Darwiniana

History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

How about a consensus (or consensus busting) on 9/11 conspiracies, communist strategies, darwinian ideology, ….

February 27th, 2013 · No Comments

It is worth reading the four posts on consensus at the OWS site (see previous post). But the issue is not so much consensus as the challenges to consensus created by radical initiatives on the left. We aren’t going to get anywhere analyzing consensus ad infinitum. I think the real reason for this discussion is the larger failure of the old left and the breakdown of, if not consensus, then at least the relative popularity of the Second Internationale. That semi-consensus broke down with Stalinism. So the subtext with all these discussions, indeed, with the OWS as such, is the need for a new left on a par with the old initiatives of communism, a term with no solid consensus, even on the left.

My initiative here is to review this legacy and propose a ‘new communism’, along with a new look at historical materialism, Darwinism, scientism, and the whole tradition of marxism. These fields contain the key to a new left, but no longer have consensus value. But that can be changed by reinventing them, denouncing the old left’s failures, and more generally trying to create a democratic communism capable of postcapitalist proposals that appeal to those mesmerized by free markets.

So the trick to consensus is not bland issue promotion all can agree on, but a creative rethinking that begins without consensus, but seeks it as a radical set of proposals.

I find these discussions of the OWS to be of great value, but the net result often looks like a movement that is being ‘handled’ behind the scenes, and neutralized by being steered into this crippled discussions, as here with consensus.
I have spent ten years critiquing Darwinism, archaic marxism, and much else. The lack of consensus requires partisan isolation beyond consensus to beat people over the head, over and over until they snap out of the Darwinian, etc, consensus.
A thankless task.

Footnote: these discussions are of great interest, but they suggest paralysis…
I have asked it many times (and it may be false, off the wall): is the OWS a plant, created by hidden agents with hidden funding? Like the Soros-left CIA concoctions in East Europe. Answer: I don’t know, and the suggestion may be off the wall, but is, without prejudice, a required question for all leftist formations. The establishment must be happy the OWS is going to discuss consensus for the duration.

Tags: General

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment