All posts by Indy

philosophy, politics

>Society’s sickness

2 Comments

>Originally posted November 13, 2007.


On April 17th 2007 I wrote the Tool and Die-post about the Virginia Tech Massacre, a school shooting in the USA. I quote myself:
30+ killed this time. And still people ask the same stupid question: Why does this always happen in the United States of America – the land of the free, the biggest and best democracy in the world?

And now the madness has arrived in good old Europe. Actually, school shootings have happened outside the US of A before, for example in Scotland, Canada, Germany… But let’s take a look at a time line of recent world wide school shootings (there’s even a term for this shit, how disgusting…):
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0777958.html

Since 1996 there’s been over 50 school shootings, most of them in the USA, and since the reasons for these shootings are embedded in the sick society we live in, is it safe to say that USA breeds the sickest society of them all? Maybe so. Over there you have metal detectors at the school door, surveillance cameras, bookbag searches and bar-coded ID badges. Instead of gun control they’re talking about gun rights. Is this what the future holds in its bloody hands for Europe?


Pekka-Eric Auvinen got one thing right, quoted from his Natural Selector’s Manifesto:

Of course there is a final solution too: death of the entire human race. It would solve every problem of humanity. The faster the human race is wiped out from this planet, the better… no one should be left alive. I have no mercy for the scum of earth, the pathetic human race.

So far, so good.
I agree one hundred percent – in theory. But the way he went out together with the people that died is not something I honour at all. Not the least bit. To me the whole thing was just pointless and nothing but a tragedy for those closely related to what happened.

The following text is quoted from Pekka-Erics “Attack Information”-document, which I believe was available on the Internet along with his YouTube-videos long before the actual action began:

—
ATTACK INFORMATION
Event: Jokela High School Massacre.
Targets: Jokelan Lukio (High School Of Jokela), students and faculty, society, humanity, human race.
Date: 11/7/2007.
Attack Type: Mass murder, political terrorism (altough I choosed the school as target, my motives for the attack are political and much much deeper and therefore I don’t want this to be called only as “school shooting”).
Location: Jokela, Tuusula, Finland.
Perpetrator’s name: Pekka-Eric Auvinen (aka NaturalSelector89, Natural Selector, Sturmgeist89 and Sturmgeist). I also use pseydonym Eric von Auffoin internationally.
Weapons: Semi-automatic .22 Sig Sauer Mosquito pistol.
—

Information travels with great speed on the Internet, so I believe quite a lot of folks knew what he was up to. No one seemed to care then. Now there’s a whole different story.
How many thrive on these sickening and sad mass murders – especially during the time it was broadcasted live all over the world – without even reflecting on what’s actually causing these killings and breeding these murderers and their convictions? By browsing the Internet reading various discussions and articles in mass media and alternative forums I’d say there’s a lot of people out there doing just that – thriving on society’s sickness without any reflection whatsoever.
Is this the new ethics? The new moral?


To me it’s quite obvious that Auvinen was a product of a society that once again failed miserably. He was the victim, not the hero.
Weblog Oskorei writes that an intelligent choice for Auvinen would’ve been to engage in politics. I totally agree. I believe in the power of the small man using his mind, spirit and words to make a change. Killing a bunch of people – including yourself – is to surrender to their sickness. “But hey, you think writing a blog and joining a cause on Facebook will make a change?”, I hear you moan. I sure as hell do. I believe in understanding the big picture via alternative media, small scale activism, awareness, resistance and articulating visions. That’s my way of escaping indoctrination. Internet is a great place for this. Use it wisely.

I’d like to end this post by quoting the great mind of Nikanor Teratologen who wrote this as a comment to the Virginia Tech Massacre in Tidningen Kulturen:

Det är förstås möjligt att Cho Seung-Hui hade blivit ”galen”, han var av allt att döma mycket depressiv och kanske led av någon autistisk störning: men är inte också det samhälle han levde i grundläggande sinnesrubbat, ett ormgropskved för utspottandet av gravt störda men smart marknadsanpassade individer? Den sociala struktur, mentalitet och livskultur han desperat men förgäves försökte anpassa sig till är inte frisk och inte människovärdig – civilisationen måste förändras för att händelser likt den på Virginia Tech inte ska äga rum.
…
Det går inte att genom någon sorts överhetskampanjer eller mer omfattande kontroll-, övervaknings-, angivar- och stigmatiseringssystem heltäckande skydda skolor, arbetsplatser, offentliga platser överhuvudtaget mot enskildas planlagda och sedan lössläppta mordiska hämndraseri. Förändringarna måste inledas på individplanet, i människors beteende och attityder mot varandra. Man bör helt enkelt inte kränka och bete sig illa mot andra varelser på jorden. Allt är ett, sammanvävt, förgängligt.
…
Den grandiost sadomasochistiska och Kristusyrande självbilden som tröstande och upplyftande suggererar existensen av en andligt besläktad krets att höra hemma i och betyda något avgörande för har, imaginärt, förintat den invalidiserande känslan av att inte duga, inte räknas, inte vara älskad och inte tillåtas hysa känslor, inte finnas till, – någon kurskamrat har berättat att när studenterna skulle introducera sig själva i klassen genom att skriva sina namn på lappar var Chos reaktion att rita ett stort frågetecken. Fler människor borde kanske försöka förstå det frågetecknets djupare innebörd och ställa sig frågan om inte deras egna liv också är förtvivlat meningslösa frågetecken skrivna i Intet.

movies, philosophy, politics

>Planet Earth and misanthropy

1 Comment

>Originally posted November 01, 2007.


The BBC series Planet Eart is truly amazing. I got it on Blu-ray the other day and wow… 550 minutes of pure brilliance. I’ve seen a lot of these programs before, and the first twenty minutes didn’t quite cut it for me, but then these jaw dropping scenes of fantastic footage, time lapsed stuff and brilliant slow motion sequences began to appear and I was on my knees worshipping.




But since I’m a dystopic kind of guy holding a deep pessisism for the future (which has been nurtured for so many years), I ask you: how can you not be misanthropic after watching this series? How can you not loathe the human race? What better way to save the planet than to end all human life? What better way to end all suffering than to end our profane existence?
We’ve been destroying the earth and ourselves for so long and there is no change up front as far as I see it.






If I could I definitely would.
art, philosophy, politics

>Situationism, Part 2

Leave a comment

>Originally posted September 18, 2007.


Part one of the Situationism series can be found here.
In addition to this you may want to read about Oswald Spengler as well, here (English) and here (Swedish).
—

I take my desires for reality because I believe in the reality of my desires.
(Anonymous graffiti, Paris 1968)

People who talk about revolution and class struggle without referring explicitly to everyday life, without understanding what is subversive about love and what is positive in the refusal of constraints, such people have a corpse in their mouth.
Raoul Vaneigem, The Revolution Of Everyday Life

The situationist movement was at its peak in the late sixties, but kind of folded after the riots and shit that were trendy at the time. Their ideas live on, though. And mind you, I’m not that much into their art – or anti-art – since most of the times it just sucks. It’s their ideas that I like.

Having concluded that the art and culture of bourgeois society was intellectually fucked, doomed to repetition and soulless, meaningless activities, the situationists referred to art as something that truly could change peoples lives and their way of thinking.
Art to them was not just something to feed the senses for a while, making you feel good and momentarily happy. That way of looking at art is shallow. In the eyes and mind of Guy Debord, art was revolution. Art was war. War against the everyday madness, the everyday slaughter of the soul. Most of all, art was real and goddamn important, and the situationists were determined to see through the lies, myths and bullshit that is being thrown at us every single second of our lives.
“It was about the radiation of art into pure existence, into social life, into urbanism, into action and into thinking which was regarded as the important thing”, as stated in the book Situationister i konsten (1966). Art wasn’t supposed to be a useless medium.


So what do you get when you mix art with politics?
Street art, of course. It’s available for free for everyone to see, and the creator is most of the times totally anonymous. We cannot judge the art and the message by who the creator is, but rather by what the message constitutes and how it is executed. True art. True politics. No names, no games. Well, names in a way, since there’s usually a tag attached somewhere, but close to nobody knows the person behind the tag, and that’s what’s fascinating about graffiti. It’s the deed and action that counts, not who’s done it.
No gods, no masters.

Must erase…all signs of…life by Hop Louie
Banksy at the separation wall in Israel/Palestina

Banksy at the separation wall in Israel/Palestina

Art of Destruction Sweden (AODS)

However, street art to me is not about reclaiming the streets. Well, it is in a way, but since Reclaim The Streets today seem to equal mindless destruction executed by degenerated fuck ups with nothing better to do, I strongly reject that kind of “reclaiming”. And I bet most of the serious situationists of the 60’s would’ve done so too. Such behaviour is nothing but fake and I spit blood on their useless corpses.

The moment of revolt is childhood rediscovered, time put to everyone’s use, the dissolution of the market and the beginning of generalised self-management.
The long revolution is creating small federated microsocieties, true guerilla cells practising and fighting for this self-management. Effective radicality authorises all variations and guarantees every freedom. That’s why the Situationists don’t confront the world with: “Here’s your ideal organisation, on your knees!” They simply show by fighting for themselves and with the clearest awareness of this fight, why people really fight each other and why they must acquire an awareness of the battle.
Raoul Vaneigem, The Revolution Of Everyday Life
Mindless scribbling on walls is not about reclaiming the streets,
it’s about mindless scribbling on walls.

On a sidenote:
Scribbling is for children (and adults!), and we should strongly encourage them here. Marvin Bartel has written an essay entitled “Working with children who scribble on walls” here. You should read it! And when reading, try to relate to graffiti…


Debord et al argued that the great Spectacle, the world’s greatest soap opera, is so influental that not only does it superficially bomb us with commercials, but it possesses such power that it shapes almost all human life (this Spectacle being a small ruling minority dominating the masses, forcing the individual only to consume and participate in society as an alienated, passive idiot).

In this consumer’s society, everything is always “getting better and better”. There’s no end to perfection. Just think about it; how will Gillette’s razor blades look in a year or two? Like a rocket ready to be sent into outer space? It seems like they’re inventing a new revolutionary shaving system every year.


When will this madness end? Not until we say so. And that’s where the passive idiot thing enters the scene. The Spectacle is by no means a dialogue. It is in fact the exact opposite – a monologue, talking to itself, about itself. And as we all know, opposition (for example, in the form of street art) is not looked upon with keen eyes. This artificial “evolution” of Gillette’s shaving systems is a lethal blow to our own evolution. We’re trapped and cannot evolve at all. The situationists labelled this forced existence “a colonization of our everyday lives”.

In a future post I’ll probably write something about the situationist critique against urbanism, which in some ways touches upon what Spengler had to say about cities and such.

philosophy, politics

>Situationism, Part 1

Leave a comment

>Originally posted August 13, 2007.


Looking at political critique today, the usual opinion is that it’s an attack against the state, and debating sacred subjects is looked upon as something suspicious, odd and even dangerous. In my sinister and pure way of looking at things, it definitely should be dangerous! I love it when independent thinking is considered a threat, for to combat blindness and stupidity one has to think for himself.
Independent thinking all comes down to one thing: trying to understand your situation.

Irreverence, blasphemous thoughts, depriving something of its sacred character… That’s disgusting! You should go to work, consume and obey, and that’s it. Shut up. Do not speak your mind. Preferably, do not think at all. Because if you do, you might want to change things. And change is dangerous!

Shallow thinking means you’re subject to lies – or for the sake of it, let’s just call it “illusions”. Sounds less… dangerous.
I’m talking about everyday illusions, like meaningless “any friend of yours is a friend of mine”-clichés, or commercials, where happiness is the latest mobile phone. They soothe your mind. They are there so you won’t have to think for yourself, because if you did chances are you might go berserk with a loaded gun.


There’s an old saying:
“When faced with two options, choose the third”, meaning you should look for new perspectives instead of having to choose between two forced options.

We live in a world so dominated by consumer goods that even our social relations are “commodified”. We relate to others through cars, stereos, mass-produced music, TV shows and vacation packages.


Guy Debord and the situationists had some great ideas, mainly regarding consumer society and the human condition therein.

“The situationists see modern consumer society as a society of the spectacle where our selves are absorbed into the mass entertainments provided by film, TV, music, advertising, and consumer goods. The spectacle breeds isolation, and alienates us from meaningful work, play and communities. We are caught up in false choices between spectacles in a society which offers us spectacular abundance, yet at the same time separates us from each other and from active resistance to the cultural alienation this society represents.”

But then again, commercials and buying stuff can be damn fun! I’m a big fat sucker for records, books, movies and everything Adidas, but still; some awareness might be good if you want to make a change.
Independent thinking is revolutionary thinking.

The great band Counterblast put it this way in their song Independence:
There’s no point in life, but a big point in living.

politics

>Political tests

1 Comment

>Originally posted September 02, 2007.

Ny Moral, along with bloggers Dan Eriksson, Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum, Becqon, Fas and Robsten, was encouraged by Oskorei to take some political tests. Read about Oskorei’s results here, and about some of his views here and here (Swedish only).
Oskorei… A very interesting character, indeed.

I took the tests, but first some disclaimers:

I tend to think too much sometimes, and that’s exactly what happens when I do these tests. They come off very stiff and are simply not made for my kind of mind. Some are very confusing. Some I cannot even answer properly because I don’t have enough knowledge, facts and/or understanding (for example, my knowledge about political economics is pretty slim…), or sometimes I may have chosen the “wrong” answer because I may have misunderstood the question. Also, these tests seem to be made for Americans.
And let’s face it, some questions are just plain stupid.

However, the tests may reveal some mindbending information about the moral and political stance that you may not know you had inside. They may help you understand why you think what you think, and since independent thinking is about trying to understand your situation everybody should give it a serious try.
Don’t take the results too serious though…

For your information:
I consider party politics to be extremely one dimensional, and thus not very creative or useful. The left and right bullshit told by those in power has lost its true meaning (and power) a long time ago. That way of defining political views is by no means applicable to the world and the societies we live in today.

Now let’s get on with the tests.

—

Political compass
This test is introduced with the following words:
The old one-dimensional categories of ‘right’ and ‘left’, established for the seating arrangement of the French National Assembly of 1789, are overly simplistic for today’s complex political landscape. For example, who are the ‘conservatives’ in today’s Russia? Are they the unreconstructed Stalinists, or the reformers who have adopted the right-wing views of conservatives like Margaret Thatcher ? On the standard left-right scale, how do you distinguish leftists like Stalin and Gandhi? It’s not sufficient to say that Stalin was simply more left than Gandhi. There are fundamental political differences between them that the old categories on their own can’t explain. Similarly, we generally describe social reactionaries as ‘right-wingers’, yet that leaves left-wing reactionaries like Robert Mugabe and Pol Pot off the hook.

My results:

Economic Left/Right: -7.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.77

Moral politics
This test explains why you think what you think by mapping your personal moral system. Moral views are the major factors that influence political opinions. Every political stance can be explained by one’s moral position on the inner value of human beings and their role in society.

My results:

You scored -7 on the Moral Order axis and 1.5 on the Moral Rules axis.

The following items best match your score:
1. System: Socialism
2. Variation: Moral Socialism
3. Ideologies: Activism, Libertarian Socialism
4. US Parties: Green Party
5. Presidents: Jimmy Carter (85.18%)
6. 2004 Election Candidates: Ralph Nader (95.06%), John Kerry (76.51%), George W. Bush (39.69%)

PoliticsForum Quiz 2.0

My results:

Overall, the PoliticsForum quiz considers you a small-government, internationalist, protectionist, non-absolutist, kind of person.
These characteristics would put you in the overall category of social conservative protectionist. Your natural home at PoliticsForum would be the Conservatism area.

You scored 50 out of 100 on a scale of Individual vs Social. This means that politically you are neither more nor less likely to value the need for group actions and group benefit over individual enterprise and benefit.

You scored 55 out of 100 on a scale of Theist vs Materialist. This means that politically you are neither more nor less likely to believe that religion and spirituality are superstitions that should not inform political debate.

You scored 72 out of 100 on a scale of Big Government vs Small Government. This means that politically you are more likely to believe that government should keep out of legislating social policies, leaving such decisions to individuals.

You scored 61 out of 100 on a scale of Nationalist vs Internationalist. This means that politically you are more likely to favour international bodies over national ones.

You scored 36 out of 100 on a scale of Protectionist vs Free Trader. This means that politically you are less likely to favour free trade over protectionist policies.

You scored 65 out of 100 on a scale of Absolutist vs Non Absolutist. This means that politically you are less likely to believe that there is an absolute truth that may guide your ideological beliefs.

You scored 40 out of 100 on a scale of Controlled Market vs Liberal Market. This means that politically you are neither more nor less likely to believe that there is need for government regulation of industry.

You scored 50 out of 100 on a scale of Marxist vs Non-Marxist. This means that politically you are neither more nor less likely to follow the philosophies of Marx.

—

Phew! Interesting stuff. I’ll leave you without commenting any further and let you draw your own conclusions about my political stance and moral views, if you’re at all interested…

music

>The Reverend is dead!

Leave a comment

>Originally posted August 19, 2007.



Reverend Bizarre – III: So Long Suckers (2CD) Spikefarm Records

As much as this is a true revelation of doom, it is also the final death gasp spraying blood all over the doomed world, for this is the end of the almighty Reverend Bizarre – in my opinion the very best classic doom band ever. This is where the diabolatry of Black Sabbath, Pentagram, Saint Vitus and Witchfinder General all come together. And what a glorious ending! What a manifest of pure magick brilliance! This is meant to be worshipped now and forever, and I’m down on my knees already.

Christs may come and Christs may go, but Caesar is forever!

I was a bit disappointed with the II: Crush The Insects-album (2005). Too rockish, too childish, not enough war, not enough suffering, not enough natural selection… Not enough doom.
When discovering this unholy trinity that is Reverend Bizarre I was almost lost for words. In The Rectory of The Bizarre Reverend (2002) still stands out as one of the most amazing doom records ever to have graced my stereo with its presence. This was the ultimate doom. And then came the one hour long Harbinger of Metal EP (2003). Now that was the ultimate doom. Until now.

The light heavy weight metal on II: Crush The Insects is now forgotten (not the doom tracks on it, though…). I’m not saying it’s a bad album, but compared to what the Reverend is capable of, it sure was unsatisfactory.
However, listening to III: So Long Suckers (the title alone is just mindbending in its undoominess and fuck offy attitude!) for the first time I was immeditately hypnotized.
“So many great riffs, so little time…” – is that what they thought when finishing this album? It’s filled to the brim with beautiful, dark and ultra-heavy riffing, genius bass lines, masterful drumming that really comes alive, and the majestic vocals we’ve gotten used to, proclaiming the lyrics that are always somewhat reminiscent of the mighty Count Raven.
The song writing is jaw dropping (the two opening anthems are over 25 minutes long – each! – but still stunningly mesmerizing and purely magickal) and the production is by far their best ever – heavy, dark and crystal clear at the same time.


I’ll let the music, lyrics and artwork speak for themselves, but whatever you do: if you’re into classic doom – do not miss out on this masterpiece! This is 130 minutes of pure doom and socio-religious warfare. All hail Monsieur Earl of Void, Sir Albert Witchfinder and Father Peter Vicar!

However, if you’re one of those stressed out individuals with no patience, then this is not for you. Doom never was. You need time and patience, some calm space and an open mind. Only then will you be able to start quiet riots and rituals of doom and destruction…

I’ll close this review with the opening words of the opening track They Used Dark Forces/Teutonic Witch:

You say that I am evil, but you don’t know where I have been
If you could see some of those places, I bet you would be worse than me






philosophy, politics

>Här finns inget varaktigt och allmängiltigt

Leave a comment

>Originally posted July 24, 2007.


I wrote an essay for the Swedish paper Tidningen Kulturen and it was published today. It’s about Spengler again (more about him here), but this time in Swedish. I named it “Här finns inget varaktigt och allmängiltigt – kulturens förfall, enligt Oswald Spengler”.
By coincidence, Dagens Nyheter published an article by Mikael Löfgren today entitled “Vad ska vi ha kulturen till?“. Read that one as well.

But for now, here’s the essay. Enjoy.
Photos shot by me, myself and I in July 2007.
Skanstullsbron, Stockholm.

—

Här finns inget varaktigt och allmängiltigt
Kulturens förfall, enligt Oswald Spengler

Finns det plats för den fria anden i dagens samhälle?
Vårt rotlösa irrande på jakt efter uppmärksamhet, status och bekräftelse – och kanske framför allt jakten på tid för att hinna med jakten (!) – ger svaret nej. Själva tror vi kanske att vi är det bästa som historien kunnat frambringa – en produkt som formats, alltjämt till det bättre, sedan evolutionens begynnelse. För en utomstående torde det västerländska levernet dock te sig allt annat än intelligent.
Och det är vår intelligens som kommer att föra oss ner i avgrunden.

Så trodde Oswald Spengler (1880-1936). Han levde i den tyska turbulenta tid som föranledde politisk, ekonomisk och själslig katastrof, och han var förmodligen väl medveten om vad som stundade. I sitt mest kända verk, Der Untergang des Abendlandes (1918-1922), Västerlandets undergång, utgiven i två volymer, menar han att vi i dag befinner oss i en tid där kulturen – mänsklighetens egenvärde – är på väg att dö ut.

Spengler verkade som filosof och bemöttes kanske just därför med frän kritik från etablerade historiker för sitt nästintill mystiska och måhända flummiga sätt att skildra världshistorien.
Han kritiserade å sin sida historikerna för att de inte ”på allvar studerade övriga civilisationer”, undgick att se parallellerna och det återkommande cykliska, och i stället fokuserade alltför mycket på nutiden och det egenupplevda.

Spengler menade nämligen att det traditionella linjära sättet att se på historien åskådliggör den västerländska egoismen; som vore den västerländska människan ett praktexemplar av all tidigare mänsklig verkan, som om nuläget är det bästa möjliga. Att betrakta mänskligheten som en enda lång utveckling från lågt till högt är dömt att misslyckas. Han skriver:

”Det som fattas hos den västerländska tänkaren och som inte borde fattas hos just honom, är insikten om den historiskt relativa karaktären i hans resultat, som i själva verket är uttryck för en speciell, unik tillvaro. Han borde förstå att det finns nödvändiga gränser för resultatens giltighet och att hans ”eviga sanningar” och ”ovedersägliga insikter” är sanna för honom och hans aspekt på världen. Det borde vara en plikt för honom att söka efter andra insikter, som människor i andra kulturer utvecklat med samma grad av visshet. En framtida filosofi borde ha en sådan fullständighet. Först då skulle man förstå historiens formspråk, den levande världen. Här finns inget varaktigt och allmängiltigt. Allmängiltighet är felslutet att mitt också gäller för andra.”

Spengler uppmanade alltså läsarna att upptäcka och utforska bortom sig själva. Han jämförde själv vilt mellan olika kulturer genom världshistorien för att påvisa likheter och bevisa sina teser.

Enligt Spengler finns det blott åtta högkulturer som stått för den kulturella evolutionen: den babylonska, egyptiska, kinesiska, indiska, mexikanska (Mayakulturen och Aztekerriket), grekisk-romerska, arabiska och västerländska (europeisk-amerikanska). Var och en av dessa högkulturer har bidragit till utvecklingen, och alla har varit lika värdefulla.
Tydlig gemensam nämnare för att styrka Spenglers tes om de åtta högkulturerna: de varar alla i omkring tusen år och följer samma evigt återkommande organiska livscykel. De rymmer således både födsel, blomstring, förfall och död. Det finns ännu inga undantag.

Spengler använde sig av årstiderna för att förtydliga sina resonemang.
Våren innebär kulturens nedkomst. Här formas religionen (bakom varje högkultur finns en värdefull, mentalt samlad religion) och de grundläggande principerna.
Sommaren är kulturens höjdpunkt. Har skapas bestående verk, väsentliga tankar föds och frodas och storslagna prestationer utförs.
Hösten betyder början till slutet. Kulturell förbistring, omfattande katastrofer, massiva människoomflyttningar och oförmågan att kommunicera bidrar till att vintern nalkas. Den fria, intelligenta tanken har resulterat i ateism, ett tänkesätt som försvinner i sinom tid, och i samband med städernas och civilisationens död sker en återgång till den ursprungliga religionen och släktskapet med naturen. Våren kommer alltid igen.
Spengler ser alltså en övergång mellan kulturen och civilisationen. För oss i väst skedde detta någon gång under 1800-talet.
Civilisationen representerar makt, pengar, irreligiositet, en koncentration av intelligensen till staden. Spengler skriver:

”Vad är morgondagens civiliserade politik i motsats till gårdagens kultiverade?”

Och det gäller inte enbart politiken. Även moralen, konsten, kunskapen, vetenskapen och känslolivet har drabbats av civilisationen. Konsten handlar om mode. Vetenskapen finner inga självklara svar. Politiken styrs av pengar. Kulturell förvirring råder. Det är den verkliga början till det verkliga slutet.
Civilisationen är en kulturs oundvikliga öde, då ingenting angår ”folket”. Den så kallade ”demokratin” styrs från städerna av en själlös människomassa, som till skillnad från den kultiverade människan riktar all energi utåt, uppåt, mot något evigt – något som följaktligen är ouppnåeligt. Självförintelse pågår.
De stora städerna utgör spiken i kistan för civilisationen.

Låt oss ta det från början:
Kulturen uppstår på landet. Bonden brukar sin jord – sin jord – och upprättar en själslig, andlig relation till den. Hembygden blir oerhört viktig, något att dö för, då det är det eget skapade som brukas. Bondens hus är ”bofasthetens stora symbol”, ty det har vuxit fram ur den egna marken.
Stadsmentaliteten representeras av en gruppsjäl. ”Det är inte storleken som skiljer staden från byn, utan existensen av en mentalitet”. De civiliserade jättestäderna föraktar bondens själsliga rötter och tar avstånd från lantlivet. I staden talas ett språk som endast talar till ögat och som till slut blir oförståeligt för bonden. Det finns nu två liv: ett utanför staden och ett innanför. Bysmeden lär ha mer gemensamt med bysmeden i andra länder och kulturer än med stadssmeden några kilometer bort.
Denna stadsbildning och distansering är en förutsättning för varje kultur. Alla stora kulturer har nämligen varit stadskulturer.
De tidiga byarna har samma sorts närhet till jorden. De följer landskapsbilden med kullar, ängar och vattendrag. De lantliga småstäderna bekräftar landsbygden, låter pyramiderna och katedralerna växa ur marken. Storstäderna vill vara något annat, något mäktigare. De trotsar naturen, förnekar den. De strävar uppåt och utåt, absorberar landskapet och kräver sitt utrymme i form av breda huvudvägar i stället för slingriga landsvägar, parker i stället för skogar och fontäner i stället för källor och så vidare. Det är konstgjort och själlöst. Stadsmänniskan blir därefter. Den har höjt sig över bondebefolkningen och dikterar nu reglerna. ”Antikens forum och den västerländska pressen är i hög grad andliga maktmedel för den härskande staden”. Stadsmänniskorna, som föraktar hela sin kulturs moderslandskap, bor nu i en världsstad som inte längre behöver hävda sig mot landsbygden. De är lika beroende av penningtänkandet som bonden förr var beroende av jorden. Imperialismen är slutepokens givna symbol.


Men det hemska slutar inte där. Spengler talar även om avfolkningen. Staden befolkas av intelligenta människor, och han menar att det är intelligenserna i varje kultur som utgör de ”sista” människorna. Han talar om den civiliserade människans ofruktsamhet:

”Storstädernas sista människor vill inte leva längre, möjligen kanske som enskilda individer, men inte som typ, som massa; där slocknar rädslan för döden. Det som fyller den äkta bonden med en djup och oförklarlig ångest, tanken på familjens och namnets utdöende, har förlorat sin mening. … Barnen uteblir, inte bara för att de blivit överflödiga, utan för att den skärpta intelligensen inte hittar några skäl för dess existens.”

Och det som är bundet till ”stenen och intellektet” går sakta men säkert under.
Spengler skriver emellertid, krasst konstaterande men ändå hoppfullt, att:

”Bonden är den eviga människan, oavhängig all kultur som tagit plats i städerna. Han finns före den, han överlever den, sturigt avlande nya släktled, inskränkande sig till jordbundna sysselsättningar och färdigheter, med en mystisk själ och ett torrt, till det praktiska bundet förstånd, basen för och den ständigt flytande källan till det blod som skapar världshistoria i städerna.”

Kjell Ahlinge, radioveteran med programmet Eldorado i P2 som ständig ledsagare, fick nyligen frågan ”Är kulturvärlden väldigt trångsynt egentligen?” av riotbrain.se. Hans svar löd:
– Det är mycket roligare att prata med frisörer och snickare än med dem som kommit långt i kulturvärlden.
Och det är så långt vi har kommit. Vi bevittnar kulturens dödsryckningar.
Här finns inget varaktigt och allmängiltigt.

Mattias Indy Pettersson

—

Published in Tidningen Kulturen #22/2007, July 24th