I'm reminded by your discussion of the paradox of autonomy of something that a friend wrote a number of years ago, that we are moving towards a society that offered "total freedom with total surveillance." Recall the old liberal/progressive cry when dealing with such things as abortion and homosexuality: Keep the government out of my bedroom! Well ironically enough, it could be that your bedroom ends up being the only place where the government isn't.
It's clear that Dostoevsky wrestled with the problem of autonomy, and I'm convinced that the foundational documentation of that struggle is "Notes From Underground." This is more explicitly brought out later in "Demons" by Shigalev: "Starting from unlimited freedom, I arrive at unlimited despotism," and then finally in "The Grand Inquisitor."
There is a correspondence here too with the Italian theologian/philosopher Antonio Rosmini (1797-1855). I've not read him, but I've seen references to him that compare his thought on freedom to that of Dostoevsky.
I had been reading Dostoevsky for years, trying to put these various inclinations of thought together into something workable, when a couple years ago I read Berdyaev's book "Dostoevsky: An Interpretation." I found that somewhat to my surprise, he had done it already! The book contains lengthy discussions of FD's views on man, spirit, freedom, etc. Very much worth reading if you're at all interested in FD, the question of freedom, or both.
Fyi, it is in Del Noce where I first read of the Dostoevsky/Rosmini connection. In 'The Problem of Atheism' he describes how Italian philosopher Pietro Piovani was prompted to study Rosmini after reading Beryaev's book on FD, and then writing his own book on Rosmini which apparently has never been translated into English. Del Noce calls it one of the best philosophical books to have appeared in post-war Italy (title: La Teodicea Sociale del Rosmini).
Another remarkable essay, NS, thank you. When we hosted our first Free Speech in Medicine and Science Conference in 2022, one of the things I noticed about our speakers and attendees (people like Jay Battacharya, Trish Wood and Francis Christian) is that a disproportionate number of them were devout Christians. It seemed that something about their faith allowed them to escape the fear-fuelled groupthink which was characteristic of the whole COVID debacle. It does seem indisputable that the rise of the totalitarian state has gone hand in hand with, as Nietzsche put it, "the death of God." I wrote about this on our Substack recently: https://pairodocs.substack.com/p/in-defence-of-the-christians
A brilliant meditation on the relationship between freedom and paralyzing fear, between passivity and nihilism. Steps toward the re-sacralization of western man, the recovery of our humanity, the courage that is our birthright, and resistance to the bureaucratic nightmares of our times.
Many acute observations and insights that ought to be re-read and pondered. Indeed, I just ordered a copy of Forest Passage so I can read Junger directly. He obviously speaks to the spiritual desolation of modernity and the recovery of courage which Aristotle recognized as the central virtue.
As an aside, it is hard not to note that FDR's "fourth freedom" (1941) "Freedom from Fear," robs man of his courage, thus making him more vulnerable to and dependent on the state and its "experts," and the fear they in turn manipulate.
The section on the inviolability of the home being grounded not in the constitution (by which I assume Junger meant codified law generally rather than any particular constitution) but in the character of the father who inhabits the home was helpful. It resolved for me an irritated restlessness I've been living with since reading your essay about the U.S. constitution.
It's not a matter of choosing between a constitutionally constrained society and one scaffolded merely by the virtue of its members. You weren't saying that a constitution has no power. You were saying that a society's constitutional order only has efficacy because of the bravery, decency and civic commitments of its members. So it's fine to defend the constitution, to argue for integrity and modesty in its application to issues of law - and we should. But the finest constitution and the noblest, wisest jurisprudence are no match for the managerial state waving the banner of safety in front of a people who would rather live as automatons than be subject to, say, the challenge of sorting out truth from falsehood or suffering insults to their feelings.
In short: sound SCOTUS decisions are easy, national character is hard. I do see it now. The man with the axe was the illustration that worked for me.
Ernst Jünger is a great and inspiring model. From his youthful work (“Storm of Steel”) to his mature work (“The Marble Cliffs”) he personifies the highest physical and moral courage. I'm intrigued to read "The Forest Passage". Are you aware of the Jünger Translation Project on Substack? https://open.substack.com/pub/juengertranslationproject/p/maxima-minima-ernst-junger-9a6?
As it happened, the historical circumstances in which he lived made Jünger powerless to avert the disaster of Hitler’s rise to power.
And for us?
We are only one more stolen election away—or possibly another massive false flag event—from finding ourselves at Patrick Henry’s moment of decision:
“The gentlemen may cry ‘Peace, peace’ but there is no peace! The war has actually begun. The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brothers are already in the field! Why stand we here idle?
“What is it that the gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?
“Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”
You are fearful of Dying for Nothing as well as Dying Alone, you Will have nothing to Fear if you Believe in your own Actions and that they will be Remembered.
Is "I agree", too simple? We have three choices it would seem: join the Borg, open rebellion/war, or nurturing the free soul. My route is the 3rd and my haven is in the natural world. I find nutrition, peace, balance and both logic and reason in the symbiotic relationships that make the natural world, work. It requires a willingness to be alone, to listen and learn from ancient wisdom all around. It requires humility and trust, that mankind is meant to be a part of the world, in it, of it, respectful and grateful; not hubristic, controlling and dangerously disdainful. We make ourselves sick and unhappy -- and misery loves company, eh? Join in! Power hates inner strength, serenity.... because it has lost that soul to joy.
One of the few things Aristotle & Plato agreed on was this: only a man who has learned personal self-government, subduing his own private passions and fears to reason, could ever be capable of collective self-government. This is what Adams famous "our constitution is for a moral and religious people" line refers to.
You either conquer your fear it allow it to rule you. And I suspect no one really knows for sure whether they've conquered it until faced with a test of real courage.
I put Junger's book on hold at my library. It sounds like a wonderful read. Thanks.
Thanks so much for this. I'll order The Forest Passage as soon as I post this comment.
By the way - if you want to read stirring accounts of Viking Age Icelanders defending their homes to the death, check out Njal's Saga. My favorite is the episode involving Gunnar of Hlithahrendi.
Great piece. Love footnote #1. 102 is about as transcendent as you can get. Perhaps living a good life can also result in a long life...I would recommend "Diary of a Man in Despair" by Friedrich Reck-Malleczewen. Regards
Bravo... why I subscribe, for this
Fantastic stuff, especially for today.
I read The Forest Passage last month and I'm currently making my way through Eumeswil.
Timely reads. Suspiciously so, in that way life manages.
What a great Independence Day meditation...
I'm reminded by your discussion of the paradox of autonomy of something that a friend wrote a number of years ago, that we are moving towards a society that offered "total freedom with total surveillance." Recall the old liberal/progressive cry when dealing with such things as abortion and homosexuality: Keep the government out of my bedroom! Well ironically enough, it could be that your bedroom ends up being the only place where the government isn't.
It's clear that Dostoevsky wrestled with the problem of autonomy, and I'm convinced that the foundational documentation of that struggle is "Notes From Underground." This is more explicitly brought out later in "Demons" by Shigalev: "Starting from unlimited freedom, I arrive at unlimited despotism," and then finally in "The Grand Inquisitor."
There is a correspondence here too with the Italian theologian/philosopher Antonio Rosmini (1797-1855). I've not read him, but I've seen references to him that compare his thought on freedom to that of Dostoevsky.
I had been reading Dostoevsky for years, trying to put these various inclinations of thought together into something workable, when a couple years ago I read Berdyaev's book "Dostoevsky: An Interpretation." I found that somewhat to my surprise, he had done it already! The book contains lengthy discussions of FD's views on man, spirit, freedom, etc. Very much worth reading if you're at all interested in FD, the question of freedom, or both.
Fyi, it is in Del Noce where I first read of the Dostoevsky/Rosmini connection. In 'The Problem of Atheism' he describes how Italian philosopher Pietro Piovani was prompted to study Rosmini after reading Beryaev's book on FD, and then writing his own book on Rosmini which apparently has never been translated into English. Del Noce calls it one of the best philosophical books to have appeared in post-war Italy (title: La Teodicea Sociale del Rosmini).
Another remarkable essay, NS, thank you. When we hosted our first Free Speech in Medicine and Science Conference in 2022, one of the things I noticed about our speakers and attendees (people like Jay Battacharya, Trish Wood and Francis Christian) is that a disproportionate number of them were devout Christians. It seemed that something about their faith allowed them to escape the fear-fuelled groupthink which was characteristic of the whole COVID debacle. It does seem indisputable that the rise of the totalitarian state has gone hand in hand with, as Nietzsche put it, "the death of God." I wrote about this on our Substack recently: https://pairodocs.substack.com/p/in-defence-of-the-christians
A brilliant meditation on the relationship between freedom and paralyzing fear, between passivity and nihilism. Steps toward the re-sacralization of western man, the recovery of our humanity, the courage that is our birthright, and resistance to the bureaucratic nightmares of our times.
Many acute observations and insights that ought to be re-read and pondered. Indeed, I just ordered a copy of Forest Passage so I can read Junger directly. He obviously speaks to the spiritual desolation of modernity and the recovery of courage which Aristotle recognized as the central virtue.
As an aside, it is hard not to note that FDR's "fourth freedom" (1941) "Freedom from Fear," robs man of his courage, thus making him more vulnerable to and dependent on the state and its "experts," and the fear they in turn manipulate.
Well said, and perfect FDR 'freedom from fear" connection to the essay....
The section on the inviolability of the home being grounded not in the constitution (by which I assume Junger meant codified law generally rather than any particular constitution) but in the character of the father who inhabits the home was helpful. It resolved for me an irritated restlessness I've been living with since reading your essay about the U.S. constitution.
It's not a matter of choosing between a constitutionally constrained society and one scaffolded merely by the virtue of its members. You weren't saying that a constitution has no power. You were saying that a society's constitutional order only has efficacy because of the bravery, decency and civic commitments of its members. So it's fine to defend the constitution, to argue for integrity and modesty in its application to issues of law - and we should. But the finest constitution and the noblest, wisest jurisprudence are no match for the managerial state waving the banner of safety in front of a people who would rather live as automatons than be subject to, say, the challenge of sorting out truth from falsehood or suffering insults to their feelings.
In short: sound SCOTUS decisions are easy, national character is hard. I do see it now. The man with the axe was the illustration that worked for me.
Ernst Jünger is a great and inspiring model. From his youthful work (“Storm of Steel”) to his mature work (“The Marble Cliffs”) he personifies the highest physical and moral courage. I'm intrigued to read "The Forest Passage". Are you aware of the Jünger Translation Project on Substack? https://open.substack.com/pub/juengertranslationproject/p/maxima-minima-ernst-junger-9a6?
As it happened, the historical circumstances in which he lived made Jünger powerless to avert the disaster of Hitler’s rise to power.
And for us?
We are only one more stolen election away—or possibly another massive false flag event—from finding ourselves at Patrick Henry’s moment of decision:
“The gentlemen may cry ‘Peace, peace’ but there is no peace! The war has actually begun. The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brothers are already in the field! Why stand we here idle?
“What is it that the gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?
“Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”
You are fearful of Dying for Nothing as well as Dying Alone, you Will have nothing to Fear if you Believe in your own Actions and that they will be Remembered.
It is that simple.
Is "I agree", too simple? We have three choices it would seem: join the Borg, open rebellion/war, or nurturing the free soul. My route is the 3rd and my haven is in the natural world. I find nutrition, peace, balance and both logic and reason in the symbiotic relationships that make the natural world, work. It requires a willingness to be alone, to listen and learn from ancient wisdom all around. It requires humility and trust, that mankind is meant to be a part of the world, in it, of it, respectful and grateful; not hubristic, controlling and dangerously disdainful. We make ourselves sick and unhappy -- and misery loves company, eh? Join in! Power hates inner strength, serenity.... because it has lost that soul to joy.
One of the few things Aristotle & Plato agreed on was this: only a man who has learned personal self-government, subduing his own private passions and fears to reason, could ever be capable of collective self-government. This is what Adams famous "our constitution is for a moral and religious people" line refers to.
You either conquer your fear it allow it to rule you. And I suspect no one really knows for sure whether they've conquered it until faced with a test of real courage.
I put Junger's book on hold at my library. It sounds like a wonderful read. Thanks.
The path forward is a return to the virtues
Fantastic. I think you’re spot on.
Thanks so much for this. I'll order The Forest Passage as soon as I post this comment.
By the way - if you want to read stirring accounts of Viking Age Icelanders defending their homes to the death, check out Njal's Saga. My favorite is the episode involving Gunnar of Hlithahrendi.
Great piece. Love footnote #1. 102 is about as transcendent as you can get. Perhaps living a good life can also result in a long life...I would recommend "Diary of a Man in Despair" by Friedrich Reck-Malleczewen. Regards
Remarkable, thank you!