Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Postmodernism Dead? - If Only It Were True
According to a piece in Prospect, a eulogy of sorts written by Edward Docx titled Postmodernism is dead, postmodernism is dead, with the funeral to be held at the Victoria & Albert Museum in the U.K., which titles their obituary for postmodernism’s alleged funeral Postmodernism—Style and Subversion 1970-1990.
If only it were true. Postmodernism isn’t dead, in fact I think it still flourishes, only under other guises and meaningless names. The insidiousness of postmodernism persists, as Malone Vandam recently noted in a piece titled The flat mental affect of postmodernism, wherein he states the following, which goes far in explaining why Docx and the Victoria & Albert Museum are mistaken about postmodernism’s demise.
Postmodern awareness is not real awareness, because it drains meaning out of things and so cannot reach their real value nor determine their real relationality, each to the other, all for the purpose of instead making all valuations relativistic, all equal, and hence all equally empty of their meaning.
If only postmodernism were indeed dead, buried deep in a hole in the ground, covered with the Tate Gallery’s collection of shit, a stake through its heart, and covered with a sarcophagus which makes Chernobyl’s look like a mole hill.
Docx is wrong about postmodernism being dead, but he did get this right about postmodernism, with the exception of the word “was,” of that I’m certain.
Postmodernism was a high-energy revolt, an attack, a strategy for destruction. It was a set of critical and rhetorical practices that sought to destabilise the modernist touchstones of identity, historical progress and epistemic certainty.
“I’m a Marine, that’s what I am,..”
The title to this post are the words of Cpl. Dakota Meyer, who will be awarded the Medal of Honor on September 15, 2011, becoming the first living Marine to be awarded the Medal of Honor in 38 years.
I salute Corporal Dakota Meyer.
Via Theo Spark
Penn Jillette Clarifies Compassion for the Needy
It’s amazing to me how many people think that voting to have the government give poor people money is compassion. Helping poor and suffering people is compassion. Voting for our government to use guns to give money to help poor and suffering people is immoral self-righteous bullying laziness. [...]
I don’t believe the majority always knows what’s best for everyone. The fact that the majority thinks they have a way to get something good does not give them the right to use force on the minority that don’t want to pay for it. If you have to use a gun, I don’t believe you really know jack. (bold by ed.)
Penn Jillette in a CNN piece titled I don’t know, so I’m an atheist libertarian.
Via Samizdata quote of the day for Wednesday, August 17, 2011.
This morning I read that Obama is “fretting” over the possibility of a ‘lone wolf’ terrorist attack occurring.
I’m curious as to who or whom, exactly, Obama is referring to. Is Obama referring to a ‘lone wolf’ Tea Party terrorist such as Joe Biden refers to, or some ‘lone wolf’ low level terrorist such as described by the Department of Defense, or a ‘lone wolf’ domestic terrorist such as described by the Department of Homeland Security, or just some ‘lone wolf’ individual with terrorist tendencies such as Pennsylvania has described, because Obama surely is not referring to an actual terrorist such as Khalid Sheik Mohammad.