In the second part of our Q&A session we answer to questions about what is ethnicity (or people) and can it be defined, whereas Christian dictum of turning the other cheek is at odds with historical reality, why the political community should have origin that its member cannot re-create, how Internet based Right could just be a homosexual grooming operation and much, much more. Also we provide some thoughts on Schopenhauer and the way we discern between what is useful and what is superfluous for the kind of philosophy we practice on KT.
When discussing the roots of Communism and of what is called non- or semi-communist Left – which nevertheless keeps some latent causal relation to dialectical materialism – one crucial question usually gets passed over in silence. Namely, is there a single unique ruling principle to this systematical attempt to absorb the world in thought and, if yes, what exactly is it?
Taming the KGB accents one more time, Deirdre hosts another Luminar Podcast with Mihai and me:
"on the way from David Icke to Michel Houellebecq we chat about consciousness, knowledge, ego, the dark night of the soul, smashing the idol of the self, ambition or lack thereof, what is meaningful work, the willing participation of the people in their own control, comparisons between Communism and the European Union, the rush among the masses towards progressiveness and cutting roots, Croatia, Romania and Ireland, the role of intellectuals, James Joyce's depiction of the odyssey in modernity and other writers like him, and finally onto Houellebecq's unscratchable itch."
In a new episode of Luminar Podcast, Deidre informs us about wonderful world of surrogacy and in quite off hand fashion demonstrates once again that feminism, especially in the hands of - oh, the irony - "merciless millenials" is the one aspect of posthumanism especially concerned with the destruction of women.
It is more or less usual procedure to observe political correctness from the point of view of someone rejecting it - looking from the outside upon this peculiar edifice and attempting to describe and explain it. However this always seems to be not completely satisfactory. There's always a sense of some point being missed.
Well, here we'll attempt something different: show how PC acts upon us from the standpoint of one submitting to it and suffering its coercive power. From this angle, some quite worrisome insights become apparent, chief one of them being a potential of PC to act intimately - intrinsically - i.e. invisibly upon the will itself, changing not only actions and thoughts, but very faculties of man that act or think.
We delve into question of curious ability of Leftist intellectuals to circumvent the massive crimes of their political favorites and still have debates with their opponents without this ever becoming an issue.
Is this accidental or is it due to inability of the political Right and Center to employ the right arguments?
Or is it something deeper than that?
KT, of course, opts for the third option.
With the help of KT's Department of Eastern European Affairs and Keeping Asses in the Armchairs even nostalgia can reveal some important truths. The dissolution of Communism was not the only catastrophe that befell this peculiar part of the world. Let us inspect some more subtle and more sinister processes that slipped through in the wake of it and were anticipated by ill fated generation whose youth was forfeit at the dawn of the "New World Order". We on KT are hell bent on redeeming that lost time - so we invite you to sink with us in the disclosure only true nostalgia can provide ...
A perspective we could, albeit quite loosely, denote as “East European viewpoint” is to a large extent absent from, mostly anglophone, internet media and internet mediated intellectual scene. So how does East Europe defend from what we on KT call "politics of dissolution"? Come and see ...
In this video we analyze Slavoj Žižek's proposition to reinvent the "divine violence" of "classical" revolutionary, laid out in his essay on Robespierre. We point out Slavoj's rhetorical tricks by which he obfuscates his, rather blatant, appropriation of the thesis that Revolution (a.k.a. "Event") without terror is "decaffeinated", i.e. not really revolutionary at all. Also, we lay out Žižek's proposal of "revolutionary subject" as an essentially "inhuman human" - a virtual being brought into existence by depersonalization - the proverbial "individuum" which, for some reason, pops up every now and then into our focus when we analyze ideas of postmodern totalitarians. We conclude by demonstrating how Žižek's clown like demeanour and rhetorical tricks hide quite, if only potentially, dangerous man.