Postmodernist Babble...
Language is the bumpy, pot hole ridden road we travel while trying to define the world. When looking over the edge we see that it is actually a bridge without support that circumvents the globe. It is suspended by its own gravity and below is nothing more than a void. Meaning is constantly in flux and any single word can have multiple meanings, phrases littered with symbolism, paragraphs a plethora of paradigms, and the entangled chaos expands ever outward.
Each person's individual culture has no consistent center--each experience shifts them within the tangled labyrinth of identity--so with no absolutes there can be no foundation. The illusion of a base is purely the result of naiveté or spite. The blurred basis is dictated by demagogues and the herd never bothers to adjust their focus to see that the ground work rests upon a pile of bullshit.
Deconstructionists have chipped away at the floor of meaning leaving themselves standing in the corner upon a pillar descending beyond our vision, and upon it rests the word "be". Structuralists tie these decaying tiles together and arrange them according to parity and balance. They fail to realize that the arrangement must be continuously adjusted due to the ever changing weight and meaning of each tile.
The analysis of language to discover concrete meaning is destined for failure. So if language is not guaranteed to transfer an idea without variation, then what is the point of communication. Wouldn't it be prudent for all to remain silent and abandon this flawed device? The postmodernist philosopher Rorty said that all discourse was simply conversation. No infallible rule of law, only an evolving dialog between opinionated subjects regarding phenomena. Those that affirm eternal truth expose their ignorance of the absurdity of their claim. Nevertheless, we still have many people that make such rediculous assertions in order to govern scores of people. And why shouldn't they, it allows for greater advantage and exploitation of the masses.
Nietzsche claimed that the Overman would govern a slave caste that would naturally submit and serve them. Are these demagogues the Overman? Is the gullible unquestioning herd the slave caste? Surely they would rise to the level of Overman if they had the capacity to do so... Capacity is the problem. Barriers to entry of the Overman caste: capital, education, location, appearance, etc... There are a great many that possess the will to power comparable to the Overmen but are restricted and remain in the slave caste due to lack of priviledge.
Would the slave caste willingly submit to their oppressors if it weren't for their acceptance of their lot? The Overmen are composed of spiritual leaders, governors of law and providers and distributors of means. To revolt against them is to oppose the core of culture: god, country, commerce, purpose, etc... The herd has no choice and has adapted to embrace their slavery.
Those straying of the herd at the margin is what drives advancement of the herd condition. Overmen routinely silence the dissent of these spiteful slaves. What is surprising is that the herd itself despises these revolutionaries for not conforming to the norm. The current trend is a cooperation between the two classes to prevent any uprising by controlling the exposure of young to the ideologies of the margin. The herd elders, at the direction of the oppressors, condition their offspring to abhor the discord of the margin. The power of the oppressors is therefore guaranteed by the oppressed.
How can the margin infiltrate the herd's center and spread the seeds of dissent? The channels of communication to the masses are regulated by the oppressor, so any means utilizing an established media would be censored and of no avail. Grass roots efforts are at the mercy of the barriers to entry imposed by the hegemony. Abandoning the pursuits of universal freedom becomes the only viable option to avoid futility.
But the message is out there. I have received it and am retransmitting it to a very limited audience. There is a collective awareness amongst the margin and the motivation is there to spread dissent. Do we not know that we have the herd surrounded? Do we not realize that we are the boundary between the herd and the overman? If we leave the herd to its own druthers, they will surely never see beyond the surface. They will be bound to the simulacra where reality is synonymous with appearance. Appearances will be under the control of the oppressor and the herd will accept the reality they're given. Since the overman provide the foundations of culture and define the world, albeit flawed and vulnerable, the herd itself is at their mercy.
An infallible definition of truth that encourages dissent is the only potential savior of the herd from the overman. The definition must topple those purported by the oppressor. The philosophy must be stronger than Kant, Descartes and Hegel. It must be able to stand up against deconstruction. It must become the compass of Rorty's conversations. It must embrace a future where each is his/her own guiding force. It is the law of originality, the glory of the unique, the committment to the tangent, the worship of Phi.
Each person's individual culture has no consistent center--each experience shifts them within the tangled labyrinth of identity--so with no absolutes there can be no foundation. The illusion of a base is purely the result of naiveté or spite. The blurred basis is dictated by demagogues and the herd never bothers to adjust their focus to see that the ground work rests upon a pile of bullshit.
Deconstructionists have chipped away at the floor of meaning leaving themselves standing in the corner upon a pillar descending beyond our vision, and upon it rests the word "be". Structuralists tie these decaying tiles together and arrange them according to parity and balance. They fail to realize that the arrangement must be continuously adjusted due to the ever changing weight and meaning of each tile.
The analysis of language to discover concrete meaning is destined for failure. So if language is not guaranteed to transfer an idea without variation, then what is the point of communication. Wouldn't it be prudent for all to remain silent and abandon this flawed device? The postmodernist philosopher Rorty said that all discourse was simply conversation. No infallible rule of law, only an evolving dialog between opinionated subjects regarding phenomena. Those that affirm eternal truth expose their ignorance of the absurdity of their claim. Nevertheless, we still have many people that make such rediculous assertions in order to govern scores of people. And why shouldn't they, it allows for greater advantage and exploitation of the masses.
Nietzsche claimed that the Overman would govern a slave caste that would naturally submit and serve them. Are these demagogues the Overman? Is the gullible unquestioning herd the slave caste? Surely they would rise to the level of Overman if they had the capacity to do so... Capacity is the problem. Barriers to entry of the Overman caste: capital, education, location, appearance, etc... There are a great many that possess the will to power comparable to the Overmen but are restricted and remain in the slave caste due to lack of priviledge.
Would the slave caste willingly submit to their oppressors if it weren't for their acceptance of their lot? The Overmen are composed of spiritual leaders, governors of law and providers and distributors of means. To revolt against them is to oppose the core of culture: god, country, commerce, purpose, etc... The herd has no choice and has adapted to embrace their slavery.
Those straying of the herd at the margin is what drives advancement of the herd condition. Overmen routinely silence the dissent of these spiteful slaves. What is surprising is that the herd itself despises these revolutionaries for not conforming to the norm. The current trend is a cooperation between the two classes to prevent any uprising by controlling the exposure of young to the ideologies of the margin. The herd elders, at the direction of the oppressors, condition their offspring to abhor the discord of the margin. The power of the oppressors is therefore guaranteed by the oppressed.
How can the margin infiltrate the herd's center and spread the seeds of dissent? The channels of communication to the masses are regulated by the oppressor, so any means utilizing an established media would be censored and of no avail. Grass roots efforts are at the mercy of the barriers to entry imposed by the hegemony. Abandoning the pursuits of universal freedom becomes the only viable option to avoid futility.
But the message is out there. I have received it and am retransmitting it to a very limited audience. There is a collective awareness amongst the margin and the motivation is there to spread dissent. Do we not know that we have the herd surrounded? Do we not realize that we are the boundary between the herd and the overman? If we leave the herd to its own druthers, they will surely never see beyond the surface. They will be bound to the simulacra where reality is synonymous with appearance. Appearances will be under the control of the oppressor and the herd will accept the reality they're given. Since the overman provide the foundations of culture and define the world, albeit flawed and vulnerable, the herd itself is at their mercy.
An infallible definition of truth that encourages dissent is the only potential savior of the herd from the overman. The definition must topple those purported by the oppressor. The philosophy must be stronger than Kant, Descartes and Hegel. It must be able to stand up against deconstruction. It must become the compass of Rorty's conversations. It must embrace a future where each is his/her own guiding force. It is the law of originality, the glory of the unique, the committment to the tangent, the worship of Phi.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home