From: Kharin (kharin@kharin.com)
Date: Fri Sep 26 2003 - 09:06:52 MDT
"This is an extraordinary outburst from someone normally so calm and fair.
Scruton is nothing like a Falwell or Buchanan. This claim is a calculated
slander"
Hmm. The language was intemperate perhaps, but I suspect not inappropriate. Scruton has had one particular theme throughout his career as a media 'philosopher' (I say this since his 'academic achievements' are recognised more by the Daily Telegraph than in philosophy departments anywhere; I am not aware that he currently holds any academic tenure). This theme is of a commitment to conservatism in its most doctrinaire sense; i.e. what appears to be a wish that 1950s Britain had been perserved in aspic and left as it was before the 1960s came along and spoilt everything. The consequence of this is that Scruton has been left with a deep and abiding sense of loathing at modern society and, in particular, its godlessness (this is what I usually term Daily Mail siege mentality).
More recently, whereas many on the right seek to walk the tightrope between defending social conservatism and free market economics, Scruton has at least between been consistent enough to observe their incompatibility and has accordingly grown to dislike the market in the same way as those on the far left. Given that I support social liberalisation, secularism and globalisation there are not really many points where I am likely to find agreement with Scruton.
Returning to the particular book in question, the problem is that he essentially shares much Islamic revulsion at godless Western decadence, making him a rather unreliable figure when it comes to defending Western civilisation (or at least the parts of it that followed the dark ages). I would again draw your attention to Scruton's own words (the same quote from a different source):
"And if the messages from the Western media include, as now they do, the flood of pornography guaranteed by the Supreme Court under the right of ‘free speech’ (even if the ‘speech’ in question consists largely of grunts), can we be surprised if the normal, pious Muslim soul draws the conclusion that what he is witnessing is the Realm of Satan? Globalisation presents him simultaneously with the goal of martyrdom and the means to achieve it. In such circumstances there is surely very little work for Osama bin Laden to do.
I believe that we can defend ourselves against Islamic terrorism. But we must begin from a correct perception of what globalisation means to those who witness it from the Islamic standpoint. We will then come to see that globalisation is not a great movement to be advanced, but an unfortunate by-product of our successes, and of the unified political culture that made them possible - a by-product that must be controlled and limited like a dangerous drug, and not treated as the single cure of the world’s many diseases."
The point about Falwell by the way, is that both share a deep dislike of secular modernity with the Islamic fundamentalists they purport to opose.
---- This message was posted by Kharin to the Virus 2003 board on Church of Virus BBS. <http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=54;action=display;threadid=29335> --- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Sep 26 2003 - 09:06:59 MDT