From: epowers@dewey.NMSU.Edu (POWERS)
Subject: "What went wrong":Aiken and Powers enlighten the world
Organization: New Mexico State University
Distribution: usa, na
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 18:38:01 GMT

	Okay, the title is a joke.  We'll see how the rest goes.  Here's the  
conversation so far:


epowers@spock.NMSU.Edu (POWERS) writes:

>	I think the best comment came from Walt Kelly's Pogo years ago:  "We  
>have met the enemy, and he is us."  I am far from suggesting that humanity is  
a  
>mere cancer on the face of the earth, but somewhere we have gone terribly  
wrong  
>in our attitudes, leading to things going wrong with our actions.  Every  
>human-invented utopia has wound up being hell for someone.  Neither Socialism  
>nor Capitalism (or any other -ism) has the ability to make things the way they  
>should be.


	Man's hubris has gotten the better of him countless times.  This
said, I do not see what has gone terribly wrong.  That is, I do not
think whatever evils or degredations there are in modern society to
be new; to imagine that "somewhere" we have gone off on the wrong
track is superficially appealing, but intellectually without substance. 
I do not mean here to insult you.  I would, however, like to point out
that the theoretical structure of Utopias (however conceived) requires
a Total Revolution to make the "mere" ideas into flesh.  Although the 
Utopian vision antedated it, the French Revolution was the first attempt
to incarnate the philosophical abstraction of Utopia.  
	Socialism and the Socialist ideal are, of course, the godchildren
of the French Revolution.  Socialism is revolutionary by nature, since it
requires that the partisan divorce his mind from his heart, and to 
alternately follow each as the Movement requires.  It abhors mere rationalism
as being devoid of "authenticity", and it excoriates romanticism as being
insufficiently tractable to inflexible abstract theories.  Socialism posits
any one individual as being fungible; it insists upon the "truth" of 
absolute human equality.  Socialism has brought heaven to earth the best 
it could.  Utopia was made flesh here and there in this century, in the
form of Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, and others.  The longing for Utopia
that, sadly enough, is human nature, has brought us tyranny, genocide, and
the debasement of civilization.
	Capitalism does not suppose that any Utopia exists; it is 
thoroughly dystopian.  It makes few assumptions about human nature, and
none about the value of individual endeavors.  Unlike the Socialists, few 
capitalists would suggest that a "pure" (i.e. lassiez-faire) capitalism
is either possible or desirable.  Adam Smith and Andrew Carnegie, among 
others, insisted that Capitalism was workable only within a context of
moral conduct (charity being the greatest of all virtues).  Capitalism
is Counter-revolutionary; it is the economic system that is the subtext
of all economic systems, capitalist or not.  To suggest that capitalism
is Utopian is to put the cart before the horse.  Capitalism, unlike 
socialism (on a grand scale), may have been "born" with the Enlightenment,
but the instincts upon which it is organized are not social constructs.
Biological necessity is severely underestimated by the Left as a 
determinant of human behavior.
	But back to your statement that we have gone wrong "somewhere."
This is the basis of the revolutionary, Utopian ideal: that there has
existed a "more perfect" human condition than the present one, and that
"somewhere" a wrong turn was taken, leading us to this worst of all
possible worlds.  This line of thought becomes the justification for
Total Revolution, with its mad desire for Utopia, and all of its violent
excesses, mindless hero-worship, and intolerance.


Comments welcome.



Andrew Aiken


	Thank you for the challenge.  I'll take your statement "I do not mean  
here to insult you" at face value, although your use of fifty-cent phrases like  
"it excoriates romanticism as being insufficiently tractable to inflexible  
abstract theories" maikes me wunder if yore tryin' to confooz a pore backerds  
New Mexan.  I consider brevity and simplicity to be the soul of wit, but I do  
understand the temptations of academia.
	If I understand you correctly, your major points are something like  
this:
	1.  Nothing has "gone wrong," things are the same as they have always  
been.
	2.  You have no reason to believe that things have "gone wrong".
	3.  Seeking after utopia has only brought tyranny, genocide, the  
debasement of civilization, violent excesses, mindless hero-worship, and  
intolerance.

	My idea that we have gone wrong somewhere is not a premise of my  
philosophy, but one of its conclusions.  In the 70's, I would have been  
labelled a Jesus Freak.  So if you wish to attack my idea that somewhere we  
have gone wrong you must also attack my Christian beliefs.  Please don't  
hesitate to do so, either!  I'm not unused to criticism, or discussion, and I  
consider Christianity to be like any other philosophy.  It has certain premises  
and follows these to their conclusions, and they are not above attack.  
	I agree with you that seeking after utopia requires "Total Revolution".   
The imagery used in the Bible to describe what's usually called the second  
coming are images of total revolution that few modern revolutionaries would  
dare dream of.  So naturally, I don't think total revolution to be necessarily  
bad.
	This does, however, bring up something in your post I do find  
confusing.  On what basis do you call things "evils or degredations there are  
in modern society"?  "Degredations" seems to me to imply that things were  
different once.  Even your use of the word "evils" implies that there is, or  
has been, something different to which it can be compared.  If everything is as  
it has always been, then I must agree with Alexander Pope:  "Whatever is, is  
right."
	Would things be better if "the longing for Utopia that, sadly enough,  
is human nature" did not exist?  Would rape, murder, stealing, and so forth,  
vanish if people did not long for things do be better?  Or are you saying that  
a longing for Utopia is what originally caused those things to appear?  If so,  
Utopia was lost by longing for something that already existed.  Would you  
please elaborate?  I have no idea why you would call anything "evil" or even  
"bad".  Why do you think genocide is bad?  Violent excesses?  Intolerance?   
They are poor evolutionary strategies, but why are they "evils"?
	I also think that actions reveal attitudes, and I would say the  
examples you used of leaders who brought about Utopia (Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot)  
are examples of leaders who wanted power, not utopia.  They bandied the idea  
about in much the same way our leaders talk about balanced budgets and  
responsible government spending.  "Their lips are as smooth as honey, but in  
their hearts lies deceit."
						Please reply.
						Erik Powers 
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton