What it Means to be Historically Shallow
More or less every thinking man has at one point in his life uttered or at least heard the phrase “X is a-historical” or “Y is not in continuity with history”. Admittedly, this doesn’t apply to thinking middle aged children one must often deal with in the public sphere of our day, but the question still stands: what exactly do we mean when we claim that something is historically shallow?
In this podcast we’ll try to find the answer, because, whether or not our answer is adequate, some answer has to exist.
This presupposition is not shared by conservatives who work on assumption that roots of tradition(s) are in themselves something that should be upheld without thinking and that thinking in itself act as acid solvent upon all real historical roots and, hence, the origins of peoples and nations.
Needless to say, we don’t share this opinion.
We start by laying out the problem of dialectics between conservatives and “progressives” and point out the insufficiency of the conservative – literary “reactionary” – mentality.
Then we proceed to lay out the metaphysical basis of historical roots through analysis of Aristotle’s dictum according to which everything coming to pass naturally, or essentially, “comes to pass always or for the most time”.
We conclude with some remarks on our day and age, and the curious prevalence of formal legal systems over unique and individual traditions, embodied in ethnicity, religion and traditional philosophy.
Listen on Mixcloud:
Listen on Youtube:
Branko Malić
Kali Tribune runs on reader’s support. If you found the above informative and/or enlightening, consider supporting us.
