text:
Tag Archives: liberaltarian
Assuming a Pretzel-Like Shape
Posted on March 29, 2016 by Loquitur Veritatem
Will Wilkinson — of whom I've written many times (e.g., here) — twists his brain into a pretzel-like shape while trying to reconcile libertarianism with what he calls neoclassical liberalism. In essence, Wilkinson and his ideological allies have concocted an after-the-fact justification for the past 80 years of governance in the United States. That is to say, they prefer a fascistic nanny state to a truly libertarian regime, but can't bring themselves to admit it. So they concoct "libertarian" arguments for "positive liberty" and "social justice," which necessarily require the state to shrink the zone of true liberty — negative liberty — until it vanishes.
Posted in Political Movements & Theories	/ Tagged liberaltarian, libertarianism, neoclassical liberalism
Cato, the Kochs, and a Fluke
Posted on March 8, 2012 by Loquitur Veritatem
If you follow the libertarian sector of the blogosphere, as I do, you will have noted the recent dominance of two controversies: the future of Cato Institute and the subsidization of contraceptives. In the matter of Cato, it seems that the Koch brothers want to take control of Cato for the purpose of making it more "relevant" to current political issues, much to the universal dismay of the libertarians commentators whose opinions I have read. In the matter of contraceptives, it seems that the testimony of Sandra Fluke, a Georgetown University law student, has fostered libertarian-conservative agreement in opposition to Ms. Fluke's whining plea for mandated insurance coverage of contraception (e.g., here and here).
I will not bother to recite the history of the controversies, nor will I try to summarize what various writers have said about them. If you are unfamiliar with either or both of them, start here and here, then follow the links therein. My modest aim is to show how the controversies reveal a link between left-libertarianism and the subsidization of contraceptives.
I therefore turn to Will Wilkinson, a former denizen of Cato who has described himself as a "liberaltarian." What is a "liberaltarian"? I refer to myself:
In "More Pseudo-Libertarianism," I say that I must come up with a new name for left-libertarians, inasmuch as they are not really libertarians. Some of them have tried "liberaltarian," an amalgam of (modern) "liberal" and "libertarian." To be a "liberaltarian" (with a straight face), one must believe that leftists are willing to abandon their pursuit of all-encompassing government and join left-libertarians in their pursuit of absolute fairness (by whose standards?) in economic and social outcomes. Leftists seek the latter objective, but will never be persuaded to drop the former one.
All of which suggests that a left-libertarian is really a (witting or unwitting) collaborationist: an intellectual Vichyite or, in the parlance of the 1950s, a fellow traveler or comsymp (communist sympathizer).
Comsymp has a certain ring. Perhaps "libsymp" is what I'm looking for. I'll give it a try.
Anyhow, the libsymp named Will Wilkinson seems to have a (libsymp-related) grievance against Cato, which is evident in his commentary about the Cato-Koch affair; for example:
Suppose Cato, without changing anything at all about its ideological orientation, were to focus more energy on some issues currently of interest to both groups like AFP [Americans for Prosperity] and groups like, say, the ACLU or Amnesty International? I think there's a plausible argument that this would lead Cato to deliver greater libertarian bang for its donors' bucks, while possibly even improving its non-partisan reputation.
Now, I'm not sure I buy this argument. I tend to think that a greater focus on practical political relevance would tend to exert a subtle pressure on Cato's analysts to take it relatively easy on perceived allies when they do and say things harmful to liberty. Indeed, this pressure already exists, and it wouldn't be a good idea to increase it, since it's already biased toward the right. The legacy of right-fusionism has been to desensitize many libertarians to the inherently liberty-limiting aspects of social conservativism, and to reduce many self-described libertarians to acting primarily as cheerleaders for the economic agenda of "free-market" reactionaries….
For folks outside the Beltway, for whom the Cato staff are complete strangers, Cato looks like part of the right, if an odd one. There's a reason David Boaz [Cato's executive VP] is always complaining about newspapers identifying Cato as a "conservative" think tank, and it's not just that David Boaz likes to complain. Just ask yourself how Cato's work could have been more congenial to the GOP during George W. Bush's failed attempt to reform Social Security, or during the failed attempt to block Obamacare? Cato obviously already is in the politically-relevant intellectual ammo business. And in actual large-stakes political fights in Washington, Cato is generally on the Republican side. It would not be strange to spot a Catoite at Grover Norquist's infamous Wednesday morning meetings. Because Cato functions as part of the right.
It's tempting to think that Cato almost never does anything to help the Democrats largely because it's just too far to the left of the Democratic Party on foreign policy and civil liberties. Yet Cato is equally far to the "right" of the Republican Party on economic policy, welfare policy, education policy, and lots more. Social Security privatization is a forced savings program. School vouchers and/or education tax credits are taxpayer-funded education. Lower income-tax rates concede the income tax. Again and again Cato finds a way to settle on non-ideal, "second-best" economic, welfare, and education policies, and argue for them in away that provides "ammo" to the right. But it very rarely develops compromising second-best policies on foreign policy or civil liberties that would be of any practical use to dovish or civil-libertarian Democrats. Why not? Why was coming out in favor of gay marriage more controversial at Cato (the state shouldn't be involved in marriage at all!) than coming out in favor of school vouchers (the state shouldn't be involved in education at all!)? Why not a bigger institutional push for medical marijuana as a second-best, nose-under-the-tent alternative to outright legalization? The fact is that Cato has so deeply internalized the ethos of the venerable right-fusionist alliance that there is almost no hope of it functioning on the whole in a truly non-partisan way. I think its status-quo reputation reflects that.
I reproduced that much of Wilkinson's post just to give you an idea of the depth of his animus toward the Cato of Ed Crane's making. A particular aspect of Wilkinson's "indictment" bears on the thesis of this post. It does not take much reading between the lines to detect Wilkinson's embrace of "positive liberty," which is the antithesis of liberty. He spells it out more explicitly here:
[F]reedom has a number of meanings, and one of them is "ability to do stuff."… Persons, natural or legal, are either coerced or they aren't. Mugged people with fat wallets aren't coerced or wrongly interfered with more than mugged people with thin wallets. They just lose more money. That conservatives and libertarians always ultimately do treat tax increases as losses of freedom suggests to me that they're really proponents of positive liberty after all, but haven't thought the implications through. In that case, they're right to see growth as a matter of freedom. But then they're also are quite wrong to think that a well-functioning welfare state isn't a matter of freedom.
There you have it. Wilkinson — like other left-libertarians — hews to a key tenet of modern "liberalism," which is that people are not really free unless they have a certain measure of economic wherewithal. The taking of income by taxation, in Wilkinson's view, is morally equivalent to a lack of income.
This left-libertarian (and "liberal") view of the world depends on the slippery use of the term "coercion." The taking of something from a person by force or the threat of force is coercion. Taxation is coercion, and resistance to taxation is not a plea for "positive liberty." On the other hand, there is no coercion when a person is "forced" to accept a standard of living that is arbitrarily deemed sub-standard simply because that person does not earn enough "to do stuff," according to the arbiter's standards of what "stuff" a person needs "to do."
There is, in sum, no moral distance between the left-libertarian and "liberal" worldviews, both of which favor "positive liberty." What kind of and how much "positive liberty" should be doled out are merely matters of taste. The likeness of left-libertarianism and "liberalism" reminds me of this famous anecdote:
A man asks a woman if she would be willing to sleep with him if he pays her an exorbitant sum. She replies affirmatively. He then names a paltry amount and asks if she would still be willing to sleep with him for the revised fee. The woman is greatly offended and replies as follows:
She: What kind of woman do you think I am?
He: We've already established that. Now we're just haggling over the price.
Which brings me, at last, to Sandra Fluke, who has established what kind of person she is, and is just haggling over the price.
The Causes of Economic Growth
Positive Rights and Cosmic Justice
A Short Course in Economics
Fascism with a "Friendly" Face
Addendum to a Short Course in Economics
Utilitarianism, "Liberalism," and Omniscience
The Indivisibility of Economic and Social Liberty
Negative Rights
Negative Rights, Social Norms, and the Constitution
The Devolution of American Politics from Wisdom to Opportunism
Rawls Meets Bentham
Enough of "Social Welfare"
A True Flat Tax
The Case of the Purblind Economist
Youthful Wisdom
Taxing the Rich
More about Taxing the Rich
Positive Liberty vs. Liberty
Luck-Egalitarianism and Moral Luck
Nature Is Unfair
Elizabeth Warren Is All Wet
"Occupy Wall Street" and Religion
Merit Goods, Positive Rights, and Cosmic Justice
More about Merit Goods
What Is Bleeding-Heart Libertarianism?
The Morality of Occupying Private Property
In Defense of the 1%
Posted in Culture - Language - The Arts, Political Economy & Civil Society, Political Movements & Theories	/ Tagged Cato Institute, Koch brothers, left-libertarian, liberaltarian, positive liberty, Sandra Fluke
A New Political Label
Posted in Political Movements & Theories	/ Tagged left-libertarian, liberaltarian
If you were a physicist who was writing about Einstein's special theory of relativity, would you bother to list the ways in which non-physicists define the concept? I doubt it.
But at least one of the bloggers at Bleeding Heart Libertarians — a new group blog whose eight contributors (thus far) are professors of law and/or philosophy — advances the proposition that "liberty" means whatever non-philosophers think it means. The contributor in question, Jason Brennan, justifies his preference by saying that liberty "is a concept philosophers are interested in, but it's a not a philosopher's technical term."
That may be so, but I would think that philosophers who are going to use a term that is central to the theme of their blog — the connection of libertarianism to social justice — would begin by searching for a relevant and logically consistent definition of liberty. Brennan, instead, casts a wide net and hauls in a list of seven popular definitions, one of which (negative liberty) has three sub-definitions. That may be a useful starting point, but Brennan leaves it there, thus implying that liberty is whatever anyone thinks it is.
His evident purpose in doing so is to leave the door open to a positive definition of liberty, while dismissing those who maintain that logic demands a negative definition of liberty. Consider Brennan's list, which he calls partial and in which he uses "freedom" for "liberty":
Freedom as Absence of Obstacles: Someone is free to the extent that no obstacles impede her ability to do as she pleases.
[a.] Freedom as Absence of Deliberate Interference: Someone is free to the extent that no one deliberately interferes with her ability to do as she pleases.
[b.] Freedom as Absence of Interference: Someone is free to the extent that no one interferes with her ability to do as she pleases.
[c.] Freedom as Absence of Wrongful Interference: Someone is free to the extent that no one wrongfully interferes with her ability to do as she pleases.
Freedom as Capacity: Someone is free to the extent that she has the power, ability, capacity, or means to do as she pleases.
Freedom as Autonomous Self–Control: Someone is free to the extent that she exhibits sufficient deliberative self-control, such that she is authentically the author of her actions.
Freedom as Non-Domination: A person is free to the extent she is not subject to another person's or group's arbitrary will.
Freedom as Moral Virtue: A person is free to the extent she has the power to recognize and act upon her moral obligations.
Freedom as Absence of Pressure: A person is free to the extent she feels no social pressure to do anything.
Freedom as Absence of Reasons: A person is free to the extent she has no grounds or reasons for making decisions.
And so on. Notice that 1a–1c are just more specific version[s] of 1.
[A person who insists on using the politically correct "she" in place of the traditional and, in truth, gender-neutral "he" is likely to be a person who is driving toward an acceptable answer instead of the right answer.]
I am struck by the fact that none of the definitions offered by Brennan is a good definition of liberty (about which, more below). This suggests to me that Brennan and (possibly) the other contributors to Bleeding Heart Libertarianism will offer views about the connection of libertarianism and social justice that have nothing to do with liberty, but which merely reflect their various visions of preferred socioeconomic arrangements* and the uses (or non-uses) of state power in the attainment thereof. I therefore humbly suggest that the next order of business at Bleeding Heart Libertarianism ought to be a concerted effort to define the concept that is part of the blog's raison d'etre.
To help Brennan & Co. in their quest, I offer the following definition of liberty, which is from the first post at this blog, "On Liberty":
peaceful, willing coexistence and its concomitant: beneficially cooperative behavior
The problem with the definitions listed by Brennan should now be obvious. Those definitions focus on the individual, whereas the relevant definition of liberty is a social one. That is to say, one cannot address social justice and its connection to liberty unless liberty is viewed as a modus vivendi for a group of individuals. There is no such thing as the ability to do as one pleases — the dominant motif of Brennan's list — unless
one lives in complete isolation from others, or
one lives in the company of others who are of identical minds, or
one rules others.
The first condition is irrelevant to the matter of social justice. The second is implausible. The third takes the point of view of a dictator, and omits the point of view of his subjects.
The implausibility of the second condition is critical to a proper understanding of liberty. Brennan says (in "Positive Liberty and Legal Guarantees") that "[w]e often equate freedom with an absence of constraints, impediments, or interference." In a political context (i.e., where two or more persons coexist), there are always constraints on the behavior of at least one person, even in the absence of coercion or force. Coexistence requires compromise because (I daresay) no two humans are alike in their abilities, tastes, and preferences. And compromise necessitates constraints on behavior; that is, compromise means that the parties involved do not do what they would do if they were isolated from each other or of like minds about everything.
In sum, "peaceful, willing coexistence" does not imply "an absence of constraints, impediments, or interference." Rather, it implies that there is necessarily a degree of compromise (voluntary constraint) for the sake of "beneficially cooperative behavior." Even happy marriages are replete with voluntary constraints on behavior, constraints that enable the partners to enjoy the blessings of union.
The specific landscape of liberty — the rights and obligations of individuals with respect to one another — depends on the size and composition of the social group in question. It is there that the question of positive vs. negative liberty (really positive vs. negative rights) takes on importance. I will tackle that question in a future post.
* Sure enough, only a few hours after I posted this, we hear from the newest recruit to Bleeding Heart Libertarianism, Roderick Long (a left-libertarian whom I have addressed before). Long's is a left-libertarian because he is against state power but, at the same time, against outcomes that can occur in the absence of state power:
On the one hand, I'm committed to libertarianism in a fairly standard sense: self-ownership, the non-aggression principle, Lockean homesteading, private property, and free markets. On the other hand, I'm committed to a fairly standard set of traditionally leftist concerns, including opposition to such social evils as worker exploitation, plutocratic privilege, racism, homophobia, gender inequality, militarism, environmental degradation, and the prison-industrial complex. (Call them all "oppression" for short.)
"Worker exploitation" is what happens when workers and employers are free to agree about the terms and conditions of employment, which is good for competent, productive workers and bad for incompetent, unproductive ones (the ones that unions protect). "Plutocratic privilege" is bad only if it is the result of crony capitalism; otherwise, it is merely a case of well-to-do individuals enjoying the fruits of what they have earned. "Racism" is a inescapable aspect of human nature, and it cuts in all directions; typical efforts to compensate for it result in the theft of property rights and the hiring and promotion of less-qualified persons. "Homophobia" is a personal choice, and efforts by the state to squelch it will surely result in the theft of property rights and denial of freedom of speech. "Gender inequality" is mostly a figment of the imagination of leftists who always fail to take into account differences in age, experience, and aptitude when lamenting the fact that women generally earn less than men and are "underrepresented" in certain occupations. "Militarism" is what has kept many a Roderick Long from going to the concentration camps of Nazi Germany and the gulags of Soviet Russia. "Environmental degradation" is vastly overrated, to the point where Americans pay more for a lot of things than they should (oil among them), and is becoming an excuse for prohibitively costly and needless regulations aimed at fighting a myth and scientific fraud: anthropogenic global warming. The "prison-industrial complex" has, in fact, kept violent criminals off the streets and led to a reduction in the rate of violent crimes.
I am surprised that Long doesn't have "universal health care" and "living wage" on his list.
Roderick Long is to libertarianism as Adolf Hitler was to capitalism. Long wants a stateless world, but only if the "free" people in it have "correct" attitudes and beliefs.
Posted in Political Movements & Theories	/ Tagged bleeding heart libertarian, Jason Brennan, liberaltarian, liberty, negative rights, positive liberty, positive rights, Roderick Long
Libertarian Conservative or Conservative Libertarian?
Are they the same thing? No, they are not, as I will try to explain.
A prominent libertarian of my acquaintance once said to me that a libertarian may be a person of conservative mien. His implication was that a libertarian — one who favors (at most) a minimal, night-watchman state — might be conservative in his personal views about, say, the kinds of behavior in which he would engage, even while tolerating behavior, by others, in which he would not engage. A person of such character might be considered a conservative libertarian. Such a libertarian would not, for example, take a homosexual "marriage" partner or abet an abortion, even though he would (in all likelihood) insist that such things should be allowed by the state (as long as the state is in the business of allowing or disallowing such things).
What, then, is a libertarian conservative? Is he, in effect, the "conservative" libertarian of the preceding paragraph — unwilling to invoke the power of the state against acts in which he would not engage? Is that all there is to it?
Hardly. I have played fast and loose with the idea of conservatism by portraying it as a kind of prudishness or finickiness. Conservatism, properly understood, is not those things.
But I am getting ahead of myself. Let us begin with libertarianism. It is a "big tent" that accommodates anarchists and minarchists. Minarchists believe that government, being inevitable if not necessary, must be kept within strict bounds. Given the inevitabliity of government, it is better to control it than to be controlled by it. It is therefore better to design an accountable one that can be kept within its bounds (or so minarchists hope) than to suffer an imposed regime, most likely an oppressive one.
Why do minarchists prefer strictly limited government? There are two reasons. The first reason is a desire to be left alone, or more elegantly, a deontological belief in the right to be left alone. The second, consequentalist, reason is that voluntary social and economic transactions yield better results than government-directed ones. Friedrich Hayek makes that argument in his essay, "The Use of Knowledge in Society".
Whether deontological or consequentialist, minarchism holds that the central role of government is to protect citizens from foreign and domestic predators. This protection cannot be absolute, but government's evident ability and willingness to dispense justice and defend the nation are meant, in part, to deter predators.
More generally, the ideal government is restricted to the protection of negative rights. Such rights, as opposed to positive rights, do not involve claims against others; instead, they involve the right to be left alone by others. Negative rights include the right to conduct one's affairs without being killed, maimed, or forced or tricked into doing something against one's will; the right to own property, as against the right of others to abscond with property or claim it as their own; the right to work for a wage and not as a slave to an "owner" who claims the product of one's labor (e.g., a government that does more than protect life, liberty, and property); and the right to move and transact business freely within government's sphere of sovereignty (which can include overseas movements and transactions, given a government strong enough to protect them).
To a minarchist, then, rights are limited to those that can be exercised without requiring something of others (e.g., transfers of income and property). The one necessary exception is the cost of providing a government to ensure the exercise of rights. That cost must be borne, in some arbitrary way, by citizens who, on the one hand, see no need for government (i.e., anarchists) and by citizens who, on the other hand, have differing views about how the cost of protecting rights should be shared.
Does minarchism square with conservatism? It all depends on what one means by conservatism, and on the brand of minarchism one has in mind.
There is, in my view, a "core" conservatism, which Russell Kirk articulates in his "Six Canons of Conservative Thought":
(1) …Political problems, at bottom, are religious and moral problems… (2) Affection for the proliferating variety and mystery of traditional life, as distinguished from the narrowing uniformity and equilitarianism and utilitarian aims of most radical systems. (3) Conviction that civilized society requires orders and classes…. Society longs for leadership…. (4) Persuasion that property and freedom are inseparably connected, and that economic levelling is not economic progress…. (5) Faith in prescription and distrust of "sophisters and calculators." Man must put a control upon his will and his appetite…. Tradition and sound prejudice provide checks upon man's anarchic impulse. (6) Recognition that change and reform are not identical….
Kirk's canons, at first glance, seem orthogonal to minarchism, if not opposed to it. But they are compatible with right-minarchism (as defined here):
1. Political problems are moral problems. A right-minarchist would say that it is immoral to take from others what they have rightly earned what they possess. There are, of course, persons who profess to be religious and yet believe that it is right for government to take from the "rich" and give to the poor (or whatever group happens to find favor with those who control government at a particular time). But a truly conservative view of the matter is found in the Seventh Commandment: You shall not steal. A Christian is exhorted to do good with his income, sharing with others and being as open-handed as possible toward employees, while meeting his family's needs and maintaining a viable business. The sharing of one's income and the property that derives from it is a matter of conscience, not a matter for government to decide.
2. Right-minarchism is not in any way a "radical system." The only kind of "equalitarianism" to be found in right-minarchism is the equality of rights, which are the same for all. Right-minarchists reject utilitarianism — the belief in a transcendent welfare function — as nothing more than an excuse for dictatorship in the name of "society". Right-minarchists may even believe that tradition is essential to social cohesion, without which violence and suspicion would displace mutually beneficial coexistence and cooperation.
3. Orders and classes result naturally from spontaneous order,
those 'natural processes' which are not the product of reason or intention. The classic example is the free market economy in which the co-ordination of the aims and purposes of countless actors, who cannot know the aims and purposes of more than a handful of their fellow citizens, is achieved by the mechanism of prices. A change in the price of a commodity is simply a signal which feeds back information into the system enabling actors to 'automatically' produce that spontaneous co-ordination which appears to be the product of an omniscient mind. The repeated crises in dirigiste systems are in essence crises of information since the abolition of the market leaves the central planner bereft of that economic knowledge which is required for harmony. There is no greater example of the hubris of the constructivist than in this failure to envisage order in a natural process (which is not of a directly physical kind). As Hayek says in "Principles of a Liberal Social Order":
Much of the opposition to a system of freedom under general laws arises from the inability to conceive of an effective co-ordination of human activities without deliberate organization by a commanding intelligence. One of the achievements of economic theory has been to explain how such a mutual adjustment of the spontaneous activities of individuals is brought about by the market, provided that there is a known delimitation of the sphere of control of each individual.
Right-minarchism fosters spontaneous order, which benefits not only the form of social behavior known as economic activity but all forms of social behavior. Right-minarchism, in short, enables the cream to rise to the top, as the old (pre-homgenization) saying goes. This is true in the economic sphere, where rewards are in keeping with the value that willing buyers place on the products and services of sellers. It is true, also, in the social sphere, where institutions and persons are honored and respected for the value they add to the lives they touch. There are natural "orders and classes", and they are preferable to the arbitrary ones that are imposed by dirigiste systems.
4. Right-minarchism is founded on the intimate connection of freedom and property. There is no freedom without the right to acquire property, that is, to enjoy the fruits of one's labor. Leveling amounts to theft, and it removes a vital incentive to act in economically and, therefore, socially beneficial ways.
5. Right-minarchists agree that civil order is an essential condition for productive economic and social intercourse. It therefore follows that free civil institutions — family, church, club, and so on — yield traditions that conduce to civil order. Those traditions may evolve with time, but only as their evolution is found to be beneficial.
6. Right-minarchism rules out change for the sake of a politician's perceived need for change. It allows changes only where such change is beneficial to the parties affected by it, and voluntarily accepted by them.
In sum, there is no essential conflict between Kirk's brand of Burkean conservatism and the right-minarchistic branch of libertarianism.
This brings me to Friedrich Hayek — a right-minarchist, in my view — who argued as persuasively as anyone against an intrusive state (though he was not averse to a "social safety net"), but who seemingly rejected conservatism. The famous postscript to Hayek's The Constitution of Liberty is called "Why I Am Not a Conservative". In the following excerpts, Hayek's use of "liberal" should be understood as a reference to classical liberalism, the anti-statist position which is the antithesis of modern "liberalism" or "progressivism":
Conservatism proper is a legitimate, probably necessary, and certainly widespread attitude of opposition to drastic change. It has, since the French Revolution, for a century and a half played an important role in European politics. Until the rise of socialism its opposite was liberalism. There is nothing corresponding to this conflict in the history of the United States, because what in Europe was called "liberalism" was here the common tradition on which the American polity had been built: thus the defender of the American tradition was a liberal in the European sense. This already existing confusion was made worse by the recent attempt [by William F. Buckley Jr. et al.] to transplant to America the European type of conservatism, which, being alien to the American tradition, has acquired a somewhat odd character….
… [The European type of conservatism] by its very nature … cannot offer an alternative to the direction in which we are moving [i.e., toward socialism]. It may succeed by its resistance to current tendencies in slowing down undesirable developments, but, since it does not indicate another direction, it cannot prevent their continuance. It has, for this reason, invariably been the fate of conservatism to be dragged along a path not of its own choosing. The tug of war between conservatives and progressives can only affect the speed, not the direction, of contemporary developments….
… Before I consider the main points on which the liberal attitude is sharply opposed to the conservative one, I ought to stress that there is much that the liberal might with advantage have learned from the work of some conservative thinkers…. However reactionary in politics such figures as Coleridge, Bonald, De Maistre, Justus Möser, or Donoso Cortès may have been, they did show an understanding of the meaning of spontaneously grown institutions such as language, law, morals, and conventions that anticipated modern scientific approaches and from which the liberals might have profited. But the admiration of the conservatives for free growth generally applies only to the past. They typically lack the courage to welcome the same undesigned change from which new tools of human endeavors will emerge….
This fear of trusting uncontrolled social forces is closely related to two other characteristics of conservatism: its fondness for authority and its lack of understanding of economic forces. Since it distrusts both abstract theories and general principles, it neither understands those spontaneous forces on which a policy of freedom relies nor possesses a basis for formulating principles of policy. Order appears to the conservative as the result of the continuous attention of authority, which, for this purpose, must be allowed to do what is required by the particular circumstances and not be tied to rigid rule. A commitment to principles presupposes an understanding of the general forces by which the efforts of society are co-ordinated, but it is such a theory of society and especially of the economic mechanism that conservatism conspicuously lacks….
[T]he main point … is the characteristic complacency of the conservative toward the action of established authority and his prime concern that this authority be not weakened rather than that its power be kept within bounds. This is difficult to reconcile with the preservation of liberty. In general, it can probably be said that the conservative does not object to coercion or arbitrary power so long as it is used for what he regards as the right purposes. He believes that if government is in the hands of decent men, it ought not to be too much restricted by rigid rules….
Hayek's mentor and colleague, Ludwig von Mises, immediately expressed his agreement with Hayek's rejection of conservatism:
I completely agree with your rejection of conservatism. In his book Up from Liberalism, Buckley — as a person a fine and educated man — has clearly defined his standpoint: "Conservatism is the tacit acknowledgment that all that is finally important in human experience is behind us; that the crucial explorations have been undertaken and that it is given to man to know what are the great truths that emerged from them. Whatever is to come cannot outweigh the importance to man of what has gone before." [p. 154]
I quite agree with Hayek and Mises, to the extent that their target is Buckley and his adherents, in whose "conservatism" I could never find a coherent principle, except the one identified by Mises. Buckley's program, it seems to me, was always one of opposition, expressed so reconditely that it almost defies analysis and refutation. For example, Buckley rightly excoriates the infantile posturing of Murray Rothbard and his anarchistic ilk (here, at "The Right Anarchists"), while at the same time demonstrating the truth of Hayek's charge that "the characteristic complacency of the conservative toward the action of established authority and his prime concern that this authority be not weakened rather than that its power be kept within bounds"; thus Buckley writes:
… The American conservative believes that the state is as often as not [emphasis added] an instrument of mischief as of good….
But no, children, one does not therefore argue against the existence of the state. The conservative harbors the presumption against any growth in state power.
But apparently not a presumption for the reduction of state power.
Returning to Kirk, we find an affirmation of liberty in his essay, "The Best Form of Government", which he penned in the year that Hayek rejected conservatism (as he understood it). Kirk applies the idea of spontaneous order, of which Hayek was a leading exponent. But Kirk's understanding of spontaneous order goes deeper than Hayek's:
Good government is not of uniform design. Order and justice and freedom are found in diverse ways, and any government which intends to shelter the happiness of its people must be founded upon the moral convictions, the cultural inheritance, and the historic experience of that people. Theory divorced from experience is infinitely dangerous, the plaything of the ideologue….
I am saying this: governments are the offspring of religion and morals and philosophy and social experience; governments are not the source of civilization, nor the manufacturers of happiness. As Christianity embraces no especial scheme of politics, so various forms of government are best—under certain circumstances, in certain times and certain nations. And, far from being right to revolt against small imperfections in government, a people are fortunate if their political order maintains a tolerable degree of freedom and justice for the different interests in society. We are not made for perfect things, and if ever we found ourselves under the domination of the perfect government, we would make mincemeat of it, from pure boredom.
Where does that leave the relationship between conservatism and the right-minarchistic branch of libertarianism? It is superficial to proclaim the virtues of individualism and spontaneous order while rejecting the indispensable, civilizing role of tradition. A libertarian who is not also a Burkean conservative is on a par with his ostensible opponent, the rationalist of the left:
How deeply the rationalist disposition of mind has invaded our political thought and practice is illustrated by the extent to which traditions of behaviour have given place to ideologies, the extent to which the politics of destruction and creation have been substituted for the politics of repair, the consciously planned and deliberately executed being considered (for that reason) better than what has grown up and established itself unselfconsciously over a period of time…. This is, perhaps, the main significance of Hayek's Road to Serfdom — not the cogency of his doctrine, but the fact that it is a doctrine. A plan to resist all planning may be better than its opposite, but it belongs to the same style of politics. And only in a society already deeply infected with Rationalism will the conversion of the traditional resources of resistance to the tyranny of Rationalism into a self-conscious ideology be considered a strengthening of those resources. [Michael Oakeshott, "Rationalism in Politics," in Rationalism in Politics and Other Essays, new and expanded edition, pp. 26-7]
What conclusions do I draw from the preceding tour of libertarianism and conservatism? These:
It is entirely possible to be a libertarian conservative, that is, a conservative (of Burkean stripe) who believes that humane values are most likely to survive and thrive under the aegis of a minimal state. This kind of conservative is an adherent of right-minarchism, which is a species of libertarianism. And, in my view, right-minarchism is the only kind of libertarianism that is both coherent and viable.
A libertarian of conservative mien — a so-called conservative libertarian — will favor a minimal state (if any), by definition. But such a person may be "conservative" only in matters of personal taste, and not because he subscribes to the conservatism of Burke and Kirk. He may in fact be in favor of governmental efforts to demolish long-standing social norms. He will give his support to such efforts in the name of liberty and without regard for the true bulwark of liberty: the restraining influence of voluntarily evolved norms of behavior.
In short, a "conservative" libertarian is in all likelihood a left-minarchist. Left-minarchists — who support state action to impose "equality" of various kinds — dismiss (or are ignorant of) the importance of social norms in binding a people together in mutual respect, trust, and forbearance. And it is that bond — far more than the threat of state action — which allows us to go about our daily lives in the peaceful pursuit of happiness.
That said, libertarians (of all stripes) and conservatives ("conservative" yahoos excepted) have a common political enemy: the over-reaching state. Libertarians who are tempted to make cause with "liberals" because they happen to agree with "liberals" about the permissibility of certain kinds of behavior should resist the temptation. There is nothing to be gained from an alliance with "liberals", who will only use libertarian arguments cynically to advance measures that suppress liberty.
And what is liberty? It is not "do as you will as long as you don't harm others". That definition, adapted from John Stuart Mill's oft-invoked "harm principle," is an empty concept unless it rests on a specific, agreed definition of harm. Liberty — the absence of harm — is therefore a social construct. That is to say, liberty is a modus vivendi for a group of individuals. It comes down to this:
peaceful, willing coexistence and its concomitant: beneficially cooperative behavior.
What could be more conservative?
Carson Holloway, "Conservatism and Freedom", Public Discourse, November 8, 2013
Jonathan Neumann, "God, Hayek, and the Conceit of Reason", Standpoint, January/February 2014 (This is generally applicable to libertarians, though it misses Hayek's defense of tradition; see this post, for example.)
Claude S. Fischer, "Libertarianism Is Very Strange", Boston Review, January 27, 2014
Glenn Fairman, "Libertarianism and the Public Good", American Thinker, January 29, 2014
Scott Yenor, "The Problem with the 'Simple Principle' of Liberty", Law and Liberty, March 19, 2018
On Liberty
What Is Conservatism?
Line-Drawing and Liberty
Pseudo-Libertarian Sophistry vs. True Libertarianism
The Golden Rule and the State
Government vs. Community
Bounded Liberty: A Thought Experiment
Evolution, Human Nature, and "Natural Rights"
More Pseudo-Libertarianism
More about Conservative Governance
The Golden Rule as Beneficial Learning
Facets of Liberty
Burkean Libertarianism
What Is Libertarianism?
True Libertarianism, One More Time
Human Nature, Liberty, and Rationalism
The Libertarian-Conservative Fusion Is Alive and Well
Why Conservatism Works
Defending Liberty against (Pseudo) Libertarians
The Pseudo-Libertarian Temperament
Modern Liberalism as Wishful Thinking
Romanticizing the State
Governmental Perversity
Libertarianism and the State
"Liberalism" and Personal Responsibility
My View of Libertarianism
More About Social Norms and Liberty
The Authoritarianism of Modern Liberalism, and the Conservative Antidote
Another Look at Political Labels
Individualism, Society, and Liberty
Social Justice vs. Liberty
Economically Liberal, Socially Conservative
The Harm Principle Revisited: Mill Conflates Society and State
Liberty and Social Norms Re-examined
Natural Law, Natural Rights, and the Real World
Natural Law and Natural Rights Revisited
Rescuing Conservatism
Disposition and Ideology
Posted in Political Movements & Theories	/ Tagged anarchist, Burkean conservatism, conservative, conservative libertarian, liberaltarian, libertarian, libertarian conservative, minarchist, statist


Where there is smoke, there is fire and pop star Ellie Goulding has added fuel to the flame that she is singing the new James Bond theme song for the upcoming Spectre.
In a photo shared on her Instagram page, the Burn hitmaker can be seen walking down the steps outside London's renowned Abbey Road Studios where the 007 soundtracks are often recorded.
Speculation suggests that producers will announce the identity of the theme song's performer at some point in August.
Coincidentally, Goulding revealed in the image caption that she has finished recording, writing: "That's a wrap," potentially just in time for the announcement.
Earlier in July, the Outside singer first hinted at the soundtrack when she simply tweeted "live and let die", which is the title of the 1973 Bond film.
Spurring on the rumours was Stay With Me crooner Sam Smith, who ruled himself off the list of theme song contenders but admitted he had heard tales of Goulding's involvement.
The Grammy-winner told radio station Capital FM: "People seem to think I'm doing it but I have no idea what's going on."
"I'm being deadly serious. I think I would know by now. I heard Ellie Goulding was going to do it, it's definitely not me."
In December 2014, British singer Ed Sheeran also addressed speculation that he had been chosen for the yet-to-be-revealed song, claiming that his vocal abilities were not up to scratch for Bond.
The Thinking Out Loud singer told The Independent: "I am a James Bond fan but I think the theme tune should be ballsy and I feel like if I was going to do it, it would sound a bit wet.
"The Hobbit song ["I See Fire"] was perfect for me to do as it's folky and guitar-driven – a hairy short man should be singing that kind of song!"
He added: "I'd love to but I just wasn't born with the James Bond voice. You never know, I'm not ruling it out, maybe in ten years time when my balls drop."
Goulding, 28, is no stranger to recording soundtracks. In February 2015, her single Love Me Like You Do, which featured on the Fifty Shades Of Grey soundtrack, became the most streamed song in one week worldwide, clocking up 15,468,762.
Spectre, which stars Daniel Craig, Christoph Waltz, Ralph Fiennes and Monica Bellucci, is set for release on 6 November 2015.


text:
Q: Emacs Style "artist-mode" for Eclipse? Is there anything that resembles Emacs' artist mode available for Eclipse?

A: Not in as such.  But that demo almost makes me want to switch from vim!  Almost.
In the meantime, you can get some of that functionality in Eclipse from FIGLet

A: You can try Markus Gebhard's JavE.

Not really Eclipse, but...
..at least it is standalone java-application, so should be easy to copy-paste...

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


I am constantly in awe. I think of the cells that come together and the microcosm inside of me that exists in a constant hum – life buzzing to make up this body…and then recognizing my own being as a microcosm, a part of something larger, something infinite: a collective. And I, in my entirety, am simply a humming element as well.
The science feeds the romance.
And a co-mingling occurs as my curiosity and adoration leads me to a place were evidence and intuition hold merit.
It is a constant play between the seeking and the knowing, the wonder and the being, the calculations and the mystery. I have a deep respect for different perspectives when it comes to birth. In this intimate space where culture, science, and spirituality often play together and influence the care received by its participants (mainly mother and baby), there are so many variables to consider…and we are not stagnant objects. In the space that is birth, which seems to me to be most miraculous and yet most normal, dichotomies evaporate. Intellect and intuition converse in a dialogue without the need for power struggle.
For me it is so easy to get caught up in the equation and the critique. Like learning a secret code, there is this feeling of importance. I am transformed into a know-it-all five-year-old stuck on her small perspective, because I can wrap my hands around it –and possess it in a way. But then I am reminded in a gentle (and sometimes not so gentle) way that the more I know, the less I know.
Even our interventions as care providers are sometimes arbitrarily executed, cloaked in science, but in fact are not scientifically rooted by best evidence. If we intervene in the name of science, I believe best evidence should support our actions.
And so I continue to read, attend conferences, and listen. My goal is to support women in the best way I know how…mostly by just recognizing in them the strength they have at their most powerful and most vulnerable state of being.
My name is Angeline Shiley. I am a nurse specializing in childbirth and women's care. I've been trained as a birth doula and childbirth educator.


text:
HYDE's debut: "evergreen"
by Leanne on December 16, 2005 · 11 comments ·
Release Date: 2001.10.17
Peak Position: #1
Label: HAUNTED RECORDS \ Ki/oon \ SONY Records
Product Code: KSCL-411
First Press: 3″ (8cm) CD with picture label housed in a coffin shaped jewel case (Product Code#: KSDL-1223)
HYDE Official Web Site
In 2000, much to fans' surprise, L'Arc~en~Ciel announced that they were going to be on a brief hiatus. Future plans for the band were unsure, but the members knew what they wanted to do individually. hyde was the last of the members to release solo material, and his can be considered as the most experimental of the group. In October of 2001 he released his debut single as HYDE titled "evergreen". No doubt many fans of the band were surprised at the direction HYDE had chosen for his solo project. His singing style was gentler and his whole presentation became more relaxed and calm, and he even took to wearing simple loose clothing and suits. Let's see how the (then) new HYDE fairs.
1. evergreen
"evergreen" is beautiful in its simplicity musically, as well as lyrically: the lyrics seem to be calling to a loved one who had just passed. Unlike the rock tunes of L'Arc~en~Ciel, this song features instruments such as the harp, piano, and saxophone melding together with drums, percussion, and acoustic guitar to create a very pleasant and sweet melody. HYDE's voice is extremely soft in this song, but his emotion is apparent nevertheless. I think one of the highlights of the song is during the chorus when HYDE splits the word "scenery" in the line "This scenery is evergreen" with a breath in between the syllables: it gives the chorus a distinct personality. Those who are fans of more dramatic ballads will probably not take a liking to this song, but if you are able to appreciate the song for what it is, you will realize it as a rare gem among most popular music these days.
Extra: The PV is also very simple. The ending kinda caught me off guard, though. See some screenshots here.
2. evergreen -english ensemble-
The c/w track has a completely different arrangement and composition than "evergreen" — not to mention the song is entirely in English. The first two seconds or so, the cellos sound directly from the theme song of "The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask", but it quickly becomes its own song. Unlike "evergreen", the english ensemble relies mostly on the piano and violin. Because of the instruments involved, one might think this was a more dramatic version of the title song, however, I beg to differ. This version seems to lack something that the original had put together so well. Compared to the myriad of instruments that complemented each other beautifully in "evergreen", this version seems almost empty. While this version of the song may be a tad bit slower, I think that the original is more dramatic: from the wonderful melody to HYDE's gentle cooing. Although the english ensemble is beautiful in itself, it lacks what made the original beautiful in the first place. HYDE's english is not bad, and he has better pronunciation than most Japanese acts, but it almost sounds as if he has a lisp when he's singing.
Conclusion: I think this was a strong debut single from HYDE. It gave fans a completely different view of him that they were never able to see in L'Arc~en~Ciel. In the band, everyone works together, and while hyde writes most of the lyrics, they all compose, co-produce, and arrange the music together; therefore individual creativity and effort is shadowed by the success of the band as a whole. With this single, it was all HYDE without the input of any of the band members. He had the freedom to go in his own direction, and while I suspect it must have been a bit weird for him at first, I'm sure that he was happy for the experience and the complete creative control he had over his work. With this single, HYDE showed his fans that he could create catchy rock music as well as create a soothing and calming piece with more traditional classical instruments. And he's definitely succeeded!
HYDE's Season Calls Him "SEASON'S CALL" is HYDE's fourth #1 single, and it's also the first time he's had two #1 singles in a row! What's interesting to note is that the song is actually composed by KAZ (ex-Oblivion Dust, ex-Spin Aqua). So how does HYDE and KAZ fare together? Let's see.........
COUNTDOWN: are you in? After only reuniting with L'Arc~en~Ciel for two years, HYDE returns to us with "COUNTDOWN" a hard rock number being used as the Japanese theme song to the movie "STEALTH" (staring Jamie Foxx) and lyrics crying out for peace. 13.12.11.10.9.8.7.6.5.4.3.2.1, Let's review!......
Just have a little FAITH HYDE of L'Arc~en~Ciel releases his third solo album "FAITH", doing an incredible amount of research to make this album a reality. This album is heavy on Christian religious symbolism and imagery but still has HYDE's edge. His lyrics follow suit with "MASQUERADE" of his previous album ,"666", questioning God/god's intention. Now, let's see how this album fairs with his angel and devil albums before it. ......
GLAMOROUS SKY Yazawa Ai's masterpiece manga "NANA" has been gaining a lot of attention this year: first with its very own tribute album, a dedicated café, and now a movie starring Nakashima Mika herself as the rocker-chick Oosaki Nana. To play with the "realism" of the movie a single has been released entitled "GLAMOROUS SKY" under the psuedonym "NANA starring MIKA NAKASHIMA". Staying true to the style of Yazawa's character, the single contains four rock tracks, the title track being composed by the famous rocker HYDE himself.........
flashback to "heavenly" The album "heavenly" by L'Arc~en~Ciel is oft abandoned by new fans. It doesn't maintain the importance that "Tierra" had as their debut, nor is it distinguished as being a million seller as with the band's first #1 junior effort "True". It's the middle child of the sakura-era albums that's lacking much needed attention and needs to be recognized. Let's see how this much forgotten album fares.........
Tagged as: Debut, HYDE, J-Rock, No.1, Reviews, Single, Sony
Sunday Blog Roundup: Marketing Hinochi, Year-End Awards, and Otsuka Ai's Love » Ray Mescallado Archives
anne June 6, 2008 at 10:16 am
Thise single is very beautiful i loved Hydes cover of carless whisper and hes a good singer but the ever green video im not keen on his image he looks very ill in it its the bleached white hair i like him golden blonde but his hair is too bleached out hear i know he probely spent a lot of painfull hours getting it bleached white like that but the hair spoils the video i felt it distracted me away from his singing but i still love him
toOw May 10, 2008 at 12:04 pm
HYDE never come to my country (Indonesia) . Hi HYDEIST!!! I'm with you all!~
jzong vue April 13, 2008 at 12:51 pm
i know that this song is kinda old but it is still good. i could listen to this song forever and also "THE CAPE OF STORMS".
DC February 23, 2008 at 8:10 pm
I have this friend who is utterly obsessed with Hyde and Gackt Camui. It would be most appreciated if perhaps someone could send me a link of Hyde and Gackt as vampire in their movie Moonchild. Thanks! -DC
Chain February 21, 2007 at 6:33 pm
It's quite funny that i came looking for Orange Range's Kizuna but found this….Evergreen has always been my favorite song, to say also the best ballad from Hyde in my opinion. To me, evergreen itself symbolizes everlasting youth and hope, i found the same kind of resonance from this song…
Adnil Ecnerolf May 29, 2006 at 6:41 am
The song totally rocks but i prefer the song Hello b'coz it's more edgier.Hyde,pls reply back okay.You're the best!!!
Lesca January 17, 2006 at 3:46 am
From the first time I listened to L'arc~en~Ciel, I always wondered why Hyde didn't do ballads. He has a voice which would sound good in one.
Contrary to eyn, I wouldn't say L'arc is hard-core Jrock. Just nice, poppy-J-rock XD;;.
But I did love this single. I guess…it was just so…pretty. Pretty indeed ^^
eyn January 13, 2006 at 7:38 pm
Awesome ballad from a rock singer, I love how HYDE can pull out such a soft ballad after all those hardcore J-Rock Laruku's been doing, that's really some talent right there!
His white hair image is kinda striking compare to soft feeling you get from this ballad, a really unmatched combination I would say, but that's probably what makes it special.
I love how harp and saxophone is used in the original version, they really make this song sound soothing and pretty. Great arrangement overall, I wonder if he did all these by himself, because I'll be really amazed if that's the case, seeing he's all into electric guitar and stuff.
The coffin CD case must be really rare, and quite hard to imagine how it will look like in real life. You should definitely take a picture of it and share with other readers here!
shytide December 25, 2005 at 11:44 pm
Hyde does it again; he cannot ever cease to amaze me with his talents. He can go all "hardcore rock," like in "Hello," or become docile and mysterious, such as "Evergreen." Props for the review (:
Lainay December 17, 2005 at 5:07 pm
*claps* Another awesome article, Leanne! Thanks for it! Very nicely done, and the fact that it's about HYDE makes it even more awesome. XD
I heard the Evergreen version from the COUNTDOWN single before I heard this, so I kind of had an idea of how I THOUGHT it would be. But DANG, this is uh..DIFFERENT. Very very different. o.o Very pretty and soothing though, and I nevertheless love it! XD
Previous post: YUI's "LIFE"
Next post: Berryz Koubou
COUNTDOWN: are you in?
Just have a little FAITH
GLAMOROUS SKY
flashback to "heavenly"

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Home›.Tudo›Review – Sic Transit Gloria Mundi | Performative construction of an utopian monument
Review – Sic Transit Gloria Mundi | Performative construction of an utopian monument
Credits – Youtube
By Roberta Ramos
Professor in Dance Undergraduation (UFPE) and in Post-Graduation Program in Visual Arts (UFPE UFPB)
In May (from 17 to 26), the city of Utrecht (The Netherlands) was the space of Spring Festival, which includes dance, theatre, performance, with a vast program that took place in several theatres around town, and also in many other alternative and public spaces.
During ten days this year's festival edition offered a very rich panorama of young and experienced artists, most of them coming from non-hegemonic contexts. Many of their works presented intriguing ways of approaching to issues related to, for instance, what we expect from the future, what our role is when facing a collapsed world in many aspects, how we can imagine living modes of existences such as those that are imposed to the refugees, or even to the subjects that don't live under prescribed normativity patterns.
It is fair to say, then, that most of the works brought a character of political engagement on different levels, and the whole program dipped us into ten inspiring but at the same time enormously provocative days, to think about our actions, relationships, and our ability to deconstruct what is given and is not promising.
Among such instigating works, no less than a memorable event took my breath away every single time I placed myself before it. I am talking about Sic Transit Gloria Mundi, which, during ten days of Spring, was opened for visitation from 2 pm to 10 pm, in Neude, an important historical square of the city of Utrecht.
Before I refer to the nexus and artistic means created by Sic Transit Gloria Mundi, I need to tell about my disappointment, simultaneously to my aesthetic enjoyment in realizing, before the second of the five visits I would make, that I let myself be deceived by the game of the event itself, and therefore, as it was intended, I was not grasping what it actually consisted of.
In the festival's schedule brochure, Sic Transit Gloria Mundi's synopsis announced that, in face of the collapse of Western hegemony and its imperialist power, "In collaboration with the Western Hegemony National Monument Committee and the city of Utrecht", a memorial was about to be erected at Neude Square in 2018, and that Spring would mark the beginning of its construction. In addition to the aforementioned text, billboards throughout the city, light signs at bus stops raised expectations regarding the construction of the monument.
When arriving for the initial visit on the first day of the festival, a siding structure surrounded the whole square, and inside this structure, apparatuses of a building such as cranes, tubes, and so forth, were already seen from outside. On various parts of the siding, there were advertising posters containing the name and photo of the future monument, which consisted of a man tremendously sized lying prone on the floor (dead, tired, drowned, defeated?). And before him was his nameplate (or a tombstone? ): "Sic Transit Gloria Mundi".
Connected to the siding structure surrounding the building, we could enter into a visiting room in a container, from which it was possible to visualize what seemed to be the beginning of the work, through three windows for the construction in progress. We could see from the windows the workers in action, a lot of sand, more equipment, and, finally, an index of the monument that was starting to be erected: a huge hand, being moved from side to side.
What was seen outside the room was complemented by what could be seen inside: on one of the walls, a video mapping, in which we could glimpse in 3 dimensions, the design of the monument and its gigantic dimensions in relation to people and things. In the center of the room, a glass case carrying a model of the same monument. And on two other walls, a juxtaposition of photos of true events that drew attention to the diverse signs of collapse in the world: attacks on the Eiffel Tower, scenes of stock market speculation, police in front of a bank in Greece, rows of unemployment in Spain and Shanghai, toast between Putin and Mark Rutte (prime minister of the Netherlands), next to LGBTq flag photo being burned by a group of people. And finally, contributing to build the frame from which we saw the projection of this future assumption monument of the collapse of the West, we listened to the Nocturne in F Minor Op. 55, no. 1, by Chopin (listen to it here).
On the first day, I did not realize that the visiting room also had a second floor, with more elements to discover and other perspectives of the same scenario under construction. However, everything I described was enough to leave me and my sister, who accompanied me, stupefied, although in the short time we could stay on that first visit. The monument would be colossal, and its implicit assumption was astonishing: the Western man erected a tribute as a recognition of his responsibility for the collapsing world. For me, as a Brazilian – regarding the moment we have been going through (especially since 2016), the possibility of a monument of this character made total sense and represented a breath of possible human wisdom projecting itself into the future. The question I had hitherto wondered was: how was it possible, in a city of a First-World country, the existence of such extraordinary gesture, which would just put the hegemony of the West at stake? It is worth mentioning that the texts fixed to the container wall to present the work were in Arabic, Chinese, Russian, English and Dutch, in that order.
After the first day of visit, I was already decided to write, yet not knowing the infinite layers that were about to come from what I had just witnessed. The day after, I started to look for more information about it. And as I discovered, so far, that the Western Hegemony National Monument Commission would probably have been an invention set out in the synopsis, and found a critical review, I did not take long to find out that the construction of the monument was artistically fabricated as well, just as the final detail of the synopsis, which placed Spring as the landmark of this building. I also heard reports that the local businessmen were harshly criticizing the event, because the structure disrupted their business. Certainly the choice of Neude – a tourist square, full of other monuments, historic buildings, one of the largest and most powerful banks in the country, and several relaxed bars with terraces to sit in outdoors – were not at random.
Thus, it came to light to me that what made this extraordinary gesture really consisted of a 'performance-installation' (the categorization does not matter much, especially in this case), signed by Studio Dries Verhoeven, by the Dutch theater artist Dries Verhoeven (see the website here), of extraordinary and provocative production.
Dries Verhoeven, author of the performance | Photo – Youtube | #4ParedeForAll #PraCegoVer – Color image of Dutch artist Dries Verhoeven, a man with blue eyes and a khaki cap.
The initial disappointment was that I realized the colossal counter-hegemonic monument would never be built. For all sort of reasons, I hugely wanted to believe that its existence was real, although the expenditure for its building could represent one more contradiction. On the other hand, when this event was erected as a performance to me, I could see, even more dazzled, its power, ingenuity and genius.
From the second visit on (and in each one of them perceiving new details), my sight was guided by a reading of this event-performance-installation as an utopian monument, that is, a place that does not exist, in this case imaginative of an assumption: the one which would state that Western human glory or hegemony failed. Sic Transit Gloria Mundi is the Latin phrase that was used until 1963, when the papal power would be assigned to a new pope, and means: "all the glory of the world is transitory."
From that point on, the windows to the false construction formed another frame: during those ten days, the performers (all of them black people, probably to bring out another of the critical layers of the concerned work, related to their exploration) carried out sterile, circular, and repetitive actions, that did not lead to the construction of absolutely anything, while they also contemplated the nothingness being done, besides leading us to see the utopian matter of such assumption.
As a part of the utopian monument, the only thing we saw, from the first day and during the whole period, was the hand, whose palm was displaced to assorted places, by cyclical actions (which could only be noticed over the extended time of the performance), in the inverted position (upwards) to the one that it was in the memorial's model and videomapping (downwards). This inversion seems to suggest a kind of appeal for men to recognize their limits, to rethink their place in the world, and the world itself, as well as the values to which they erect monuments.
While the future monument never comes, and along with it the extraordinary gesture of assumption of an infinite succession of errors (as the juxtaposition of photos mentioned above allows us to see), what is seen are innocuous actions, which are in the process of constructing nothing, except to move and display a great appeal.
Among other layers that only came out to me from the second visit, there are the ones enabled by the visit to the second floor of the visitor's room. Unlike the melancholic atmosphere there, reinforced by one of Chopin's nocturnes, the seemingly cheerful and lazy song Hollilli (listen here) invites us to immediately shift into another type of environment. In this upper part of the visiting room, we find several shelves offering for 10 Euros (each) series miniatures of the monument to be "built" as a souvenir, and we are welcomed by an extra nice "Hello" of the Chinese actor, who performs the seller of such simulacra, striving to do his job well, justifying himself for not speaking English so well.
Here, once more, the polysemy of composition sets in. On the one hand, the cool atmosphere leads us to believe that this is a sarcastic arrangement to criticize the idea of the tourist souvenir from monuments or museums, which flatters and simplifies the reality it evokes. From the second floor, the existence of windows equally to the same "building" allows us to see the event from another frame, as well as its innocuous actions, of a monument that will never be erected. We look at this new frame, which, ironically, allows us to forget and erase the collapses that justify such building, while we can have our own miniature of Sic Transit Gloria Mundi, as well as visitors so commonly buy and take with them the bizarre keyrings and other objects that imitate the ear of Van Gogh in the store of the homonymous Museum of Amsterdam; or even small pieces of the Berlin Wall.
Everything changes, however, if we think about the reality of her singer, Miriam Makeba (1932-2008), as a South African black woman who had a life of activism, for Human Rights and against Apartheid. Would it be, then, such choice a part of the utopian matter of the monument (again): the glory of counter-hegemonic values over the stifling power of the West?
Finally, after all the visits and discoveries, I am aesthetically fortunate by my own prior ignorance about the artist and the performance at stake, because the power and genius of a performance-installation-monument-event was erected to me through my findings during the visits' process. In Neude, but also in many other places of my country or anywhere in the world, I can see this same 'place that does not exist', this utopian recognition monument (equally utopian) of the weariness due to the incessant and intransitive power of the world, and the fact that all the glory of the world is transitory.
English Version's Proofreading – Poliana Dantas
Clique aqui para ler a versão em português
TagsDries VerhoevenFestival SpringPerformanceRoberta RamosSic Transit Gloria MundiUtrecht
#08 Memória, Arquivo e História | Podcast ...
Crítica – Sic Transit Gloria Mundi | ...
Filipe & Marcelo – 'Até que a vida nos aproxime do que nosso corpo pode' | Casamento, performatividade e agência
Performance "Thalassa" se apresenta no Recife
"Diafragma: dispositivo versão Beta" se apresenta na UFPE
Porto Mídia recebe performance "Diafragma – Ensaio sobre a Impermanência"
PodCast #02 – Palcos Documentários
.TudoDossiês
Editorial | Don't Touch! It's Art! – Sobre estética, política e a transexual crucificada (ou a arte de habitar conflitos)
Crítica – Atos Íntimos… e Um Ato Loucos – Luna e Polo | As margens e os fluxos que atravessam a cidade


Provides ultimate sophistication and comfort.
Designed for the road, the Saucony Women's Grid Seeker Running Shoes offer solid underfoot protection which means you don't have to hold back.
The Saucony Women's Grid Seeker Running Shoe's heel Grid System and IMEVA midsole provides a cushioned underfoot ride and it also features a REACT2U ultra-plush Memory Foam Sockliner and plush tongue and collar for ultimate comfort.


The instance 1581. Dauids sling against great Goliah : conteining diuers notable treatises, the names whereof follow next after the epistle to the reader: by E.H, (electronic resource) represents a material embodiment of a distinct intellectual or artistic creation found in Boston University Libraries. This resource is a combination of several types including: Instance, Electronic.


text:
J&J gets okay for a third first-line Darzalex combo in US
Johnson & Johnson continues to extend the use of its Darzalex therapy in newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma patients, getting an FDA approval as an add-on to a widely-used triple-drug regimen.
J&J's Janssen unit said the big-selling drug has been approved for use in combination with Takeda's Velcade (bortezomib), Celgene's Thalomid (thalidomide), and dexamethasone – known as the VTD regimen – for newly-diagnosed patients who are eligible for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT).
Anti-CD38 antibody Darzalex (daratumumab) has previously been approved by the FDA for use with Revlimid (lenalidomide) and dexamethasone, as well as alongside Velcade, melphalan and prednisone, but only in patients who aren't able to receive an ASCT.
Due to the risk of toxic and even fatal complications related to ASCT, not everyone with multiple myeloma is a candidate for a stem cell transplant, with some patients excluded based on their age, health or other factors.
For those who are eligible, it is important that the drugs used as induction therapy before a transplant can rapidly reduce malignant cells in the bone marrow, be well-tolerated, and not interfere with stem cell collection.
The approval is based on the results of the phase 3 CASSIOPEIA trial, which showed that adding Darzalex to VTD resulted in higher stringent complete response (sCR) rates and progression-free survival (PFS) compared to VTD alone.
CASSIOPEIA "is one of the largest transplant studies ever conducted in multiple myeloma, and the largest study conducted with daratumumab," commented clinical investigator Philippe Moreau, of the University Hospital of Nantes, France.
"It's important that patients get a deep response from their frontline therapy, and CASSIOPEIA demonstrates that the addition of daratumumab to VTD before and after transplant markedly increased depth of response compared to VTD alone for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma," he added.
Darzalex was first approved by the FDA in 2015 for use in patients with multiple myeloma who received at least three prior therapies, and now has seven indications that have driven sales steadily upwards to $1.4 billion in the first six months of the year, an increase of nearly 50%.
In July, Janssen filed for approval of a new subcutaneous formulation of Darzalex that has been shown in clinical trials to be as effective as the current intravenous version of the drug with a much shorter infusion time.
And earlier this year Janssen signed a licence and option deal with Denmark's Genmab, which co-developed Darzalex, to produce a successor in multiple myeloma, codenamed HexaBody-CD38.
TG Therapeutics challenges Roche with FDA filing for CLL drug
Oncology round-up: CAR-T conference raises hopes for solid tumour therapy
Clinical decision-making insights for haem/oncs
When science and biology combine – the outlook for ADCs in cancer drug development


text:
Polymastia manusdiaboli är en svampdjursart som först beskrevs av Carl von Linné 1767.  Polymastia manusdiaboli ingår i släktet Polymastia och familjen Polymastiidae. Inga underarter finns listade i Catalogue of Life.

Källor

Horn- och kiselsvampar
manusdiaboli

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia