Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:20:17 -0500
Subject: Re: BHA: Delivered up to the world 


Jan --

I wonder if this is a Eurocentric view:

>occultism is
>at base a vulgar kind of spiritualist/idealist monism, deeply anti-
>ratio and anti-materialism, implying the rejection of both objective
>science and political democracy, and subsequently the whole
>emancipatoric project of Enlightment philosophy; in this sense it
>is both regressive and oppressive, leading to various forms of
>alienation like conformism, defeatism, political apathy and
>ultimately nihilism (i.e."not-being" is the "qualitas occulta"):
>occultism is opium for/of the dummies of (late-)capitalism !

Although Europe certainly has its own occult traditions, at least some
threads of such traditions reflect an encounter of the imperialist west
with a precapitalist other.  Also, I get the impression that in the third
world progressives are much more comfortable to consider themselves at once
communist and voodoun, etc.  I have no doubt there are deeply reactionary
strains of occultism.  They are not hard to find.  I wonder if we always
want to paint with as broad a brush.  Compare, for example, the way
traditional medicine has been so often suppressed by the west.  This was
not Marx's way.  If there is in the old worth preserving, you do it.  Or
imagine taking marxism to indigenous people anywhere without being ready to
make some fine discriminations.

Howard




At 01:22 AM 1/31/01 +0100, you wrote:
>hi Mervyn,
>
>thanks for the excerpt from your paper, sounds very interesting,
>hope it will be published, the issue is worth it !
>
>yes, the phenomenon of occultism stays an attractive topic, not
>only because it's an ur-old phenomenon that's still abundantly
>flourishing today [from stockmarket astrology to web-based
>shamanism] but also because its adherents and practioneers can
>be found throughout all classes (and genders), although i don't
>have a clear idea whether the occult intentions and practices
>vary, or not, criss-cross these strata.
>
>      one of the things that has always fascinated me are those
>      occultist/esoteric sects in and around power-elites: e.g. in
>      modern times, figures as Raspoetin in Tzarian Russia, Himmler
>      and Hess in Nazi Germany, Nancy Reagan, and here in the
>      Netherlands we have a queen-mother (Juliana) with clear and
>      documented interests in the occult and one of her doughters
>      (Irene) contends that she can communicate with trees (sic.)
>
>but whence Adorno's attack on (fear for) occultism ?
>
>his line of critique -as you excerpt nicely summarizes out- is
>quite straight forward and runs roughly as follows: occultism is
>at base a vulgar kind of spiritualist/idealist monism, deeply anti-
>ratio and anti-materialism, implying the rejection of both objective
>science and political democracy, and subsequently the whole
>emancipatoric project of Enlightment philosophy; in this sense it
>is both regressive and oppressive, leading to various forms of
>alienation like conformism, defeatism, political apathy and
>ultimately nihilism (i.e."not-being" is the "qualitas occulta"):
>occultism is opium for/of the dummies of (late-)capitalism !
>
>   [rephrased in DCR-lingo: the ideology of occultism is an
>   irrealist ensemble, producing defencive shields and TINA
>   formations, which in the end blocks off our (individual and
>   collective) awareness and consciousness of a possible
>   Eudaimonia]
>
>--- all in all, the verdict seems clear: occultism is bad and should
>be abolished !
>
>but does this mean that the case is closed now and that this is all
>that could be said ?
>
>- what about the thought-provoking linkings between occultism,
>erotica and art (e.g. in the cave paintings of Lascaux, Hieronymus
>Bosch, Dali and Bataille) ?
>
>- and isn't occultism (in its etymological sense of "kept in hiding")
>a functional and natural response to the panoptical tendencies of
>our modern society with all its reality TV and supersurveillant
>techniques ? [thus occultism and esotericism as a healthy antidote
>against, and escape from, total transparency ? ;-)]
>
>- and from a basic CR perspective: the refutation of uccultism
>is not only a matter of ideology critique a la Adorno, but also,
>and even more so imho, a matter of the concrete scientific study
>of (apparent) occult phenomena and the subsequent explanation,
>or renouncement, of them in/on acceptable scientific terms: i mean,
>to claim f.i. that "astral bodies are nonsense" only makes good
>sense if you can scientifically proof that "astral bodies" are
>*necessary impossible to exist*, and not because the believe in
>them is in some from of regression or alienation: in the end a CRst
>needs hard (empirical & conceptual) evidence !
>
>and yes, you'r right, the soft-social sphere of the novella doesn't
>offer us much, if any, "hard evidence" for that matter .....
>
>yours,
>Jan
>
>
>
>
>
>     --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
>


     --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---