Categories
Uncategorized

The problem of the bourgeoisie

I watched Terrence Malick’s “Badlands” today, and could not escape the sense that what I was witnessing was, in some measure, the drama of the 20th century.

Not only does he never, as the movie notes state, “judge” the perpetrators of really what amount to stupid crimes, but he seems, through the music and overall tone, almost to admire them, almost to wish to be them, almost to wish he, too, could run amok, and leave this pedestrian, predictable, world behind.

It is worth noting that the most important and emphatic early support the Nazis got was among German students, who were studying at what were at the time the best universities in the world.  Our Ph.D system is based on German models, and as Allan Bloom discusses at length in his magnum opus, much of the angst and confusion we see even today is Germanic in origin.

These students wanted lives of meaning and excitement.  They wanted to reject the bourgeois mindset, and set out upon adventures, upon world conquering, upon great risk and great reward, and this is what Hitler promised them.

The Communists promise no less.  They had to compete for the affection of Germans, and largely lost since the concept of Kultur was deeply favorable to the Nazis.  But the underlying emotional longing is the same.

I do not think it overstating the case to say that much of the idiocy that happens in our universities is an intellectual reaction to an emotional problem, which is the sanitary, safe, predictable nature of the world we have built.  This applies even to the cause of safe spaces, which for the time being are anathema to most traditional Americans, and thus revolutionary.

Anything that pushed the buttons of “ordinary” people must be good, these people reason.  Martin Sheen, obviously, is a paradigmatic Leftist. He also starred in a sympathetic movie about a mass murderer.

The problem, the deep problem, is how to soften the tough, leathery hides of our sensory and emotional perception, how to learn to see the world as beautiful, how to feel kinship with the natural world, how to leave behind complete safety, and to feel the excitement of the wild animal.  Nothing in our educational system teaches this.  Nothing in our churches teaches this. 

So I say again: Kum Nye, in my view, really is the missing piece in Western culture.  I am an enthusiast by nature, and prone to making exaggerated claims.  Perhaps I am here, too.

But I am conversant with the currents of philosophy, have degrees in religion, am widely read in psychology, and watch and interact with people from all walks of life every week.  Nothing better–with the exception of combining it with Neurofeedback–has yet crossed my path.

What makes the tiger feel alive is not the kill, but the heightened sensations which attend it, the need for vigilance, alertness, and following connection with all the senses.

On a related note, I was pondering the other day that calling someone a “lion” is really not a particularly large compliment.  Lions hunt creatures weaker than themselves.  The true animal heroes are the smaller ones, like mongooses, which pick and win more fair fights.

But then I started reading up on the Tibetan notion of this whole thing, and they make an interesting point: as the apex (in most cases, although hippoes and others can sometimes best them in some cases in my understanding) of the food chain, lions are RELAXED.  They are not afraid.  This, indeed, is valuable, which makes the symbol valuable, when interpreted correctly.