Ethical Implosion

Michael Moore: "Bush lied to the American people"
Bill O'Reilly: "It's not a lie if you believe it to be true"
The O'Reilly Factor: FOXNews, July 27, 2004

Wow - the greatest irony in modern philosophy, spelled out in no uncertain terms for a mainstream audience. Who are the ultimate relativists? Who are the greatest deconstructionists of truth?

The irony is obvious, in that the greatest moral upholders of truth will always be the ones that utterly destroy the universal nature of truth, by holding truth to be the foundation underlying their individual legitimacy to power. Who are the ultimate relativists?

Neoliberal Neoclassical economics? Hmm, the thought of the 'unique', 'free' individual under these terms sets the spine shivering. How could a mathematical agent be modeled as empirically rational, yet still retain a unique identity? Millions of algorithms imploding on the generic notion of a self segregated, logically controlled entity. How could one recognize this random millionth person-less construct a self identity? How could one utterly disregard all obvious observances of reality in favour of the abstract model behaviour? Who are the ultimate relativists?

When the hurricane engaged social sciences (World War Two anyone?), who was making the rallying cry? Who are the ultimate relativists?

But of course, the modeling of rational behaviour, to the absolute extreme, was epitomized in the crescendo of the Cold War, where simulation and abstract stimulation of the opponent became the modus operandi of conflict, the shift from historical materiality into abstract reality, the hyper-capitalist turn saw the Berlin Wall fall, and September 11 stall, the symmetry of conflict and confluence in these matters was just astounding...

So nearly fifty years after the end of history (it didn't end in 1989), of matrixes and mayhem, this period of humanity has just been the first installment. From cold wars to burst walls, to total irradiation (information anyone?) it seems that humans have succumbed - fallen in that shadow of state that was encumbered - and what awaits?

"What we call humanism has been used by Marxists, liberals, Nazis, Catholics. This does not mean that we have to get rid of what we call human rights or freedom, but that we can't say that freedom or human rights has to be limited at certain frontiers. For instance, if you asked eighty years ago if feminine virtue was part of universal humanism, everyone would have answered yes. What I am afraid of about humanism is that it presents a certain form of our ethics as a universal model for any kind of freedom. I think that there are more secrets, more possible freedoms, and more inventions in our future than we can imagine in humanism as it is dogmatically represented on every side of the political rainbow: the Left, the Center, the Right." Truth, Power, Self: An Interview with Michel Foucault - October 25th, 1982

I must admit that I have submitted to the fantastical in my reaction to the problem of fascism - digital hyperstition has become a fascinating attraction, so it's probably worth bearing in mind for future readers, that this is not at all rational. It's all about the meaning of what you think is factual.