Heidegger

> Tudor,
> According to the news videos coming out of Venezuela, e.g.,(
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6699… ) I saw many rioting
> students and older people who did not seem to be malnurished. But you
> are missing the point. The old baggage about capitalism and socialism,
> the Right and the Left, The Conservative and the Liberal, is totally
> irrelevant in the modern global estate. It is not even a question of
> old fashioned Castro or Chavez socialist dictator types who are a dying
> breed. Hence, your view is obsolete insofar as it does not address
> Global Corporate gigantism and a technologized bureacracy operating
> from the USA to China to Saudi Arabia and the Euro-Nation. In any case
> I can appreciate your idealism that apparently ignores the new Brut-
> reality of the totally and irremedially homogenized humanoid tenants of
> the planet earth for whom an option to rebel no longer exists. That is
> the new existential collective stasis. There are no longer oligarchic
> tyrannts to suffer the loss of their heads except media made paper
> ones like George W. Bush and who has no more personhood and individual
> sovereignty than anyone else on the planet. The final day and its
> amorphous mass as the unus mundus “heaven on earth” has arrived and may
> perdure for the next hour or the next thousand years but where the
> *principium individuationus,* as prefered dead by Nietzsche, only
> haunts like a no account ghost and vaporus shade.
> Sincerely;
> Bernard

Frankly, I was not idealistic in my account; I simply tried to explain a
social phenomenon, as caused by how it feels to live there.

And, about the above, I have learnt it from Michael Gillespie’s article on
Heidegger in Strauss and Cropsey, and some books of Gustave Le Bon.

Bureaucracy is necessary, and no serious Heideggerian could argue that
something necessary should be avoided because it is “bad”.

Bureaucracy makes you have the gas for your car, enables you earn a living
(be it by keeping inflation under control), protects your property, takes
care that’s enough light on the streets and so on.

In fact, it’s not even that bad; one could enjoy the benefits of
bureaucracy, which makes possible our social existence, and still think
about the deep problems of philosophy; the two are not mutually exclusive.
In fact, you’d be amazed to find out that those who do the real mind-work
which ensures the proper functioning of the bureaucratic cogwheels, are men
of high intellect and schooled at the school of great thinkers.

Think of how neocon think-tanks promote Bush’s agenda; and that is to some
extent only a caricature of the real mind-work behind caring for the complex
mechanisms of nowadays society.

A comedian playing a madman has this joke:

“My father told me that what you can’t change it, you should accept it. I
think: what you can’t accept it, you should change it.”

That’s kind of attitude of the sixties, wherein everybody was called to
change the world for the better.

So, if you can’t change it, perhaps you don’t need to worry about it. Simply
think about it without emotional pathos, contemplate and meditate about it,
coldly and calmly.

We, Romanians, have a saying: the Devil is not as black as he seems. Evil
will never reach absolute (100%) magnitude on this planet. Besides,
individuation you do it yourself, it is not meant for the collective.

Greetings,

Tudor

Posted on Wednesday, May 30th, 2007 at 6:45 pm
comment | rss 2.0 | trackback