April 19, 2005

SELF-INFLICTED SLAVERY

Holding on to all that humanity can mean (Thomas Hopko, International Herald Tribune, April 18th, 2005)

As the cardinals of the Roman Catholic Church cloister themselves to choose a successor to John Paul II, we may ask one more time what it was about the late pope that elicited the love and respect of millions of people, including many not sharing his convictions. And what it was about him that also produced the confusion, as well as the contempt, of many, including some identifying themselves as Christians, and Catholics.

I'm convinced that the answer to this question is found in a little book by C.S. Lewis, published in 1944, "The Abolition of Man." It is also found in Karl Stern's spiritual autobiography "The Pillar of Fire," first printed in 1951, especially in the addendum called a "Letter To My Brother." And it is found in the early writings of Alexander Solzhenitsyn.

Lewis, Stern and Solzhenitsyn were all committed Christians. But these writings are not about Christianity as such. They are about a vision and experience of human life in our modern, and now postmodern, European and North American worlds that are being enforced, and emulated, all over the earth.

The conclusions of Lewis's "reflections on education" may be clearly stated. If students absorb, however unconsciously, what they are taught in modern schools, the result will be a world of "men without chests." People will no longer be human in the traditional sense, he said. They will be deprived of the uniquely human intuitions of goodness, truth and beauty that their humanity obliges them to acknowledge, honor and serve. They will be nothing but brains and bodies, computers and consumers, calculators and copulators. They will be conquered by the very nature they strive to conquer in the name of freedom and autonomy, as they constantly reinvent humanity under the enslaving control of their elite conditioners.

Karl Stern put it a bit differently. In 1951, before the self-destruction of Communism, the mass production of computers, the construction of the Internet and the proliferation of genetic projects, Stern claimed that Western societies, and the societies that they would inevitably come to influence and control, held out only four possibilities for human beings. One is despair, moral nihilism and suicide. Another is nationalist ideology and sentiment that would bring nothing but suffering, destruction and death. Another is the Marxist materialism that would attract myriads of good-willed idealists but would prove itself corrupt to the core. The fourth possibility was what Stern called "rationalist pragmatism" and "scientism," which he predicted would be actualized in a "global experiment" that would produce a "form of nihilism unequaled in history." "Compared with it," he wrote, Nazi Germany and Communist Russia, "would look like children's playgrounds. Man's life on this earth would come about as close to the idea of hell as anything on earth may."

Solzhenitsyn described the same thing artistically. His world was not only Communist Russia; it was humanity as such. His heroes are human beings who in Lewis's terms still have "chests." His villains are ideologues, hypocrites and liars, whom he characterizes as wholly "without an upper story." He said that the Russian "Baba" identified the cause of the world's problems when, seeing evil in the village, she would shake her head and solemnly declare that we "have lost the likeness."

Whatever, Dude.

Posted by Peter Burnet at April 19, 2005 7:14 AM
Comments

There is another possibility, though it is only a possibility. American nationalism is inherently, though tacitly, religious, universalist and crusading, and can ensure that men, and now we must of course say women, have chests.

Posted by: David Cohen at April 19, 2005 7:39 AM

David:

If you replaced nationalism with civilization, it is certainly the best hope. 51-49%, though, is cutting it a little fine, no?

Posted by: Peter B at April 19, 2005 8:56 AM

See, you foreigners come in and try to stir up trouble. Even I don't think that the line between patriotic G-d fearing American and godless European secularist is whether you voted for Bush or Kerry.

Posted by: David Cohen at April 19, 2005 9:15 AM

I really cannot see the much of a distinction between Stern's "despair, moral nihilism and suicide" on the one hand and "rationalist pragmatism and scientism" on the other. I suppose all rationalist programs lead to despair, etc., but the converse isn't necessarily true.

Posted by: Bruce Cleaver at April 19, 2005 9:37 AM

or, this guy's theory is full of holes and there are considerably more than four possible outcomes to life.

Posted by: cjm at April 19, 2005 10:23 AM

David:

See, you foreigners come in and try to stir up trouble...

Hey, don't blame me. It's that universalist message of yours. Kind of like the Catholic Church under John Paul. He was so universalist everybody in the world now thinks they know who should be pope and feels they have a right to be heard on doctrinal direction. Wanna hear my take on social security reform?

Thankfully Canada has no universalist message and so we can tell everyone to mind their own business.

Posted by: Peter B at April 19, 2005 1:15 PM

Everyone (except me) neglected to say, "Orrin: you rock!"

Posted by: george at April 19, 2005 2:02 PM
« REFORMATION FROM WITHIN: | Main | FARCOCRACY: »