Categoria: thoughts on life and its philosophy

small print

da Peter Herrmann's Blog, posted in general, thoughts on life and its philosophy, works, projects, publications

Probably only few people perceive reading arithmetical formulas exciting, but writing them is somewhat exciting, in particular if one thinks about the small print, i.e. the thorough definition of the underlying and inherent items. Sure, the exiting part is then reading the work by others, using those formulas in a more or less novelist manner.

Is it the same in looking at real history? What is the small print, what is the big formula? The textbook-like and short official presentations, the various official documents on IMF policies etc.  or the handwritten notes, that had been buried in the achieves? Showing what irresponsible people knew, how they managed – or failed to manage – to influence private capitalist interests (another expression for: left control over national politics to global capitalists) and what they had been eating before, while and after decisions had been taken.

There is surely a good reason for burying “personal documents” in the vatican archives for 70 years …

Based a little bit on both is the draft on “Economy of Difference and Differentiation. Precarity – searching for a new interpretative paradigm” which is the preparation for moving collaboration with Vyacheslav Bobkov from the All Russia Centre of Living Standard  on our next book forward.

The work is especially building on:

Also the working Papers

Austerity

da Peter Herrmann's Blog, posted in contemporary socio-economic situation, general, thoughts on life and its philosophy

Austerity policies (for some more general considerations on austerity see here)  in Belgium are not new – and a 2013 study by Oxfam about

THE TRUE COST OF AUSTERITY AND INEQUALITY

may provide a glimpse at the problem. And it clearly shows the tensions that are not least caused by the European Union policies. So, it is no wonder that we find no measures against countries as Hungary where we find an ongoing battle about the attempts of the Orban-Government to criminalise homelessness and the homeless – relative success stories, informing us that the

Hungary Supreme Court Allows Homeless Back on Streets

are surely overshadowed by the fact that the same policy is now pursued by different means, as according to the same source now

The bill allows district local councils to rule certain areas as prohibited for the homeless. [1]

Of course, it still is a success, not least as we have to recognise in this context that

Civil Rights Groups Rally against Ban of Homeless from Public Areas

But, coming back to Belgium, there is more to it:

In short we may speak of a “convergence” of policies in Europe against homelessness as policies against the homeless.

Noteworthy is that austerity policies in Belgium are increasingly virulent.

In consequence not least of this Belgio-European political course we find that the scale of poverty increased tremendously recently, doubling in just four years.

But that is not all – these dramatic cuts in personal lives are going hand in hand with the redefinition of public spaces and the responsibility of private.

If EUrope really wants to claim its roots in ancient traditions (which is surely dangerous in some respect, e.g. if we think about the abduction of Europe by Zeus)[2]/[3] there would be good reason to revisit for instance Cicero’s work stating in paragraph 22 of the first book of De Officciis

Sed quoniam, ut praeclare scriptum est a Platone, non nobis solum nati sumus ortusque nostri partem patria vindicat, partem amici, atque, ut placet Stoicis, quae in terris gignantur, ad usum hominum omnia creari, homines autem hominum causa esse generatos, ut ipsi inter se aliis alii prodesse possent, in hoc naturam debemus ducem sequi, communes utilitates in medium adferre, mutatione officiorum, dando accipiendo, tum artibus, tum opera, tum facultatibus devincire hominum inter homines societatem.

Steven Hill argues that

Europe … was founded on a feudal and Catholic value system which believed that the exercise of privilege by the wealthy came with wider social obligations beyond mere charity. Typical of this view, St. Augustine in the 5th century AD declared, “He who uses his wealth badly possesses it wrongfully.”

But even in Northern American law we find, according to Gregory S. Alexander the notion

that American property law, both on the private and public sides, includes a social-obligation norm, but that this norm has never been explicitly recognized as such nor systemically developed

Sure, engaging in this debate would open a wide field – Aquinas, for instance can be interpreted in both ways, as supporter of equality and inequality alike, as advocate of accumulation and modesty. And there would also be the need to discuss the “translation” of ancient traditions (not only of Christianity but also of Islam and all the others) into “modernity”.

In any case, the reality is rather simple: the public, the common, the general interest had been redefined by these European institutions – and they are further redefined – giving the power away to private bodies that are now building their fortresses within the fortress.

Looking at this fortress then, here the recent excessively violent form, it remains to be discussed if it is in line with Article 1 – Protection of property of the Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms [4]

Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general principles of international law.

The preceding provisions shall not, however, in any way impair the right of a State to enforce such laws as it deems necessary to control the use of property in accordance with the general interest or to secure the payment of taxes or other contributions or penalties.

Sure, looking at the formulation of this passage from the protocol shows the entire dilemma: lawful is what is said by the law and the law says what the lawmakers say.

There can only be one conclusion then: we need a law made by the people and not for the people …. – and of course, for this we need the public spaces.

Otherwise, there are too many ways of people being killed – and some are slower than this, but not less brute.

 

===================

[1] Hmmmm …: I opened the Wall Street Journal website for several times now and there is always the same ad coming up: “Discover your Perfect Home”

[2] see Maria Mies: Europe in the Global Economy or the Need to De-Colonize Europe; in: Peter Herrmann (Ed.): Challenges for a Global Welfare System: Commack, New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.; 1999: 153-171; here: 160 f.

[3]            see in this context also the reflections SURELY PROVOCATIVE – THE STAGING OF ‘RUSALKA’ and EUROPE ANCIENT AND PRESENT

[4] as amended by Protocol No. 11 (Paris, 20.III.1952 – according to the provisions of Protocol No. 11 (ETS No. 155), as of its entry into force, on 1 November 1998)

things in perspective

da Peter Herrmann's Blog, posted in contemporary socio-economic situation, thoughts on life and its philosophy

Yes, the development of Cuban-USNA-relationships is great. Still, there are some things a bit worrying, for instance if we read in a

FACT SHEET: Charting a New Course on Cuba

we read

… it does not serve America’s interests, or the Cuban people …

There are many more interesting aspects in the formulation that provokes some thoughts … – about who states and people are, about what is good and what is bad …

One source we should not forget when following the debate is surely the one from Cuba itself.

The Big Formula – and a “look between the windows”  – or a Pre-Christmas Story

da Peter Herrmann's Blog, posted in contemporary socio-economic situation, joys - what we usually take for it, thoughts on life and its philosophy

I walked back from the library where I had been working during the day – a few days before Christmas 2014 – elaborating a formula that makes it possible to formulate (of course, no formula can calculate) schemes of (dis-)integration of societies – I left my scooter near to the office, so I have to walk down the Via dei Condotti, one of the most luxurious shopping malls in Rome, at this time of the year probably also one of the busiest places in town although many are here just for window shopping, the displays full of surprises showing that the world is a stage, and lost its sense.

It is not often that one sees it, that I see it (may be that I am not often enough walking through the city): a more or less young man, a man in “his best years”, obviously foreigner, migrant, being dragged by another man – “private security” is written on his jacket. That he has to look after his bike while dragging the other along the street does not make things better. A few people turn around … – few people turn around, watching the scene. – What could one do, what we see is most likely legal, according to the letters of the law.

A few meter further: one policeman, one policewomen, their car standing in the way, but still leaving enough space for a large Merc to pass and turn from one of the side streets into the narrow mall; enough space for the not smaller BMW that follows. I am not aware of a sign that limits traffic here but even of their would be –

Wound for a wound, eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth

Leviticus 24:20

But here it about something else:

sign for a sign

And of course it is telling – it is also part of the formula on which I had been working – that we find this division of labour between private security service and police, executing sovereign tasks.

Via dei Condotti, one of the most luxurious shopping malls in Rome, at this time of the year probably also one of the busiest places in town although many are here just for getting absorbed by the window dressing of our societies.

Yes, plural as it is only by accident that I see it here; there are so many other places like it, and many more…

The Church and Economy

da Peter Herrmann's Blog, posted in thoughts on life and its philosophy, Uncategorized, works, projects, publications

I just finished the draft of another article which may one day end up in a small collection of theological writings – actually already my three volumes “Writings on Philosophy and Economy of Power”

New Princedoms; God, Rights, Law and a Good Society and Rights – Developing Ownership by Linking Control over Space and Time are reasonably full on this topic.

This time it is on Liberation Theology, a contribution written for an edited volume on Social Pedagogics in Latin America (Edited by Jacob Kornbeck and Xavier Úcar)

While writing, I came across this passage, from an article by Rachel Donadio in the New York Times (Francis’ Humility and Emphasis on the Poor Strike a New Tone at the Vatican; 25.5.2013:

“The economy has picked up again here,” said Marco Mesceni, 60, a third-generation vendor of papal memorabilia outside St. Peter’s Square. “It was so hard to sell anything under Benedict. This pope attracts huge crowds, and they all want to bring back home something with his smiling face on it.”

Much could be said – and is said already – on this pope, his charisma and his meaning for the development of catholicism; and much had been said about unintended consequences of action. In this case it is amazing in which way and to which extent we – even being pope – cannot escape commodification. of course, there is also a meaning for papal politics in it: the demand to take up responsibility in the world in which we live.

Indeed, we may then be grateful to read in the same article:

He has repeatedly returned to the euro crisis and the suffering it has caused in Greece and the Catholic countries of Southern Europe.

“If investments in the banks fail, ‘Oh, it’s a tragedy,’ ” he said, speaking extemporaneously for more than 40 minutes at a Pentecost vigil last weekend, after a private audience with the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, the architect of Europe’s austerity policies. “But if people die of hunger or don’t have food or health, nothing happens. This is our crisis today.”

Still, all this remains very limited: as important as moral statements are, it is important to work towards real redistribution, public responsibility and a new approach towards global economy, based in human rights:rights that have to go beyond protection and need to be enhanced by a fourth generation of Human Rights.

wage – poverty – death rate II

da Peter Herrmann's Blog, posted in contemporary socio-economic situation, thoughts on life and its philosophy

After having recently written about wage, poverty and death rate, I just want to make readers aware of a post in another blog, by Paul Spicker, titled Feeding Britain. it is especially remarkable that it is about the situation in claimed “triumphant Britain” – some claims are just shames….

Where are we going?

da Peter Herrmann's Blog, posted in contemporary socio-economic situation, joys - what we usually take for it, Peter's Log, thoughts on life and its philosophy, works, projects, publications

Looking at the edition of the 25th of November 2013 of L’Osservatore Romano, and the online version of the article

Between Dignity and Transcendence

we read the report on the pope’s visit in Strasbourg, where he addressed the European Parliament and the Council of Europe.

Opening that page, I saw on the top one of Raphael’s most beautiful frescoes:

The School of Athens

Now, one may take it simply as nice ornament. And actually meaningful as it is frequently claimed that Europe today has the still strong roots in ancient history in particular of Athens and Rome. Looking at Plato and Aristotle at the centre — it is surely a remarkable reference to European tradition then: can we interpret their appearance together as hinting to the claim for a “moral, ethical state”? Plato’s obviously pointing on a merger of dialectics and the trinity – we may take from the book in his hands: the Timeaus the famous passage:

“For whenever in any three numbers, whether cube or square, there is a mean, which is to the last term what the first term is to it; and again, when the mean is to the first term as the last term is to the mean—then the mean becoming first and last, and the first and last both becoming means, they will all of them of necessity come to be the same, and having become the same with one another will be all one”.

And we see Aristotle, holding the Nichomachean Ethics in his hands, as a kind of secular challenge, asking for the goodness in the here an now, guided by the two sets of virtues

  • moral virtues are in his view prudence, justice, fortitude, courage, liberality, magnificence, magnanimity, temperance;
  • intellectual virtues are in his view justice, perseverance, empathy, integrity, intellectual courage, confidence in reason, autonomy.

There is so much more in it, even the positioning of the various colleagues of the two central figures is telling: For instance Diogenes – the personification of putting into practice of complete modesty and self-sufficiency – somewhat degraded on the stairs, “scientists” as Heraclitus, Euclid or Parmenides somewhat sidelined, working “on the ground”, though it is left open if this is meant to be a positive or a negative reference to the “exact sciences”.

But there we may actually hesitate, assuming that is not so open.

Obviously, at Raphael’s time such fresco had not been a standalone work, and indeed we all know that it is part of La Stanza Della Segnatura, The Room of the Signature. And such “being part of” means nothing less than the different sides of the room being in a “communicating relationship.

This means that the Scuola di Atene is actually only one part of a wider dispute: it is confronted with

accompanied on the one side by the

and on the other side by

Taken together it reflects the dispute between philosophy, theology sidelined by jurisprudence and poesy.

It may be open for dispute in which way La Stanza actually is mainly a reference to humanism and universalism. And it may be left open in which way each of them finally has to be defined. In any case the perspective in particular of the two main sides is eye-catching: the philosophers, “walking out” of the painting, into the room and slightly stepping down … passing the realities: “exact science” science (Heraclitus, Euclid or Parmenides) and “self-chosen modesty” (Diogenes), from there taking us – all of us who are standing in the middle of La Stanza, and thus being part of the entire scene, part of this history – with them: now “ascending”, open for the dispute of the sacrament which is not much different from the last judgement (for that, of course, my favourite is that by Rubens — former students of mine may remember the tour I made with them through the Alte Pinakothek and the Pinakothek der Moderne in Munich.

Having read the speech in Strasbourg and the interview Francesco gave on the return trip, I realise that … – I think I realize just some surprise. Of course, Im a not against reference to some ancient philosophers — but I am surprised if we stepped from there only about 300 to 500 years (I know, generous with figures) forwards.

====

Coming back to one on the lower levels, Parmenides. He reflected on

Being is all there is.

According to him there are two realities: the one of truth, i.e. the one that objectively is and cannot be changed; according to him, the other is a reality of opinion and appearances – deceitful and tempting on the basis of nothingness.

Sure, the solution sounds simple: acceptance of reality, rejection of appearance.

The tricky thing however is …, well, a world in which appearance is reality. In other words: a world in which a virtual economy: speculation on financial markets, faked insurance of risks which is assessed by corrupt systems … where such a world is the world of Parmedian truth.

Indeed, we have to return to Plato here, and to what he said about dialectics — and to how dialectics had been put on its feet, much later.

====

Raphael, surely one of the most outstanding artists of the renaissance … —

— … the pope’s visit in Strasbourg under the umbrella of La stanza della Segnatura … —

— … the positioning of the event under the heading Between Dignity and Transcendence … —

all this may be a reminder to think about some aspects of what I wrote under the title

Prolegomena. Encore Citizenship – Revisiting or Redefining? in the book I edited under the title

World’s New Princedoms. Critical Remarks on Claimed Alternatives by New Life

(Amsterdam: Rozenberg Publishers, 2010 and Bremen/Oxford: academicpress, 2012)

Worrying and enlightening is in particular what had been said at the end of the interview, and it should be the Italian (as far I know original) version. It is about a certain denial of the past, of having been archbishop of Buenos Aires – though this personal history remains as such present, the emphasis is now laid on being successor  of St. Peter which is strangely interpreted in a highly Eurocentric way. Is there so little from Latin American historical experience – past and present – that is worth to arrive at a truly global respective, a perspective that is inspired also by the wealth of indigenous people?

So, where are we going? And to where is the pope actually leading us?

It is something that needs to be discussed further – not so much the Vatican’s perspective but the perspective for instance emerging from the socialist movements in Latin America.

A tiny contribution may be found in a chapter I wrote for a book. The chapter is on

Social pedagogy and liberation theology,

written for a book titled

Latin American Social Pedagogy: relaying concepts, values and methods between Europe and the Americas”?

and

edited by Jacob Kornbeck and Xavier Úcar (forthcoming)

Optimism – Pessimism – Realism

da Peter Herrmann's Blog, posted in academic life - living in academia, contemporary socio-economic situation, social quality, thoughts on life and its philosophy

We frequently talk about the glass, wondering if it is half full or half empty … , and easily deny or overlook when it is broken.

Only looking for a new one then will allow us to avail of one that is at least half full and that may be filled up further.

It is not too late yet …

da Peter Herrmann's Blog, posted in academic life - living in academia, general, thoughts on life and its philosophy

It was in the dreary month of November,

The gloomy days grew shorter,

The wind tore the foliage off the trees,

….

No, not the time I visited Germany, as Heinrich Heine did, writing A Winter’s Tale about Germany

 

We ended a European conference: social services, the meaning of care with its various facets, not least the pressure from marketisation and the neglect of a system of which it had been said in 2013 that this capitalism kills.

 

I said good bye to a colleague from Hungary – I did not know her, mentioned en passent my position at the Corvinus University and ….

… Could I only recite that then

She sang of love and its woes,

Of sacrifice and meeting again,

High above, in a better world,

Void of suffering, void of pain.

I heard another story instead

Orban finally took him away

– so on the occasion of my next visit I will not see the Marx statue that stood in the central hall of the university. Of course, it had been only a monument, a symbol – but yes: it had been a symbol: a manifestation of a writer, scientist and activist. And it had been a symbol for a writer who had been recognised as important contributor to the development of world culture – part of the heritage of Western culture which means in the understanding of the UNESCO a recognition not only of the importance but also in terms of the positive contribution.

With the news about Orban’s recent coupe I leave the venue – a stale feeling, weakness and disgust …

Indeed, Orban and his myrmidons learned what their recent victim said:

The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.

Of course, it is important, necessary to accuse this infringement of respect of Western culture, this arrogance of a snooty-nosed little upstart who is known for his pathological outages, his populist megalomania. Still, there is a wider perspective.

Some may recall the sentences by Martin Niemöller:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.[1]

And indeed, it is cum grano salis also relevant here:

  • First they came for the social commitment of property and established the radical freedom of the market – but we enjoyed it: choice and being able to decide
  • Then they came for the regulation, and dismantled the systems of regulating at least some standards – but we always objected bureaucratic rule and did not bother, assuming that reason will win anyway
  • Then they took the last public services away, establishing the market rule across the board – didn’t we complain for a long time of the lack of quality of public services …
  • Finally, there had indeed not been such thing as society, only individualists, pretending sociality by the commodities they buy, the brands by which they exhibit themselves … and even the memory of alternatives had been wiped out – then it will be too late …

Not yet – if we are serious now in interpreting the development correctly and, indeed, change it fundamentally.

[1]            There are different versions and there is along discussion on the statement – see here… And here.