20-10-2015, 05:17 PM
I'm not sure, Lauren. But it looks pretty clear to me that corporate America is more than happy for them to run the show at the moment - and this might have something to do with the anti-democratic nature of big business and the fear that other nations are growing and evolving to threaten the American hegemon - and have to be stopped by any means. We can also look at the Rhodes-Milner model that underpinned the Anglo-American sphere for so long, and observe that government was run by a small (actually "tiny" if far more accurate), elite cabal in complete secrecy as far as the public was concerned - so this really isn't a new phenomena, and I suppose you can argue that nothing's really changed; democracy was always a facade. This, I think, has been shown, particularly in the UK, where the public overwhelmingly voted for Harold Wilson and his Labour Party in to power. That eventually resulted in a planned coup that didn't quite come off and ultimately led to a surprise resignation of Wilson, following all sorts of dirty tricks against him. I suppose one might argue that in the US Carter was a similar case in point and the failure of his military to successfully carry out the rescue of US hostages in Iran always seemed to me to be a convenient way of killing his chances for re-election.
Evidently, the British and American elite's 'fling" with proper democracy proved to be a mistake. Hence Thatcher and Reagan and all that has subsequently followed.
Interesting that Drury was sent a stuffed owl by a Straussian. I was reading a quite long essay about Strauss just yesterday that quoted liberally from his writing. In it Strauss referred to Epicurianism as the distraction of the masses. By this he meant that the herd, but not the "philosophers" he regarded himself and a few others to be, followed the school of the Greek philosopher Epicurius and indulged in hedonism. According to the Oxford definition I looked at, the greatest "pleasure" of Epicurianists was/is "freedom from anxiety and mental pain. This fits extremely well with the psycho-drama that is conducted every year at the Bohemian Grove get-togethers that is known as the "Cremation of Care" ceremony. As you probably recall the symbol of the Grove is a giant Owl. So for me the person sending her an owl was being smug and laughing because Straussians consider themselves to be above the normal pleasures, as they are, in their own minds, philosophers and ascetics.
And, of course, in following their fecking awful, brutal, arrogant, cruel, and power-craved ideology, this simply shouts about them that they are compensating for an inferiority complex. Consequently, the one thing they can never actually attain is to be philosophers. They're the shadow of that.
Evidently, the British and American elite's 'fling" with proper democracy proved to be a mistake. Hence Thatcher and Reagan and all that has subsequently followed.
Interesting that Drury was sent a stuffed owl by a Straussian. I was reading a quite long essay about Strauss just yesterday that quoted liberally from his writing. In it Strauss referred to Epicurianism as the distraction of the masses. By this he meant that the herd, but not the "philosophers" he regarded himself and a few others to be, followed the school of the Greek philosopher Epicurius and indulged in hedonism. According to the Oxford definition I looked at, the greatest "pleasure" of Epicurianists was/is "freedom from anxiety and mental pain. This fits extremely well with the psycho-drama that is conducted every year at the Bohemian Grove get-togethers that is known as the "Cremation of Care" ceremony. As you probably recall the symbol of the Grove is a giant Owl. So for me the person sending her an owl was being smug and laughing because Straussians consider themselves to be above the normal pleasures, as they are, in their own minds, philosophers and ascetics.
And, of course, in following their fecking awful, brutal, arrogant, cruel, and power-craved ideology, this simply shouts about them that they are compensating for an inferiority complex. Consequently, the one thing they can never actually attain is to be philosophers. They're the shadow of that.
The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
Carl Jung - Aion (1951). CW 9, Part II: P.14