Bloom was the arch-mental masturbator. Windy as desert flats in spring and empty as an abandoned hanger. He sound like what I imagine a predatory Priest sounds like to a child. You know, almost no-body outside of academia knows who this man is? He tried to say so much he said nearly nothing. Scholars are sensitive and have fragile ego's; as a result no-one in this room was willing to admit they'd gotten approximately nothing from this lecture and demand this pervert to get to the goddamn point!
Bloom was not "conservative" in any Burkean sense. He was culturally more of an FDR liberal - middle-class Jewish parents, etc. He was also over-the-top gay, which is irrelevant. But he was conservative in the sense of opposing cultural Marxism, and the people he genuinely influenced went on to become conservatives or neo-cons. But Bloom was a philosopher, not a strictly political thinker. His concern was the university and the state of the students not marginal tax rates or foreign policy.
One cannot admire Dostoevsky and follow Rothbard with any sane consistency. It simply doesnt make sense. Dostoevsky uses the novel as a Christian evangelist. Rothbard is concerned with preserving liberal political liberty, & is an agnostic.
As for Bloom: he was not a political activist in any sense. He spoke for the sake of philosophy & its serious oppositions. He didnt espouse any personal "commitments". His writings are more interesting & useful than the various rumors about his private life.
Your superficial conception of exoteric aspects of certain aforementioned worldviews are forgiven be it that you are absolutely ignorant of esoteric traditionalism.
BTW: Bloom was openly and vulgarly gay - a pompous Queen actually. No rumors; just facts. This is not a private matter because Bloom so exalted "friendship" over romantic love, especially in his embarrassing last book, that it seems fair to ask where he was coming from. The Straussian cult of Grecophilia at the expense of the true twin foundations of the West - Rome and Christianity, owes much to this "manly" homosexuality and to Strauss's misogynistic Judaism.
Interesting, didn't know he was gay. Reminds me of Jung's autobiography when he discusses Nietzsche and his admiration for him but that the only true 'Nietzscheans' he ever knew were both homosexual. Then there's Foucault obviously, another one 'openly and vulgarly gay'. There's definitely some kind of pattern emerging here. I used to be a Nietzschean but soon saw the error of my ways so I count myself out of this company. Is it rage against the herd, the superman as paternal object of love?
If you can understand how Franklin could admire Whitefield, Nietzsche could admire Pascal, Hemingway could admire Chesterton, and Pound could admire Eliot, then you may be able to understand how a Rothbardite could admire Dostoevsky. Propaganda and artistry are not mutually exclusive qualities.
The cultural demographic you describe sounds awfully like what I understand to be the standard "Yankee" and quintessential PC liberal-democratic (or Linconite 'Republican'), I'm curious how he managed to come to such a sophisticated understanding of the thinker in question and cultural stance.
I'm a keen Hoppe reader; surprised to encounter a Rothbard AND Nietzsche reader here, of all places . . . today is a good day.
Allan Bloom was an incredible intellect. His warnings went completely over the head of us, and the American mind is now officially closed.
I am a bit interested in his personal commitment to any idea of conservatism, in respect to some of the weird rumors I have heard floating around about the man.
@spruntfemalespray and it's you're dumb dumb
mholdens82 9 months ago
@spruntfemalespray I agree. but read Ravelstein and tell me he wasn't a super smart, creepy guy.
mholdens82 9 months ago
Comment removed
mholdens82 9 months ago
Bloom was the arch-mental masturbator. Windy as desert flats in spring and empty as an abandoned hanger. He sound like what I imagine a predatory Priest sounds like to a child. You know, almost no-body outside of academia knows who this man is? He tried to say so much he said nearly nothing. Scholars are sensitive and have fragile ego's; as a result no-one in this room was willing to admit they'd gotten approximately nothing from this lecture and demand this pervert to get to the goddamn point!
mholdens82 1 year ago
not because they are catholic so much as because they are Irish
DAVID3766 2 years ago
Edit, edit, edit...
Lots of hems and haws and puny pronunciamentos and few kernels worth grinding between the mind's teeth.
Nietzsche was a poetic bomb-throwing humoristic romantic contrarian.
Like Groucho Marx , HE WOULD SING: "Whatever it is, I'm against it!"
Bloom is
voidforpurpose 2 years ago
Allan Bloom was the great American mind.
scotty123123 3 years ago
Allan Bloom is a windbag and this series is a complete waste of time. He blubbers all the way through and says pretty much nothing substantive.
onehappiness 2 years ago
So true. His insights are few and far between.
He... umm... well... uhhhh hahhaha.... uh....
Are all over the place.
bahramf 2 years ago
@onehappiness I was waiting for something with substance too, but I already knew all of this.....
Icannottolerateit 1 year ago
@onehappiness agreed
lilnuwr 2 weeks ago
Nietzsche in four words: "Become your own god".
greatsea 3 years ago 2
Deconstruction and the Left seeks to "castrate" Nietzsche.
lol.
barrywinehousexp 2 years ago
Bloom was not "conservative" in any Burkean sense. He was culturally more of an FDR liberal - middle-class Jewish parents, etc. He was also over-the-top gay, which is irrelevant. But he was conservative in the sense of opposing cultural Marxism, and the people he genuinely influenced went on to become conservatives or neo-cons. But Bloom was a philosopher, not a strictly political thinker. His concern was the university and the state of the students not marginal tax rates or foreign policy.
MarcusCMarcellus 3 years ago 3
What is your solution to the Frankfurt School's monopoly on the means of communication?
It was not logic and gentle persuasion that displaced Pro-Western intellectual activity with the inverted Weltanschauung of PC.
In the Burkean sense, Ted Kennedy is now a 'conservative,' so count me out as well...
I personally fall between a Rothbardian economic viewpoint and a Dostoevskian spiritual viewpoint.
DiversityRecession1 3 years ago
One cannot admire Dostoevsky and follow Rothbard with any sane consistency. It simply doesnt make sense. Dostoevsky uses the novel as a Christian evangelist. Rothbard is concerned with preserving liberal political liberty, & is an agnostic.
As for Bloom: he was not a political activist in any sense. He spoke for the sake of philosophy & its serious oppositions. He didnt espouse any personal "commitments". His writings are more interesting & useful than the various rumors about his private life.
DocteurLariviere 3 years ago
Your superficial conception of exoteric aspects of certain aforementioned worldviews are forgiven be it that you are absolutely ignorant of esoteric traditionalism.
Keep learning, and never stop trying.
DiversityRecession1 3 years ago
Gentleman, please.
BTW: Bloom was openly and vulgarly gay - a pompous Queen actually. No rumors; just facts. This is not a private matter because Bloom so exalted "friendship" over romantic love, especially in his embarrassing last book, that it seems fair to ask where he was coming from. The Straussian cult of Grecophilia at the expense of the true twin foundations of the West - Rome and Christianity, owes much to this "manly" homosexuality and to Strauss's misogynistic Judaism.
MarcusCMarcellus 3 years ago
Interesting, didn't know he was gay. Reminds me of Jung's autobiography when he discusses Nietzsche and his admiration for him but that the only true 'Nietzscheans' he ever knew were both homosexual. Then there's Foucault obviously, another one 'openly and vulgarly gay'. There's definitely some kind of pattern emerging here. I used to be a Nietzschean but soon saw the error of my ways so I count myself out of this company. Is it rage against the herd, the superman as paternal object of love?
zootsoot2006 2 years ago
Forgot to include compensation for being considered a 'fairy' growing up.
zootsoot2006 2 years ago
"Dostoevsky uses the novel as a Christian evangelist"
Hopefully you don't believe that is all he has to offer in his novels.
vos360 3 years ago
If you can understand how Franklin could admire Whitefield, Nietzsche could admire Pascal, Hemingway could admire Chesterton, and Pound could admire Eliot, then you may be able to understand how a Rothbardite could admire Dostoevsky. Propaganda and artistry are not mutually exclusive qualities.
greatsea 2 years ago
@greatsea what are you talking about?
mholdens82 1 year ago
Comment removed
mholdens82 1 year ago
The cultural demographic you describe sounds awfully like what I understand to be the standard "Yankee" and quintessential PC liberal-democratic (or Linconite 'Republican'), I'm curious how he managed to come to such a sophisticated understanding of the thinker in question and cultural stance.
I'm a keen Hoppe reader; surprised to encounter a Rothbard AND Nietzsche reader here, of all places . . . today is a good day.
barrywinehousexp 2 years ago
Looking over your profile, I see that you are from Lichtenstein, the nation that Hoppe holds up as almost the ideal of a confederal Europe.
I concur with him, and would love to hear more about your country.
DiversityRecession1 2 years ago
@MarcusCMarcellus
Absolutely right.
aes229 1 year ago
Allan Bloom was an incredible intellect. His warnings went completely over the head of us, and the American mind is now officially closed.
I am a bit interested in his personal commitment to any idea of conservatism, in respect to some of the weird rumors I have heard floating around about the man.
DiversityRecession1 3 years ago