Darwin and the left
nemonemini at cosmiverse.com
nemonemini at cosmiverse.com
Thu Dec 6 11:00:25 MST 2001
Let me say that I was quite unworried as to being unsubbed. As a
critic of Darwin, and not one who injects 'god' into that criticism,
I am without friends, and know it, so I was merely being a bit glum.
But I will win this argument, so why worry. Anyway, you would have to
unsub Mr. Perelman first. My point is only to take it easy on any
suggestion of a Darwin party line here. I have said I deeply respect
Marx, but if there well a revolution tommorrow I will be eliminated
day one. So I don't belong anywhere and sneak up on internet lists
as a lurker (like Michael Perelman, another firing squad case). Let's
relax. I don't plan to take over the list, but I do plan to separate
Darwinian thinking from the left.
I think you misunderstand me, assuming it is important, I wouldn't
care actually being
unsubbed, since I could not fit in anywhere just at the moment. It is
a risk, and a sacrifice, for me just to subscribe here. So what.
And I am actually ten times more deadly than a reactionary because I
am left of Marx and mean to rewrite the subject starting with all the
critiques of his work I can find. This doesn't have to be a big deal,
nor do I wish to sound alarmist. Old style theory won't work
anymore. I ought to be a born-again Rawlsian, but I am not, and yet
also, looking at Newsweek standing in the store this afternoon, I was
struck by an article saying the Taliban were nearly paranoid after
the American attack. They were expecting a brave Kyber Pass replay
and got smucked. Smart bombs appearing from nowhere days on end. The
power here is so awesome, one must pause and reflect on the chances
of revolution. So what's the answer? They beat you on theory with
Darwin brainwashing, and they beat you on military tactics, for any
simple pipedream of the great complot, so I would say the situation
is desperate. But I should leave this list's style untouched, since a
few indirect communications are more productive.
Anyway, my viewpoint on historical theory is not easy to understand,
nor just at the moment would you particularly like it. I promised
myself I would communicate it to the left, as a kind of antidote to
its preemption. It is a pretty useful tool to see the problem with
Darwin, and historical theories generally. I am not concerned about
being called crazy,or the rest of it. The relation to Marxism will
become clear. As to Darwin,
it takes time and work and would take a lot of posts here to
establish the case against his theory here via email, and it never
works. The whole subject is so confused, it is hard to get anything
straight. It shouldn't be so hard, but it seems it is. It is junk
for hitech idiots. Anyway, the critiques I offer are available
elsewhere. My cautionary statement
is to consider what's really happening out there in the cultural
debate, and not think crude old-fashioned materialism is going to
convince the public anymore. I am no Creationist, but they were the
one's to blow the whistle on the deceptions here. The left should be
more alert to the quicksand it will find itself in here.
For all of these reasons then I think it is more practical just to
lie low and let the list be itself and do what I have done so far,
which is the occasional torpedo mode.
As to Darwin, I think my arguments are sounder than you might
think,and with my still unclear 'eonic effect' I have a demonstration
of where the theory went wrong. It is still in the 'Oh that's crazy
stage'. But that will pass. I hold the ace on historical evolutionary
theory, and my viewpoint simply leaves Darwin's descent of man in the
Sincerely, neither friend nor foe...
This message was sent by Cosmiverse.
Get Your Free Email Account Today!
Join us Today as a Digital Passenger aboard
Cosmic Voyage 2000 ( http://www.cosmicvoyage2000.com )!
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
More information about the Marxism