So did Christianity....   I was really talking about Confucius  NOT
Confucianism (sorry)
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Kibler <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, August 27, 1999 8:47 AM
Subject: Re: EP and academics
 
 
> Perhaps I should remind you that Confucianism underwrote both human
oppression, and an entire set of exclusionary principles in China for many a
year. The Confucians prescribed the forms in which a painter could paint.
There were to be no other forms than those prescribed. The Confucians
prescribed the sort of clothes that were to be worn by people of different
occupations. The Confucians outlined a society in which a person, like a
word, could only have one meaning or relation at a time. To use Chad
Hansen's example, here is how something so noble as the Confucian belief in
the need to maintain terms played out:
>      As Confucius notes, a minister in relation to his prince is always a
minister; in relation to his son, he is always a father. Consequence?  if a
man is identified as a thief, then he cannot at the same time be identified
as a human being. Thus to kill a thief is not to kill a human being.
>    jen?
>
> >>> William Stoneking <[log in to unmask]> 08/27 7:31 AM >>>
> Fascism has as one of its guiding tenets the exclusion of certain groups
of
> people...
> who do not belong within the identifiable boundaries (guiding mythologies)
> of the
> group in power (the group which sets the agenda for what is right,
valuable
> and
> worthy of perpetration).... it makes victims of those who are not
identified
> with the
> fatherland... indeed, with Fascism, the myth of of national identity
demands
> an
> exclusionary clause... an us and them mentality is central to this...
i.e.:
> the
> farthest point one can go from a Confucian ethic which upholds the ideal
of
> jen
> (human-heartedness) in all human intercourse. Ironically, to the extent
that
> Pound list members exclude some of their fellows on the basis of academic
vs
> non-academic, published vs non-published.... and to the degree that they
use
> this perception in order to promote their own identity, etc... to this
> degree they
> are fascist.
>
> Stoneking
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Robert Kibler <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, August 27, 1999 8:15 AM
> Subject: Re: EP and academics
>
>
> > No, I certainly would not, and in fact, for years, just the opposite was
> true. I judged the magnicifent ideality of the Soviet Constitution--or the
> communist experiment--by the actuality of Soviet communism. Having lived
in
> China, and having travelled extensively in the Societ Union, I have seen
> first hand the oppression an ideal social program can bring to actual
social
> situations. So when in graduate school, where many students and faculty
> remain fashionably Marxist, I took the position that we should not be
> irresponsibly wielding political ideologies as a literary tool, when they
> have caused so much damage to human beings on the planet. Lit crit should
> not exist or operate in a complete vacuum. Lit crit should not separate
> ideological cause from real time effect.
> >     But you know, I am not as sure now that any social ideology causes
the
> damage--whether it is democratic, national socialist, monarchist, fascist,
> roman catholic, protestant--what have you. All they do is prove--their
> presence proves--that people want to bond together for protection against
> enemies real and imagined. They want to believe in something, be
productive,
> triumphant, and in the right. And they want the rewards that should come
> from right action.  But the ideologies themselves simply become a vehicle
> for those who would drive them. And those who do drive them--they are
nearly
> always the problem. They can take any ideology where they want it to go.
> >      Fascism is no better nor worse than any of the other isms out
there.
> And it has a beauty--a good intention, in ways--and in ways, it even
> resulted in some positive social effects. What did Pound say--he wished
that
> his work would be examined in its parts, and not taken and judged at once,
> as a whole. The Fascist doctrinal texts deserve a read--as does the
> communist manifesto, and the historical records of the See of Peter. And
in
> like manner, we should learn to separate out what is positive from what is
> negative, even from that which seems to have an overwhelming amount of the
> negative to it.  My response that fascism gets a rap is directed against
> wholesale judgements. It is so easy to say 'and yes, fascism,' then roll
our
> eyes and bond in agreement that it was a horrible, despicable nightmare
for
> the world and for people. It may have been that too. But I would suggest
> that we not consider THAT the whole story, that we instead look at the
story
> in its parts.
> >     As society, like academia, moves further and further away from
> condoning or promoting anything like independent thought,  the accepted
use
> of history is as a series of summary, wholistic soundbites. They are,
after
> all, a lot easier to acquire than is a diverse judgement of parts. And
such
> wholistic judgements are becoming the ever more requisite shibboleths to
> social acceptance.
> >    Call it a quirk, but of this I am wary.
> > >>> Daniel Pearlman <[log in to unmask]> 08/26 9:16 PM >>>
> > I'm sure you would not judge the actuality of Soviet communism
> > by the magnificent ideality of the Soviet Constitution.
> >
> > ==Dan
> >
> > At 05:49 PM 8/26/99 -0500, you wrote:
> > >As a utopian vision, Fascism has some merit. Mussollini's manifesto,
for
> > example, promotes some of the same kind of ideas as does Confucius--a
need
> > for order, but within order, flexibility. The need to subordinate the
> > individual to the whole. Some may argue against the merit of this--and I
> am
> > not sure that I like it myself--but it is the same impulse that built us
> > great cathedrals in the middle ages, for example. Like fashion, certain
> > terms, like certain writers, become throw aways--especially in the
> academy.
> >  That is, for years, it was fashionable to condemn Nietzsche, because of
> > the alleged connection between his philosophy and the Nazis. It in fact
> was
> > so easy to condemn him that no one had to read him. Yet there is no Nazi
> in
> > Nietzsche. If anything, he is sort of Buddhist. For years (even now) it
> has
> > been easy to throw away Pound, rather than to read him. How many of you
> > have encountered resistance somewhere along the line when you suggested
> > that you liked Pound? How many people have had difficulty getting
> > professors to teach him? What is his place in the Modernist anthologies?
> > Likewise, there are some darn compelling essays on fascism as a social
> > program.
> > >   And they finally got those swamps drained in Italy, right?
> > >
> > >>>> Joe Brennan <[log in to unmask]> 08/26 5:26 PM >>>
> > >since I'm obviously (I thought) punning, it has several meanings --
> assent,
> > >of course, and also a comment on pound's "political leanings."
> > >
> > >jb....
> > >
> > >In a message dated 8/26/99 3:41:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> > [log in to unmask]
> > >writes:
> > >
> > ><<
> > > i trust this acknowledges your assent, and not a
> > > declaration of political leanings...
> > >
> > > Stoneking
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Joe Brennan <[log in to unmask]>
> > > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > > Sent: Thursday, August 26, 1999 3:05 PM
> > > Subject: Re: EP and academics
> > >
> > >
> > > > or even  right on....
> > > >
> > > > In a message dated 8/26/99 2:53:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> > > > [log in to unmask] writes:
> > > >
> > > > << right.
> > > > >>
> > >
> > HOME:
> > Dan Pearlman
> > 102 Blackstone Blvd. #5
> > Providence, RI 02906
> > Tel.: 401 453-3027
> > email: [log in to unmask]
> > Fax: (253) 681-8518
> > http://www.uri.edu/artsci/english/clf/
> >
> > OFFICE
> > Department of English
> > University of Rhode Island
> > Kingston, RI 02881
> > Tel.: 401 874-4659
> >
>