The Open Society and It's Enemies
A long time ago I wrote a review of Karl Poppers liberal manifesto, the Open Society and It's Enemies. Though I am now convinced that Popper was wrong about communism and marxism I believe that he was more or less right about the Soviet Union (in that respect, I suppose that I must align myself with the Trotskyists).
One of the main things that I have come to believe is that analytical philosophy is as much propagandist as it is a school searching for truth. Popper was, as Feyerabend so well remarked, more ideologue than philosopher. The same holds in general true of Russell, Ayer and Nozick. The ideology is distributed through a series of biting, if usually sarcastic, remarks concerning whatever opponent of the school of analytical philosophy that is targeted. Christians, continental philosophers, sociologists and marxists are typically assaulted in this fashion. Absurd connections are made between Nazism and Communism, stale dogmas of philosophers past are regurgitated and comments and remarks that have little in common with the text as a whole are thrown in for best effect. Contempt for different schools thought is distributed in textbook after textbook and article after article.
I believe this might have been more or less a refreshing, even revolutionary tactic that helped to clear out the philosophical rubbish - once upon a time, anyway. Witness Russell's battles against Christianity and British Hegelians. Through a sharp mind, formal logic and a lot of wit he managed to win the day. Popper did much the same, but with a lot less British sarcasm and a lot more fire and brimstone. In many ways, Popper lay the foundations of many liberal critiques: the idea of a utopia creates fanatics, a closed society that controls everything through a powerful state essentially hampers and hamstrings democracy, etc.
But what has happened to that legacy, that still had at least a little intellectual integrity? It has become not just an empty dogma, repeated endlessly and idiotically by entire cores of journalists, teachers and petty philosophers. It has, by the irony of history (that Popper himself hated so much) become the problem of the liberal states today. What is happening with the much-lauded open society? Walls around Europe, in America, in Israel. Anti-terror laws are used against political and cultural dissidents in Denmark. The "war on terrorism" has killed more people than the terrorists ever could, and in the process it has unleashed a reactionary-fascist wave across the world. Where are the liberals when the basic rights of freedom and privacy are being threatened?
Perhaps there should be a part three to the Open Society and It's Enemies: Capitalism. Much like the corporativism that was practiced in Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany and various collaborator states, massive corporations and a political-economical elite is leading the onslaught against what Rawls calls the freedom of the peoples.
It's time to remember Immanuel Wallersteins book: the Death of Liberalism. Capitalist corporations always struggle for a monopoly, which wrecks the entire concept of the 'free' market. Where are the liberals of today? At the barricades, defending national sovereignity, freedom of speech and tolerance? Hardly. The liberal legions are either as much hypocrits as John Stuart Mill was and locked into a battle with an enemy that doesn't exist ("Islamofascism" indeed) or they are defeated and made passive. Neolibs and other market fundamentalists seem to have long since won the day.
No, there is but one resistance in the battle for the open society. Then, as now, socialists are forced - not by our kind hearts, but because our commitment to the working class - to defend liberal principles of the state.
One of the main things that I have come to believe is that analytical philosophy is as much propagandist as it is a school searching for truth. Popper was, as Feyerabend so well remarked, more ideologue than philosopher. The same holds in general true of Russell, Ayer and Nozick. The ideology is distributed through a series of biting, if usually sarcastic, remarks concerning whatever opponent of the school of analytical philosophy that is targeted. Christians, continental philosophers, sociologists and marxists are typically assaulted in this fashion. Absurd connections are made between Nazism and Communism, stale dogmas of philosophers past are regurgitated and comments and remarks that have little in common with the text as a whole are thrown in for best effect. Contempt for different schools thought is distributed in textbook after textbook and article after article.
I believe this might have been more or less a refreshing, even revolutionary tactic that helped to clear out the philosophical rubbish - once upon a time, anyway. Witness Russell's battles against Christianity and British Hegelians. Through a sharp mind, formal logic and a lot of wit he managed to win the day. Popper did much the same, but with a lot less British sarcasm and a lot more fire and brimstone. In many ways, Popper lay the foundations of many liberal critiques: the idea of a utopia creates fanatics, a closed society that controls everything through a powerful state essentially hampers and hamstrings democracy, etc.
But what has happened to that legacy, that still had at least a little intellectual integrity? It has become not just an empty dogma, repeated endlessly and idiotically by entire cores of journalists, teachers and petty philosophers. It has, by the irony of history (that Popper himself hated so much) become the problem of the liberal states today. What is happening with the much-lauded open society? Walls around Europe, in America, in Israel. Anti-terror laws are used against political and cultural dissidents in Denmark. The "war on terrorism" has killed more people than the terrorists ever could, and in the process it has unleashed a reactionary-fascist wave across the world. Where are the liberals when the basic rights of freedom and privacy are being threatened?
Perhaps there should be a part three to the Open Society and It's Enemies: Capitalism. Much like the corporativism that was practiced in Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany and various collaborator states, massive corporations and a political-economical elite is leading the onslaught against what Rawls calls the freedom of the peoples.
It's time to remember Immanuel Wallersteins book: the Death of Liberalism. Capitalist corporations always struggle for a monopoly, which wrecks the entire concept of the 'free' market. Where are the liberals of today? At the barricades, defending national sovereignity, freedom of speech and tolerance? Hardly. The liberal legions are either as much hypocrits as John Stuart Mill was and locked into a battle with an enemy that doesn't exist ("Islamofascism" indeed) or they are defeated and made passive. Neolibs and other market fundamentalists seem to have long since won the day.
No, there is but one resistance in the battle for the open society. Then, as now, socialists are forced - not by our kind hearts, but because our commitment to the working class - to defend liberal principles of the state.
Labels: Ideology, Karl Popper, philosophy, the open society
posted by Björn at 9:15 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home