But the mainstream academic view of Pound is not an endorsement of Social Credit--it's an endorsement of his phenomenal ear and cultural immersion. Nobody is going to pipe up in defense of his usury fixation, hatred of FDR (and, uh, Jews), or agrarian fantasies about America.
-
-
Replying to @jamesamarcus @HeerJeet and
It's more than a little inconvenient for Jeet's argument that Kenner, the one example Jeet had in mind, is not only not teaching but has been dead for 18 years.
3 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @AliceFromQueens @jamesamarcus and
Remarkably Plato, Kant, Heidegger etc. are also dead and still exert an influence in academia.
4 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet @AliceFromQueens and
The notion that Kant is fascist is utterly risible.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @SanchoValstein @AliceFromQueens and
The claim is that Kant was a biological racist. Which is true.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet @SanchoValstein and
You really haven't been near a college in a long time if you think you have a leg to stand on in this argument. You should just withdraw ur absurd claim. As I said, you;'re right about Schmitt and arguably Heidegger. That should be enough to dispute Hanania
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @AliceFromQueens @HeerJeet and
I hasten to add before u inflict more conceptual confusion here that the claim you should withdraw is the claim from earlier in the thread, about Kant being offered as political exemplar. Ofc he was a biological racist but that's peripheral to your argument abt university norms
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AliceFromQueens @HeerJeet and
And for that matter....pic.twitter.com/NwhzcPvw6p
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @jamesamarcus @HeerJeet and
nice grab. it makes Jeet's claim even weaker, which didn't seem possible a moment ago
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @AliceFromQueens @HeerJeet and
The whole paper is here: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4543266 But even if Kant hadn't (at least partly) renounced his earlier position on racial hierarchy, he would be taught in spite of that idiocy, not because of it.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
The question isn't whether he's taught in spite of or because but whether he's taught. I'm all in favor of having racist thinkers taught. If you think Kant is too ambiguous replace with Jefferson or Carlyle. The point is they are taught, rightly so.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.