Comments on: Archdruid Watch: Völkerwanderung http://anthropik.com/2007/06/archdruid-watch-volkerwanderung/ se wo were fi na wosan kofa a yenki Sun, 06 Jul 2008 18:58:30 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: jhereg http://anthropik.com/2007/06/archdruid-watch-volkerwanderung/#comment-148741 jhereg Thu, 28 Jun 2007 16:18:28 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2007/06/archdruid-watch-volkerwanderung/#comment-148741 Hmm, okay, I see your point. I guess that's not really an explicit enough statement to actually lodge in my head. (Yes, I know it's pretty explicit about his opinion of primitivism, but it's not explicit about [b]why[/b] and those kinds of statements just don't stick for me, they don't seem useful enough to keep around). Hmm, okay, I see your point. I guess that’s not really an explicit enough statement to actually lodge in my head. (Yes, I know it’s pretty explicit about his opinion of primitivism, but it’s not explicit about [b]why[/b] and those kinds of statements just don’t stick for me, they don’t seem useful enough to keep around).

]]> By: Jason Godesky http://anthropik.com/2007/06/archdruid-watch-volkerwanderung/#comment-148740 Jason Godesky Thu, 28 Jun 2007 16:13:20 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2007/06/archdruid-watch-volkerwanderung/#comment-148740 "Both these narratives attempt to force history into the Procrustean bed of some form of secular theology; neither one of them, as I’ve argued repeatedly here, offers much in the way of useful guidance for the future taking shape in the circumstances, choices, and missed opportunities of the present." ? “Both these narratives attempt to force history into the Procrustean bed of some form of secular theology; neither one of them, as I’ve argued repeatedly here, offers much in the way of useful guidance for the future taking shape in the circumstances, choices, and missed opportunities of the present.” ?

]]> By: jhereg http://anthropik.com/2007/06/archdruid-watch-volkerwanderung/#comment-148737 jhereg Thu, 28 Jun 2007 16:10:29 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2007/06/archdruid-watch-volkerwanderung/#comment-148737 Those are the only two areas I see him addressing in this particular entry, tho'. As I said, small nit. Those are the only two areas I see him addressing in this particular entry, tho’. As I said, small nit.

]]> By: Jason Godesky http://anthropik.com/2007/06/archdruid-watch-volkerwanderung/#comment-148736 Jason Godesky Thu, 28 Jun 2007 16:09:05 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2007/06/archdruid-watch-volkerwanderung/#comment-148736 No, he draws plenty of parallels between them besides that. As far as he's concerned, they're both equally foolish, equally disproven, and equally based in a bunch of religious hogwash. No, he draws plenty of parallels between them besides that. As far as he’s concerned, they’re both equally foolish, equally disproven, and equally based in a bunch of religious hogwash.

]]> By: jhereg http://anthropik.com/2007/06/archdruid-watch-volkerwanderung/#comment-148733 jhereg Thu, 28 Jun 2007 16:03:39 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2007/06/archdruid-watch-volkerwanderung/#comment-148733 <blockquote>Of course, Greer starts off by equating "apocalypse"—the idea that life would get better after the end of civilization—with the insanity of perpetual growth: "Both these narratives attempt to force history into the Procrustean bed of some form of secular theology; neither one of them, as I’ve argued repeatedly here, offers much in the way of useful guidance for the future taking shape in the circumstances, choices, and missed opportunities of the present." </blockquote> Small nit. Greer doesn't really try to equate apocalyptic narr. to perpetual growth so much as he's equating 2 aspects of the narratives. The first being that they both: <blockquote> work to foreshorten our view of the future</blockquote> The second being that they both: <blockquote>force history into ... some form of secular theology</blockquote> Neither of which I agree with, but in your paragraph above, it doesn't seem clear that Greer is really just talking about these two specific areas.

Of course, Greer starts off by equating “apocalypse”—the idea that life would get better after the end of civilization—with the insanity of perpetual growth: “Both these narratives attempt to force history into the Procrustean bed of some form of secular theology; neither one of them, as I’ve argued repeatedly here, offers much in the way of useful guidance for the future taking shape in the circumstances, choices, and missed opportunities of the present.”

Small nit. Greer doesn’t really try to equate apocalyptic narr. to perpetual growth so much as he’s equating 2 aspects of the narratives. The first being that they both:

work to foreshorten our view of the future

The second being that they both:

force history into … some form of secular theology

Neither of which I agree with, but in your paragraph above, it doesn’t seem clear that Greer is really just talking about these two specific areas.

]]>