Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


In yesterday’s post, we identified the two Classical and collectively exhaustive schools of thought. These schools are as follows: the Platonic (mystic) and the Aristotelian (rationalist). We also set out a timeline… of sorts for these two schools of thought, from their inception to the present. We noted that contemporary “movements” and actions and utterances of public figures can be easily placed in these two camps. And lastly, we provided a paradigm of sorts to assess who presently is in which camp.

The reason that your humble blogger went through the above exercise before getting to the subject matter of the post, is due to the fact that language, in the post-modern world, and not only, has been weaponized.

Two examples of this linguistic weaponization (through mischaracterizations) are as follows:

Rationalism –  Rationalism is one term, among many that has been “misappropriated” by the forces of evil. Catholicism in reality, has historically had a strong strain of rationalism. In reality, this rationalist school of thought has provided the philosophical structure for the organic development of the Catholic Church since the rise of the Dominican Order early in the 13th Century. Initially, this theological school was known as Scholastic Rationalism but later took the name of its greatest theologian and exponent, i.e. St. Thomas Aquinas. Thomism was finally suppressed in the Catholic Church (outside of the SSPX) at the Second Vatican Council. (see here)

Populism  –  Is defined as follows:

Populism is a political style of action that mobilizes a large alienated element of population against a government seen as controlled by an out-of-touch closed elite that acts on behalf of its own interests. The underlying ideology of the Populists can be left, right, or middle. Its goal is to unite the uncorrupt and the unsophisticated (the ‘little man’) against the corrupt dominant elites (usually the orthodox politicians) and their camp followers (usually the rich and the intellectuals). It is guided by the belief that political and social goals are best achieved by the direct actions of the masses. Although it comes into being where mainstream political institutions fail to deliver, there is no identifiable economic or social set of conditions that give rise to it, and it is not confined to any particular social class.[1]

Political parties and politicians often use the terms populist and populism as pejoratives against their opponents. Such a view sees populism as merely empathizing with the public, (usually through rhetoric or unrealistic proposals) in order to increase appeal across the political spectrum (cf. demagogy).[2]

As one can read in the above text, one major difference between the two terms above is that Scholastic Rationalism has a direct philosophical lineage to the Lyceum of Aristotle, while Populism has no direct lineage to either of these philosophical schools what so ever.

Given the above, whose ready for a quiz?

Below are two screen shots. One is a contemporary example of a rational based philosophical school while the other is an example of a mystic philosophical school.

Furthermore, one is an example of a purported Populist position while the other one is not.

Which is which?

A) See original HERE: (hint: anti-populist TRANSRATIONAL Mystic)

krugman

B) See original HERE: (hint: populist Rationalist)

brexit-may

What we see in the above two examples is that a Populist position does not necessarily connote whether that position has either a Rationalist or a Mystic philosophical underpinning.

Furthermore, the term Populist is currently used in an emotionally charged manner, i.e. weaponized. Populism is used as a “pejorative (term) against their opponents. And “Such a view sees populism as merely empathizing with the public, (usually through rhetoric or unrealistic proposals) in order to increase appeal across the political spectrum (cf. demagogy)”.

So the moral of the story is: do not get too caught up in what something is named, but rather dig down to find out whether it is a rational based (Aristotelian) or a emotion (mystic) based (Platonic) construct.

Yes?

Which brings us to the subject matter of this post. If you recall, in yesterday’s post we presented a situation where the effective leader of the Platonic TRANSRATIONAL Mystic camp (“liberal democracy”) – Frau Merkel, is set to travel to Poland to meet the effective leader of the Aristotelian Catholic Rationalist camp – Pan Kaczynski.

Today, we get more information as to what constitutes a TRANSRATIONAL Mystic/anti-Populist position and a abridged definition of their “ideals”.  (emphasis and comments added)

What we should understand from this material above and below, is that we are on the verge of a Rational Populist Movement spearheaded by Donald J. Trump. His counterparts on the Old Continent are Jaroslaw Kaczynski in Poland and Victor Orban in Hungary, from the Rationalist Christian (Orban is a Calvinist) camp.

Their adversaries in turn are the mainline parties from the Platonic (mystic) tradition, led by a federated European Union and their effective leader, Frau Angela Merkel. This camp has no reason based, scientific arguments, so are left with IDEOLOGICAL, rhetorical and mystical devices. And it is on the basis of these IDEOLOGICAL arguments that Frau Merkel and the rest of the European Cultural Marxists are trying to rally the remnant and keep the dysfunctional status quo alive.

And part of this dysfunctional status quo is the German Bishops’ Conference and their “soft power” funding of anti-Catholic projects through the  German Church tax, the KIRCHENSTEUER.

And from look of things, the Germans are ready to go down fighting…. again!

Below is a short post from the catholic Zero Hedge blog with my comments that should serve as a good example of that which we have written above.

merkel-drama

Merkel Says She Is Ready To “Fight A Generational Battle” With Trump To Preserve Liberal Democracy And Trade

Shortly after Germany retaliated to Trump’s overnight press attack, when German economy minister Sigmar Gabriel said on Monday morning that Germans would gladly buy US automobiles if only America could “build better cars”, (this is an issue of exchange rates of the Euro currency to US Dollar more than a quality issue) and that – responding to Trump’s criticism of Germany’s “catastrophic” refugee policy (objectively correct observation)– he said there “is a link between America’s flawed interventionist policy, especially the Iraq war, and the [European] refugee crisis” (no link between Iraq and refugees. Supposedly “rapefugees” are from and on account of the failed Obama/EU Syria interventionists policy), Merkel fired her own shot across the bow of Trump’s proposed protectionism, when she told industry leaders late on Monday that she would remain committed to free trade, rebutting Trump’s comments about a border taxes on car imports. (“Free trade” with an undervalued currency – such as the Euro currency, provides Germany with a YUGE trade surplus that allows German government to fund all their “soft power” Cultural Marxism agenda globally. It’s good for Germany, bad for it’s competitors.)

Taking advantage of the anti-populist wave stirred by Trump, Merkel, speaking to the German Chamber of Commence and Industry in Cologne, urged industry leaders to remain supportive of the German government in the forthcoming Brexit negotiations between Britain and the European Union. “We can’t let anyone divide us,” she said quoted by Reuters. (Germany as a huge net exporter to the UK has NO interest (rational) in a stiff negotiating position, i.e. a HARD BREXIT. A Hard Brexist is a political (mystic) position in order to threaten the Brits from attempting to regain control over their borders, judiciary, et al. and leaving the Federal European Project.)

As far as free trade and open markets go, Merkel told the industrialists her government was prepared to fight to preserve them. (There is nothing stopping Germay/EU from negotiating a free trade deal after BREXIT. This is a non sequitur.)

We’ve got to fight this battle, if for no other reason than principle,” Merkel said, referring to Germany’s commitment to the free trade, and asking German business to “join her in defending liberal democracy and trade”, saying “in every generation one has to fight for one’s ideals.” (The reason Merkel and EU want to fight BREXIT is to stop the UK from regaining control over their borders. Free Trade has nothing to do with it. “Liberal democracy” i.e. Cultural Marxism on the other hand has everything to do with this.)

“I’m ready for that,” Merkel added. (Classical Fallacy of Ambiguity – Merkel is fighting for open borders in terms of illegal migration, not in terms of trade. Brits will gladly agree to a mutually beneficial trade deal which would satisfy German industry. 

“I have the impression that we are once again at a crossroads,” Merkel tells a business chamber gala in Cologne, hinting at an ideological crusade to rid the world of backward-looking protectionists. (Prejudicial Language Fallacy – who wants to be backwards?)

Indeed, she then said that halting protectionism is part of the struggle, and would not give up on free-trade deals with the U.S. “I have a lot of resolve, but the number of doubters is growing,” says she’s “deeply convinced” that “embracing competition rather eliminating it is best for human development and for prosperity in Germany.” (Here again, one can easily embrace competition when one has an undervalued currency. But the Greeks, who are also in the Euro currency at an overvalued level – for the Greek economy that is, would beg to differ. Not too much “human development” going on there at present.)

Needless to say, Merkel has never met anyone quite like Trump.

She then appealed to the audience to resist giving up those principles “too hastily for reasons of short-term gain.”

Merkel echoed words from her Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble earlier on Monday, who issued a not so thinly veiled warning to Trump over the dangers of protectionist trade policies.”

Whoever wants growth – and I trust this administration will be a growth-friendly one – must be in favor of open markets,” Schaeuble told the Wall Street Journal in an interview. “Protectionism can afford short-term advantages but is almost always damaging in the long term.”

Of course, Keynes himself said the same thing about Keynesian economics, the bedrock of all modern economic thinking, but that’s a different topic. (Ouch!)

As for Germany and its preparedness for an “ideological” crusade against Trump and the world’s protectionists, be careful what you wish for. (Ideological crusade is necessary since the alternative, i.e. returning to a stronger Deutsche Mark with the resulting cessation of excessive trade surpluses, is not a politically good alternative for the Germans. Especially when they are trying to reinvent human nature, but the world. Just like in the 1930’s and 1940’s.)

It’s beginning:

Germany: Split in Merkel’s Christian Democratic Party. Human Rights Speaker resigns over “rapefugees” policy. See here.

UK: Britain will leave EU Single Market, but will put final EU deal to vote in both Houses of Parliament.  (see here)

 

Advertisements