J. Peterson says during his interview with J. Rogan that he is against identity politics, but at another point he says that “compelled speech” runs against the Anglo-Saxo/British common law tradition. He admits that legal traditions arise from an ethnos (cf Code Napoleon).
The liberal reading of Nietzsche is that, since we must start from scratch and look towards what hurts or harms us, we should see that classical liberalism does te least harm of any other system by allowing us to pursue projects of reinvention maximally.
-
-
The problem is that the foundations of this system (partly Christian) have been dynamited, which means the liberal Nietzschean is really only offering a pragmatic defence of liberalism, but he cannot do so in public rhetoric since it seems too cold.
Show this thread -
He knows that liberalism cuts across the “wisdom of the body” or any deeper chthonic engagement. But he still thinks that it’s a better place to be than anywhere else, simply for pragmatic reasons. The difficult comes when he has to defend liberalism.
Show this thread -
He cannot offer a sincere Lockean defence of property, nor can really appeal to the God that made liberalism (He dead). So he has to temporise between the “wisdom of the body” (rightist collectivists) and the disembodied abstract (leftist collectivists).
Show this thread -
He has his “little democratic supermen” who start car dealerships or are very good amateur painters, but he cannot allow anyone to go too far...no more Napoleons. And in this he is as democratic as the leftists who oppose him.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.