| I'm not sure I buy the idea that Telos is a right wing journal now. But the email exchange recorded at this site is very provocative. The characterization of Counterpunch as 'Left Fascism' is a bit extreme, no? Sure, there might be evidence of some Foucauldian 'microfascisms' in the epistemological assumptions of some of its contributors but thats hardly what the author had in mind with the term.
http://www.telospress.com/main/index.php?main_page=news_article&article_id=202
NiK On Oct 26, 2007, at 7:22, Christian Garland wrote:
> From: theory-frankfurt-school-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: theory-frankfurt-school Digest, Vol 28, Issue 8
> To: theory-frankfurt-school@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 12:00:17 +0100
>
> Send theory-frankfurt-school mailing list submissions to
> theory-frankfurt-school@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://www.srcf.ucam.org/mailman/listinfo/theory-frankfurt-school
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> theory-frankfurt-school-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> theory-frankfurt-school-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of theory-frankfurt-school digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: The ugly metamorphosis of Telos (walter a davis)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:02:26 -0400
> From: "walter a davis" <davis.65@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [FRA:] The ugly metamorphosis of Telos
> To: "'Discussion of Frankfurt School Critical Theory'"
> <theory-frankfurt-school@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Message-ID: <002e01c81720$70258ac0$31e1dd45@D35NPC61>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> As Nietzsche said, "The desert grows, woe to he who harbors deserts within."
> And religion is, in all forms, the desert.
>
>
> walter a. davis
> Professor Emeritus, Ohio State University
> www.walteradavis.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: theory-frankfurt-school-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:theory-frankfurt-school-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ralph
> Dumain
> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 11:52 AM
> To: theory-frankfurt-school@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [FRA:] The ugly metamorphosis of Telos
>
> I noticed this transition a number of years ago but was puzzled by how it
> happened.
>
> I'm not sure I see it as inconsistent, at least as far as Picconose is
> concerned. Piccone revealed his snobbery in TELOS #6, in which some of the
> articles (later transformed into a book?) cited below are included, e.g.
> Dunayevskaya. Piccone was always a European snob. For example, he looked
> down on the university at Buffalo, where he was then located (and so was I,
> but not yet college age), I guess because it wasn't Ivy League, though it
> certainly had top notch people there. Piccone wasn't a head of state or
> party, but I suspect he still harbored that intellectual's love of power
> which got channeled through the snobbery of what is now called continental
> philosophy. So naturally, when the left falls apart, the power-instinct
> takes over and gravitates toward the going thing.
>
> Didn't this happen to Eugene Genovese?
>
> Gottfried wrote a book on the Hegelian Right, so I'm guessing that has
> something to do with his interest in TELOS.
>
> Now I'm wondering what to make of this book coming out of TELOS Press:
>
> Jihad and Jew Hatred: Islamism, Nazism and the Roots of 9/11
> by Matthias K?ntzel
>
> http://www.telospress.com/main/index.php?main_page=news_article&article_id=1
> 99
>
> I recently had an online encounter with someone associated with TELOS. It
> began with my criticism of an extremely shallow review I found on its web
> site. I made these comments:
>
> On Christopher Hitchens's God is Not Great
> by Hannes Stein
>
>
> http://www.telospress.com/main/index.php?main_page=news_article&article_id=2
> 01
>
> One would have hoped that this once sophisticated journal could have
> done better than to print this trash. Two obvious improvements would be:
>
> (1) just as threat artists and authors were inspired by religion in
> their time, today's artists need to be inspired by ideas appropriate to
> ours;
>
> (2) the question of social causality in relation to superstition has to
> do more than simply tally up the alleged pluses and minuses of religion.
>
> What a shitty review.
>
> Then I left a comment on this piece:
>
> Between Secularism and the Return of Religion
> by Danilo Breschi
> Monday ? August 27, 2007
> Telos News & Notes
>
> http://www.telospress.com/main/index.php?main_page=news_article&article_id=1
> 95
>
> Ominous, demonstrating inter alia the retreat of intellectuals in the
> face of a new Dark Age.
> I know Robert Darnton as a distinguished historian of the French
> Enlightenment.
> I have no idea from the description what claims he makes in this
> forum.
>
> To my surprise, I got a message from the author:
>
> >At 09:11 PM 10/12/2007, Danilo Breschi wrote:
> >----------------------------------------------------------------
> >Why "ominous"? What does you mean? I think it was simply a pluralist
> >forum with different points of view among freemen and free thinkers,
> >both believers and not-believers. Discussing something is real: a new
> >role of religion (not only and firstly
> >Catholic) in European societies and politics. Is it good? Is it bad?
> >Let's discuss on that.
>
>
> To which I replied:
>
> >If Europe's secularism is waning and Europe is degenerating to the
> >level of the United States, that is a depressing sign for the future of
> >civilization. Habermas is apparently degenerating from his already
> >lukewarm liberalism. Novak is a right wing piece of shit. If Kaufman is
> >correct, Europe is on the decline.
> >Siedentop is full of crap. Eder's post-secular society is nonsense.
> >Schmitter: a post-liberal democracy?--sounds like the backward slide to
> >despotism. The rise of nationalism means a rising threat of fascism.
> >
> >The overall perspective is bleak, hardly a new humanism.
> >
> >What has happened to TELOS? It's not what it used to be.
>
> I have not heard from Breschi since.
>
>
> At 08:33 AM 10/25/2007, Christian Garland wrote:
>
> > >> April 24, 1991> The metamorphosis of Telos>>
> > A splintered journal pokes into its own
> > contradictions> In These Times | April 24-30,
> > 1991>>> WHY WOULD A JOURNAL that has described
> > itself as "the philosophical> conscience of the American left" and "a
> > journal of radical thought"> invite a senior contributing editor of
> > The World & I*a publication of> Rev. Sun Myung Moon's Washington Times
> > corporation*into its editorial> circle? The journal is Telos, and its
> > new comrade is Paul Gottfried, a> self-described "reactionary" who has
> > also written for such> publications as Policy Review, the official
> > magazine of the Heritage> Foundation. Why would someone with
> > Gottfried's politics be interested> in a journal like Telos?>>
> > Gottfried claims to detest the bureaucratic welfare state for its>
> > uprooting of the family and of traditional community. He thus feels>
> > comfortable with a group like Telos, whose critique of the capitalist>
> > welfare state (and of the former Soviet-style
> > states) has, for two> decades, been trenchant.
> > The kind of community Gottfried is interested> in preserving, by his
> > own admission, is one fraught with traditional> hierarchies. "I do
> > believe in the inevitability of patriarchy,"
> > he> says, while claiming to be "more afraid of
> > the meddling bureaucrats in> the Equality Opportunities Commission
> > than in the recrudescence of> Klan violence.">> Heidegger*sidestep or
> > goose step>> Two recent events inside the pages of Telos illuminate
> > the
> > ideological> changes the journal is undergoing.
> > In a recent Telos book review,> Gottfried plunges straight into the
> > raging debate over the Nazism of> the late German philosopher Martin
> > Heidegger, disputing the claim of> Victor Farias (author of the book
> > Heidegger and
> > Nazism) that> Heidegger's philosophy is deeply contaminated with
> > fascism. Farias> called attention to such moments in Heidegger's
> > career as his 1933> reference to "the glory and the greatness of the
> > Hitler revolution,"> and to a speech to German students that same year
> > in which Heidegger> proclaimed: "Doctrine and 'ideas' shall no longer
> > govern your> existence.
> > The F?hrer himself, and only he, is the current and future> reality of
> > Germany, and his word is your law.">> Heidegger, in a 1948 letter to
> > Herbert Marcuse, explained his> attraction to Nazism in these words:
> > "I expected from
> > National> Socialism a spiritual renewal of life
> > in its entirety, a> reconciliation of social antagonisms and a
> > deliverance of Western> Dasein from the dangers of communism.">>
> > "Should Heidegger," wrote Gottfried, "while trying to demonstrate his>
> > Nazi beliefs, have stressed disjunctions rather than links between
> > his> philosophy and his political career?"
> > Gottfried concluded that> "Heidegger's most inexcusable sin seems to
> > have been that he> challenged a still-dominant mindset. He dared to
> > state that human> fulfillment is not likely to be attained through an
> > ever-expanding> technology or in a managerial society, and that
> > democratic> individualism has resulted in the
> > loss of cultural specificity and in>
> > delegitimating long-established community.">> Telos editor Paul
> > Piccone defends Gottfried's review, arguing that> there is no
> > connection between Heidegger's fascism and his philosophy.> "Gottfried
> > is right, and Farias is wrong," he claims. (This distances> Piccone
> > significantly from J?rgen Habermas, the German social theorist> who
> > has, with Farias, pointed to the important connections between>
> > Heidegger's political commitments and philosophical project.
> > Habermas,> once close to the Telos group*they put out a special issue
> > on
> > the> occasion of his 50th birthday*has been the
> > object of scathing attacks> in the journal's pages in recent years.)>>
> > Dubious
> > rehabilitations>> Heidegger is not the only
> > Nazi intellectual Telos has defended> recently.
> > In the summer of 1987 they published a "special issue" on> Carl
> > Schmitt, the German legal theorist and, in the words of Hannah>
> > Arendt, "convinced Nazi," who authored no fewer than five books and
> > 35> tracts in support of Hitler's regime during the period of
> > 1933-36.>> According to historian Richard Wolin, "During this phase,
> > there were> few depths to which Schmitt would not sink: he penned an
> > essay in> support of the bloody SA purge of June 30, 1934*the famous
> > 'Night of> the Long Knives'*with the ominous title "The F?hrer
> > protects the> law.'" The following year, Schmitt authored an article
> > endorsing the> Nuremberg anti-Semitic legislation of 1935.
> > But, wrote Gary Ulmen, the> main catalyst behind Telos' rehabilitation
> > of Schmitt, "it is always a> mistake to evaluate the significance of a
> > thinker and judge his or her> writings on the basis of personal
> > political decision, good or bad.">> In their joint introduction to the
> > special issue on Schmitt, Ulmen and> Piccone wrote frankly of the
> > irony in their attempt to encourage a> restored interest in Schmitt's
> > work: "Carl Schmitt is an extremely>
> > controversial figure, compromised by his collusion with Nazism at the>
> > peak of his career and throughout his life a European
> > conservative> whose authoritarian political
> > objectives have never been in doubt. So> what is a nice leftist
> > journal like Telos doing in a theoretical dive> like this?">> "However
> > one views the situation," they went on, "Schmitt's> work*ranging all
> > the way from political romanticism to guerrilla> warfare*is clearly
> > one of the most important contributions to> 20th-century political
> > theory and deserves to be seriously> confronted.">> Schmitt's central
> > contention was that modern parliamentary
> > liberalism> as a political form is incompatible
> > with democracy because the former> inevitably degenerates into a
> > system of fragmented
> > interest-group> conflicts and thereby
> > undermines the "legitimacy" necessary to
> > sustain> the latter. Schmitt argued this case
> > prolifically, authoring a series> of
> > influential books and essays, including The Crisis of Parliamentary>
> > Democracy. Although Schmitt's political commitments were clearly>
> > right-wing, his theories about liberal democracy were picked up by a>
> > number of European Leninists who joined Schmitt in feeling the need>
> > for an authoritarian structure (for them, the Communist Party) to>
> > provide the power necessary to run the state.>> According to Wolin,
> > what Schmitt longed after as a replacement for> parliamentary
> > democracy was a "F?hrer's democracy," a system in which> the
> > population submits to the authority of a ruler. "There is a>
> > terrifying degree of continuity," says Wolin, between Schmitt's>
> > "authoritarian political thought and his base servility under the>
> > Nazis. Schmitt's doctrines call for a leader to make decisions, and
> > in> Hitler he found his man.">> Piccone and Ulmen argue, however, that
> > "Schmitt's rigor,
> > conditioned> no doubt by his training in
> > jurisprudence, compounded with his> no-nonsense approach to concrete
> > power relations, can provide a> healthy corrective to the predominant
> > leftist moralism, which more> often than not clouds judgment to the
> > point of precluding effective> political analysis.">> A long strange
> > trip>> Telos didn't start out on this ideological footing, however.
> > It> published the proceedings of its "First International Conference"
> > as a> book, Towards a New Marxism, in 1970. The collection included
> > essays> such as Piccone's "Phenomenological
> > Marxism" and the late Raya> Dunayevskaya's "Hegelian Leninism." Telos
> > went on to publish
> > books> such as Gustav Landauer's For Socialism
> > and Antonio Labriola's> Socialism and Philosophy in 1980.>> Although
> > Telos had always been critical of orthodox Marxism, there was> no
> > question of its commitment to socialism*indeed, to some> reconstructed
> > version of Marxist theory. In Piccone's own (1987)> words, Telos began
> > with a "systematic effort to retrieve the lost and> suppressed
> > tradition of Western Marxism. ... Of course, at that time> we had not
> > yet realized that Western Marxism, in all its variations,> would also
> > turn out to be a dud, but it certainly seemed a
> > worthwhile> effort.">> Today Telos stands
> > ideological light-years away from its recent past.> Piccone is a
> > virulent anti-Marxist and eschews the terms "socialist"> and
> > "leftist."
> > What could be behind the move he so quickly made from> neo-Marxism to
> > neo-Schmittianism?>> In a 1987 issue of the editors' newsletter (the
> > Telos Public Sphere),> Piccone acknowledged a crisis at the
> > journal*both organizational and>
> > theoretical: "Half of our editors have retired intellectually and>
> > burned out politically, the other half [are] rapidly becoming senile,>
> > cynical or purely careerist, while the rest are beset by a
> > combination> of both. ... What I think has happened is that, with the
> > disappearance> of any meaningful political
> > 'movement' and the abandonment of the> Marxist paradigm, we have
> > scattered in many directions*not always> necessarily compatible."
> > He bluntly called on his fellow editors to> ask, "What do we stand
> > for, and what are we attempting to accomplish> with Telos?">> He
> > concluded candidly that, "in a nutshell, our relation to capitalism>
> > has become much more tolerant and nuanced than ever before,
> > especially> in light of the disasters
> > associated with any kind of socialism or> planned economies." He went
> > on to lament that "lately Telos has not> been flooded by much on the
> > way of dynamite theoretical contributions.> ... Either we move beyond
> > this point or we are not going to be around> very long.">> In fact, it
> > was precisely during this period that several Telos> editors resigned
> > (and shortly thereafter that such friends as Ulmen> and Gottfried got
> > involved with the journal). Among the reasons> editors gave for
> > leaving the journal were Piccone's "support of U.S.> armed
> > intervention in Nicaragua" and "an atmosphere [at the journal]> that
> > is not only sexist but is demeaning to all human beings." In> response
> > to criticisms that the journal lacked any
> > feminist> perspective, Piccone responded by
> > suggesting that feminism "be kept in> the kitchen." (Piccone's
> > personality has been described as "vulgar"> and "obnoxious" by several
> > former editors.)>> The right turn at Telos has appeared in its most
> > obscene form,> however, only recently. Piccone announced his criticism
> > of U.S. policy> in the Persian Gulf just days before the war broke out
> > by
> > lamenting> that George Bush had waited so long
> > to bomb Iraq. Piccone wanted to> see Saddam Hussein destroyed, even if
> > it meant nuclear weapons being> dropped in his country. Why? The Iraqi
> > dictator's military ambitions> and aggressive actions in the region
> > made him an impediment to order> and stability, Piccone explained.>>
> > Why would someone like Piccone be interested in preserving the kind
> > of> order and stability currently in place (i.e., the order of the
> > world> capitalist system)? Because, he explained, like it or not, it's
> > the> only system in the world and will remain so [his emphasis] for as
> > long> as we're around.>> Left-wing cannibalism>> According to Douglas
> > Kellner, a philosopher and social critic who> wrote for Telos before
> > its turn to the right, "Telos represents the> collapse of a certain
> > segment of the left intelligentsia that> renounced its leftism and
> > moved to totally reactionary positions, and> in so doing drove away
> > all the intelligent and creative
> > progressives> who once formed the best of
> > Telos. All that is left are a few> embittered and alienated
> > pseudo-intellectuals who focus
> > their> 'critique' on their former comrades
> > while Reagan and Bush have> destroyed American democracy and now the
> > Middle East.">> Ironically, it was Gottfried who, at Telos'
> > 1990 conference (held in> Elizabethtown, Pa., where Gottfried teaches
> > political science and
> > was> thus able to persuade Elizabethtown
> > College to finance a Telos weekend> on its campus), suggested to his
> > newfound colleagues that they were> evading any discussion of what he
> > perceived to be an ideological> division within the group. He pointed
> > out that there seemed to be two> distinct positions on the editorial
> > board: One, rooted in the critical> tradition, has anti-authoritarian
> > instincts and
> > counter-establishment> politics; the other,
> > coming more from the tradition of organic> conservatism, criticizes
> > existing structures of power but values a> return to more established
> > traditions of order and authority. While> the two camps are united on
> > certain fronts, Gottfried argued, their> profound differences should
> > not be denied or belittled.>> Gottfried's attempt to provoke
> > discussion on this apparently touchy> subject was met with hostile
> > resistance from Gary Ulmen, whom> Gottfried had named as being part of
> > the second, more conservative,> camp. Ulmen emphatically eschewed
> > Gottfried's use of these
> > ideological> categories, shouting, "We simply
> > reject them.">> The journal recently advertised that its "Second
> > Elizabethtown"> conference would take "as its point of departure
> > Christopher Lasch's> new book, The True and Only Heaven." Among other
> > things, Lasch> (another ex-leftist with an interesting political
> > pedigree) now argues> that the "left"/"right" distinction has become
> > obsolete.
> > Perhaps> denying the meaningfulness of "left"
> > and "right" is Telos' way of> moving from one to the other without
> >admitting it.>> I told Piccone that his new practice of refusing to
> >employ such> "meaningless" political vocabulary reminds me of the
> >slogan of the New> Age
> > Greens: "We're neither left nor right*we're in front." "No, no,"> he
> >explained. "We're backwards."> Posted by Danny at April 24, 1991 11:18
> >PM _
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theory-frankfurt-school mailing list
> theory-frankfurt-school@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.srcf.ucam.org/mailman/listinfo/theory-frankfurt-school
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> theory-frankfurt-school mailing list
> theory-frankfurt-school@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.srcf.ucam.org/mailman/listinfo/theory-frankfurt-school
>
>
> End of theory-frankfurt-school Digest, Vol 28, Issue 8
> ******************************************************
The next generation of MSN Hotmail has arrived - Windows Live Hotmail_______________________________________________ aut-op-sy mailing list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.resist.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aut-op-sy aut-op-sy
|