Contrary to much popular opinion, the Enlightenment did not create a single path forward for humanity, let alone one frozen in amber for perpetuity. The insidious error of Hegel and Marx was the conceit of a linear history, and those who believe that liberalism is the only logical outcome of the Enlightenment are hewing to that error with devotion. You are falling for a variant of the right side of history.
Nisbet’s Twilight of Authority argues that the two key ideas of the Enlightenment were individualism and equality; these are interdependent and yet in tension. Individualism is the one we tend to focus on most hereabouts, and generally at the far end of the spectrum. The problem is that individualism tends to undermine institutions in general, and consequently with the loss of authority therein the gravitational pull of authority is upward1 – to the national level. Equally ironic is that individualism has no grounds without equality (to a degree) as the more natural social environment is hierarchical – both individualism and equality fight the hierarchical tendency. Nisbet further argues that all culture is feudal – due to the hierarchy that normally exists in any culture, thus both of these Enlightenment values are corrosive to culture, period. Consider the tradition of the military2 (and this spans centuries of human life and many cultures and governments) – is there anything more hierarchical? Even all of those within a given rank aren’t equal, they are rated and the best are slated for promotion to a higher rank (and each higher rank is a narrower slice of humanity exercising a greater span of authority). Initiative of an individual may be rewarded3 and heroism is recognition of the individual – but always from a higher level in the hierarchy and in context of the martial culture. Individualism (at the extreme) is going to tend to narcissism and nihilism4 – because nothing transcends the individual or binds him to society through institutional authority (save for how he chooses to bind himself which may be transactionary or otherwise transitory).
Individualism also presents the problem of popular sovereignty5, and here the libertarians (and more so the anarchists) have the better of the argument. If I as an individual cannot compel you (due to the Non Aggression Principle) then what power am I ceding to government to do that in my stead? If we are bound together (in the fashion of a bundle of sticks), it is the emergent collective property and not the aggregation of individual wills that is the source of power. I bet you don’t like where that’s going, do you? I don’t either, but the logic isn’t easily refuted, particularly with populace (the Roman mob) as the justification.
The real problems kick in with equality and the push for more equality. Nisbet quotes de Toqueville (Democracy in America) to this point:
The foremost, or indeed the sole condition, which is required in order to succeed in centralizing the supreme power in a democratic community, is to love equality, or to get men to believe you love it. Thus, the science of despotism, which was once so complex, has been simplified and reduced, as it were, to a single principle.
It is shocking and frustrating to see that we were warned and we’ve ignored that warning, for generations now. And it is annoying to come to this realization and still have your peers refuse to see it. When were you ever taught this in school, as opposed to the progression of ever greater equality – starting with the founding of this country, through the demolition of slavery, women’s suffrage and the modern civil rights movement? What conservative voice ever called out standing athwart history that this advancement of equality must be halted? We have reached optimum equality – said no one, ever.
Nisbet goes on to describe what he called the New Equality as something we better know now as equity. But he points out that this equality – a leveling – is not as novel as we might suppose. Leveling in society is never about raising up the many, it is about dragging down the few – it is the human crab bucket. Heinlein’s observation on this is known as bad luck is on point; likewise Vonnegut’s Harrison Bergeron. Equality is not a natural condition, it is an abstraction and ideal. We here tend to realize that equality should be limited, but that isn’t based on a principle, it is based on a preference (for a traditional understanding, not one that withstands a great deal of scrutiny).
I love Calvin Coolidge’s Fourth of July address as much as anyone. It is a great refutation of the Progressive viewpoint6, yet it has no authority beyond tradition, and the Enlightenment does not hold tradition in great respect. The entire history of capitalism (in both economic and social spheres) has been as Schumpeter had it – creative destruction. That is fueled by and produces innovation – not the conservation of tradition. Reason demands more than tradition (or faith) can answer. And even this fine speech regurgitates the conceit of consent of the governed7. Who exactly was We the People when that was written? Who was it when Coolidge spoke? Who is it today?
The last big item I’ll tackle from Nisbet is this – no institution is broken by attacks upon it. The attacks only come when the institution is already in decay, and it is precisely that decay that invites the attacks. This is pretty much the diametric opposite of what we typically believe. It shouldn’t be that difficult to see, with the benefit of the Roman example. Rome didn’t fall to the barbarians because those attacks had weakened Rome, it was the weakness of Rome in decline that brought the attacks right to the gates. Nisbet argues this is a reoccurring pattern in human life and argues the point even to the modern family (although there is an ancient callback to the decline of the Roman family – pater familias and all). When we decry the attacks on the family, we are failing to see how the family was already weakened (and the weakness inviting the attack). Ultimately Nisbet sees a pattern playing out; a cycle that has happened before, is happening now and will happen again. You can’t get much farther from the progressive march of history into a glorious future than that.
- Why this gravitational direction? I would posit that it is the reflection of what we take to be the ultimate authority above us – God. ↩︎
- Nisbet talks quite a bit about the military model in times past (Roman) and current, and how it has influenced (and grown during) times of declining authority. ↩︎
- Billy Mitchell was of course court-martialed for his initiative. ↩︎
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYhNbp-PO28 ↩︎
- Sovereignty itself is problematic enough. It is conjured out of nothingness without God. With God it is just delegation. ↩︎
- And is there any political trend in America that more thoroughly validates de Toqueville’s concern about centralizing power? ↩︎
- As Spooner had it – where and when did any of us consent? ↩︎
The church. Which the Enlightenment also merc’d.
And while the linear progression of history, and its retard cousin, the Utopian Year Zero end of history, are both obvious fictions disproved even on the short historical timeline of our present lives, there’s almost certainly no returning to certain pre-Enlightenment conditions, either socially or economically.
Post-Enlightenment won’t entirely abandon the Enlightenment any more than after the fall of the [Western] Roman Empire all aspects of Roman society were erased.
Also, the Reformation pre-dates the Enlightenment and in many ways opened the path.
“there’s almost certainly no returning to certain pre-Enlightenment conditions, either socially or economically”
Sounds like a linear history conceit.
Back from riding – perfect cool fall day. Also, apropos of this post, I just received the copy of Nisbet’s The Quest for Community.
Half-cocked response, two sentences in:
The printing press allowed the bible to fall into the hands of the rabble. It also made possible the broad dissemination of bawdy tales.
Lorenzo Warby has an interesting perspective on that – and contrasts what happened in the West with the printing press to the social impact in China (where it was a tool of centralized power).
I’m always intrigued by analysis like that. However, from my skim of that article – no mention of Confucianism which I think doesn’t get enough attention in the west.
Equality is not a natural condition, it is an abstraction and ideal.
What used to be referred to as a “polite fiction”.
Like “social justice”. I burst out laughing the first time I heard that nonsense term.
at the far end of the spectrum – some libertarians are odd but that does not mean they are on the spectrum.
no institution is broken by attacks upon it.
From without, maybe. We seem to have been the victims of a successful attack from within.
Nope, even those only come after the institution under attack has already decayed.
Is the decay inevitable then? Is that where creative destruction is born?
I don’t know if it is inevitable – it kinda seems that way. The Roman family decayed and a contributing factor was that the men who had served in the Roman military had been ‘liberated’, or at least lived under a different regime which changed them, and did not wish to simply return to the fold. Later the Roman military would decay itself as commanders became more corrupt.
The Church had certainly decayed prior to the Reformation and yet it stands today (even as it decays seemingly before our eyes).
“We seem to have been the victims of a successful attack from within.”
“Mom, she got more jello than me”
a leveling – is not as novel as we might suppose – well there were the Levellers back in the day of another King Chuck
Contrary to much popular opinion, the Enlightenment did not create a single path forward for humanity – but can we even say the enlightenment was a singular moment in time and a break, or just a gradual progression of things…
On individualism and equality, there is the eternal issue of definitions and purism. The world is messy, no concept can be taken to idealist levels. You will never have absolutes, just a constant tug of war between various forces. the hope is to get to a point of somewhat equilibrium that allows a bit of thriving. I have said in past posts that no comment or institution or system of government can be made that lasts forever. each generation must fight the fight.
no concept can be taken to idealist levels
Paging Winston!
Tell his mom to call me
Make sure you wear a rubber, dude.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXgSCpb1TE0&rco=1&ab_channel=Chaddakins
You fucked Lumberg!?
Almost on topic. Beth Mole probably my “favorite” scold at Ars Technica has a gem today.
Trust in scientists hasn’t recovered from COVID. Some humility could help
https://arstechnica.com/science/2024/11/nearly-half-of-us-thinks-scientists-are-smug-study-finds-humility-helps/
The comments are 100% what I expect from the site. Don’t say I didn’t warn you.
hOrSe dEwOrMeR!!1!
😂
Within the first 5 or so comments.
Interesting that neither the author nor any of the commenters mentioned Michael Mann.
Pseudoscientists like Bill Nye or charismatic mediocrities like NdG Tyson have done more to reinforce public mistrust of science than all the public health official COVID announcements put together.
We should trust the science. Just not THAT science.
Great point!
Somehow they got through that whole article without mentioning “disinformation”. There is hope for us yet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-2k3hlmlDE&ab_channel=MatadorRecords
Another good reason not to have ranked comments by up/down votes.
How did this comment
get so down voted.
I swear looking through that its like watching a human centipede form that is eating its own ass end.
It got down voted because it wasn’t truthy/popped the narrative. Up and down voting is a really good way to foster groupthink if there’s no moderation of the people voting up/down.
Best comment
Ars Readers: “Science should be trusted.”
Ars Article: “Here’s a study indicating a better way for scientists to present their findings.”
Ars Readers: “This scientific study shouldn’t be trusted.”
Upvote -46 (16 / -62)
And stop calling us out, m’kay?
Rome didn’t fall to the barbarians because those attacks had weakened Rome, it was the weakness of Rome in decline that brought the attacks right to the gates. – I’d say it is both. Barbarian attacks did weaken Rome, hard to argue that repetitive military campaigns do not put a strain on a country. And barbarian attack / movements had other motives than sensing Rome’s weakness.
Rome survived worse threats during the Punic Wars, because it was robust at the time, not in decay.
as I said it was a combination of both… but the repeated wars did weaken it more than just the internal strife, and probably amplified the internal strife. Economic problems, higher taxes for the army, rebellions against the taxes, more generals who wanted to be emperors, who thought they had better answer for the attacks… It is possible the crisis of the third century could have been better resolved without constant external attacks.
Carthage was never in a good position to defeat Rome, really. It was just much smaller, mainly a naval power, and relied on mercenaries for foot soldiers. Absent a couple of once in several generation leaders, they would likely have never been that much of a threat.
The barbarian “invasions” were more in the nature of migrations. I am by no means a classical scholar (probably should have opened with that), but whole peoples, numbering in the hundreds of thousands, migrating into your empire strikes me as a tougher nut to crack than a rival naval/mercantile power hundreds of miles away.
The term “decay” is carrying a lot of weight in that formulation, too. I’m not sure where I would draw the line between internal assaults and decay.
Hard to define decay but you know it when you read the history.
In the late Republic, the Senate was essentially for sale to the highest bribery. In the late Empire, they were so politicized, the great General Stilicho was executed in 408 by rivals. Rome was sacked in 410.
That’s what decay looks like.
Nisbet further argues that all culture is feudal – due to the hierarchy that normally exists in any culture, thus both of these Enlightenment values are corrosive to culture, period. – I am not sure I get this bit but I suppose it is all a matter if definition…
Speaking of cultural degeneracy and faux equivalence
Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene repeatedly misgendered Delaware state Senator Sarah McBride, a trans woman, in a video clip that has circulated online.
On Monday, Greene was asked by a reporter for comment on fellow Republican Congresswoman Nancy Mace’s resolution which seeks to ban transgender women from using women’s bathrooms at the U.S. Capitol. The proposal comes ahead of McBride’s arrival in Washington, D.C., where she will make history as the first openly transgender member of Congress.
A video of the interview with Pablo Manríquez shared on X, formerly Twitter, sees the Georgia Republican refer to McBride as “a man,” and “he” multiple times.
Reality is hard.
That’s a man, baby!
Which one?
*snark*
And so it begins. The camps are already under construction.
https://www.wsj.com/world/africa/a-cash-starved-russian-ally-detains-western-miners-staff-in-tax-raid-55537469?st=GcNhzy&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
Showing their French influence…
2.5 times profits seems a little aggressive. Doing business in modern Africa is retarded.
Unless you are the UN.
I think ‘retarded’ covers the UN quite nicely.
Squeezing the goose that lays the golden eggs.
“If I wouldn’t pay the CEO $160MM to work at my company, what makes you think I will pay you $160MM to let him work at my company? I can get another one for a fraction of that, if it comes down to it.”
If the Resolute Mining Company won’t come to my rescue
If the Sugar Refining Company won’t save me
Who’s gonna save me?
It’s no secret that scientists—and the science generally—took a hit during the health crisis.
Plainly bogus claims packaged as sneering egghead condescension backfired? No way.
a scientist with high intellectual humility would show a willingness to admit gaps in their knowledge, listen to input from others, and update their views based on new evidence.
Stop it. You’re killing me.
Do the others go to the right cocktail parties? Otherwise who cares.
Social status is a helluva drug.
“I am the science.”
“I knew Mr. Wizard. You sir are no Mr. Wizard.”
And according to those commentators, Fauci was clear he was expressing his clear opinion and not expressing fact.
Dr. Demento could run circles around the beagle killer.
If Stallone is The Law, surely Lundgren is The Science.
The comments are 100% what I expect from the site. Don’t say I didn’t warn you.
Absolute faith in experts is what defines the superior intellect.
Resolute didn’t specify the purpose of the payments
Ransom is is an ugly word. let’s just say it’s a token of our respect and esteem.
Sad trombone…
Manhattan prosecutors on Tuesday told the judge presiding over President-elect Donald Trump’s criminal hush money case they concede he may need to consider pushing back sentencing until Trump is out of office — but they plan to fight Trump’s renewed efforts to get the verdict tossed.
https://www.nydailynews.com/2024/11/19/nyc-prosecutors-trump-sentencing-in-hush-money-case-may-be-delayed-will-fight-overturn-verdict-stormy-daniels/
And the novel legal theory that allows to not sentence someone for 4.5 years to suddenly do so?
It’s all novel legal theory, why stop now?
My guess is the logic is this. Keep delaying, thus having a constant talking point that the old media can continue to trot out any time the Trump Admin has to sue. Also, they know anything beyond either dropping the charges out right or at most a fine for a ledger ‘crime’ will not hold up at SCOTUS if not the NY SC.
The Left: He’s going to refuse to leave office at the end of his term!
Also The Left: As soon as he leaves office we’re going to throw him in prison for the rest of his life!
Incentives, how the fuck do they work? Even the most well-intentioned person will consider clinging to power if they’re going to get tossed in the clink once they give it up.
Governor of Gaul it is!
Speaking of Rome and its empire, I watched Caesar and Cleopatra (from the GB Shaw play) recently. Definitely recommend.
*on Prime
In other news:
https://www.theblaze.com/news/dnc-union-staffers-angry-layoffs
I’m starting to understand how they blew through $1 billion so quickly.
Start with $2.5m to do a single town hall interview with Oprah Winfrey.
Or apparently every possible interview she did outside *possibly* the big three networks as it is beginning to appear she paid for interviews to ensure they were favorable and/or all setup with known questions to advance her campaigns narrative*
*in which, she even fucked those up.
I hate to take the DNC’s side but I figured election night was all the notice that needed to be given and win or lose at that.
Harris is already ahead in the polling for 2028. I hope those polled are ready to substantially increase their campaign donations.
Her concession prize will be Governor of California, a very achievable position if she decides to run.
They deserve her.
She’ll bankrupt the state in the first
year6 months.Too late.
Absent the creative book-keeping, that State has been bankrupt for 20 years.
lol They didn’t seriously think any of that money was not going into some coffer she controls?!
Just write them a check from those -$20 million accounts.
“You got your check, now get outta here!”
Well, I’m sure their union leadership will go to bat for them and get them what they deserve, right?
Right?
That money is not just gonna launder itself!
Jaguar commits suicide.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/jaguar-attempts-bud-light-itself-cringeworthy-woke-ad
Should have gone back to the classics.
https://youtu.be/XzyNPoI17rE?feature=shared&t=57
Jesus even their X replies…learned absolutely nothing unless they have some high balcony view of some dastardly plan by an evil cabal getting ready to be unleashed upon humanity.
I figured that type was their prime demographic by now anyway, well them and the poor suckers that buy them off lease because of the massive depreciation that won’t be able to afford to get them fixed.
Wow…
I guess since they essentially stopped selling product for a year or so the marketing department had nothing better to do.
Their demographic is significantly different from a US light beer drinker so I don’t think it’s going to kill them. OTH, I don’t see how it’s going to help them either.
I’m reminded of Chris Tucker’s character in “The Fifth Element”. He did it better.
His character was also banging stewardesses on the flight.
Holy shit! Their homepage:
https://www.jaguarusa.com/index.html
Of course we have to remember this:
https://www.jaguarusa.com/comparison-tool/index.html
*yawn*
Damning with faint praise, but that was Tucker’s finest performance.
I’m just happy Biden’s press secretary can still find work.
LOL @ Stinky
Unless they are dropping a hydrogen powered vehicle, a personal flying car or an actual Transformer; they are copying. What a stupid ad even outside the weird artsy shit.
That did confuse me a bit.
Without looking at the URL I would never guess which company made those.
rhywun: you just identified the worst part of the ridiculous industry.
Burn.
That was fire. Kind of like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_Rwx8DFoOI&ab_channel=FOX31Denver
Jaguar commits suicide.
Old news.
Like around 1975?
That Jaguar ad doesn’t even register as “woke” with me; just flat out retarded. Like outtakes from some ’60s pseudo-psychedelic crap like Head.
NERD ALERT
Trump just landed in Brownsville for the Starship launch today at 5.
Jaguar website- a seismic change is coming.
They’re going to merge with Frederick’s of Hollywood?
Every new Jaguar now comes with a matching leopard print thong.
The cars will end up the size of cement trucks.
Today I learned
It’s not often that a carmaker takes a time-out from making cars, but when disaster strikes, there’s not much choice. A scheduled cessation, on the other hand, such as Jaguar’s recently announced plan to pause making vehicles entirely, is exceedingly rare. Less common still, Jaguar production won’t cease for just weeks or even months but for as much as a year or more. The news might lead one to believe that the parent company’s name, JLR (for Jaguar Land Rover), may henceforth stand for Just Land Rover.
Recently, it’s tended to feel that way. Jaguar has been ramping down production for years. It dropped its flagship XJ sedan at the end of the 2019 model year. In 2021, Jaguar torched a nine-figure investment when it scuttled an all-electric replacement that was meant to launch around 2022 and share Range Rover’s MLA platform. Then, during an investor briefing this past July, JLR CEO Adrian Mardell confirmed that XE and XF sedans, E-Pace and electric I-Pace crossovers, and the F-type sports car have ended production or would do so by year’s end. Speaking with disarming frankness, he conceded, “None of those are vehicles on which we made any money.”
——-
Jaguar very much has a plan for the future, along with a party line as to what went wrong. And that plan, which it calls Reimagine, is dramatic: Jaguar will depart the mass-market premium field entirely in favor of a three-model lineup of EVs gone significantly upmarket. They will cost more than any Jaguar of yore—and, it is hoped, generate more profit. The new blueprint calls for sales of 50,000 units worldwide at most, a far cry from earlier peak volumes.
The world’s most expensive clown cars? It could work.
Didn’t BMW get there first?
https://www.hagerty.com/media/maintenance-and-tech/completely-different-the-clown-shoe/
the Z3 couple may be the ugliest thing that BMW made — and Chris Bangle wasn’t even involved!
Well, Fisker Automotive did clear some market space for this.
Rivian is waiting for their turn.
Going all EV?
LOL they really do wanna go out of business.
They are operating on a five-year lag.