This Week we explore Nietzsche’s influence in Critical Theory, and the uses in American Culture to Divide and Conquer its citizens.
What Is Man According to the Church, it’s Fathers, and Scripture?
I think the biggest problem in answering this question is that mankind has forgotten who God is, in his Three Persons, and in His Incarnation. And he thinks of God as an enemy to the free exercise of his free will. According to Christos Yannaras:
“God is not the “judge” of men in the sense of a magistrate who passes sentence and imposes a punishment, testifying to the transgression. HE is judge because of what He is: the possibility of life and true existence. When man voluntarily cuts himself off from this possibility of existence, he is automataically “judged.” It is not God’s sentence but His existence that judges him. God is nothing but an ontological fact of love and an outpouring of love: a fulness of good, an ecstasy of loving goodness …Man is judged according to the measure of the life and existence from which he excludes himself. Sin is a self-inflicted condemnation and punishment which man freely chooses when he refuses to be as a personal hypostasis of communion with God and prefers to “alter” and disorder his existence, in an act of self-creation, fragmenting his nature into individual entities – when man prefers corruption and death, death enslaves him. …For the Church, sin is not a legal but an existential fact. It is not simply a transgression, but an active refusal on man’s part to be what he truly is: the image and “glory”, of the manifestation, of God,. Christos Yannaras. The Freedom of Morality B#81A, pp.36, 46. The Bible and the Holy Fathers for Orthodox, Manley,1989;
Rejecting God, What Has Man Become?
What has man become, what is this thing, this image, this empty vessel that struts across this staging area of life, daring to thumb its nose at the very thought of God, this empty well that wants to relegate God as a meme that, not being concrete, yet refusing to die must be actively opposed, and at the extreme of opposition, disappeared. Perhaps the question should be rather, as the Psalmist asked:
“4 What is man that you are mindful of him, the son of man that you care for him? 5 You made him a little lower than the heavenly beings  and crowned him with glory and honor. 6 You made him ruler over the works of your hands; you put everything under his feet: 7 all flocks and herds, and the beasts of the field, 8 the birds of the air, and the fish of the sea, all that swim the paths of the seas.”
And in Genesis 1:26 the answer is recorded for us: “Then God said, ‘Let us make man in Our Image, according to Our Likeness. Let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of heaven, over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that moves on the earth. So God made man; in the image of God, He made him; male and female He made them. Then God Blessed them; and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multipy; fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of heaven, and over every living thing that moves on Earth.”
As Yannaras has said, man is the image of God, with a potentiality that we can chose to accept or reject. And in this manner, we fill the earth.
But what is this filling of the earth? And one may ask with what? The man is an earthen vessel. The Church teaches that man is to fill this vessel with the Holy Spirit, this is how he would have dominion over the earth. In his discourses on the Human Condition St. Basil explains then the exhortation from Mt.5-48: “Become perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect” the word Perfect, a priest once told me also means to be whole. And how is this wholeness manifest in behavior? Saint Basil writes: “Do you see how the Lord restores to us that which is according to the likeness? For he makes his sun rise upon evil and good, and he sends rain upon just and unjust [Mt.5-45]. If you become a hater of evil, free of rancor, not remembering yesterday’s enmity; if you become brother -loving and compassionate, you are like God. If you forgive your enemy from your heart, you are like God. If as God is toward you, the sinner, you become the same toward the brother who has wronged you, by your goodwill from your heart toward your neighbor, you are like God. As you have that which is according to the image through your being rational, you come to be according to the likeness by undertaking kindness. Take on yourself a heart of compassion, kindness, ‘that you may put on Christ. For through those things by which you undertake sympathy you put on Christ and drawing near to him is drawing near to God. Thus the creation story is an education in human life.” St. Basil 44:17. On the Human Condition
So man is an image of God, and by striving for the likeness of God, that is the ability to impartially and sincerely love one’s neighbour, one becomes in this manner, like God and in doing so becomes his authentic self. But what does the world teaches us about what man is.
So, disclaimer: I’ve been reading Nietzsche on and off for a few years, and his writing style strikes me as the ravings of a madman, with no restraints, or perhaps the restraints of his education. He definitely was exposed to much literature and philosophy. I believe that his writing style really informed the academic writings of the modernists and the post-modernists. And another thing about Nietzsche writings is that I do not find anything original in them, they seem to be a strongly distilled exposition of ideas and sentiments that are as old as the Fall of Mankind. In that vein, Nietzsche represents a type of the falleness of the mind, heart and soul of Mankind. He also is to modern philosophy what Aristotle and Plato was to ancient philosophy in that, his ideas will appear in almost all those who followed after him. He is a type of a tragic anti-Christian father of all the current and well regarded anti-Christian philosophers of this modern age. But, I myself, have seen his ideas in other manifestations: that is, in the neo-Platonism of the Roman Catholic Church before, during, and after the Reformation; in revolutionary France’s bloodthirsty attack on the Christianity, in Napoleon’s de-Christianilization of the criminal code where ever he conquered, which began the worldwide de-coupling of the Christian Ethos and moral code from the governments’ legislative code. This dismantling of the great Christianization of the Roman law code of the God-inspired St. Justinian the Great, set the scene from which the attacks against Christianity would occur. Not only in the streets, but with legislation, in the courts, and in the decrees aka executive orders, of impious and irreverent leaders. And I think one may agree that we are seeing a contemporary revolutionary zeal to root out any remaining traces and re-emergences of the Christian ethic in legislative, courtroom, executive and social spheres.
Nietzsche’s psychological study on the genesis of morality is based on the premise that God is a creation of man’s psychosis as he deals with his need for contractual interaction, the threat, and consequences of punishment and the inability to keep promises to others and the traditional proscription against the free exercise of one’s will. In his psycho-historical analysis, the priest caste, its acts of self-denial is a manifestation, or a type of personification of resolving and the conquering of this inner struggle, but also the seed from which the oppression of the followers spring. There is a good in the elementary awareness of the contractual state, in that it The value of this is the raising up from a mere brute state. But one must progress beyound this rudimentary caste system.
From this priest caste system comes the moral code in which Nietzsche exhorts all men who want to truly progress, that is in order to progress, must accept the work to overthrow, to overcome in order to be a more ‘free’ himself or herself, willing oneself into being, so to speak, overthrowing the imposed law of the priest-caste system, once beneficial, but now a hinderance for further progress.
It is in this mindset that Nietzsche is against traditional values, and in particular the traditional values of the Church because he reasons that the Church is an outgrowth of the priest caste system, and thus is a hindrance to mankind fully realizing himself. Rosseau himself alludes to this, in his Social contract, and like Nietzsche writes in the context of master/slave, or more accurately, of a either an over class and an under class, or in Rosseau sense, that of systems and social mores that are unnaturally restrictive of man natural inclinations. Then Nietzsche defines ressentiment as a type of longing for power, but of also admiring the power of the overlords, and wanting that power for oneself. His historical analyses highlights this a type of ressentiment of the priest caste which has become an aristocratic ruling class. This ruling class becomes the object of hatred for those oppressed by them. Nietzsche seems at this point to marvel at the method of revolution by the underclass, the underclass being the Jews who became Christians. Nietzsche points out admirably, the irony in how the lower classed Judeo-Christian ethic upends the Roman ethics which Nietzsche identifies as one in which Roman Aristocracy is maintained, and exhibited as a model to be followed by all, this is upended by a shrewd appeal to such values as Love Thy Neighbor. Nietzsche sees that the Judeo-Christian usurping of the Pagan aristocratic class system as an insidious triumph of a type of jealousy of the Aristocratic class turned into an ironic theology of self-denying love but from the bottom up. In this way, the oppressed Judeo-Christian upends the morality of the older ‘priest-caste’ systems of ancient civilizations and replaces it with its own. This is how Nietzsche sees it. And he thinks it was a brilliant act of rebelling, but now these “new” oppressors need to be overthrown by a newer, more evolved morality, one that takes off the shackles of a piety based on mythological origins born of psychosis, thereby freeing man to truly become his more advanced, and a better self to be able to express his will fully.
Nietzsche’s main criticism of contemporary psychologist studies into the origin of morality was their inattention to the history of the development of morality. His own theory of the emergence of the priest-caste system uses or rather re-imagines history as a process of dealing with the societal psychosis of mankind in the context of the contract, the social contract, and the evolution of the commercial contract, but he departs from a kinetic revolutionary model, and sees in his presentation of the Judeo-Christian ‘triumph’ over the Pagan Aristocrats, as a model, for destroying Judeo-Christian culture and values. In other words Judeo-Christian values destroyed the Roman-Hellenistic culture, but Nietzchean Ideals will overthrow the Judeo-Christian model, using the Judeo-Christian methodology as shown above. In essence: The Victim as Cunning Hero. The adherents to Critical Theory attempt to use politically correct ideology to shame people, to corral them into ideological dead ends, to manipulate them with a insidius efficiency to turn the self hate of the victim into a self hate of those labeled as the oppressors of the victim. And one other thing, that Nietzsche notes, that the Judeo – Christian was able to replace the morals of the Roman-Hellenistic world with its own. And he delights in this rather ‘bloodless’ coup.
I want to present here that many writers such as Herbert Marcuse, Allen Ginsburg, Norman Mailer, and Donna Haraway, are perhaps some of the more influential philosophers of these contemporary times, and to understand the influence of Nietzsche on their writings, is to understand the emotional and rather narcissistic techniques the left uses to disarm and overwhelm the everyday man into a feeling of shame, and despair and to promulgate an unhealthy sense of unworthiness in order to overthrow the last social vestiges of Christian morality in the Western world and to put into its place a most monstrous vision of the who the human being is. Nietzsche envisions a world, where one does what one wants, when one wants, (and I want to mention that the Republicans who adhere to the Objectivistic philosophy of Ayn Rand also espouses this view) and that this selfishness would be an expression of advancement and would also be a benefit to others. As the story of the Flood reminds us, nothing can be further from the Truth. Furthermore, I think it is deeply malicious and cunning how african americans who identify as “blacks”, and who profess to come from a Christian culture are being used to attack the Christian culture of “whites”. They are not aware that the word symbol “whites” is simply a euphemism that obscures the true target of their vanguard demands for retribution and their attacks on traditional values, being that Christianity is the source of traditional values. I will like to present the argument that the new usurper of the “aristocratic class” aka known as “the whites” in this contemporary time, is the White Negro and his brother in arms, or rather his ally for the moment, the person who is culturally “black”. the phrase Orange is the new Black should give one a hint as to how Black has become a metaphor for anything that is anti-Christian, socially progressive, and free of any Christain morals.
Allen Ginsburg: the Howl of Despair and Misappropriations
Ginsburg’s poem Howl is a description of the Human Condition as expressed in the underbelly of the white-picket culture of the 1950’s. Underneath the rapidly expanding prosperity and consumer materialism, there is deep unhappiness, the children of the physically, psychologically, and spiritually maimed who have returned home from the two world wars wars which were unprecedented in the manifestation of human cruelty and human evil. These kids were trolling the slums of Harlem, becoming addicted to drugs, and sex, all to a soundtrack of the jazz which at the time was a music that embodied the distortion, disillusionment, and the psychic pain of the children of the victims and soldier/rescuers of these victims of both WWI and WWII. And man could not and did not keep his promise that there would never be a WWII. Not only was there a WWII, but there also was the likelihood of a WWIII, there was the specter of communism, whether one was for or against it, there was the adoption of the Evolution Theory, there was the active desacralization of schools by John Dewey who was advocating with Harry S. Truman’s support, the taking out of religious studies from the public school system, of which the Land Ordinance of 1785 specifically allocate funds for.
IN his poem he both decries and celebrates the debauchery…revealing the innocent outrage in this poem, an unconscious pious repugnance at the fallen society which he brands as Molech, that unleashed such horrors as aforementioned onto the world while at the same time taking a macabre, participatory and juvenile delight in its seductive invitation to forbidden pursuits. The fifties I do believe was not the last vestige of pious America. It was the newly affluent middle class who were partaking of the entertainment of the day, which was subverting the Christian ethos of the country. It was during this time that Kinsey was doing his sex research funded by the Federal Governmment, it was at this time that Edgar J. Hoover was having his sex parties, It was at this time that LSD studies was be perpetrated on an unknown populace by the Central Intelligence Agency.
But at what time, one can ask, that certain popular entertainment was not subversive to Christian culture. The thing is that it was becoming popular, and dominant, even though it was as yet underground, found in the new speakeasy, the jazz joints of Harlem. But what Ginsburg realizes that there is no peace here, only destruction and angst, mental illness, and the society’s macabre attempt to cure the broken soul through the mental health institution of that time, itself a broken system. At that time the institutions was creating the clinical literature it would need to be able to begin its assault to replace religious institutions in their mission to both administer to the needs of the soul and to administer its cure. But here Ginsburg looks at the ways the various sections of society are enslaved and maddened by the progress that can produce such carnage and uncertainty and produce such broken souls who are trying to rebel against it. This is the maddening irony of the left. I also find it pretty interesting that people like Ginsburg, Malcolm X, and L. Ferlinghetti lost their mothers to these mental institutions.
Norman Mailer: The Hipster Manifesto
While Ginsburg was looking at the debauchery of his own soul and that of his peers with mesmerizing;y enthralled anxiety, Mailer was making a Nietzschean strategic deduction. First he identified the black criminal as a person that the disaffected white man could identify with, both in sympathetic, patronizing way, and as a means to an end, in terms of subverting the moral code of the dominant Americanized Christian culture. Just as evolutionists considered the primates a referential species, that is, an extant primeval model, to understanding man’s behavioral evolution, Mailer, took the black man as a referential species and model for subverting and overthrowing Christian culture. Remember, The initial model was the Judeo-Christian people that Nietzsche speaks of in his first essay of the Genesis of Morality.
Mailer begins his own essay with a quote from Caroline Bird’s The Unlost Generation—
“Our search for the rebels of the generation led us to the hipster. The hipster is an enfant terrible turned inside out. In character with his time, he is trying to get back at the conformists by lying low. . . . You can’t interview a hipster because his main goal is to keep out of a society which, he thinks, [is] trying to make everyone over in its own image.” He takes marijuana because it supplies him with experiences that can’t be shared with “squares.” He may affect a broad-brimmed hat or a zoot suit, but usually he prefers to skulk unmarked. The hipster may be a jazz musician; he is rarely an artist, almost never a writer. He may earn his living as a petty criminal, a hobo, a carnival roustabout or a free-lance moving man in Greenwich Village, but some hipsters have found a safe refuge in the upper-income brackets as television comics or movie actors. (The late James Dean, for one, was a hipster hero.) . . . it is tempting to describe the hipster in psychiatric terms as infantile, but the style of his infantilism is a sign of the times, he does not try to enforce his will on others, Napoleon-fashion, but contents himself with a magical omnipotence never disproved because never tested. . . . As the only extreme nonconformist of his generation, he exercises a powerful if underground appeal for conformists, through newspaper accounts of his delinquencies, his structureless jazz, and his emotive grunt words.Any Negro who wishes to live must live with danger from his first day, and no experience can ever be casual to him, no Negro can saunter down a street with any real certainty that violence will not visit him on his walk.”
So one begins to see the ideal of the Negro evolve, in popular culture, into a black hip cat, sexually promiscuous, living from day to day, like an animal, only living for instant gratification, and having a seething hatred for his white oppressors, even those who were living exactly as he himself was. The negro becomes the noble savage criminal. It was white people who dropped the bomb on the Japanese, who enslaved the Jews and exterminated whole families in ovens, in brutal scientific experiments, tested the atomic bomb on its own citizens. The Black man was to become the saviour, and showing the path, out of the dark world, but he will also be a type of anti-Christ, an model of the world without the yoke of the Christian Faith. So the black criminal, the saviour of mankind fights against, and rejects in his immorality, , the oppressive white culutre that restrains full expression of his soul in the public sphere. Mailor elevates the criminal into a type of anti-hero, stereotypes him with that of a cool cat, which means the white it is implied are the dogs, who chase the cats. But cats have a will of their own.
Mailer writes “A totalitarian society makes enormous demands on the courage of men, and a partially totalitarian society makes even greater demands for the general anxiety is greater. Indeed if one is to be a man, almost any kind of unconventional action often takes disproportionate courage. So it is no accident that the source of Hip is the Negro for he has been living on the margin between totalitarianism and democracy for two centuries. But the presence of Hip as a working philosophy in the sub-worlds of American life is probably due to jazz, and its knife-like entrance into culture, its subtle but so penetrating influence on an avant-garde generation—that post-war generation of adventurers who (some consciously, some by osmosis) had absorbed the lessons of disillusionment and disgust of the Twenties, the Depression, and the War. Sharing a collective disbelief in the words of men who had too much money and controlled too many things, they knew almost as powerful a disbelief in the socially monolithic ideas of the single mate, the solid family and the respectable love life.”
The black man, thus, laughs at the hiprocrasy of the breakdown of family values, true authentic family values, as the world were being taught to dream in Art Deco fantasizes of a technological utopia that would make life easier, and women mere honey pots in their own homes. It seems that the Christian churches were someone losing the attention of the American people, and their children at this time. How does one explain the holocaust, if one doesn’t have a solid understanding of the falleness and redemption of Mankind. But then Mailer continues:
“Yet even Lindner who was the most imaginative and most sympathetic of the psychoanalysts who have studied the psychopathic personality was not ready to project himself into the essential sympathy— which is that the psychopath may indeed be the perverted and dangerous front-runner of a new kind of personality which could become the central expression of human nature before the twentieth century is over. For the psychopath is better adapted to dominate those mutually contradictory inhibitions upon violence and love which civilization has exacted of us, and if it be remembered that not every psychopath is an extreme case, and that the condition of psychopathy is present in a host of people including many politicians, professional soldiers, newspaper columnists, entertainers, artists, jazz musicians, call-girls, promiscuous homosexuals and half the executives of Hollywood, television, and advertising, it can be seen that there are aspects of psychopathy which already exert considerable cultural influence.”
And he writes further on in the essay: “So no wonder that in certain cities of America, in New York of course, and New Orleans, in Chicago and San Francisco and Los Angeles, in such American cities as Paris and Mexico, D.F., this particular part of a generation was attracted to what the Negro had to offer. In such places as Greenwich Village, a ménage-à-trois was completed—the bohemian and the juvenile delinquent came face-to-face with the Negro, and the hipster was a fact in American life. If marijuana was the wedding ring, the child was the language of Hip for its argot gave expression to abstract states of feeling which all could share, at least all who were Hip. And in this wedding of the white and the black it was the Negro who brought the cultural dowry.” —Mailer
You see, for these hipsters, the cultural referential species was the Negro, who replaced what Rosseau identify as the noble savage (the red indian) as the moral model of mankind. In Nietzschean terms it is the Negro who is to become a living meme of subversion of Christian values, and what is the “good” in society: and we find almost fifty years later that guilt was going to be the grease that let the Negro and his allies hog tie the Conservative, The Christian, and not only hog tie this segment of society, but also force them renounce Christ, God forbid. Let us put on Christ, and by our patience endure until the end. It is from this plantation, this slavery, that the True Christ calls all men, including the Negros enticed by the promises of such soothsayers as Nietzsche, Ginsburg, Mailer, Chomsky, and Marcuse.
But Is this not what Nietzsche himself wrote concerning that which he thought highly of the Jewish/Christian subversion of the ancient Roman Empire?: In his complaint against the purely psychological analysis of English philosophers search for the origin of “good”, he writes ” “People,” so they proclaim ‘originally praised unegoistic actions and called them good from the perspective of those for whom they were done, that is, those for whom such actions were useful. Later people forget how this praise began, and because unegoistic actions had according to custom, always been praised as good, people then felt them as good—as if they were something inherently good.” We perceive right away that this initial derivation already contains all the typical characteristics of the idiosyncrasies of English psychologist–we have ‘usefulness’ ‘forgetting’ ‘habit’ and finally ‘error’ allas the foundation for an evaluation in which the higher man up to this time has taken pride, as if it were a sort of priviliege of men generally. This pride is to be humbled, this evaluation of worth emptied of value. Has that been achieved?” asks Nieztsche. “…Now first of all, it’s obvious to me that from this theory the essential focus for the origin of the idea “good” has been sought for and established in the wrong place: the judgment “good” did not move here from those to whom “goodness” was shown? On the contrary, it was the “good people” themselves, that is , the noble, powerful, higher-ranking, and higher-thinking people who felt and set themselves and their actions up as good, that is to say, of the first rank, in oppostion to everything low, low-minded, common, and vulgar. From this pathos of distance they first arrogated to themselves the right to create values, to stamp out the names for values. What did they care about usefulness! Particularly in relation to such a hot pouring out of the highest rank-ordering, rank-setting judgments of value, the point of view which considers utility is as foreign and inappropriate as possible….that is the origin of the opposition between “good” and “bad”. The right of the master to extend names extends so far that we could permit ourselves to grasp the origin of language itself as an expression of the power of the rulers…” and so on. For Nietzsche Good is synonomous with prideful. Thus the collapse of aristocratic value judgments, occurs when the contrast between egoistic and unegoistic comes to the fore in the consciousness, in the masses, of which the Negro, the rebellious Negro has become a modern symbol of. The Negro becomes the opposite of what is good, noble, (he is denied by this philosophy to understand that he too is made in the image of God, by the very fact that he is indeed, of mankind, and descended from the same root stock of all men, Adam, made by the hand of God Himself). The Negro is the opposite of the aristocrat, the opposite of the Godman, Jesus Christ, in fact they have made him into a type of Anti-Christ, and every hipster white or black, is to emulate him if they are to survive in the brave new world being set up by the Globalist, the usherers in of the last stage of the long defeat. But our Saints say we may have more time to save these lost souls, if we ourselves would only repent, rebelling against the dark sayings of the tools of the enemy of mankind.
Donna Haraway: the Hipster as Cyborg
Donna Haraway is an important feminist writer whose works , which ironically,
extrapolates the ideas of such science fiction writers as Isaac
Asimov, and Phillip K Dick, presents a new post-modernistic biological philosophy: She presents
the fantasy of bio-technological union of man with his creation, the artificially
intelligently enhanced robot as a new political utopian metaphor.
Haraway’s book, Primate Vision, was a treatise that exposed the biases of
anthropologically trained social and naturalist scientists of the early to late 20th
century to work out the idea of inherent inalienable rights of individuals in the
context of manifest destinies of civilizations. This desire served to influence the
types of questions asked of the object of inquiry, namely primate sociality and its
relationship to the development of the systems of power brokering in the area of
civil governance. She states that in the early to mid twentieth century the main
goal of the United States was to clarify and consolidate the national interest of the
American Way of Life. This was represented by such men as the famous
taxidermist Carl Akeley, Carl Carpenter, Robert Means Yerkes the
psychobiologist, and Theodore Roosevelt, the 26th president of the United States.
Eugenics played a big hand in this discourse.
The feminist response to the idea of a male driven and a male centered first
causal rational for a sociality based on the obtainment of power at all cost–even if
for the common good, was contested by the entry into the field of female
anthropologists whose goal was to prove the capability of women as power
brokers within the realm of primate sociality and additionally to test Marxist
principles in service to female empowerment. This was to be tested on the raw
natural canvas of the behaviours encountered in different primate species such as Chimpanzees, Bonobos, and Langur Monkeys. Additionally, feminism at the beginning of the era of political world
wide unrest in third world countries, and of maltreated peoples of color in
industrialized countries was engaged in the act of carving a place for women in a
traditionally male environments. Ironically, in the field of anthropology, this was
spearheaded by Louis Leakey’s personal involvement in launching the career of
such luminaries as Jane Goodall and Dian Fossey.
His choice of women, for him, was probably apolitical in the sense that he
needed observers who were willing to observe, over a long period of time the actual
behaviour of primates. In addition, his wife Mary, had more than contributed to
Palaeo-anthropology. And while it can be stated that Goodall’s work seemed to
be a work conducted with a fair amount of scientific rigour,–thus she was able to
make discoveries that changed how researchers addressed aggression in males
and in females, later researchers such as Barbara Smuts, and Sarah Hrdy began to
ask questions that reflected more immediately male aggressiveness to females and
their young; gender identity, and the cultural distinction of roles, the question
being whether male and female roles were proscribed or derived, as related to
how these questions arose in the field of social policy in their natal countries.
Haraway’s presentation of the science of anthropology as a work in collecting
behavioural artifacts to support cultural beliefs of individualistic and collective
entitlement–and this in order to facilitate for marginalized peoples a naturalistic
rationale and dogma to enable these groups to participate in power brokerage as
conceptually defined by men–can not be challenged. For while the power elite
where collecting cultural and sociality artifacts to substantiate their claim to
dominance, the oppressed, that is those of the oppressed who were privileged
enough to be educated, began to collect cultural and sociality artifacts, in order to
substantiate their claims to also participate in the arena of political power
brokering. They did this by using metaphors to describe their identities, either by
accepting that which the so called dominant culture had labeled them, or by
adopting their own metaphorically derived identities. This is a major feature of
the feminist theoretical framework and other frameworks such as the afro-centric
theoretical framework. And here too and elsewhere in her writings it is Nietzschean in its attributes.
This gives her the opportunity to suggest that being as there is no such thing as
objectivity in science, and being that there is this issue of power–Who gets to
wield it, who gets to authour reality in relation to it–and being that the new fields
of bio-genetic engineering and bio-technologies manufacturing offers untold of
before new opportunities to exploit the newly perceived frontier of interpersonal
integration and communication between individuals–scientists, especially social
scientist who are in the position of being the authours of the social myths of
reality by dent of the aura of scientific sacredness surrounding their work need to
recreate a story that:
a. begins to continue to challenge the use of God as metaphor by the ole
boy network (freemasons but also the True Church which is in oppostion to freemasons in particular) to challenge the current hierarchical
power brokering hegemony at its metaphoric root and
b. to deconstruct this metaphor and create a new metaphor that embraces
the collective and individualistic nature of the population in terms of a
bio-technical metaphor. The new metaphor she suggests is not human
but beyond human. The new creature is called a cyborg.
In the essay the Cyborg Manisfesto from the book Simians, Cyborgs and Women, the
characteristics of this metaphoric, political creature according to Haraway, are
that cyborgs are:
“…oppositional, utopian, and completely without innocence. No
longer structured by the polarity of public and private, the cyborg
defines a technological polis based partly on a revolution of social
relations in the oikos, the household. Nature and culture are
reworked; the one can no longer be the resource for
appropriation on incorporation by the other. The relationships
for forming wholes from parts, including those of polarity and
hierarchical domination, are at issue in the cyborg world.
Unlike the hopes through a restoration of the garden; that is, through the
fabrication of a heterosexual mate, through its completion in a
finished whole, a city and cosmos. The cyborg does not dream of
community on the model of the organic family….The cyborg
would not recognize the Garden of Eden; it is not made of mud
and cannot dream of returning to dust. Perhaps that is why I
want to see if cyborgs can subvert the apocalypse of returning to
nuclear dust in the manic compulsion to name the Enemy.
Cyborgs are not reverent; they do no re-member the cosmos.
They are wary of holism, but needy for connection—they seem
to have a natural feel for united front politics, but without the
vanguard party. The main trouble with cyborgs, of course, is that
they are the illegitimate offspring of militarism and patriarchal
capitalism, not to mention state socialism. But illegitimate
offspring are often exceedingly unfaithful to their origins. Their
fathers, after all, are inessential.”
And thus again Nietzsche rears his stridently clamouring epiphany.
She writes further that this state of mentality is possible for three reasons.
“the boundary between human and animal is thoroughly breached.
the boundary between “animal-human (organism) and machine” is
the boundary of physical and non physical is very imprecise
The chief substratum idea for this metaphor is the immunological network of
biological systems and the nodal point network systems of the internet. This is an
extenuation of the idea as presented by Dawkins of genotypic codon arrays in a
vast soup combining in ways that create the phenotypic expression of the state
of complex levels of organizational existence. But for Haraway, as it is for Dawkins, the foundational
purpose of the person is to replicate, that is; to produce offspring, not to engage
in hierarchical power brokerage for resources or any other need for survival.
Combining this idea with the idea of the boundary systems of the immunological
system, its ability to interface with the inner and outside environment of an
individual , and the ability for cells to metamorph into entirely different cells
based on an interaction with an antigen or enzymatic code, we have a situation
where the cyborg can use this reality to become a creature that can morph, so to
speak, into a new political or apolitical entity, in order to become an new
embodiment of social change. All of this is facilitated by the ability of organisms
to communicate with one another. Entertainment. You will see this paragraph as we begin the explore the Covid virus as an agent of biological and social change.
So now we have the phenomenon of poly amorous couplings and transgenderism and even trans-specism. And ofcourse, trans-human roboticism…All of these modern post Christian ideas of humanity are already becoming the realized alternative to the Christian realityy of the spiritual life, the reality of God, and again one sees the black because now the rebellious negro is the black, (as in orange is the new black) becoming a metaphor for this progress of human evolution. As mentioned above,we also are witnessing the introduction of another agent of cultural and biological change: the virus. The Fittest will Survive…it’s Social Darwinism all over again.
Parts of the above are excerpted from my book the “Spiritual Evolution of Oppression“
Next Week: Noam Chomsky,Herbert Marcuse, Gloria Steinem, Hugh Hefner the CIAs cultural moles? Oh yes and the virus as an evolutionary agent of change.