ and the world He lives in, walks and preaches for our sake. It is, as if, Rouault is reminding us that our world, one of endless fight and rivalry is not a decent place in comparison with the world according to Christ which is unknown to us. And Rouault shows us through his paintings this genuine world which we cannot see clearly on his canvasses.

Rouault‘s manner of painting life of Christ makes Him almost unavailable to our eyes which are used to our false/fake everyday existence where we like to brag about before our neighbors. Our pompous and proudly prosperous self-centered life is a shameful contrast to Christ’s tremendously humble/modest existence which should become as clearly visible if we could forget about our own flashy and bombastically loud presence.

Rouault’s unique manner of representing Christ’s life and his world deserves high appreciation. The feeling that nature is self-hiding, as if, trying to be unavailable to regular human perception, as if, withdrawing from being noticed, which Rouault projects to his canvasses is masterfully imagined. We see, as if, the spiritual world is closing its eyes so as not to see the profane reality of our philistine life. The part of Rouault’s originality is his style which prevents regular perception from too easily entering the subject of the painting. It’s like iconic portraits of Madonna where St. Mary keeps out the palm of her hand, as if, to prevent too enthusiastic viewers from entering the world of sainthood.

Georges Rouault, “Christ on the Road 2”

Georges Rouault (1871– 1958)

Last Pages (p. 10-12) From Ch. 9 of the Book “Ideological Superstitions and Political Misperceptions in the 20-21st centuries”

By comparing these four modes of the conformism in relation to power we see that with each step of seeming distancing from power (direct support, indirect support, enjoyment of power as spectacle and consumption) the consciousness of continuing identification with power is more and more destroyed. Power gets the ability to become invisible and by this avoid resistance. Liberal conformism is the most conformist form of relation to power. “The transition to monopoly capital has dealt a mortal blow to the individual… ‘The category of the individual,’ wrote Horkheimer, ‘is not able to withstand giant industry.’ Subject’s subjectivity is being administered out of existence… The subject is paralyzed as an active historical force…Yet psychic and character forms of reification are historically specific. The concept of reification, as Adorno points out, must not be reified. It would be wrong to identify the sexually repressed, cold Puritan as the unchanging bourgeois character form of reification… Today it is often the reverse: instant intimacy, smiles, liberation in one’s own backyard. Marcuse’s concept of ‘repressive desublimation’ or Adorno’s of ‘desexualization of sexuality’ are efforts to come to grips with the recent historical dynamic of the psychic dimension. This psychic dimension is as fluid and historically variable as capital itself; as the succession of capitalist forms accelerates, so do the psychic forms. In the blur, the dead shells of domination appear to come alive. Even the most resilient are turned into desperados hunting for pleasures in the amusement park of life.” (Russell Jacoby, “Social Amnesia [A Critique of Contemporary Psychology from Adler to Laing]”. Beacon Pr., 1975, p. 99-100) Consumerist (hidden from awareness) identification with power, identification through such distance that object of identification cannot be seen and felt at all, is a form of psychological reification that with each year becomes more extensive and intense. The higher survival/success stress the more we have to consume (and the more amazing technical toys and designed items of luxury) to feel satisfied, the less time and energy we have for psychological and spiritual development.

People imply that slave labor becomes less enslavement if it is compensated for by money. People work up to three jobs, sometimes six or even seven days a week to feel that they are still succeeded/survived. People are ready to adapt to any decision made by decision-makers if their life will continue to include consumption and entertainment. They will sacrifice spirituality, wisdom, rationality, ability to think disinterestedly and objectively, ability to live peacefully with other people. They will agree to use nukes against another people just to continue to make money and entertain themselves.

Can way out be found? “Credence-credit. The linking of these two ideas may derive from primitive times, when a mankind still in childhood, separated from the mother, was forced to rely on the Other in order to survive. That other may be the father, the king, the prince, the parliament, the party, the welfare state, or the intellectual. As long as we remain children (and who has completely escaped from childhood?), we need transference – a synonym for love and faith… [Psycho]-analysis is apprenticeship in separation. Analytic experience reveals that the discourse of the father, king, prince, or intellectual is your discourse… Analytic discourse speaks of a humanity that is willing to lose in order to know itself as pure loss and thus pay its debts to the Almighty; it aims for tenuous, temporary ties and relationships… Analysis is a means of transition from trust to separation. I give my heart, then I reclaim it in order to risk it once more, ad infinitum. I am always prepared to be pushed off center without tragedy and with sufficient pleasure that I am ready afterward to renew relations with others… Having discovered the essence of the other, I am able to settle in myself. To settle in oneself through love of the essential good… Analysis gives me confidence that I can express all the parts of my being, and this confidence quells my narcissism and enables me to transfer my desire to others. I can then open myself up to the variety of experience…” (Julia Kristeva, “In the Beginning was Love [Psychoanalysis and Faith]”, 1987, p. 55 – 56) While describing the trail of psychological and spiritual development relevant to the destiny of every child and every adult in Western Democracies and larger world, Kristeva is not talking here only about psychoanalysis as an only tool for this universal task but about humanistic education and serious culture in general the part of which psychoanalysis became.

Destruction of humanistic education in USA (that reach its culmination in cult of machoistic bravado, mine-ization of money and addiction to entertainment, and the growing inability to differentiate between belief and truth, and between psychological projections and reality) makes it near impossible to help people to develop in mind, in soul and in heart. Disappearance of public intellectuals in the mosaic of professionalization and technical punditry invests in the problem. “The crime of Galileo was less what he discovered or said but how and where he said it. He renounced Latin to write in fluid Italian for a new public. As the Florentine ambassador reported after a meeting of papal authorities with Galileo, ‘If he wanted to hold this Copernican opinion, he was told to hold it quietly and not spent so much effort in trying to have others share it.’ This is precisely what Galileo rejected. He had decided, states a modern account, ‘to by-pass the universities and address himself in the vernacular to the intelligent public at large. This involved no doubt a sacrifice of the international value of Latin, but Galileo did not care to mark himself as an exclusive member of the light-shy and scattered republic of scholars… He felt right at ease in the street, in the square…’ [Today] the danger of yielding to a new Latin, a new scholasticism insulated from larger public life, tints the future gray on gray. While professional…languages can be a refuge, and a necessity, they can also be an excuse and a flight… The demise of public intellectuals reflects the recomposition of the public itself; it coincides with the wild success of television, the expansion of the suburbs, the corrosion of the cities, the flattening of the universities. The eclipse of the big general magazines, such as Look and Life, itself registers a parcellation of a once more homogeneous public; they have been replaced by ‘special interest’ magazines – tennis, computer, travel, sports… Younger intellectuals…have surrendered to their times… Humanity does not make history just as it pleases, but it does make history. By the back door choice enters the historical edifice.” (Russell Jacoby, “The Last Intellectuals [American Culture in the Age of Academe]”, Basic Bs, 1987, p. 236 – 237).

In the area of the analysis of the people’s life in today’s society the knowledge and competence is dissolved in formal equality of all opinions. People think that to study to form competent opinion is eccentric and even arrogant and ‘elitist” position contradicting the spirit of democracy.

Hate becomes a brother of money and entertainment again.

Segment from Ch. 9 of the Book “Ideological Superstitions and Political Misperceptions in the 20-21st centuries”

“‘It is difficult to get a man to understand something,’ wrote Upton Sinclair, ‘when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.’” (Paul Krugman, “The Great Unraveling [Loosing our Way in the New Century]”, W.W. Norton, 2004, p. 210), so having quoted independently thinking economist meaning his colleagues who became a heralds of ultra-conservative party line of globalism. “Why smart people act foolish?” – he continues to question the economic orthodoxy, “they are employees, not principal; they are trying to make money and careers of themselves. In that position, it is hard to take a long view. In the long run, even if you aren’t dead, you probably won’t be working in the same place. It is also difficult for someone managing other people’s money to take an independent line. To be wrong when everyone else is wrong is not such a terrible thing: you may lose a bonus, but probably not your job. On the other hand, to be wrong when everyone else is right… So, everyone focuses on the same short-term numbers, tries to ride the trends, and buys the silly economic theory de jour.” (Paul Krugman. Ibid, p.30)

Directly Krugman talks about economic animals – engineers and technicians of the functioning economy, but indirectly about almost everybody in US of that time. That’s how one segment of human being, even one of the basic functions of man – survival and success, starts to occupy whole human being subduing all another human interests and needs.

Everybody is reducing their worldview to survival. People reduce their professionalism to the demand of their employers. That’s why Hollywood directors are not commenting about life anymore and creating instead juicy distractions. That’s why journalists cannot afford serving interests of public – sensible need to know the truth, but public’s psychotic needs to scapegoat and self-aggrandize, and neurotic need to be entertained occupies all their time. That’s why food manufacturers cannot afford to provide public with healthy food. That’s why gasoline monopolists fixate people on fossil fuel – they want to make all possible money from the oil resources before it will be allowed the massive development of the alternative technology. That’s why many professors of History, Sociology and Psychology sit quietly in Academia instead of disposing today’s administration childish and cruel way of handling problems.

Survivalism/succeedism destroys professionalism, responsibility, and orientation on truth. It distorts genuine human opinions. It censors what is true and sincere. It encourages what is not sincere. Salary and profit become spokesmen for the truth. Something wrong in human psyche that surrenders to its fragment and forgets everything in front of survival/success. “People in the United States consume half of sleeping pills, tranquilizers, and other legal drugs sold in the world, as well as half the illegal drugs… The US makes up only 5% of world population.” (Eduardo Galeano, “Upside Down [A Primer for the Looking-Glass World]”, Metropolitan, 2000, p. 251) Are all of these drugs needed to balance the psychological fragment of surviving/succeeding by any price, to neutralize its despotic power over human holistic organism? There is nothing wrong with salary, with ‘survival” and for that matter – with money as such. But when stress of survival is going up people respond with extreme patterns of behavior. One of them is money- and success-worship, forgetting about anything else, transforming accumulation and consumption into despotic monarchs.

It is easy to understand how chronically hungry person can steal food. But in US people fight for fat tarts with despair that match hunger. Millionaires fight each other like bums from Bunuel’s film “Viridiana”. Rich and successful are perceived by poor and non-successful like gilded statures of Buddha in Far East countries. They are objects for admiration and identification like kings and dukes were in medieval times. Americans who are losing their job to Chinese and East Indians admire g-corporate power and wealth even more. “The United States sell about half the weapons in the world and buy about half the oil world consumes. Its economy and life style depends to a large degree on arms and oil.” (Eduardo Galeano, ibid, p. 186) As American g/global-corporations consume, digest and excrete into the world American poor consume hamburgers, pizzas, coca-cola and entertaining technical toys – and feel themselves rich. Edward Luttwak analyzes what he calls “Shopping as a therapy”: “Why do Americans spend so much, and why do those who has less to spend nevertheless go ahead and spend their way into debt and bankruptcy? Americans enslave themselves to the Demon Debt to accumulate all sort of far from-essentials, from large powerful tracks used as a mere cars, down to porcelain baubles advertised on late-night television… To pay for their buying habits, Americans work more hours during each year than any other advanced population on earth except for the Japanese, and when it comes to vocations even the Japanese manage 25 days per year as against the 23 that Americans average, a miserable portion of free time as compared to the 42 days of the Germans and the 38 that the French find insufficient. True, some people obtain so much satisfaction from their job that they live to work. But many work overtime and even seek second job, sacrificing their personal freedom and family life to consume more. In fact, many Americans do not choose to work in order to buy – they must work to pay the interest and repay the principle on what they have already bought.” (Edward Luttwak, “Turbo Capitalism: Winners and Losers in the Global economy”, HarperCollins, 1999, p. 204 – 205) For Americans it is not Word is in the beginning of what is, it is a merchandize. But, as it is well known, the one who drinks on credit gets twice as drunk.

American children learn consumerist mania from adults and seductive appeal of advertisement propaganda. Entertainment industry and oral fixation of whole culture based on the idea of appropriation, possession and easy satisfaction became irresistible role models. With such orientation that is “good for economy” small kids and adult kids feel that they live in the best country in the world. Toy-world of consumption of artifacts and images is superstition incarnated into consumable items. Consumption is an acting utopia. Its attraction “lies in the construction of an optical image from which existence itself – the miseries of the self and of existential temporality… has been removed as if by a magic, a masterful feat of ideological prestidigitation.” (Fredric Jameson, “Archeologies of the Future [The Desire Called Utopia and Other Science Fictions]”, Verso, 2005, p. 193) This sleight of hand incorporation of utopia is intended to cover up real problems of prospering Democracy wallowing in well-being. “Overpopulation, pollution, an inhuman rate of technological change… transform itself under our very eyes into a form of state power more oppressive than the tyrannical feudal structures it was called into being to sweep away…Tourist art is certainly a new space of creation and production… The other is Disneyfication, another word for postmodernity and its simulacra: for Disneyfication is the process whereby inherited cultural images are now artificially reproduced, as in all those lovingly rebuilt city centers which are ‘authentic’ reproductions of their former selves… Within the ahistorical closure of our ‘societe de consommation’ [we witness] prodigious saturation of messages, advertisements, and packaged libidinal fantasies of all kinds, which characterize our daily experience… The reading signals of soap opera are mainly triggered by the presentation of each of the major figures as the bearer of what used to be called a ‘personal problem’, a 1950s pop-psychological American term that designated neurotic paralysis and the hung-ups that prevent people from functioning. The category sets the terms of narrative in terms of development rather than morality… Replacement of the historical by the nostalgic, this volatilization of what was once a national past…is, of course, at one with the disappearance of historicity from consumer society today, with its rapid media exhaustion of yesterday’s events and of the day-before-yesterday’s star players (who was Hitler anyway? Who was Kennedy? Who, finally, was Nixon?” (Fredric Jameson, Ibid, p. 198, 197, 215, 291 – 292, 297 – 298, 285) History is transformed into a flea market. Historical personages into wax figures.

Merchandize pedagogy prepares the victims of consumerist or pop-culture to perceive the real world as a department store, and real people as appealing for success and money rock-music stars. War planners planed war as a business adventure – as consumers of circumstances, chances, opportunities, and calculations. They have lost the ability to perceive world and human life as world and human life – as something that is not identical with its business aspect. War planners are as much products of consumerist pop-culture, as American children and salesmen.

In US “TV programs are children’s primary source of formation, information and deformation, as well as their principal source of topics for conversation… Children take classes in consumption and violence from the screen. [We have a deal here with] mental colonization of the next generation. From early on, children are trained to find their identities in merchandise that symbolizes power and to get hold of it with a gun.” (Eduardo Galeano, Ibid, p. 293) Items for consumption is the world transformed into toys. In this sense consumption is the opposite of education. To be a compulsive consumer means to be under the power of infantile omnipotent phantasy. It is very difficult to overcome our proclivity for projective identification with other people (not to differentiate between others and our subjective projections into them). But merchandise is made for projective identification – for appropriation, possession and consumption. To live with merchandises as a way of life is going against the necessity to overcome proclivity for projective identification (PI) and to learn how to treat other people as another human beings. “The struggle here is between omnipotent phantasy on the one hand and the acceptance of reality on the other… When omnipotent phantasy dominates, the desired state of affairs in accordance with the pleasure principle predominates over the realistic. Reality testing has failed as omnipotent projective identification comes to distort the object and the subject’s relationship with it… The battle between perception of reality and the omnipotent imposition of phantasy onto reality is a long battle which proceeds in small stages… This battle is a constant attack on perception by the omnipotent self, and it is not only an attack on external perception but also an attack on perception of one’s own inner states.” (Hanna Segal, “Psychoanalysis, Literature and War”, Routledge, 1997, p. 27, 28, 30) Human society cannot live without economy. But it is something else when it exists for economy, and when human being lives to appropriate, to consume and to owe others. Material prosperity that was meant to liberate us from hunger and fighting for survival enslaves us. “Most men in industrial society… are anxious, vacuous, and isolated consumers, bored with life and compensating for their chronic depression by compulsive consumption. Ever more attracted to things and gadgets than to life and growth, they are men whose aim is to have much and to use much, not to be much.” (Erich Fromm, “You Shall Be As Gods [a Radical Interpretation of the Old Testament and Its Tradition]”, Fawcett Ps, 1966, p. 179) Consumerist society shapes itself on the model of plants, not even animals. It perceives the world as roots of trees perceive soil. And it perceives consumers as flower perceives bees or wasps.

Consumerist society is a second great trick after Paradise. It is the invention of the conservatives forced into creativity by the dominance of liberalism. If you cannot beat Democracy politically, you can do this by economic seduction. Plebs will not be able to resist consumption. “Bush Sr, outlined his vision of the future in these terms: ‘We need to keep America what a child once called the nearest thing to heaven. And lots of sunshine, places to swim, and peanut butter sandwiches.’” (Eliot Weinberger, “What Happened here [Bush Chronicles]”, A New Directions, 2005, p. 44) In this way Democratic society was transformed into consumerist society; democratically oriented people were transformed into consumerists. Pasolini in his “Luteran Letters” called this transformation anthropological mutation.

How people with Democratic psychological structure could allow themselves to be transformed from human beings who live – into consumers who survive to consume? “Any society, no matter what the culture, as soon as it outgrows its extended clan structure, shows evidence of strain. Ceaseless rivalry simmers between factions within the culture and between cultures. The thin veneer of mature responsibility to the society peels away as soon as a personal need, real or imaginary, is felt… There is absolutely no common ground to account for this universal lack of responsibility except the biological immaturity of man himself. While the mature animal of any species has instincts which impel it to preserve its group, the young of any species expect all their personal needs to be gratified immediately, without reference to the needs of the group. In fact, the young are not even aware of the group as a whole, but only of those individuals which form part of their immediate surrounding… In man, the ‘passing the buck’ or ‘leave it to George’ philosophy is an extension of the child’s expectation that anything that needs to be done will be done without his participation in the effort… Special groups make nonnegotiable demands and are satisfied only when they are obtained in full, regardless of their possible effect on, damage to, or disruption of the whole society… These traits are in no way different from the child’s expectation of the fulfillment of its desires without question, or thought, of how this fulfillment is obtained. The child wants what it wants when it wants it, without consideration of the needs of others, and man-child does not outgrow this pattern.” (David Jonas and Doris Klein, “Man-Child [A Study of the Infantilization of Man]”, McGraw-Hill, 1970, p. 340 – 341) Consumption society that is just operational definition of mass-cultural society is a giant mechanism of infantilization of human being through fixating people on consumer toys and by this distracting them from their maturation inside the experience of having deal with another human beings. Why to make people infantilized? Because in infantilized condition they will not be able to understand and, therefore, to challenge effectively the decisions of decision-makers.

The five percent of USAmerican population have an income of more than $200,000 a year. This five percent get almost half of the money BJr’s tax cuts provides. Those who make less than $75,000 a year – eighty percents of population, receive less than quarter of the cuts. Less than 1 percent (0,8 percent) of population making more than $500,000 a year get more than a third of the cash from BJr’s tax cuts. While in 1961 the salary of executives was about 15-18 times bigger than of ordinary workers, today pay for CEOs has grown – from 185 times of average workers in 2003 to 279 times in 2005. Why ordinary Americans swallow this? Crudely, because they have ice-cream, the cheeseburger, and Hollywood and rock-music entertainment. It is hot-dogs and coca-cola make them feel as rich as rich are. Mass culture is an absorber of socio-political resentment and in this sense is an equivalent of outburst of revolution or reaction. Mass culture works like caffeine and sugar combined with processed fat. Mass culture is so good in shooting the political trouble in advance that it should be invented for that purpose. But it wasn’t. Like genetic mutations are used for the advantage in survival retrospectively, after their appearance, mass culture was used to promote big business agenda by distracting people from actual problems by pseudo-satisfactions. Pseudo-prosperity is as good leverage as eternal life – people open to it their hearts. And they will defend it like they defend life after death – with all vitality of their bodies and souls.

Conditions of life in US envelop every citizen with several layers of socio-psychological armor against the possibility of recognizing the truth of their spiritual misery and psychological underdevelopment – occupation with possessions – the pride of ownership, success in money-making, the chance of identification with wealthy people, with tough/strong political leaders and with superstars. By seeing in media how BJr (Bush Jr.) then and today’s administration castigate their political and international enemies, people feel as strong/tough as their conservative leaders are. But if you rely on social power to sustain your well being it is always illusory. Identification with power is participation in mystification because power always represents submission as spontaneous admiration, despotism as love and care, war as self-defense, murder as heroism and self-sacrifice as glory. We can say that power recognizes itself only as love, care, heroism and glory. This is smart peculiarity of power’s consciousness, in which extra-lie always feeds extra-power and fed by it.

last part from chapter 7 of the Book “Ideological Superstitions and Political Misperceptions in the 20-21st centuries”

But let’s imagine that somebody who projects to the world his identity, be it his passionate religious or ideological belief or the truth about his sexual choice, does this only seemingly while in reality he is making a moral statement, which expresses his desire to help people to understand something. In this case it will be of no importance that he really believes in Democracy or Communism, in Marx or Jefferson, or whether he is really gay “by nature”? He just wants to remind people that something in Democracy, Communism or being other in sexual choice is good for them to have an encounter with. In this situation a person is making a statement in principle, states his/her position, shows his/her stance and not his/her personal belief or complex. To make a statement about person’s stance, not about his/her belief or complex requires a much higher level of psychological development.

The most powerful non-conformist stance in defense of homosexuality, for example, will be the one that heterosexuals take. In the same manner, the most effective declaration of the right for any religious or political belief must come from non-believers and people of alternative beliefs. And it is the believers who ought to be defending the sacred right of atheism as a spiritual stance. Fight for human and civil rights must not be a fight for MY (or my referent group’s) human and civil rights. But today human beings are too barbaric for disinterested fight for the rights of others. By fighting for rights they are not fighting for rights – they fight for themselves, their survival and success.

When I name my belief or my complex as my essence and identity, take it as a nucleus of my personality with one hundred percent of identification with it – I turn into a gay or lesbian fundamentalist, or flagriotic/jingoistic enthusiast or a religious warrior. Religious or ideological belief or a complex is conformism in relation to one’s private fixations. A fundamentalist homosexuality or heterosexuality (when a person defines his personality based on his/her sexual preference) is psychologically similar to a religious or political fundamentalism. Most gays and lesbians are people for whom their sexual preference is identity-giving issue, as for fundamentalist religious or political/ideological believers their identity is provided by their belief (it is the belief what gives name to their soul). In other words, “it’s not me who is jingoist, it is my objective greatness if America makes me its soldier”. “It is not me who is SRussian communist, it is objective greatness of Marxism makes me its follower”. It is not me who is gay; it is my great nature what makes me the one”.

One possible result of basing your identity on somebody else’s authority is splitting the complex or belief from the encounter with our own curiosity and intelligence, with our own intellectual potential for self-reflection, self-criticism and self-development. Another result is naturalization of conformist stance. As soon as you are not responsible for your own identity and actions it will be natural for you not to take responsibility for actions of your government, leaders or religious authorities. Conformist stance is good for the health! It reduces stress, it put your blood pressure down – with getting rid of your responsibility you are relaxing and are ready to go to health club.

Inside the issue of the equality between different sexual preferences to claim that you are gay by nature is a spot of conformism in the very Democratic orientation on equality and anti-discrimination. Gays like to be equal without taking responsibility for the right to be treated equally. It is as if they expected their “nature” to claim equality instead of themselves. They use the situation of fight against discrimination to claim equality, as if gayness was equivalent of race and their fight is against the racism. By this they transform the problem into very traditional and bio-morphic mode of fighting for human rights instead of enlarging and complicating the scope of progressive fight for freedoms and equality. They want to use the achievements of the previous liberation movements instead of enriching and pluralizing previous concepts of fight. Like religious fundamentalists and political fanatics put responsibility for their belief on God or ideological Ultimate Truth, gays/lesbians recruit “nature” for the throne of ultimate responsibility.

To claim that Marxist worldview reflects objective Laws of Historical Development of Human Societies verified by Marxist’s belief is a juicy spot of conformism in the very revolutionary fight for better conditions of living and nobler way of life. Russian Marxists like very much the slogan of better conditions of people’s life without taking responsibility in fighting for these better conditions. The decision is made by “objective absolute truth”. They prefer to see themselves as followers of true ideas, as believers in objective truth, not as people who fight for what they think a right course. Like American gays rely on “nature” or “genes”, Marxist “revolutionaries” rely on “objective Laws” they have discovered through their belief. In their fundamentalist fashion they took their truth without any doubt or self- or credo-criticism.

Soviet Marxists in a substantial degree are like the majority of American democrats – who instead of fighting for Democracy (and being ready to lose their positions and salaries in a process) because of growing right-wing destroyers of Democracy, are repeating Democratic slogans relying on its wisdom and traditional authority, while conservatives systematically dismantling the melting benefits of American Demos. The best achievements of the American Democratic Congress is to pass the Laws which will be ignored by conservative Senate or vetoed by President.

The fact of Stalin’s becoming a General Secretary of Communist Party was quite predictable already in pre-October revolution period. It was enough to notice fundamentalist nature of Soviet Marxism with its dogmatism and intolerance to be able to predict totalitarian future of Soviet revolution. For the majority of Marxist believers the absence of any doubt in Marxist dogma (connected with absence of any creative ability to meet new challenges with a new solutions) extended itself into the absence of criticism in relation to Commander-in-Chief and party superior wisdom. It is like in today’s US jingoistic/flagriotic stance automatically presupposes the loyalty to the Trumppresident.

Your belief or nature cannot fight instead of you. And they cannot take responsibility for your fight. Only human beings can fight for their rights or better conditions of life. Of course, belief in “Objective Truth” or in “Nature”) can help psychologically to feel more confident and hopeful. But price for this is the danger of degradation into conformism of directly political kind or indirectly political kind, like philistinism in America and Trumpmerica. When people with totalitarian psychology will come to power they will, like in Nazi Germany, put philistines in their miserable place – they will show them who is in charge – on the streets and in preventive detention centers. American Gay fundamentalism can easily provoke Soviet or Nazi type repression of homosexuality.

Russian lesson of fundamentalist Marxism should be taken very seriously. The deficit of self-reflection and self-criticism is an indicator of deficit of creative ability that makes it impossible for people to face their problems and their others.

What starts with the inability to endorse our own otherness with a symbolic gesture of taking responsibility for what we are – can end in a socio-political conformism and collapse of Democracy or even survival.

Posted on –   Ch. 7. SRussian Marxism’s Boiling and Bullying – We-are-the-first: “Inevitable Laws of Historical Development are on our Side” by Acting-Out Politics

« Previous Entries  Next Page »


August 2020
« Jul    




Recent Comments