If I am honest I must recognize that the egalitarianism and despise of unmerited privilege and class in my own view is the product of English Liberalism, culture and circumstance, and not one of uncompromised reason. I am English, I was raised in England, my grandparents were "in service" and they died of malnutrition in 1949, too late for the welfare state that was finally established that year.
We subjugate other species yet I am as convinced of their equal standing in terms of the necessary receipt of compassion. The systemic notion of "jobs" and "employment" means that our time will be recorded as the most successful culture of slavery in all history. The population are today "intelligent slaves." They do not have the liberty to freely determine their daily actions or their whereabouts for the majority of their time in pursuit of their own productivity and happiness. They cannot speak and act without fear that their speech or their free actions will terminate their income or residence. "In this society we trade income for liberty, I prefer liberty," I say. But most people do not. They prefer comfort, convenience, schools, healthcare and the illusion of perpetual security. They appear to prefer a uniformity of culture and they subjugate themselves to it. Being a convinced Pragmaticist in Semeiotic, I have to challenge myself. Is this "intelligent slavery" the natural and necessary order? Is the population that pays lip service to liberty and democracy, whose vote is impotent and that entraps itself in the semeiotic veil of public narrative serving only their subjugation, ultimately suffering a necessary delusion in the cause of evolution and species growth and survival? I can't say that I like it much if this is the case, but as a Positivist I must rise above mere opinion in all matters. I certainly choose to define myself differently and I choose for myself a different path, the path of liberty. I guess the outliers are necessary. Yet I have always been an idealist and have wanted for all the liberty that I find for myself. With respect, Steven On Oct 5, 2011, at 10:31 AM, Eugene Halton wrote: > Dear Stephen et al., > > But what about this, a darker side of Peirce from a letter to > Lady Welby of December 28, 1908. Though against English liberalism (update to > today’s “neoliberalism”) as futile rationalism, Peirce’s alternative is not a > more inclusive democracy, but one in which people ought to be enslaved, > universal suffrage denied, labor organizations repressed. He approves the > “intelligent slaves” who enabled classical Greek to be “the most perfect > language ever spoken.” > > Peirce’s sheer blindness to the blood and depravity wrought by > American slavery, and which American Apartheid was continuing to inflict, to > what the unfettered emergent capitalism of what Mark Twain and Charles Dudley > Warner had termed “The Gilded Age” was effecting in spawning new breeds of > Aristocrats of Money and levels of social inequality, to the repressive and > killing work conditions that industrial capitalism was wreaking, to the > rights of women and minorities excluded then from voting to be fully > participant citizens, is just appalling: > > “Being a convinced Pragmaticist in Semeiotic, naturally and necessarily > nothing can appear to me sillier than rationalism; and folly in politics > cannot go further than English liberalism. The people ought to be enslaved; > only the slaveholders ought to practice the virtues that can alone maintain > their rule. England will find out too late that it has sapped the foundations > of culture. The most perfect language that ever was spoken was classical > Greek; and it is obvious that no people could have spoken it who were not > provided with plenty of intelligent slaves. As to us Americans who had, at > first, so much political sense, we always showed a disposition to support > what aristocracy we had; and we have constantly experienced, and felt but too > keenly, the ruinous effects of universal suffrage and weakly exercised > government. Here are the labor organizations, into whose hands we are > delivering the government, clamouring today for the ‘right’ to persecute and > kill people as they please. We are making them a ruling class; and England is > going to do the same thing” (Dec. 28, 1908. Hardwick, 1977: 78-79). > > Peirce, C. S., and Welby-Gregory, Victoria (Lady Welby), Semiotic and > Significs: The Correspondence between C. S. Peirce and Victoria Lady Welby, > edited by Charles S. Hardwick with the assistance of James Cook, Indiana > University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, IN, 1977 > > Gene > > > > From: C S Peirce discussion list [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Stephen C. Rose > Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 7:56 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [peirce-l] “Some Leading Ideas of Peirce's Semiotic” > > ….Peirce like Nietzsche is a posthumous author and I do not believe he will > come to full flower save possibly in this century. When he does it will most > certainly be because he influenced the thinking behind the global democratic > revolution. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the PEIRCE-L > listserv. To remove yourself from this list, send a message to > [email protected] with the line "SIGNOFF PEIRCE-L" in the body of > the message. To post a message to the list, send it to > [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the PEIRCE-L listserv. To remove yourself from this list, send a message to [email protected] with the line "SIGNOFF PEIRCE-L" in the body of the message. To post a message to the list, send it to [email protected]
