Share this page!

Carlo Lancellotti Profile picture
Twitter logo
7 Jan, 4 tweets, 1 min read
Among other things, the events at the Capitol were a desecration of the main temple of American civic religion by a competing faith, and I think that contributed to it emotional impact.

(especially with the shaman etc.)
One cannot look up at the fresco in the dome of the Capitol and fail to recognize its religious significance. A perfect replica of a baroque Church dome with the coronation of Mary replaced by the apotheosis of George Washington.
The question with Trump is always whether he is the real agent of the desecration or just the apocalypse (revelation) of the inevitable outcome of choices that predate him.
(The answer is most probably both...)

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Carlo Lancellotti

Carlo Lancellotti Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @_CLancellotti

Carlo Lancellotti Profile picture
14 Nov 20
Been thinking about the radical opposition between the PC-progressive concept of *representation* and the classical concept of *recognition*.

(which has the same etymological structure as *respect*: mutual knowledge, mutual seeing).
Every human being wants to be recognized *as human* by other humans. This is the root of true "inclusion": the recognition of a common humanity beyond our differences, where the word "humanity" has a metaphysical-religious significance (being relationship with the infinite).
By contrast, the concept of representation is psycho-sociological: I am defined not by my humanity, but by belonging to a certain group, more or less arbitrarily defined by singling out certain psycho-somatic or characteristics. As a result, I have a right to be "included"
Read 5 tweets
Carlo Lancellotti Profile picture
12 Sep 20
Even some of the most intelligent critics of liberalism sometimes do not make a clear enough distinction between the terms in which the question arose in the the 19th century, and the terms in which it arises today.
In the 19th century, "liberalism" operated in the context of secularized Christianity (e.g. Kantian ethics) and attempted to separate morality from metaphysics and religion. As such it led to relativism, subjectivism and various other ills.
But after 1917 we have entered the stage of the expansion of political atheism which rejects classical (Aristotelian and Christian) ethics in favor of the "ethics of the direction of history" (Del Noce), which in turn leads inevitably to various forms of totalitarianism.
Read 6 tweets
Carlo Lancellotti Profile picture
29 Aug 20
Historically Fascism was born as a revolutionary movement that rejected Marxist historical materialism (the link between the revolution and the necessary logic of history) while keeping the dialectical aspect (man as creator, politics as true religion, the primacy of praxis).
So, the Fascist type (Mussolini) was an "activist without a plan," who valued action and personal power as ends in themselves but had no vision of the future. This is why he ended up an ally/instrument of conservative forces that gave Fascism the appearance of being reactionary.
In that sense, some of today's "revolutionaries" seem more Fascist than Marxist. The "other half" of Marxism (sociologism, secularism, technocracy) is the ideology of the professional classes (so called "liberals" who are economically quite "conservative.")
Read 4 tweets
Carlo Lancellotti Profile picture
18 Aug 20
This is a very nice essay, which could be qualified in various ways from a "Del Nocean" perspective:

quillette.com/2020/08/16/the… via @Quillette
1) What is acting today is actually "half-Marxism" because it has mostly shed Marx's philosophy of history, thus becoming "irrational." The "revolution" does not fulfill the plan of history but just a will to power, and is entirely "intra-bourgeois" like 1968 in Europe.
2) Conversely, liberalism has shed its 19th century Kantian or Protestant aspects, and has embraced the "other half" of Marxism: materialism, sociologism, relativism etc What DN calls "objectivized" Marxism without the revolutionary impulse.
Read 7 tweets
Carlo Lancellotti Profile picture
7 Jun 20
My Sunday thoughts: the question of the moment is whether the protests will push for *reform* or pursue the mirage of *revolution*. I think the jury is still out, but the academic-journalistic complex is clearly pushing in the second direction, which matches their world view.
"Reform" recognizes that we must strive as hard as we can to realize permanent values (e.g. justice) which transcend us, and which we can achieve only imperfectly because evil (e.g. racism) lurks within everyone (original sin) and cannot be ultimately eliminated, only contained.
By contrast the "revolution" thinks that evil can be eliminated, because it resides NOT IN US but in "the system" and the system can be changed by the exercise of power. Thus it expresses a dualistic, non-biblical (gnostic) type of religiosity (modern prototype: Marxism).
Read 7 tweets
Carlo Lancellotti Profile picture
18 May 20
From DN's' "Problem of Atheism" (1963): "The historical result of Marxism is, on the one side, Communist reality, in the way it has become realized, and on the other the affluent society ... In a certain sense, Marxism has already completely won, but negating itself most totally.
Because of this victory, there is the tragic situation of Christianity today, such as it never happened before: it is in a vise between two opposite types of society, which share a common origin, neither one of which is Christianizable. A parallel situation holds for liberalism..
The affluent society is characterized by 'natural irreligion,' by the 'loss of the sacred,' by the rejection of the dimension of tradition and of the past, because all values have been found to be relative to specific historical situations.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @_CLancellotti has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @_CLancellotti!

Read all threads by @_CLancellotti