Dear David M (after the following exchange)
> > > DM: Yet there have always been those trying to challenge Enlightment > > > blind spots, Blake,the great Romantics, Jung and there is a social > > > class struggle in this Enlightenment movement too that is far from > > > intellectual. > > Bo; You have some strange notions of what "intellectual" and "social" > > means in a MOQ context. When king and nobility were toppled by the > > French revolution and the burgoise came to power, it was an upheaval of > > the French society, but NOT social in the sense of (in the social > > level's hey-day) when one despot overturned another. The French, the > > American, the Russian revolutions were all about the intellectual level > > taking over from the social level, displacing the latter's view that the > > human condition is god-given with its own view that OBJECTIVELY seen all > > men are equal. You wrote on 21 oct.: > DM: My point is that class interest struggles are thought with > intellectual weapons but their motivation is tied up with class power > and not just intellectual concerns. Well, as in the "what came first: SOM or Knowledge " question, this is much of the same "hen vs egg" paradox. The point is that class struggle is an intellectual fallout. I know of no pre-intellect (level) culture that knew - or knows - the class concept, much less struggle between classes. > Today there are new powers and new struggles going on. I think we could > see SOM as the intellectual tool of a certain class freeing itself from > theological rule and now as the justification of its hold over power. The basic struggle is intellect's "all men are free and equal" vs the religious "accept your lot because it's God's will." What new struggles that don't fit this pattern I would like to learn about. > I'd like to think there is an intellectual and political alternative to > this. The rise of Islam is interesting. Here, a repressed class has > taken up religion to fight their secular repressors. What the outcome > may be is very unclear to me. Seeing the muslim world as a repressed class using religion as a tool to get their natural born rights isn't viable. If so the muslims who have moved to the West would be happy to have their freedom and rights? Instead they want the oppression - religion - they left introduced in the Western societies, and strap on explosive rucksacks to make their point. > Like all tools used to fight an enemy, it is unclear how they may > develop if victory is achieved. Is the fight really with the west or is > it really within the islamic world, about its formsof government and > its future? Yes, it's within the islamic world, their own values the culprit? But why? Naturally because they accept, respect and welcome "social value" and its means of keeping order: Religious regimes and/or despotism. One would think the Iraqis happy to get rid of the dictator, but he was just replaced by the other kind: The Taliban-like struggle back to religious fundamentalism. > The west's involvement adds to the complexity. I am sure > much change in the Islamic world will be felt for some time. Let's hope > that a better future can be found for the unsettled parts of the > Islamic world, with as little bloodshed as possible. You can hope for "much change in the Islamic world" but it will never come about. A democratic, secular, muslim country is an oxymoron. > A very difficult situation not helped by dodgy analysis. That's what I > tentatively think but I am far from familiar with the complexities of > the Islamic world. I don't know if it's my analysis you deem "dodgy", but IMO it's all these well-meaning "complexity" analysis leading nowhere, except avoiding reality which are to blame. Bo Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
