web analytics

Home » LitVote Latest » Currently Reading:

The Other?

 
They hate you if
you’re clever
and they despise a fool

John Lennon
 

I can think of no more potent words to describe the ontic situation (of denigration) of the powerless( in context of class, caste, race, gender, et. al.)vis a vis the empowered.
 

*
 

To state the obvious, even within The Other, dominant groups mistreat the weaker: so there is a near endless regress of the binary across the spectrum.
 
An upper class Woman may oppress a lower class woman, despite both being the ‘oppressed’ vis a vis Males.
 
An Afro-Am , oppressed by white racism, can in turn look down upon
native Africans for being lower on the totem pole, and so on.
 
Happens all the time.
 

*
 

Putting on Modernist, ‘Progressivist’, airs does not alter that reality one whit.
 
So, the moral superiority of Victims is contextual, and temporary, only.
 
Yesterday’s victims can turn today’s oppressors, given half a chance.
 
Besides, as Colin Wilson pointed out aeons ago there is nothing an Outsider wants more than to be an Insider.
 
So , the moral gap between the Primary and the Other may not be as deep as is oft imagined.
 
Examples abound, if one looks around with care.
 
Both the historical avatars of EuroModernism (EM) – Capitalism and Socialism – have been run through with stark iniquity, oppression, and injustice.
 

Stated unhappily, truth is that Man is a beast, lest we forget.

 

*
 
And the only (near)”Utopia” ( I do NOT subscribe to that term) that exists is a communal, familial, tribal, entity that, intra-tribe, adopts pacific, affective, ties, within a matrix of co-operative mutualism.
 
It is the one locus where unpredictable male violence, the very bane of human society, is best enchained/entrapped within the healing bonds of Affective Relations.
 
This is what Women achieve(d), in that societal form: no other formula has ever worked.
 
In my parlance, (with)in that instance, the Social Economy of Affections (Tribal modes) trumps the Political Economy of Interests (EM).
 
It is, indeed, the First Condition of Civilisation: i.e., the domestication/pacification of Men.
 
The Second Condition is the Pacification (domestication) of Nature.
 
So now we should know why all utopias (of EM inspiration) fail:
male aggression in such arid domains – let’s call them, advisedly, No Woman’s Lands – razes them to the ground, in fruitless power struggles.

 
*
 

Recognition of our real, intrinsic, species traits has never been an EM forte: they prefer fantasy – kindergarten pap ? – to lull doubt and disquiet .
 
We accord instinctual behavior to our close cousins – say the chimps – but fail to apply it to ourselves.
 
This is because early EM theorists imagined that ‘MAN” was created in the image of ‘god’: Darwin’s correction came too late.
 
The conjectural ‘progressivism’ keeps us all in thrall of that powerful amphetamine called ‘hope’ , endlessly organising, marching, whispering,’yes, we can’: despite dispositive evidence to the contrary.
 
It is time we grew up: to self-realisation?
 
As Ben Franklin had it, those who subsist on hope die of starvation.
 
There is no systemic and sustainable amelioration possible within EM societies: it is always a situation of permanent struggle in a self-defined Adversarial Society.
 
Rather, we need to restructure the entire edifice on a different ontic and epistemic foundation.
That is my Basic Thesis (Farewell to Modernism, NY Peter Lang, 2017)
 
It is not that vested interests capture ‘democracy’, as is erroneously believed: it is that vested interests originally (historically) created that instrument – to serve themselves.</em>
 
*
 
One other matter.
 
I have dwelt , incessantly, on the Iniquities of EM upon the Other: but the Other, I must emphasize, is not at all innocent of a not dissimilar barbarism.
 
The West did not invent (and I hope they can stomach this slur!) violence or expropriation.
 
In the area of male savagery, East and West are entirely on par.
 
The glaring fact(or) that does separate Occidental Despotism from
its Oriental Counterpart – and this point is Vital – is that the former claimed high moral ground throughout, and despite, their latter-day despoliations.
 
That sort of bald-faced hypocrisy was notably absent amongst the latter.
 
If hypocrisy is the homage vice plays to virtue, well the Other simply wasn’t up to that high European standard.
 
Genghis , presumably, proclaimed no such wild claim(s) to historical virtue?

 
The point, I hope, is made.

 
[© R.Kanth 2022]

 

Professor Rajani Kanth, is Author of Coda (Novel) , A Day in the Life (Novel), and Expiations (Verse)

Share Button

Comment on this Article:







Ad