Liberal totalitarianism: the repressive mechanisms of modern Western society and their critical analysis of the foreign philosophy of the twentieth century

RR Vahitov, Ph.D., Bashkir State University, Ufa

Part 1. "Another West" Western intellectuals against capitalism

In liberal circles of contemporary Russian intelligentsia taken to perceive the West as an ideal of social organization, and the same people that are very, very skeptical about the efforts of Soviet propaganda to create an idyllic picture of life in the USSR, with remarkable naivete believe in liberal propaganda stamps, although in fact already elementary common sense says that it is hardly possible in the whole self-promotion of a trust company, in whatever form it may be expressed — whether the speech of politicians or organized tourist activities.

I must say that it is unconditional and radical Westernization of our liberals like anecdotal desire to be "holier than the Pope himself," because at the same West relation to arguments about "freedom of capitalist society" and "the virtues of the Western way of life" of intellectuals are often very, very critical.

Of course, this is not about unambiguously politically engaged intellectuals such as political strategist Zbigniew Brzezinski, who are actively working on the introduction into the life of a certain political ideas as part of the organizations funded by the state, by no means, is meant critically thinking, opposition intellectuals who stand apart from the biased state "politics", generously paid for by foundations, and who seek to analyze the various aspects of life in Western society do not start from those ideological eulogies that are pouring out of the mouth of officious politicians. Their "specific gravity" in "intellectual mosaic" of the West is very, very significant.

Without the concepts of non-conformist thinking philosophers such as Herbert Marcuse, Theodor Adorno, Jean-Paul Sartre, Louis Althusser, Roland Barthes, Jacques Lacan, Jacques Derrida, Julia Kristeva, Jean Baudrillard, Slavoj Zizek, Rene Guenon, Julius Evola, Carl Schmidt, Ernst Junger, Alain de Benoist, it is impossible to imagine modern foreign idea. But this is only the "tip of the iceberg" — philosophers, which is semi-official, academic tradition of the West, both because of their significance, and because of the half-hearted, trade-missnogo nature of their protest, and there is the underwater part of the iceberg — "irreconcilable nonconformists" theorists extreme form of protest, the leaders of the movement "the sixties" and the small underground groups (Guy Debord, Tony Negro, Ulrike Meinhof, Claudio Mutti, Hakim Bey, etc.).

They all profess different political and philosophical views — ideal if one is a communist society, where there will be full equality of men and unmounted all repressive mechanisms, including those that are now sanctified authority of culture, others see the purpose of its mission in the reconstruction of a traditional society where all aspects of life are subordinated to religious perception of the world — but they all share a recognition of the abnormal character of capitalist society, where the market has become all-pervasive, all turned into a commodity — the people, the ideas, the national interests, the whole of the country and where the propaganda pressure on society has reached astounding dimensions, but it got hidden implicit form. The most deeply the phenomenon of "soft, liberal totalitarianism" is studied in the so-called "new left" — the generation of foreign thinkers seeking to push the boundaries of the classical "left" due to the synthesis of the humanistic content of Marxism with other latest philosophical trends — psychoanalysis, structuralism, existentialism (which By the way, is in itself evidence of the creative potency and depth of Marxism, which in no way limited to vulgar Stalinist dialectical materialism and historical materialism, is believed to post-Soviet newly minted anti-communists who judge of Marxism to the extent of their ignorance).

"New Left" was opened, the mechanism of action of capitalist ideology, so that even their eternal opponents — Western neo-conservatives, traditionalists, without sharing their positive ideals, appreciate the critical part of their teachings and their use developments. Also, importantly, the "new left" are the successors to the tradition of humanism, originating in the European Enlightenment, therefore, their critique of liberalism and liberal society there is criticism from within and is essentially a samodekonstruktsiyu liberal discourse, to use the terminology of Derrida.

Liberalism proclaims the values of human rights and freedoms, and the emancipation of society from the state, equality before the law, the rationalization of public life, "new left" a show that liberal society itself does not correspond to the values proclaimed by him and unwittingly likened to those societies that are at the level of liberal officialdom are the most severe criticism. We will not be at the same time wondering why this is happening? — Because the answer would be linked to the analysis of the crisis itself metaparadigmy Enlightenment proclaimed ideals of progress, rationalism, individualism, egalitarianism, and thereby make a clean break with the mental universe of traditional society. Discussion of this is possible only in a separate, large work, but here we set a much more modest goal — to break the spell "samovoskhvalyayuschego monologue" of modern capitalism by those who knew and studied it from the inside.


Like this post? Please share to your friends: