Instead of pray and let God to do things, Pound did move forward (and this
is why he is GREAT). I mean, the Confucius.

Hongguang Bi

----- Original Message -----
From: "charles moyer" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 3:54 PM
Subject: Re: Pound & Politics


>     Beautifully done, Tom. I feel exactly the same way about Pound, and I
> would expect there are others who share a similar honest interest and fair
> assessment. Furthermore, you demonstrate that over the years you have
become
> truly familiar with the man and his works. This is one of the best
postings
> I have seen on this list. It is one which was worth waiting for.
>     Have you any thoughts about Pound's association with Mencken, and how
> relevant both these loveable curmudgeons are to today's "boobism"?
>
> Charles
>
> ----------
> >From: Tom White <[log in to unmask]>
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> >Subject: Pound & Politics
> >Date: Mon, Jan 20, 2003, 10:59 PM
> >
>
> > Tom W. NJ
> > I'll bite. I'm in so sense a scholar, rather, like you, just a reader of
> > Pound. Off and on, since 1950. Don't think the Cantos have ever been
issued
> > WITH notes (and I hope they never are), but there are great books
explaining
> > the "village explainer," easily found in the bibliographies. Hope you
are a
> > subscriber to Paideuma.
> >
> > To cut to the political question. It is all really about the money
system.
> > Pound had become convinced the money system was a devilish racket. He
never
> > wavered from this view, elaborated since by disciple Eustace Mullins and
> > others, and very much the opinion of the Austrian school of Economics
and of
> > its leading American intellectual light, the late Murray N. Rothbard.
The
> > jury on this is in: the system IS a devilish racket, but we are stuck
with
> > it until it somehow transits to some other system. God's own guess as to
the
> > how and when of that.
> >
> > The Jewish question. Pound angrily pushed (he was not a saint) the
routine
> > European distaste for the "alien" to the absurd degree visible in his
Rome
> > radio talks, but in a calmer moment he said race prejudice is a sign of
> > intellectual defeat. He didn't hate Jews as people, or so I think, but
he
> > hated the "Semitic" mind or ethos, which scholars tell me is on view in
the
> > Talmud and of course is derivable from some of the morally dimmer
passages
> > in the OT. He caste it up against the "Mediterranean" ethos, the Greek
gods
> > if you will. He told an Italian nun who asked if he was a religious man
that
> > he believed in the Greek gods, to which she answered (as I recall), "E
tutti
> > religione," which I trust means "It's all religion."
> >
> > The curious thing is how it doth appear the world is now at last
catching up
> > with Pound. What he was objecting to was the left, socialist, atheist
ethos
> > of non-observant or apostate Jews (which was oddly the mirror image of
the
> > money worshiping Jews, à la Rothschild), what one writer, talking of the
> > Russian Rev. of 1917, has lately called "Lenin's willing executioners,"
> > mimicking the accusation by a Jewish writer that Germans and especially
> > German Catholics were Hitler's. But among the things now being revealed
is
> > the extent to which the "big" and "Zionist" Jews themselves did not
exert
> > maximum effort (this is the mild statement) to rescue their fellows in
> > Europe. We are not at the end of revelations on this. Accusations are
now
> > being made by dissident Israeli intellectuals that the largely clueless
> > European Jews were deliberately sacrificed by the Zionist "organizing
> > brains," to gain international clout as super-victims, the very clout
that
> > Finkelstein (http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/) has now exposed as
heavily
> > fraudulent.
> >
> > None of this is to excuse Pound's faults, but the thing is more
complicated
> > than most people are willing to see. The Net is opening it all up, and
> > nothing is finished yet. Pound will continue to be execrated by the same
> > people who think America should police the globe, take on the Arabs
> > wholesale, and contain China and Russia and North Korea and all the rest
of
> > the Johnny-pop-ups. Belligerent idiocy seems to be the distinguishing
> > characteristic of our Maximum Leaders.
> >
> > Enough. I've let myself be a bit carried away. You can't talk about
Pound
> > with the average American school graduate. But there are a lot of people
> > around who agree with you on his poetry, and a lot, though fewer, who
agree
> > that his hatred of the money system and the big money people (Jews
figuring
> > prominently but not solely in the roster< say, "Rockefeller") was as
> > justified as any hatred can be, which, speaking in Christian-Catholic
terms,
> > is never as to people but always as to "structures of sin."
> >
> > I think Pound was horribly wrong in thinking the "State," the "Muss," or
> > anyone else of that ilk, could bring money and/or cultural salvation.
But
> > his case presents a mile-high obstacle to the long-run continuation of
the
> > present system. I believe as Alfred North Whitehead wrote, that
ultimately
> > poets are the rulers of the world. Of course it remains to be seen if we
get
> > by the current threat to the human race and are ever able again to
settle
> > down to the study of letters and the practice of creative peace, that
is,
> > return to questions of truth and beauty. Let us pray. Tom White
> >
> >> From: Tom Walsh <[log in to unmask]>
> >> Reply-To: - Ezra Pound discussion list of the University of Maine
> >> <[log in to unmask]>
> >> Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 21:19:48 -0500
> >> To: [log in to unmask]
> >> Subject: Intro
> >>
> >> Listserver,
> >>
> >> Thanks for this opportunity to share thoughts and discussions with
> >> experts in Pound. I hope I've used the correct email address. Although
> >> I've been a programmer for 25 years, for some reason, I've always had
> >> problems with listservs, and their complexity (at least what I perceive
> >> to be complexity!)
> >>
> >> I know what follows is redundant. I know you've all probably read this
> >> series of statements more than several times. As a background, I've
read
> >> Pound since college, and have always had the same problem. Whenever a
> >> member of the previous generation spots the name "Pound", they, more or
> >> less, call me a traitor to America. I know about Pound's background,
how
> >> he sided with Italy and its regime, how he broadcasted political
> >> messages, both anti-Semite and anti-Allies, and how he was arrested,
> >> tried as insane, apologized and was locked away, where he worked on the
> >> last part of the Cantos. The fact that his work won a post-War award
> >> must have shocked the world. However, it doesn't shock me. His lines
> >> remain brilliant.
> >>
> >> But, a true artist should be regarded as devoid of his past, as the
> >> Revisionists said, right? My mind's heart always stops when I read his
> >> powerful lines, dripping in myths, supported by ancient names and
> >> languages, bringing English to an airy arena, with literary splendor.
> >> His poetry is untouchable, striking, fresh, and always refreshing in
its
> >> use of tones and words. And, of course, I haven't touched on who he
> >> influenced, which is every poet since his time.
> >>
> >> Can the list advise on the dichotomy between his politics and his
> >> poetry? Also, I'm currently trying to locate one book, which contains
> >> both the Cantos and annotations to the Cantos. Do you have any
> >> suggestions?
> >>
> >> Thanks, again, for this opportunity to address you.
> >> Tom NJ