Ships in Horrible Storms

[Phil Rumpole]

I read it accurately. When hunger and hardship explained Hitler coming to power, the French revolution and the Soviet revolution, as just three examples, you abandoned rationalist ideology as the cause, and moved instead to their only perpetuating regimes. Experiments were done to explain human behaviour in following orders by the Nazis. These did not require any ideology  , only a sense of authority . You then said that social pressure, authority and a power structure were the definition of ideological posession without explaining what particular ideology they were associated in the American experiments. When I asked again, you spoke of socialism.

Either the participants and organizers in the experiments were socialist or you mentioned it in response to my question for no reason.

If we can conclude that no socialism or Nazism was involved in those experiments and the only thing that is required is ideological posession, then ideological posession has nothing to do with rationalistic nihilism. You define ideological posession as only social pressure, authority and a power structure. These are as old as any herd species and in particular humans.

The peace deals you mentioned as an extention of moving embassy to Jerusalem and outraging the Arabs were gunboat diplomacy.

Logical conclusions from testing your theory are not bad faith, but if its a better explanation for you than Nietzsche being fallible, I will abide and stop kicking your sacred cow.

• Tweet

[RE]

I don't agree that material hardships can adequately explain any of the above mentioned, but I don't need to. All I need to show is that, after the revolutions (and democratic election of Hitler), ideological commitment/possession was necessary to maintain their brutal, dehumanizing policies at such a large scale.

Yes to keep it up you need to create an ideology that justifies perpetual murder.  Both the Radical Right and Radical Left, the Christians and the Muslims and the Rich & Poor all have justifications for killing the "other| in their ideologies.  The goal is always the same, reduce the population of those who disagree with you, thus you can be richer.  This went Viral during the Age of Oil and the Greed went amok with right wing capitalist ideology.  In the words of Gordon Gekko, "Greed is good".

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/PF_iorX_MAw" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/PF_iorX_MAw</a>

RE

• Tweet

[RE]

Did the ancients keep their killing small because they lacked ideology, or post penicillin population and technology?

First off, there were a lot fewer Homo Saps in 1500 vs 2000.  Global Population was 425M as opposed to 6.2B in 1500.  So there were many less people available to KILL and run up your numbers as a Political/Religious unit.  All major ideologies have a large Kill Count over the millenia.  You also could not KILL so many people at once, the technology wasn't up to it.  Really only since the Scientific Revolution have their War Machines become good enough for killing millions at a pop.

Recent high Kill Counts are mainly a result of fewer people and death dealing power, not ideology.  People alive in 1500 were just as violent as those living in 2000.  Absolute numbers have increased, but percentages do not seem to have changed much.  According to the Bible,  in times of Collapse the 4 Horsemen were empowered to do a 25% Culling of the Herd.  All 4 Horsemen are riding now.  I can hear their hoofbeats.

Revelation 6
King James Version

6 And I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals, and I heard, as it were the noise of thunder, one of the four beasts saying, Come and see.

2 And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.

3 And when he had opened the second seal, I heard the second beast say, Come and see.

4 And there went out another horse that was red: and power was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another: and there was given unto him a great sword.

5 And when he had opened the third seal, I heard the third beast say, Come and see. And I beheld, and lo a black horse; and he that sat on him had a pair of balances in his hand.

6 And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts say, A measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny; and see thou hurt not the oil and the wine.

7 And when he had opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth beast say, Come and see.

8 And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth.

RE

• Tweet

[Ashvin]

If we can conclude that no socialism or Nazism was involved in those experiments and the only thing that is required is ideological posession, then ideological posession has nothing to do with rationalistic nihilism. You define ideological posession as only social pressure, authority and a power structure. These are as old as any herd species and in particular humans.

Rationalist ideologies and nihilist ideologies (they are two separate kinds) are obviously sub-species of ideologies in general. Anything can be considered an ideology. If you read a book by your favorite author, then start to view every aspect of the world through that author's lens, you have been possessed by an ideology. It happens to us all the time in modern society. It is when you cede your personal responsibility for critical thinking to a broad set of ideas.

Marxism is a rationalist ideology. Do you deny that? This ideology was undeniably what drove the Russian revolution and various other revolutions of the 20th century (Mao, Pol Pot, etc.). The possession of Soviet citizens, etc. by this ideology is what allowed the State to maintain their brutal policies over long periods of time.

National Socialism can also be considered a rationalist ideology, however it is also a good example of the fine line between rationalism and nihilism. Hitler wanted to create an ethno-nationalist, technocratic new world order, but when it became clear that was not happening, he simply wanted everything and everyone (including himself and his family) to be destroyed. It is the ultimate rejection of being itself.

The peace deals you mentioned as an extention of moving embassy to Jerusalem and outraging the Arabs were gunboat diplomacy.

This is what I would call ideological possession. You are so enamored with the anti-Trump and, presumably, anti-Zionist ideas that, no matter what deals are struck and how many lives are saved in the region as a result, you will find a reason to call it a bad thing. If it comes from Trump and/or benefits Israel in any way, then it must be bad. You have ceded your critical thinking on this issue to the ideology.

Logical conclusions from testing your theory are not bad faith, but if its a better explanation for you than Nietzsche being fallible, I will abide and stop kicking your sacred cow.

Of course Nietzsche was fallible, and there are quite a few arguments he made that I believe were off the mark. But the 20th century atrocities as a result of rationalist and nihilist ideologies rising up in the wake of the rejection of Western Christian values (the "death of God") was one that he got absolutely right, and that is evident to anyone who reads him critically.

• Tweet

[RE]

If you read a book by your favorite author, then start to view every aspect of the world through that author's lens, you have been possessed by an ideology. It happens to us all the time in modern society. It is when you cede your personal responsibility for critical thinking to a broad set of ideas.

By this definition, Christianity is an Ideology.  So is Islam & Judaism also.  The Bible, Koran & Talmud are all books people look to for answers on how to live.  The issue here is that ideologue on the Diner is used as an epithet.  It has a layer of criticism embedded in the word.  So essentially everyone is an ideologue, and the word loses it's validity as a critique.  You're a Christian Ideologue.  What else is new?

RE

• Tweet

[Ashvin]

I don't agree that material hardships can adequately explain any of the above mentioned, but I don't need to. All I need to show is that, after the revolutions (and democratic election of Hitler), ideological commitment/possession was necessary to maintain their brutal, dehumanizing policies at such a large scale.

Yes to keep it up you need to create an ideology that justifies perpetual murder.  Both the Radical Right and Radical Left, the Christians and the Muslims and the Rich & Poor all have justifications for killing the "other| in their ideologies.  The goal is always the same, reduce the population of those who disagree with you, thus you can be richer.  This went Viral during the Age of Oil and the Greed went amok with right wing capitalist ideology.  In the words of Gordon Gekko, "Greed is good".

All you really need is the dissipation of evolved values which tame the innate human tendency towards violent conflict. This violent conflict happened since time immemorial, even when there were barely any resources to fight over. The values which tamed the violence evolved through ancient mythological systems, i.e. they were not rationally created by anyone. The modes of thinking which allowed for the scientific and industrial revolutions were the same ones which dispensed with those values as unnecessary byproducts of ancient superstitions. None of this is a coincidence.

• Tweet

[Ashvin]

If you read a book by your favorite author, then start to view every aspect of the world through that author's lens, you have been possessed by an ideology. It happens to us all the time in modern society. It is when you cede your personal responsibility for critical thinking to a broad set of ideas.

By this definition, Christianity is an Ideology.  So is Islam & Judaism also.  The Bible, Koran & Talmud are all books people look to for answers on how to live.  The issue here is that ideologue on the Diner is used as an epithet.  It has a layer of criticism embedded in the word.  So essentially everyone is an ideologue, and the word loses it's validity as a critique.  You're a Christian Ideologue.  What else is new?

RE

That's why it's so important to keep an open mind and constantly reflect on your inner states, i.e. what is driving you to think and act in certain ways. This is what depth psychology in the 20th century was really concerned with (and many would say Nietzsche played an important role in paving the way for Freud, Adler, Jung etc)

As you know, I used to identify with fundamentalist Christianity and that was ideological possession. I don't anymore, but it's always a risk that whatever system of religious thinking I get into could be another form of ideological possession. As a general rule, if the ideas you are enthralled with allow you to blame others for your problems or the world's problems, and abdicate you of personal responsibility, then it's an ideology which has possessed you.

My view right now is that all ancient, long-lasting religious traditions have evolved to guard against this ever-repeating phenomenon. It is what the Christian tradition is concerned with when it points to "demonic possession". It is also what the pagan traditions thought of as being possessed by the spirits of various gods.

• Tweet

[RE]

All you really need is the dissipation of evolved values which tame the innate human tendency towards violent conflict.

Why do evolved values dissipate?  Because there's not enough resources around! Historically Food, but now including many other things.  if I can get gas for my car, why can't my counterpart in Myanmar get it for his?  He wants to live the Happy Motoring life too!  Problem of course is there isn't enough around for everyone.  So they all fight over what there is left.

RE

• Tweet

[RE]

I used to identify with fundamentalist Christianity and that was ideological possession. I don't anymore, but it's always a risk that whatever system of religious thinking I get into could be another form of ideological possession. As a general rule, if the ideas you are enthralled with allow you to blame others for your problems or the world's problems, and abdicate you of personal responsibility, then it's an ideology which has possessed you.

My view right now is that all ancient, long-lasting religious traditions have evolved to guard against this ever-repeating phenomenon. It is what the Christian tradition is concerned with when it points to "demonic possession". It is also what the pagan traditions thought of as being possessed by the spirits of various gods.

You're not a Fundamentalist Christian anymore?  You no longer believe the Bible is literal truth?

RE

• Tweet

[Ashvin]

All you really need is the dissipation of evolved values which tame the innate human tendency towards violent conflict.

Why do evolved values dissipate?  Because there's not enough resources around! Historically Food, but now including many other things.  if I can get gas for my car, why can't my counterpart in Myanmar get it for his?  He wants to live the Happy Motoring life too!  Problem of course is there isn't enough around for everyone.  So they all fight over what there is left.

RE

This dissipation happened mostly in the late 18th and 19th centuries, at the height of the scientific revolution but right before the industrial revolution really picked up with fossil fuels. Nietazche wrote about in the 1880s, when Europeans were generally content with their lives and the peaceful state of affairs.

The values are what had allowed people to weather the storms of material hardships throughout human history. When they went, so did the ability to deal with adversity without succumbing to the allires of the political extemists.

• Tweet

[Eddie]

I seem to agree with Ashwin here:
I am an engineer not a philosopher, yet I too am struggling to see anything positive to come out of Nietzsche's work from what little I have read of it. (When I retire I will read more of his work, along with more Charles Dickens... I loved a tale of two cities).

If he predicted cataclysmic times in the 20th century he got it pretty damn right by my reading of history.

I am too busy with reality unfolding around me, like many at the moment, to see anything other than bad behavior being excused because society is unfair. Its always easy to blame others for your predicament. As you rightly point out politicians do it all the time. (Pauline Hanson here in Oz) Create a "THEM" to blame so "WE" can prevail. Religion is just the ultimate political power game, which is what makes theocracies so dangerous.

Call out bad behaviour in Israel and you are an anti semmite. Call out bad behaviour of the Sudanese youth gangs car jacking in Melbourne and you are racist. Call out the bad behaviour of the government bailing out the rich and you are a socialist. Call out rioters and you are a facist.

The left in the US need to call out BLM and other rioters. The right the racists. Both need to call out the bank bailouts that only help the rich.

Being a heterosexual white male who owns property I am automatically sexist, racist, facist and homophobic it would seem. I absolutely have enjoyed some privelidge as a result of my genetics, but i have not sought it out, so I should not be called out for this.

The irony of you calling me a leftie in another post Ashwin amuses me. I have been called everything you can think of at one time or another when ever I call out bad behaviour. The only real point of contention should be what I consider bad behaviour. Many others have considered my behaviour bad.

If you can benefit others by your actions you should. Behaviour defines us not what others label us. Probably too simplistic for some intenectuals, but simple enough for logical me.

JOW

Although we are many thousands of miles apart, we live in the same world.  I appreciate that comment, JOW.

• Tweet

[Eddie]

If you read a book by your favorite author, then start to view every aspect of the world through that author's lens, you have been possessed by an ideology. It happens to us all the time in modern society. It is when you cede your personal responsibility for critical thinking to a broad set of ideas.

By this definition, Christianity is an Ideology.  So is Islam & Judaism also.  The Bible, Koran & Talmud are all books people look to for answers on how to live.  The issue here is that ideologue on the Diner is used as an epithet.  It has a layer of criticism embedded in the word.  So essentially everyone is an ideologue, and the word loses it's validity as a critique.  You're a Christian Ideologue.  What else is new?

RE

That's why it's so important to keep an open mind and constantly reflect on your inner states, i.e. what is driving you to think and act in certain ways. This is what depth psychology in the 20th century was really concerned with (and many would say Nietzsche played an important role in paving the way for Freud, Adler, Jung etc)

As you know, I used to identify with fundamentalist Christianity and that was ideological possession. I don't anymore, but it's always a risk that whatever system of religious thinking I get into could be another form of ideological possession. As a general rule, if the ideas you are enthralled with allow you to blame others for your problems or the world's problems, and abdicate you of personal responsibility, then it's an ideology which has possessed you.

My view right now is that all ancient, long-lasting religious traditions have evolved to guard against this ever-repeating phenomenon. It is what the Christian tradition is concerned with when it points to "demonic possession". It is also what the pagan traditions thought of as being possessed by the spirits of various gods.

Where is that fucking like button? 

• Tweet

[RE]

Nietazche wrote about in the 1880s, when Europeans were generally content with their lives and the peaceful state of affairs.

Do you include the French Revolution?  The Russian Pogroms?  How about Oliver Twist?

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/upD6cB9Rzvk" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/upD6cB9Rzvk</a>

RE

• Tweet

[Ashvin]

Nietazche wrote about in the 1880s, when Europeans were generally content with their lives and the peaceful state of affairs.

Do you include the French Revolution?  The Russian Pogroms?  How about Oliver Twist?

The French Revolution could be thought of as the inauguration for rationalist ideologies which would come after it. It was the first major rebuke of traditional religious values in Western Europe.

Fyodor Dostoevsky was involved in protest when was a teenager in Russia (circa 1840s), and the Tsar ordered him to be executed by a firing squad. It turned out that the soldiers in the firing squad had blanks, but it scared him so badly he developed epileptic seizures for the rest of his life. These seizures also gave him mystical experiences. Dostoevsky was admired by Nietzsche, which is VERY high praise. He ended up writing some of the greatest novels ever written in any language, including Notes from the Underground, where he brilliantly captures the fatal flaw of rationalist utopian ideology:

“And, indeed, this is the odd thing that is continually happening: there are continually turning up in life moral and rational persons, sages and lovers of humanity who make it their object to live all their lives as morally and rationally as possible, to be, so to speak, a light to their neighbours simply in order to show them that it is possible to live morally and rationally in this world. And yet we all know that those very people sooner or later have been false to themselves, playing some queer trick, often a most unseemly one. Now I ask you: what can be expected of man since he is a being endowed with strange qualities? Shower upon him every earthly blessing, drown him in a sea of happiness, so that nothing but bubbles of bliss can be seen on the surface; give him economic prosperity, such that he should have nothing else to do but sleep, eat cakes and busy himself with the continuation of his species, and even then out of sheer ingratitude, sheer spite, man would play you some nasty trick. He would even risk his cakes and would deliberately desire the most fatal rubbish, the most uneconomical absurdity, simply to introduce into all this positive good sense his fatal fantastic element. It is just his fantastic dreams, his vulgar folly that he will desire to retain, simply in order to prove to himself--as though that were so necessary-- that men still are men and not the keys of a piano, which the laws of nature threaten to control so completely that soon one will be able to desire nothing but by the calendar. And that is not all: even if man really were nothing but a piano-key, even if this were proved to him by natural science and mathematics, even then he would not become reasonable, but would purposely do something perverse out of simple ingratitude, simply to gain his point. And if he does not find means he will contrive destruction and chaos, will contrive sufferings of all sorts, only to gain his point!”

• Tweet

[Ashvin]

I used to identify with fundamentalist Christianity and that was ideological possession. I don't anymore, but it's always a risk that whatever system of religious thinking I get into could be another form of ideological possession. As a general rule, if the ideas you are enthralled with allow you to blame others for your problems or the world's problems, and abdicate you of personal responsibility, then it's an ideology which has possessed you.

My view right now is that all ancient, long-lasting religious traditions have evolved to guard against this ever-repeating phenomenon. It is what the Christian tradition is concerned with when it points to "demonic possession". It is also what the pagan traditions thought of as being possessed by the spirits of various gods.

You're not a Fundamentalist Christian anymore?  You no longer believe the Bible is literal truth?

RE

No. It is filled with Truths, but not when read literally.

• Tweet