Self-Flagellation at Politics Annoynymous

From an email exchange today, in which my interlocutor appears in italics; "X", of course, does not, at least not in this context, denote silent-film star Francis X. Bushman:

[Quoting Conor Friedersdorf] "So why are so many liberty-invoking 2nd Amendment absolutists reliable Republican voters, as if the GOP's stance on that issue somehow makes up for its shortcomings? And why do they so seldom speak up about threats to the Bill of Rights that don't involve guns?"

Here's one answer among probable others: Because they are just looking for a convenient noble rationalization for their desire to play with their toys.

Acting completely on the basis of an understanding or resolution is the very thing that almost no one will ever do. It is why hypocrisy is really the only "sin" that X ever speaks about, because it is the final and real measure of one's relation with the infinite, with God, whatever you want to call it - with something that involves more than just floating through life and therefore actually being a real individual. See Kierkegaard, e.g., Concluding Unscientific Postcript, early part of the work, where he describes what it would mean if someone actually took various thoughts or beliefs seriously in the fullness of passion, and how such a person would never be done with developing it in his life. And where he mocks Hegel for the notion that one grasps something and just "moves on" and corresondingly mocks Hegel for having developed the most comprehensive systemic metaphysics in the history of philosophy, and which, nota bene, completely consistently with Hegel's view of the development of Geist, has no ethics.

I am reminded of how, within my reproachful alienation from all of today's standard political clusterings across the comically and tellingly named "culture" "wars", those of my former affiliation not least, lies a primary and inescapable element of self-reproach, i.e., what does it say about me that I spent thousands of hours, in blog threads and elsewhere, in the company of people whose sole effect upon me was to amplify my desire to verbally punch the noses of 99 44/100 among them, a trait of which I'm anything but proud, not least for the obvious note of self-sabotage it entails in falling far short of my own aspirational standards unto the sustaining of intellectual, emotional and moral discipline, the practicing by myself of what I too often merely preach unto Thems of all external sorts.

And then there's the steep price paid for the near-total takeover of philosophy since Kierkegaard by the professoriate, and its replacement in the general intellectual culture by the undisciplines of 10,000 varieties of perpetually-dissolving fashion and junk journalism of sorts that, once again, have me not least in their death grip.

I have no doubt whatever that you could, with no explicit intention thus, write an essay today that would sting most painfully precisely the sorts of people who, twenty or ten years ago, would have broken both legs to be first in line to buy you a beer as one presumed to be "one of us" against the monolithic Them. Who says Progress never happens?

Well, don't be too hard on yourself. I myself only resolved to leave engagement with the hubbub of daily ideological strife behind about 9 months ago.

Since I am older than you, you can still get an earlier start than me, so consider yourself fortunate.

Btw, I have never felt better, psychically speaking.

I find it more profitable and enlightening to engage mostly with good works from the past, and view the present through that lens.

Plus, nothing is really gained by engaging with fools and morons, or people who are not really seeking truth or understanding, just a convenient rationalization, spin, meme or sound bite to seize on to give themselves an air of nobility and a pat on the back for doing what they want to do anyway.

On the other hand, I do think it is important to call these people what they are, and not pretend otherwise, so I think it's a fine balance that has to be achieved. Kind of like being in the current world, but not of it. 

Thanks for the complement; yes, I doubt that I am the "champion" of their rights that they formerly put stock in. I am toying with the idea of asking [the editors at my old magazine venue] if they will permit me to resume writing a column [less political than the one before]. I'll let you know if I ever get passionate enough about the idea to do it.