Liberalism or Spirituality?

George Snedeker snedeker at SPAMconcentric.net
Tue Jan 2 20:56:52 MST 2001



----- Original Message -----
From: Yoshie Furuhashi <furuhashi.1 at osu.edu>
To: <marxism at lists.panix.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2001 9:54 PM
Subject: Liberalism or Spirituality?


> >In a truly secular society, all spirituality would be private.
>
> >Anyway, I certainly do indeed think that religion -- or the lack of
> >it -- is up to the individual.
>
> >In a _truly, secular& socialist_ society,
> >sprituality&religion will be up to individuals.
>
> And so on.
>
> It seems to me that when posters speak positively of "spirituality"
> on this list, they simply mean an affirmation of liberalism
> (sovereign individualism of the inner consumer + "repressive
> tolerance"), nothing moreIS THIS WHAT SPIRITUALISM NECESSARILY MEANS? WHY
IS IT ONLY A QUESTION OF CONSUMERISM? .  "Spirituality" as shaped by late
> capitalism.  The customer is God.
>
> In "a truly secular & socialist society" imagined by "spiritualist"
> posters here, human beings will apparently be born, Athena-like, as
> full-fledged "individuals" with Kantian autonomy as well....
>
WHY WOULD THEY NECESSARILY BE FULLY-FLEDGED INDIVIDUALS? COULD THEY NOT BE
DEVELOPING BEINGS? I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND THE DEFINITION OF INDIVIDUALISM
OFFERED HERE. LET ME PUT IT ANOTHER WAY: DOES THE CONCEPT OF THE INDIVIDUAL
REQUIRE THE ARTICULATION OF LIBERALISM AS ITS GROUNDS? WHAT ABOUT THE
"SOCIAL INDIVIDUAL" THAT MARX DISCUSSED?WHAT ABOUT THE PUBLIC/PRIVATE
DISTINCTION? WOULD THIS NECESSARILY BE ABOLISHED BY SOCIALISM? PERHAPS IT
WOULD JUST BE TRANSCENDED, BUT BY WHAT? GEORGE > Yoshie
>
> P.S.  I've discussed threads here with my religious leftist friends,
> and they are all shaking their heads....FROM SIDE TO SIDE OR UP AND
DOWN???
>
> P.P.S.  One might as well read Wallace Stevens....
>
> *****   She was the single artificer of the world
> In which she sang.  And when she sang, the sea,
> Whatever self it had, became the self
> That was her song, for she was the maker.  Then we,
> As we beheld her striding there alone,
> Knew that there never was a world for her
> Except the one she sang and, singing, made.

THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME CONFUSSION OF TERMINOLOGY. RELIGION REFERS TO
INSTITUTIONAL PRACTICEES WITH THE BELIEF IN SUPERNATURAL FORCES. SPIRITUAL
CAN REFER TO SKUPERNATURAL BEINGS OR EXPERIENCES. HOWEVER, IT CAN ALSO REFER
TO SECULAR EXPERIENCES OF AN AESTHETIC NATURE. WHAT AFTER ALL IS THE
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SPIRIT AND MATTER? MATERIALISM REQUIRES SPIRIT AS ITS
OTHER. ARE IDEAS MATTERIAL OR SPIRITUAL? WHAT ABOUT ART? I AM REFERING HERE
TO A KIND OF REDUCTIONISM OF MIND OR SPIRIT TO MATTER. I AM NOT TALKING
ABOUT THE "WATCH MAKER OF THE UNIVERSE." I GUESS IT DEPENDS ON BOTH THE
REFERENT OF OUR CONCEPTS AND THEIR INTERTEXTUALITY. WHAT WE HAVE IS A
DISCOURSE, AN ARTICULATION OF MEANINGS. ARE "MEANINGS" MATERIAL OR SPIRIT???
>

WELL, CONSUMERISM HAS BECOME OUR NEW RELIGION. IT IS A MORAL DISCOURSE. THE
SHOPPING MALL HAS REPLACED THE CROSS. "We live in a world where sin is as
real as a shopping mall." George
> ("The Idea of Order at Key West," at
>
<http://www.santafe.edu/~shalizi/Poetry/Stevens/The_Idea_of_Order_at_Key_Wes
t.html>)
> *****
>
>






More information about the Marxism mailing list