-Removed-Schmitt's analysis of invoking humanity was really relevant to that particular question of people who misuse empathy.
"He who invokes humanity wants to cheat!" should really be a household phrase.
You'd be surprised how little of Schmitt or other European thinkers like Locke or Marx really ate applicable to EU politics
@philokalia saidSeriously your putting a Nazi mouthpiece apologist in the same stall as Locke and Marx.
Schmitt's analysis of invoking humanity was really relevant to that particular question of people who misuse empathy.
"He who invokes humanity wants to cheat!" should really be a household phrase.
You'd be surprised how little of Schmitt or other European thinkers like Locke or Marx really ate applicable to EU politics
The phrase you quoted is just a joining up of words, everybody except the mental ill know what is meant by an appeal to someone’s ‘Humanity’, it’s basically a call for empathy and is foreshadowed in “Do unto others“ etc I’m surprised your not aware of the phrase. Or am I?
@kevcvs57 saidOh, OK, if you want to know the context of it more and see some Schmitt quotes, feel free to go to the thread over there.
Seriously your putting a Nazi mouthpiece apologist in the same stall as Locke and Marx.
The phrase you quoted is just a joining up of words, everybody except the mental ill know what is meant by an appeal to someone’s ‘Humanity’, it’s basically a call for empathy and is foreshadowed in “Do unto others“ etc I’m surprised your not aware of the phrase. Or am I?
I also want to be clear -- the work I read had no reference to the Nazis and was just a standard political philosophy bit. It has gone on to influence people like Zizek and Arrendt.
There's far more open anti-Semitism in Niezsche.
Would you blast a guy for quoting Nietzsche?
@philokalia saidSo you don’t think there’s a link between him being a Fascist ( a political philosophy that also misused Nietzsche ) and an attempt to delegitimise the concept and / or application of a universal humanitarian standard? The final solution was just coincidental rather consequential I expect.
Oh, OK, if you want to know the context of it more and see some Schmitt quotes, feel free to go to the thread over there.
I also want to be clear -- the work I read had no reference to the Nazis and was just a standard political philosophy bit. It has gone on to influence people like Zizek and Arrendt.
There's far more open anti-Semitism in Niezsche.
Would you blast a guy for quoting Nietzsche?
@kevcvs57 saidNo, I actually think it is a legitimate concern with the misuse of universal principles. You could say that he had witnessed Communist aggression in Europe under such a basis, and he could also see the way that Americans would also do this when they took up the cause against the Germans in WWI.
So you don’t think there’s a link between him being a Fascist ( a political philosophy that also misused Nietzsche ) and an attempt to delegitimise the concept and / or application of a universal humanitarian standard? The final solution was just coincidental rather consequential I expect.
I think he was concerned with making all conflict as localized as possible, and coming down just to the relevant parties.
When people fight over universalized ideas, war itself becomes very universalized and happens on a global scale. Moreover, the war becomes one in which the opponent has to be utterly defeated -- it is not enough to beat them, you have to secure so much more & have some final triumph over an ideological opponent.
But what does that even get you in the end? Ideologies are always shifting.
I also think that Fascism is a very diverse political phuilosophy -- whether we are talking about the Romanian, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, German, or Middle Eastern (Ba'athist) forms....
You can get Brazilian integralism in which it is explicitly against racialism, or the German form which is hyper-racialist, and all of the forms in between. Aleksander Dugin talked about fascism mostly as the "third position," because it was not something that was really meant to be a universalized. It was different everywhere it sprang into existence.
He had this interesting take on modernity
Democracy = modernity
Communism = Hypermodernity
Third Position = alternative modernity, which was never truly seen because it was self-devouring
And he came up with the concept of "the Fourth Position," which has not yet been invented, but will seek to take the best parts of all of these and resolve them.
One of the reasons I eventually worked my way around to Schmitt was because I was very inspired by Dugin, and my journey into all of these things was influenced by a lot of questions that I had about politics after 9/11 when I was trying to understand the Islamist movements. It really opened my eyes to a whole new way of thinking because, previously, I was just thinking about the ty pical left/right divide y ou see in first world nations.
1 edit
@philokalia saidOh I get that he wanted the powerful to be unrestrained in their abuse of the weak, he was a fascist after all.
No, I actually think it is a legitimate concern with the misuse of universal principles. You could say that he had witnessed Communist aggression in Europe under such a basis, and he could also see the way that Americans would also do this when they took up the cause against the Germans in WWI.
I think he was concerned with making all conflict as localized as possible, ...[text shortened]... reviously, I was just thinking about the ty pical left/right divide y ou see in first world nations.
Unfortunately finding universal principles inhibitive when you want to commit genocide and enslave neighbouring states proves their worth rather than discredits them.
So I might be labouring the point here but are you saying that the universal revulsion at the idea of gassing men, women and children in the name of racial purity and carrying out mass slaughter in order to physically dominate a continent is a negative?
Are you saying that the US intervention was a negative thing and that they were conned into opposing Nazi Germany by propaganda based on these universal humanitarian values?
What am I missing here?
BTW, y'all, lest we forget the thread topic,
Turkey is now threatening to get out of the agreement as well. They, too, like
Poland do not like the political teachings that go along with this anti-domestic
violence initiative. It really does goes a lot deeper than what the headline
leads people to believe.
1 edit
@philokalia saidIt's the tolerance of homosexuality in Japan that goes back centuries. The protagonist of The Tale of Genji (eleventh-century novelistic account of life at the court of Heian-kyo, i.e., Kyoto), spurned by one of his (many) female lovers, sleeps with her younger brother instead. "Genji pulled the boy down beside him ... Genji, for his part, or so one is informed, found the boy more attractive than his chilly sister". Surviving diaries from the period also make non-judgmental reference to same-sex love, and we are told of Emperors who kept male lovers in their harems.
Mishima is a pretty grat figure -- really have meant to explore his work more.
I had assumed that there is longer roots in anti-homoseuxality in Japan. Of course, I was aware that there were periods of homosexuality being popularized, but I thought the roots of modern anti-homoseuxality was a bit deeper.
And the Shingon priest Socho wrote poems of homosexual desire in the fifteenth or sixteenth century.
@earl-of-trumps saidWell if a bastion of female emancipation like the Erdogan government thinks it’s a bad idea I guess their must be something in it.
BTW, y'all, lest we forget the thread topic,
Turkey is now threatening to get out of the agreement as well. They, too, like
Poland do not like the political teachings that go along with this anti-domestic
violence initiative. It really does goes a lot deeper than what the headline
leads people to believe.
@earl-of-trumps saidSo what people believe is incorrect?
It really does goes a lot deeper than what the headline
leads people to believe.
Does "people" include you or are you in some way special?
2 edits
@earl-of-trumps saidI wonder why Turkey agreed to it?
BTW, y'all, lest we forget the thread topic,
Turkey is now threatening to get out of the agreement as well.
I don't know why members of the Council of Europe are allowed to
opt in or out of conventions, doesn't make sense to me. Turkey should
be kicked out of the Council of Europe (although I think it would be
a first - even Russia wasn't kicked out for invading Crimea!)
edit: Turkey was actually the FIRST country to ratify the convention in 2012!
@wolfgang59 saidApparently, Turkey has the same conservative objections that Poland has, and
I wonder why Turkey agreed to it?
I don't know why members of the Council of Europe are allowed to
opt in or out of conventions, doesn't make sense to me. Turkey should
be kicked out of the Council of Europe (although I think it would be
a first - even Russia wasn't kicked out for invading Crimea!)
edit: Turkey was actually the FIRST country to ratify the convention in 2012!
it is not about domestic violence, which is a crime.
The EU is saying that you must teach in the classrooms LGBTQ and other things
that go against their beliefs, as part of the whole package. In other words, brainwashing.
The West is disappointed in Turkey in many ways but I have grown to
understand the many problems they have and everything that Erdog is doing
to keep it all together.