Archive for July 5, 2020

An Insight about Thomas Ligotti’s Worldview, dating from 2016

Posted in Uncategorized on July 5, 2020 by marksamuels

From an email to a correspondent:

“An interesting conjecture occurred to me a short while ago. It was that all of Ligotti’s philosophy (viz. CATHR) – and his (fairly recent) self-identification as an Anti-Natalist author of didactic fiction – is a philosophical attempt to negate utterly his own devout Catholic upbringing. I don’t mean a purely grisly thing like “Satanism” (which itself is forced to admit the foundational truth of Catholic theology) but that Ligotti’s (perhaps unconscious) ‘conspiracy’ approach at negation invariably posits the complete opposite of all the Catholic essential tenets – conscience and free-will, all human rights depending on the foundational right to life itself, the mystery of redemption etc. etc. Naturally, I am rather hesitant in advancing this idea; because I am scarcely impartial myself for one thing (!!), but, nevertheless, this conjecture seems to fit the case astonishingly neatly. There’s no element of amused indifference here, as with Lovecraft.”

Mark S.

 

 

Ahead of the Curve, Yet Again.

Posted in Uncategorized on July 5, 2020 by marksamuels

“People on the left had accepted wholly the assumption that great personal wealth (when held, for example, by celebrities or entertainers, rather than by bankers or other businessmen, despite both doing so via the same evil of Capitalism) was excusable. What was important was the individual’s adherence to a behavioural code presented – in its most propagandistic form – as simply being “progressive”. The code advanced its boundaries decade through decade, without the populace much noticing save for each new development being itself a sign of “progress”. The basic mode of operation appeared to be centred around values being repositioned from moral bases into ones concerned solely with cultural equality. This was the creed of the proglodytes.

If propositions are framed in terms of an imperative “Equal rights for all” then it was entirely possible to see how only an unexamined agenda could operate under that cover. “Equal rights for all” was a logically inconsistent proposition. It would also entail equal rights (e.g. free expression for all) for those wishing to abolish equal rights (e.g. to abolish free expression). In fact, what it resulted in was the old Orwellian sense that “some are more equal than others.”

Not, of course, that the process hadn’t been going on in the West decades before the 1980s. It first fully gained command of the cultural field twenty years earlier. But the 1960s wasn’t the start of anything revolutionary, it was a dead-end that has lasted (thus far) for fifty years. We are still living, culturally, in the 1960s. The Anti-Establishment is now the Neo-Establishment, who are so locked into the idea of permanent rebellion they can’t bring themselves to see, let alone, admit, the truth.”

From A Pilgrim Stranger, 2017.

Mark S.