Skip to main content

Moving Beyond The Right Wing — Left Wing Dichotomy — 2

 

The following quote is from Jakob Fries’s 1816 pamphlet, ‘The Danger Posed by the Jews to German Well-Being and Character’, translated in a footnote to Hegel’s Elements of the Philosophy of Right by H.S. Nisbet:

Jews can be subjects of our government, but as Jews they can never become citizens of our people, for as Jews they want to be a distinct people, and so they necessarily separate themselves from our German national community. Indeed, they form not merely a people, but at the same time they form a state. The basic laws of Jewish religion are at the same time the basic laws of their state, their rabbis are at the same time their chiefs, to whom the people owe the highest reverence and the most blind obedience . ..Their nationality signifies in itself only their physical origin from a distinct people. Here we have to judge them as favourably as possible. No man who loves justice wants to stand by the proposition that black is the colour of slaves, or any other proposition of that kind. In every civilized state, the same innate rights of a free man, equal protection and equal civil rights, pertain to everyone, whether by origin a Saxon, Wend, or Jew. But let us observe that we may not concede these same innate rights to anyone if he is not ready to fulfil to the state in full measure all the duties of a free man and a citizen. And here, even disregarding religion, state, and trade, and considering their mere derivation, we encounter the first great failing of Jewishness. They have existed for millennia between all other peoples on the earth, and they have cultivated themselves only in becoming rich through bargaining and haggling; they teach this to one another and that is how they preserve the purity of their race . .. It is not against the Jews, our brothers, but against Jewishness, that we declare war . . . Jewishness is a relic of an earlier, uncivilized age, which must not be merely limited, but wholly extirpated. To improve the civil condition of the Jews would be precisely to extirpate Jewry, to destroy the society of conniving second-hand street peddlers and tradesmen . . . For the Jews themselves it is of the greatest importance that Jewishness should be made an end of as soon as possible . . .So the Jewish caste, wherever it has been admitted, has always had over the whole people, above and below, from the highest to the lowest, a frightful demoralizing power. Here is the most important moment of this whole affair: that this caste should he extirpated root and branch, since of all societies and states, secret or public, it is plainly the most dangerous to the state.

Jakob Fries was a liberal, today we identify this point of view with the right wing. I am not specifically talking about Jews but exploring the line of thought. Jews are considered to be a distinct nation owing allegiance to their own Rabbis and so not capable of integration with the German community. A distinction is drawn between Jewish religion or Jewishness and the Jews and it is Jewishness that needs to be extirpated. The integration of Jews is possible only by extirpating Jewishness from them. Here an abstract notion of identity is in play where the other is not allowed to be different and tolerated because toleration is always of someone different but has to be assimilated by eliminating what makes them different. To be integrated is to be identical and difference is the cause of conflict. The other cannot be allowed to be and has to be either integrated or eliminated and the difference between Jewishness and Jews becomes a difference without a distinction. Fanaticism is the elimination of difference.

The Left on the other hand wants to get rid of identity — a form of self-love. The predilection towards the self always makes the other an enemy. The philosopher Epicurus was asked about the Pythagorean view of abolishing property and pooling together all resources. His reaction was that such a view is based on distrust of others. The Left wants to give full play to difference over identity. Toleration is based on equivocal standards because there is an asymmetry in social relations between different classes. The value system of one class is nothing but a means of oppression towards another and tolerance is not based on an extension of the same universal standards to others but on denying the self for the sake of the other. 

Both sides do not believe that there are any universal standards of values applicable to human beings by their being human beings. For one side values are ‘our’ values by us being this group of people, for the other values are relative to those who set values and they are just instruments of domination over another.  



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Criticism of Karma Theory

  Karma is a theory that believes that there is a moral providence in the world. The nature of this providence is to reward good and punish evil actions. But there are four big problems with it: Injustice is a patent fact in the world. On the other hand Karma theory would have us believe that contrary to our everyday life experiences there is complete justice in the world. People get what they deserve. Hence blame the one who suffers. Anyone who is enjoying his riches even though ill won is a good man. How many times do we see that something bad happens to someone who is good and something good happens to morally reprehensible people? The theory of karma is not a theory that arises from the need to explain our everyday life experiences. It is a dogma and forces us to interpret our experience in the light of this dogma. Since it cannot explain why there is injustice and misfortune in the world it posits the concept of rebirth. One proposition is sought to be validated through anothe...
1 comment
Read more

Jiddu Krishnamurti - The Movement Of Thought

  There is conflict inner and outer when the world presents a challenge to an individual and demands a response. The mind in order to deal with an ever changing world imposes a certain pattern on it based on past experiences and which has a means – end structure. This gives direction to all human actions which are teleological i.e. they are always goal directed. How exactly does such a process arise? Three distinct processes can be discerned but these should not be seen in a chronological but in a functional sense: a)       Means – End Structure First there is sensation, pleasant, unpleasant or neutral. Memory records it and mind projects a future state where that same sensation can be either repeated or avoided. Thought arises parasitic on memory and allows the perpetuation or the continuity of the past. This is the beginning of psychological time – a past state seeking continuity in the future and conditioning response in the present. Thus JK says tha...
1 comment
Read more

SCHOOLS OF INDIAN THOUGHT - PART 2 - NYAYA EPISTEMOLOGY

  I. JNANA Jnana is usually translated as cognition. Cognition is the only thing that has intentionality or the property of being directed at the world. It reveals objects in the world towards which goal directed action can be initiated. It is of the nature of illumination like a lamp and generates awareness in the subject of is objects. It is always used in an episodic sense and never in a dispositional sense. The later job is done by samskaras. Jnana is used to connote mental states like perception, memory, introspection, assumption, doubt, belief etc. Jnana is divided into anubhava and smriti. Anubhava is of the nature of presentation of its object while smriti is recollection of a previous experience. Anubhava of an object makes an impression in the mind of the subject and is stored there. When it is revived due to diverse factors it leads to memory of its object. So anubhava is presentational, of the form ‘I experience an object’, while memory is derivative on anubhava for i...
Post a Comment
Read more