03-05/03/13
They say that Marx turned Hegel on his head by
replacing his theory of historical unfolding in terms of the evolution of geist, or spirit, with an economic
theory of history as embodying a dialectical struggle between the owners of
industry and the producers of wealth, i.e., between bourgeoisie and
proletariat, with the latter destined, so far as Marx's reading of history was
concerned, to expropriate and supplant the former in their collective ownership
of the means of production and socialistic dispensation of wealth.
Thus from a geist-oriented highpoint in German philosophy, Marx turned Hegel
upside down in pursuit of his own degenerate theory of historical evolution as
implying the inevitable victory of the urban proletariat as the necessary
outcome of the dialectical struggle between capitalists and workers in the
class war destined to culminate not in the universal triumph of religious geist,
but in the global triumph of scientific communism! The ongoing existence of a
'struggle' between employers and those they employed was a taken-for-granted
tenet of this disgusting philosophy, as was the fact that capitalists could,
with moral impunity, be expropriated by those to whom they gave work and some
kind of living, without anyone's suspecting anybody involved in such
expropriations of blatantly criminal behaviour!
Parallel to the degeneration of German
philosophy from Hegel to Marx, we find a similar, albeit contrary, parallel
between Schopenhauer, that proponent of the world as will and representation
but, at the same time, denier of will as the solution to worldly entrapment,
and Nietzsche, the sick and lonely preacher of self-overcoming through the
affirmation of will and, as the embodiment of power, the coming of the
Superman, who would be the successor to man and 'meaning of the earth', that
is, of a world rejuvenated by his triumphant self-overcoming through powerful
ascendancy as übermensch (a
term equivalent to superman), lording it over others, rejecting Christian
values, including a compassionate negation of the will, in his vainglorious
pursuit of natural dominance in a spirit not altogether dissimilar from
Darwin's survival of the fittest, a philosophy doubtless suitable to an
imperial age and to those busily engaged upon the expansion of Empire, for
which any form of weakness or Christian compassion would be irrelevant,
especially in connection with the conquest of non-Christian peoples or
traditional enemies of Christianity.
So if Marx was the degenerate retort to Hegel,
then Nietzsche was arguably the decadent retort to Schopenhauer in his
advocacy, if not exactly embodiment, of willpower, of the supremacy of will and
the right of the wilfully supreme to dominance in a world inimical to Christian
compassion, a world characterized not merely by the survival but, more
importantly, by the prosperous aggrandisement of the fittest or strongest or
most ruthless as the natural outcome of the triumph of will over self-doubt or
self-regard. Sound familiar?
For Nietzsche, 'otherworldsmen' and
'afterworldsmen' (the terms are roughly his) are a waste of time in a world
where only the triumph of the strongest lends meaning to the earth and the
earth achieves its justification precisely through their dominance - a
philosophy that was to lead, via Spengler, who in some respects resurrected
Hegel's geist-orientated theory of history with his 'Second Religiousness',
to the triumph of the will in the twentieth-century and to the emergence, at
least in Germany, of an ideology that embodied many if not most of Nietzsche's
core values, including an abhorrence of Christianity and an almost pagan belief
in the power of will, when harnessed to blood and soil, to solve all or most of
Germany's problems.
The fact that Hitler esteemed both Nietzsche
and Schopenhauer – as incidentally did the left-leaning Albert Camus – is a
curious, even paradoxical commentary upon the Nazi leader's philosophical
tastes. But the fact remains that National Socialism would not have taken the
form it did without Nietzsche's and possibly Spengler's decadent contributions
to philosophy, which emphasized the need for a rejuvenation of Europe through
the superhuman efforts of one nation, one party, and especially one man, in the
guise of the Führer himself, the embodiment of the 'will to power' and
self-styled first Superman.
Thus if one of the twentieth-century's two main
competing ideologies, namely Soviet Communism, stemmed from a degenerate
thinker in the pseudo-scientific person of Marx, then the other, namely
National Socialism (which some would identify with Fascism), was in part the
product of a decadent thinker in the pseudo-religious person of Nietzsche,
neither of whom would inspire the thought of Spengler who, although a man of
the Right, was evidently no Nazi but, rather, one who hoped for an outcome to
National Socialism that would resemble his 'Second Religiousness' and thus stand
as a true beacon of enlightenment on the road to if not actually in 'Kingdom
Come'.
Sadly, Nazism was not to be that. For any
pretensions to its being a new dawn in religion were quickly eclipsed by
political reality and by the obvious need to combat Communism both at home and,
subsequently, abroad, thereby detracting from the possibility of a cadent
resolution to the historical process that would have been the goal of any
movement sensible enough to take advantage of degeneration in the State to
strengthen the Church, albeit not along conventional lines but, on the
contrary, along revolutionary lines commensurate with the possibility of
'Kingdom Come'.
Nazism was, in Koestler's memorable words, a
'god that failed' precisely because too much of its efforts went into combating
'godless communism' from a standpoint insufficiently cadent to prove a truly
viable alternative, a standpoint in which a peculiar kind of mental decadence
went hand-in-hand with a neo-generative barbarism epitomized by the Nazi Party's
accommodation with – some would say 'sell out to' – the largely
Prussian-dominated military as the means by which, under Nazi auspices,
Germany's rejuvenation as a 'great power' and, above all, right to imperial
expansion would be guaranteed, and achieved, not least, at the expense of the
degenerate Communist East, epitomizing, for Hitler, a subhuman failure worthy
of domination by a superhuman power entitled to more than mere survival.
The West may have declined, to paraphrase
Spengler, with the threat to if not actual communist suppression of
church/state liberalism and the degeneration of liberalism itself through the
incorporation of socialism, but Hitler was no friend of the Church, and the
want of a truly cadent alternative to social degeneration leaves us in a
position today where – if we except the Third Reich as being no more than a
precursor or racially localized manifestation of eschatological promise -
'Kingdom Come' has still to come, and where Communism, in a more covert or
underground and even apparently liberal guise, wears a Social Democratic mask,
though still very much a part of the degenerative fabric of Western
civilization, the global retort to which, though manifestly existent on an
alpha-stemming basis, cries out for a genuine cadence truly commensurate with
the resurrection of church-hegemonic values under what I term Social Theocracy,
and firmly believe to be the ideology most likely to accord with the coming of
the 'kingdom' whose values lie within, in the deepest recesses of metaphysical
self, but only if and when that self has been liberated from the clutches of
both will and spirit, achieving, at the expense of ego, the soul's beingful
delight.
Neither the Hegelian triumph of spirit nor the
Nietzschean triumph of will, nor even the twisted ego of Marxist dialectics can
bring to the world that resolution of history which Spengler, like Bunyan
before him, glimpsed from afar, albeit without an ideological definition to
seal the fate of those who would capitalize on its vagueness to uphold the
temporal (coupled to the pseudo-finite) alternatives to Eternity (coupled to
pseudo-Infinity) by continuing to bow before the Infinite (coupled to the
pseudo-Eternal) in order to enslave the finite (coupled to the
pseudo-temporal), thereby precluding their deliverance, on both positive and
pseudo-negative terms, from this world to the next.
Picasso – that degenerate bourgeois artist with
predictably left-wing sympathies but a decidedly heterosexual disposition – at
least to all appearances. For who knows what goes on underneath?
As for Dali, a much finer artist with a
capacity for spiritual values and even a higher form of religious art.
If Picasso is the alpha, then Dali is the omega
of twentieth-century Spanish art, an artist who, as is well known, politically
leaned to the right and even flourished under Franco, becoming less surrealist
and correspondingly more Catholic.
In contrasting the alpha left with the omega
right, one still needs to distinguish the extreme forms of each from their
so-called moderate counterparts, as between the noumenal objectivity of science
and the noumenal subjectivity of religion in relation to the extreme left- and
right-wing positions (or antitheses), and between the phenomenal objectivity of
politics and the phenomenal subjectivity of economics in relation to the
so-called moderate left- and right-wing positions (or antitheses), so that the
alpha left, divisible between science and politics, can be more comprehensively
contrasted, to an antithetical degree, with the omega right, divisible between
economics and religion.
In relation to Picasso and Dali, I would argue
that Picasso was more an artist of the political left than of the scientific
left, more corporeal than ethereal, so to speak, whereas I would hold Dali to be
- and this despite appearances to the contrary – more of the religious right
than of the economic right, or more ethereal than corporeal, and therefore the
polar opposite, within the axial context of Spanish Catholicism, to Picasso,
whom one can associate with the lower-order left as opposed, like Dali, with
the upper-order right – that of course being extreme (noumenal) right (and
religious).