I don't know if this applies to your interesting article but in the arts Modernism has developed the idea, or ideal, that there is no difference between low art and high art. Therefore, beauty is in the eye of the beholder – but it's mostly just a kind of madness.
However, beautiful things are harder to make than ugly things, which would imply some kind of spiritual order. We may not know "exactly" what beauty is, and ideals of it will change, but we do know the capacity to make beautiful objects requires directed effort, practice and talent.
And humans are attracted to beautiful bodies along classical lines. And waterfront property is twice the value of non-waterfront, and so forth.
And yet, in spite of these obvious examples of Modernism's own desires for beauty it pretends that from an intellectual standpoint there are no differences. I don't think they are being hypocritical; I think they are insane and possessed by demons and/or Dionysus.
I think it was Rene Girard who went into the idea that when there are no differences humans require a scapegoat. Derek Chauvin seems to have served that purpose and the madness that followed has now been met by a kind of counter ideal, one more classical and anti-Modern. But Trump isn't in complete opposition. He (and Musk) also possess a certain Dionysian quality themselves. [Liberals are using the word "chaos" a lot these days.] So, the new order seems to have absorbed and contained the madness within itself.
Apologies for the ramble but you have touched on some interesting points that we can maybe apply to these strange times we are living in.
I don't know if this applies to your interesting article but in the arts Modernism has developed the idea, or ideal, that there is no difference between low art and high art. Therefore, beauty is in the eye of the beholder – but it's mostly just a kind of madness.
However, beautiful things are harder to make than ugly things, which would imply some kind of spiritual order. We may not know "exactly" what beauty is, and ideals of it will change, but we do know the capacity to make beautiful objects requires directed effort, practice and talent.
And humans are attracted to beautiful bodies along classical lines. And waterfront property is twice the value of non-waterfront, and so forth.
And yet, in spite of these obvious examples of Modernism's own desires for beauty it pretends that from an intellectual standpoint there are no differences. I don't think they are being hypocritical; I think they are insane and possessed by demons and/or Dionysus.
I think it was Rene Girard who went into the idea that when there are no differences humans require a scapegoat. Derek Chauvin seems to have served that purpose and the madness that followed has now been met by a kind of counter ideal, one more classical and anti-Modern. But Trump isn't in complete opposition. He (and Musk) also possess a certain Dionysian quality themselves. [Liberals are using the word "chaos" a lot these days.] So, the new order seems to have absorbed and contained the madness within itself.
Apologies for the ramble but you have touched on some interesting points that we can maybe apply to these strange times we are living in.