Aztec Blues: Myth of Overpopulation as Politically Correct Human Sacrifice

You may also like...

4 Responses

  1. Ante says:

    If you are looking for a right wing malthusianism, look no further than Savitri Devi, her Impeachment of Man in particular.

    “Our ideal world, entirely free from all forms of exploitation of animals; our world, in which man would both feel himself morally compelled to help all living creatures and have every power to do so; in which the rights of vegetable life itself would be recognized and respected as far as possible; our world, we say, seems bound to remain a dream so long as the number of human beings is not brought to a minimum — a few score million only; perhaps a few hundreds of thousands on earth — and made to remain stationary (…)”

    • Malić says:

      Poor Maximine unapologetically chose the wrong political mythology – Nazis were essential Devil in the myth of post-WWII world. So her ideas could never subvert the mainstream in the way Heidegger’s or Foucault’s did. Besides, she would spare the animals. Not edgy enough.

      • Ante says:

        Hahah well she is but a soft headed woman who melts when she sees a kitten. I was mostly thinking about Mihai’s argument about Jünger. If he doesn’t fit the bill, there are others who do.

        That said, you say that the left has been destroyed by political correctness more than any other political option. How so, care to elaborate?

        • Malić says:

          Because it was channeled through Left. Webster Tarpley talked about the Sixties when he saw first hand how traditional American left issues at university were discarded by postmodernist inspired radicals. Preparata himself is a leftist and he flatly rejects the whole thing. And now, as PC is branded as absolutely leftist thing, the whole political spectrum of the Left is open to casus belli from the Right, which is what happened with the election of Trump to a large extent. I consider PC to be far deeper and ominous thing and agree with Preparata that it is in fact one of various forms of subversion aimed at igniting chaos and erasing the belief in any kind of substantially existing virtues and principles.

          The gist of it is that only possible communication is through competing power relations that cannot be reconciled even in theory. So you have to have an infinite diversity of groups fighting the system of “white falusocratic dominance” and each other: something we already witnessed in splintering of movements like feminism, black lives matter, etc.

          As for Mihai’s objection, here I only included the part related to the passage I quoted. He had more to say about other passages on Junger and its rather damning for Preparata’s academic acumen. Doesn’t make him flat out wrong in principle: things he wrote on Heidegger I agree more or less completely, for instance. But I noticed he’s prone to such escapades of generalization and eschewing of facts. He has a book on Hitler with the thesis that Anglo-Saxon finance was crucial factor for his coming into power. Haven’t read a lot of it, but what he says about Sarajevo assassination is clearly not researched.

          Also, other people noted that he tends to mold Bataille into collaborating his thesis. Not that Bataille is someone one should exculpate but you just don’t do that when you write a serious book.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *