“Modern man has a fatal propensity for attempting to free himself of his own feelings of guilt, his own anxieties and terrors, by projecting them onto some scapegoat, some incarnation of absolute evil, which he burdens with all the sins, all the shortcomings that he cannot face within himself.” -
So much truth! With family in Germany that we have visited regularly since 1977 we are witnesses to the changes/move back toward totalitarianism you have written about so well! We also witnessed the early total “buy in” of the medical community to the Covid response. Praying for the speakers of truth to continue to hold the line. Excellent article. Well done!
It's interesting to imagine what Nietzsche would think of all of this. He talked about how the weak and powerless hated the noble and honest, and used victim mentality and a morality of weakness to defeat them. Christianity was his prime example, tho a bad one I think. Hitler and the Nazis thought they were Nietzschean supermen, but they were actually good examples of his undermen, feeling victimized by the all-powerful Jews, intellectuals, and aristocrats, hating them, and using dirty tricks rather than open battle. The socialist left has always been in the undermen category, full of hatred for their betters, who merely consider them a pitiful nuisance (till it's too late).
Great points. Nietzsche is hugely influential on my thinking. I had actually explored including arguments of his on "ressentiment" and "slave morality" from On The Geneology of Morals in this essay. However, it would have added another chunk of text to an already very hefty piece and so decided against.
I hope you'll write about this in the future. It also makes me more interested in the morality/ethics of the classical Greeks and Romans and how it differed from Christianity. It's often hard to relate to those cultures because Christian morality is so foundational to our current ideas.
really insightful comment! I have also thought about Nietzsche a lot since this new woke religion has taken over. I wish he were alive to write about it.
Compascism: This is termed "culture of victimhood" by some, and "identity trap" in the Yascha Mounk book. All describe the identitarian intersectionality framework in which the elevation of "marginalized" groups is the sine-qua-none of moral & social justice. Those who adhere to this culture of victimhood have left behind the "culture of dignity" in which individual effort is rewarded.
This is a brilliant essay. I was very impressed by it, over and over, as I read various portions.
I am a "minority" with lots of "victim-hood points". However, as you suggest, these are sort of ephemeral in nature, and what attributes previously conferred advantage in the intersectionality sweepstakes can quickly be reclassified as a deficit, in the blink of an eye. This is a ridiculous, and self-defeating method of attempting to rank-order individuals for consideration. It results in a waste of human capital, which is the real tragedy. This was the mistake the National Socialists fell prey to, much to their detriment. Merit, if it can be estimated in some way, seems to be a somewhat better method of categorization, albeit not without plenty of flaws, admittedly.
I have had the good fortune to spend an extended period of time with an older lady who was raised under the Nazi educational system in Germany, and had to meet Nazi standards. I spoke to her for perhaps 2 or 3 hours per day, as often as 5 days a week, for a few years. I was astonished by what I learned. She exhibited a complete inability to imagine or understand the impact on others of various actions and statements she made. She argued with me for hours and hours about the concept of a "bully". She did not think bullying existed, when it was clear from her stories she had been a terrible bully all her life. She could not imagine anyone doing the same to her; it was out of the question, and would "never ever happen", by definition, "obviously". She also asked me, perhaps hundreds of times, why the allies had decided to defend themselves. After all, she said, the Germans were only trying to kill everyone else. What was wrong with that? Why did we have to fight back? Just to prove a point or something? She could not understand this at all. In addition, she had a million excuses for why Germany should not be blamed for attempting to exterminate Jews and other "deplorables" of that era. It was very eye-opening for me. However, eventually I could not take it any longer. Therefore, I told her daughter that I could not continue to look in on her mother and assist her. It was too much for me.
Any group or individual in power, with minimal accountability, has a tendency to wield this authority in ways that are unjust and unfair and wasteful and inefficient. I have been victimized myself because of my ethnicity, for years, in STEM. I have observed friends and colleagues go through the same thing. We need systems in STEM that have "immune systems" of various kinds in place to counter this sort of nonsense. I am thinking carefully about what these should be, because our current STEM organizations are very prone to this sort of abuse. And I have experienced it, in tremendous measure.
The current DEI bureaucracy, or HR departments, or assorted state and federal rules, do not really help much in this regard. We need to do better. We are pretty smart. Can we design better systems to make things more reasonable?
"Any group or individual in power, with minimal accountability, has a tendency to wield this authority in ways that are unjust and unfair and wasteful and inefficient."
Regardless of identity, we are all capable of wrongdoing.
As such, any policy solution to the problem of workplace abuse or discrimination that is grounded not only in reality but the recognition of human dignity, will be blind to identity characteristics and treat people as individuals.
In the book entitled "The Psychology of Totalitarianism,, the professor of clinical psychology Mattias Desmet reports a finding from the scientific research he has performed on the thinking that leads a group of people to welcome totalitarian rule over themselves. In philosophical terms, these people are "reductionists" who, by the definition of terms, reduce a "complex" physical system to a "non-comp;lex" physical system, where a "complex" physical system has one or more features that are features of the whole system and not of the separate parts of this system whereas a "non-complex" physical system has no such properties.
The engineering discipline called "control theory" reveals that every physical system mm that is under the control of a person or automatic control system has the property of "stability," thus being an example of a "complex" physical system. The many people who are unfamiliar with control theory are prone to the mistake of thinking that when a physical system is out of control it can be brought under control by imposing totalitarian rule under which telling this truth about the instability of this system is illegal and severely punished. The antidote for this mistake is advise those people who are susceptible to making this mistake of what is wrong with their thinking. What is wrong is that they are mistaking a "complex" physical system for a "non-complex" physical system., as Desmet points out in "The Psychology of Totalitarianism."
To bring an out of control complex physical system under control, a model that is predictive of the conditional outcomes of the events of the future for this system is required. Means for the construction of such a model are presented in the seven volume "Entropy Minimax Sourcebook," circa 1980,, by the theoretical physicist Ronald Christensen. After being published, this work was widely ignored, resulting in the current drift toward totalitarian rule. over us. I work pro bono 12 hours per day seven days per week at trying to turn this disaster for mankind around but cannot succeed without help.
"Hatred exists, but people will not stop hating because of tyrannical speech restrictions. Deeyah Khan, a Muslim woman of Afghan and Pakistani heritage, has shown a much better way of dealing with hate. In meeting committed racists face to face and openly asking them about their hatred for people like her,"
Bad take. 99% of the hatred is by leftists and Moslem in Europe, aside from people who've been personally victimized by Moslem crime. Who puts signs in their yards declaring their hate? The people who say they will not tolerate hatred-- what they mean is they will not tolerate conservatives.
Yes, getting rid of hatred would be good. But let's be realistic about where the hatred is.
(And don't say that only 30% of European Moslems hate Jews and Christians. That may be true, but that's still a huge number of people who smile whenever they hear of someone stabbing a Jew.)
Firstly, I would very much recommend clicking the link on Deeyah Khan in the piece and watching her clip in the interview. She has made two documentaries of relevance here: one on white supremacists and another on jihadis. Regardless of the religion she was born into (I have no idea if she is "practicing" or not), her method of disarming/dissolving hatred has strong merit in my view.
Secondly, I am not blind to Islamist intolerance and hatred. For example, I have previously written about Salman Rushdie's courage and resilience
https://gript.ie/rushdies-resilience/ . And more recently, I have delved into Islamist violence when writing about reckless mass immigration in "The Strange Death of Ireland"
I mean this in the most respectful manner but I urge you to reevaluate your assessment of WWII era Germany as it is one of the most embellished (almost mythologised) periods of human history. And without a proper undertstanding of this era it seriously hinders a proper comprehension of the modern world and the problems we face.
Other than describing Martin Heidegger as one of the "greatest thinkers" of the 20th century, there is almost nothing else in this essay to criticize. Cheating on his wife (bad) with Hannah Arendt (good) was about as good as Heidegger gets. The rest of the essay nicely illuminates "woke" in its European contexts and manifestations. Had I not found a name associated with the moniker "Quarrelsome Life", I would have bet that this fellow has such an obvious "gift of the gab" that he must be Irish. Then I saw the name "O'Regan" and knew he was Irish. So, Well said, Sir! You may go to (more likely ARE) the head of the class.
So much truth! With family in Germany that we have visited regularly since 1977 we are witnesses to the changes/move back toward totalitarianism you have written about so well! We also witnessed the early total “buy in” of the medical community to the Covid response. Praying for the speakers of truth to continue to hold the line. Excellent article. Well done!
Delighted I could contribute something of use 🙏
It's interesting to imagine what Nietzsche would think of all of this. He talked about how the weak and powerless hated the noble and honest, and used victim mentality and a morality of weakness to defeat them. Christianity was his prime example, tho a bad one I think. Hitler and the Nazis thought they were Nietzschean supermen, but they were actually good examples of his undermen, feeling victimized by the all-powerful Jews, intellectuals, and aristocrats, hating them, and using dirty tricks rather than open battle. The socialist left has always been in the undermen category, full of hatred for their betters, who merely consider them a pitiful nuisance (till it's too late).
Great points. Nietzsche is hugely influential on my thinking. I had actually explored including arguments of his on "ressentiment" and "slave morality" from On The Geneology of Morals in this essay. However, it would have added another chunk of text to an already very hefty piece and so decided against.
I hope you'll write about this in the future. It also makes me more interested in the morality/ethics of the classical Greeks and Romans and how it differed from Christianity. It's often hard to relate to those cultures because Christian morality is so foundational to our current ideas.
really insightful comment! I have also thought about Nietzsche a lot since this new woke religion has taken over. I wish he were alive to write about it.
Compascism: This is termed "culture of victimhood" by some, and "identity trap" in the Yascha Mounk book. All describe the identitarian intersectionality framework in which the elevation of "marginalized" groups is the sine-qua-none of moral & social justice. Those who adhere to this culture of victimhood have left behind the "culture of dignity" in which individual effort is rewarded.
I think our complete loss of dignity started with the Jerry Springer show and its ilk.
This is a brilliant essay. I was very impressed by it, over and over, as I read various portions.
I am a "minority" with lots of "victim-hood points". However, as you suggest, these are sort of ephemeral in nature, and what attributes previously conferred advantage in the intersectionality sweepstakes can quickly be reclassified as a deficit, in the blink of an eye. This is a ridiculous, and self-defeating method of attempting to rank-order individuals for consideration. It results in a waste of human capital, which is the real tragedy. This was the mistake the National Socialists fell prey to, much to their detriment. Merit, if it can be estimated in some way, seems to be a somewhat better method of categorization, albeit not without plenty of flaws, admittedly.
I have had the good fortune to spend an extended period of time with an older lady who was raised under the Nazi educational system in Germany, and had to meet Nazi standards. I spoke to her for perhaps 2 or 3 hours per day, as often as 5 days a week, for a few years. I was astonished by what I learned. She exhibited a complete inability to imagine or understand the impact on others of various actions and statements she made. She argued with me for hours and hours about the concept of a "bully". She did not think bullying existed, when it was clear from her stories she had been a terrible bully all her life. She could not imagine anyone doing the same to her; it was out of the question, and would "never ever happen", by definition, "obviously". She also asked me, perhaps hundreds of times, why the allies had decided to defend themselves. After all, she said, the Germans were only trying to kill everyone else. What was wrong with that? Why did we have to fight back? Just to prove a point or something? She could not understand this at all. In addition, she had a million excuses for why Germany should not be blamed for attempting to exterminate Jews and other "deplorables" of that era. It was very eye-opening for me. However, eventually I could not take it any longer. Therefore, I told her daughter that I could not continue to look in on her mother and assist her. It was too much for me.
Any group or individual in power, with minimal accountability, has a tendency to wield this authority in ways that are unjust and unfair and wasteful and inefficient. I have been victimized myself because of my ethnicity, for years, in STEM. I have observed friends and colleagues go through the same thing. We need systems in STEM that have "immune systems" of various kinds in place to counter this sort of nonsense. I am thinking carefully about what these should be, because our current STEM organizations are very prone to this sort of abuse. And I have experienced it, in tremendous measure.
The current DEI bureaucracy, or HR departments, or assorted state and federal rules, do not really help much in this regard. We need to do better. We are pretty smart. Can we design better systems to make things more reasonable?
This insight of yours is key, I think:
"Any group or individual in power, with minimal accountability, has a tendency to wield this authority in ways that are unjust and unfair and wasteful and inefficient."
Regardless of identity, we are all capable of wrongdoing.
As such, any policy solution to the problem of workplace abuse or discrimination that is grounded not only in reality but the recognition of human dignity, will be blind to identity characteristics and treat people as individuals.
Thanks for the kind words and input 🙏
In the book entitled "The Psychology of Totalitarianism,, the professor of clinical psychology Mattias Desmet reports a finding from the scientific research he has performed on the thinking that leads a group of people to welcome totalitarian rule over themselves. In philosophical terms, these people are "reductionists" who, by the definition of terms, reduce a "complex" physical system to a "non-comp;lex" physical system, where a "complex" physical system has one or more features that are features of the whole system and not of the separate parts of this system whereas a "non-complex" physical system has no such properties.
The engineering discipline called "control theory" reveals that every physical system mm that is under the control of a person or automatic control system has the property of "stability," thus being an example of a "complex" physical system. The many people who are unfamiliar with control theory are prone to the mistake of thinking that when a physical system is out of control it can be brought under control by imposing totalitarian rule under which telling this truth about the instability of this system is illegal and severely punished. The antidote for this mistake is advise those people who are susceptible to making this mistake of what is wrong with their thinking. What is wrong is that they are mistaking a "complex" physical system for a "non-complex" physical system., as Desmet points out in "The Psychology of Totalitarianism."
To bring an out of control complex physical system under control, a model that is predictive of the conditional outcomes of the events of the future for this system is required. Means for the construction of such a model are presented in the seven volume "Entropy Minimax Sourcebook," circa 1980,, by the theoretical physicist Ronald Christensen. After being published, this work was widely ignored, resulting in the current drift toward totalitarian rule. over us. I work pro bono 12 hours per day seven days per week at trying to turn this disaster for mankind around but cannot succeed without help.
Terry Oldberg
Engineer/Scientist/Public Policy Researcher
Los Altos Hills, California
1-650-518-6636
terry_oldberg@yahoo./com
I have Desmet's book on the shelf but have yet to get to it. This might be the nudge I needed 👌
Thanks for reading and for the input 🙏
"Hatred exists, but people will not stop hating because of tyrannical speech restrictions. Deeyah Khan, a Muslim woman of Afghan and Pakistani heritage, has shown a much better way of dealing with hate. In meeting committed racists face to face and openly asking them about their hatred for people like her,"
Bad take. 99% of the hatred is by leftists and Moslem in Europe, aside from people who've been personally victimized by Moslem crime. Who puts signs in their yards declaring their hate? The people who say they will not tolerate hatred-- what they mean is they will not tolerate conservatives.
Yes, getting rid of hatred would be good. But let's be realistic about where the hatred is.
(And don't say that only 30% of European Moslems hate Jews and Christians. That may be true, but that's still a huge number of people who smile whenever they hear of someone stabbing a Jew.)
Two quick points if I may.
Firstly, I would very much recommend clicking the link on Deeyah Khan in the piece and watching her clip in the interview. She has made two documentaries of relevance here: one on white supremacists and another on jihadis. Regardless of the religion she was born into (I have no idea if she is "practicing" or not), her method of disarming/dissolving hatred has strong merit in my view.
Secondly, I am not blind to Islamist intolerance and hatred. For example, I have previously written about Salman Rushdie's courage and resilience
https://gript.ie/rushdies-resilience/ . And more recently, I have delved into Islamist violence when writing about reckless mass immigration in "The Strange Death of Ireland"
https://quarrelsomelife.substack.com/p/the-strange-death-of-ireland?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
Thanks for reading my essay and for taking the time comment 🙏
I mean this in the most respectful manner but I urge you to reevaluate your assessment of WWII era Germany as it is one of the most embellished (almost mythologised) periods of human history. And without a proper undertstanding of this era it seriously hinders a proper comprehension of the modern world and the problems we face.
Other than describing Martin Heidegger as one of the "greatest thinkers" of the 20th century, there is almost nothing else in this essay to criticize. Cheating on his wife (bad) with Hannah Arendt (good) was about as good as Heidegger gets. The rest of the essay nicely illuminates "woke" in its European contexts and manifestations. Had I not found a name associated with the moniker "Quarrelsome Life", I would have bet that this fellow has such an obvious "gift of the gab" that he must be Irish. Then I saw the name "O'Regan" and knew he was Irish. So, Well said, Sir! You may go to (more likely ARE) the head of the class.