After "dark money", I 'm reading "They dont represent us" and then " the origin of totalitarianism....come here to listen overall layouts of the book....thank you !
This particular chapter you are explaining is written in a very poetic language , though she likes the meaning of words than the sound , it appears to be very poetic and I know it sounds weird it gives a kind of spiritual perspective on wealth and power .
9.16 the nation state cannot conquer other states just to enrich itself and expand indefinitely. "Since trade ignores national boundaries and the manufacturer insists on having the world as a market, the flag of his nation must follow him, and the doors of the nations which are closed against him must be battered down.Concessions obtained by financiers must be safeguarded by ministers of state, even if the sovereignty of unwilling nations be outraged in the process.Colonies must be obtained or planted, in order that no useful corner of the world may be overlooked or left unused" Thomas Woodrow Wilson (Dec 28, 1856 - February 3, 1924) was an American politician and academic who served as the 28th president of the US from 1913 to 1921. A member of the DP,he served as the president of Princeton University and governor of New Jersey before winning in 1912.
I guess the term bourgeoisie is way more than just being politically emancipated. It is bourgeoisie when one starts misappropriating politics , it is no more limited to emancipation. It is about an expansion, an intrusive aggressive totalitarian expansion at that. I think bourgeoisie sees nothing except for its reflections of greed and that's what drives it , this desire to curb this greed and the entire machinery is a fallacy. It can't curb greed by feeding it with more greed. This greed for power. This hunger distorts power. Power, which in its purest sense, was meant to coalesce living communities and to help them grow. It is possible that only the bourgeoisie sentiments beget colonization. Also this discussion gave me more to deliberate upon. The hypocrisy of liberal democracy that gives the veneer of an acting democracy but is a rue to keep the control with the bourgeoisie. I liked the deliberation on Hobbes
Bringing Hobbes to elaborate on the foundations of bourgeois society not only exposes the inherent tendencies for totalitarianism that are hidden under the humanist mask , it also an account that exposes the evolution of bourgeois logic that now has become the quintessential model for the world which the hypocritical liberalism of our time and how it can also function as a totalitarian device in guise of freedom and so on .
I tend to agree. A great example is in David Mitchell where power can be summed up as "the weak are meat and the strong do eat." it's a bizzare congruence in ethics, morals and behaviors between elites and the poor than either group is likely to admit having. what seems to seperate them is the rich can legitimately afford to spin and have laywers to protect their hypocrisy with a simulcra of virtue.
I have to give a presentation on this book and this video series has been amazingly helpful! Thank you for your time and effort in putting this together.
Castilian Monarchy came up with the idea of nation state , in Westphalia , inaugurated with ethnic cleansing of Jews , Moors those who were converted and remained in the territory were used as cheap labors and followed with the colonization of America . Without nation state there is no nationalism , without nationalism no capitalism and without capitalism there is no genocidal colonization and the imperialism and the holocaust . People of global south has been the victim of all that since 1492 . One vicious cycle started with renaissance. As fanon called the Nazism turned the entire Europe into a veritable colony .
No capitalism? I agree up to that (though page references to OT would be appreciated), but as capitalists think they’ve outgrown the states that still harbor them, using some social theory (Weber and even some Marxists) to develop their own, can we really say their ideology is a figment? I’m maybe being kind regarding the philosophy labeled capitalist posthoc -now referred to as neoliberal by outsiders or libertarian by some apologists, formed only in opposition to socialism, anarchism and more ‘foreign ideologies’ as it was adopted by western nation-states- is a coherent philosophy and not pure reaction. Arendt pointed out that thinking of a first and third world is the lost pernicious part of the ideology of capitalism in that one may think it as factual apart from ones outlook, an American, French and even Chinese communist can see it as a natural relation and even justify the exploitation, while a different relation may be applied within their own nation-state.
1492-1750 over 90% of natives in the Americas died of transmissible disease, meanwhile Europeans were not aware of or weaponizing chemical warfare. -The only counter-example could be catapulting dead animals in raids, but this was certainly psychological. Blankets distributed just does not equal sending freezing and starving people to gas chambers. I’d never justify all the broken treaties post-1750, but statistically systematic genocide did not kill the American native population.
Fanon was had not read up enough about precedents set by the American South that Nazis replicated….or a lot of precedents and philosophy. Like Darwin, Fanon had incites but no complete philosophy that you can be sure he grasps.
