From: "bob scheetz" <rscheetz-AT-cboss.com>
Subject: Re: Heidegger in Germany
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 00:03:40 -0500


Michael Eldred writes:

>I don't read Heidegger as talking in the passage in question about certain
>people, social classes, groups, or the like but of an historical necessity
>corresponding to a (metaphysical) way of thinking. The cultivation of race
is
>one way (it does not seem to me to be historically necessary) of
constituting a
>collective subjective embodying the will to power.
>
>The opening sentence in the paragraph from which you quote runs:
>"Conversely, where ideas of race and a reliance (counting) on racial forces
>arises, this must be seen as a sign that the pure power-essencing of being
has
>been set loose by being itself into the abandonment of beings by being."
>
>Power, the will to power has been set loose by being in its abandonment of
>beings and a sign thereof is a counting on racial forces. Heidegger is here
>suggesting a link between the will to power and ideas of race. He is even
>claiming that being itself is responsible for this abandonment.


Michael,
     isn't this (pure power-essencing) a fetishized, bogey, conception of
"racism"?  according to k heiden the h s chamberlain  conception
was a determination of spiritual affinity, a collective subject unified
by enculturation, paideia...compassing  jesus as well as
caesar,  st francis as well as faust ?   why would heid's usage
be the naive rosenberg version, and not chamberlain's, spengler's...
or even holderlin's?

bob



>





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