Yes~Just~Why do intellectuals hate democracy? Let’s have a think~

Septem Artes Liberales, by Herrad of Landsberg (1180 AD).

 The classical liberal arts are seven in number and were the basic skills believed necessary for success in philosophical and theological studies. We can examine them using the 12th century monastery painting above. 

 PHILOSOPHY

 In the center of the painting above, we find lady Philosophy, to whom all the arts give service.  She sits as queen of the arts, with the philosophers Socrates and Plato under her feet.  In the upper right corner, we read,

“Seven fountains of wisdom flow from Philosophy which are called the seven liberal arts.  The Holy Spirit is the inventor of the seven liberal arts, which are: Grammar, Rhetoric, Dialectic, Music, Arithmetic, Geometry, Astronomy.”

It is important to note that the seven liberal arts were held to be invented by the Holy Spirit.  It seems unlikely that the Holy Spirit would invent an educational system that was inferior to that invented by modern “expert”.  The changes in education that took place in the early 20th century were errors, not improvements.  Until we restore true education, we will not cease to reproduce the results.  We will consider the seven liberal arts surrounding philosophy beginning at the top.

 GRAMMAR

 Grammar was called by the ancients the Janua Artium, the “gateway of the arts”.  Grammar holds a book and a rod (scopae) probably for punishing young students.  Above Grammar, we read,

 Per me quivis discit, vox, littera, syllaba quid est..

By me does anyone learn what is the voice, the letter and the syllable.

 RHETORIC

 Moving clockwise from Grammar, we find Rhetoric, holding a tablet and stilus.  Rhetoric is the art of finding the means of persuading an audience.  Above her we read,

 Causarum vires per me, rhetor alme, requires.

By me, kind Rhetorician, you will seek the force of motives/cases.

 St. Augustine addressed the importance of Rhetoric best:

“Who will dare to say that truth is to take its stand unarmed against falsehood.  Since the faculty of eloquence is available for both sides…why do not good men study to engage it on the side of truth?”      

                                         -On Christian Doctrine, book IV

DIALECTIC

 Next we find Dialectic, or Logic holding a dog’s head.  Some believe the dog to be used in opposition to the wolf typically associated with heresy.  Above Dialectic it is written

 Argumenta sino concurrere more canino.

I allow arguments to battle in the manner of a dog.

 MUSIC

 Fourth is Music, playing the cithara, lyre and organistrum.  Above her, we read,

 Musica sum late doctrix artis variatae.

I am Music far and wide the teacher of the arts of variation.

 ARITHMETIC

 Fourth is Arithmetic, the art of counting objects at rest.  Here she is seen counting beads on a rope.  Her banner reads,

 Ex numeris consto, quorum discrimina monstro.

From the numbers I exist, of which I teach the differences.

 GEOMETRY

 Sixth is Geometry, the art of measuring objects at rest rightly.  Geometry is seen measuring the earth with a compass.  Over Geometry we read,

 Terrae mensuras per multas dirigo curas.

By many pains, I direct the measurements of the earth.

 ASTRONOMY

 Last is Astronomy, holding a bushel basket and numbering the stars.  The art of astronomy considers the relation between numbers and the laws of motion.  Above Astronomy we read,

 Ex astris nomen traho, per quae discitur omen.

I draw my name from the stars, by which the omen is learned.

 Lastly, what makes the classical liberal arts Christian is the spirit in which St. Augustine advised that they be pursued:

“It is well to warn studious and able young men, who fear God and are seeking for happiness in life, not to venture heedlessly upon the branches of learning beyond the pale of the Church of Christ as if these could secure for them the happiness they seek.”

I am far, far too old a man to be sexually confused~praise Jesus~but I am yet young enough to be politically confused~is anyone not~in an absolute sense~I am a Catholic Royalist~in a practical sense~I am a Classical Liberal~a Gaullist~a Rockefeller Republican~in either sense~my head is soon for the chopping block~to hasten my interlude with Madame La Guillotine~I here transmit a note taken from~what I am told is an abrogately enemy publication called Daily Beast~I’ll not here remark what that name conjures to the Italian mind~but I will say that what I transmit is today startling~in this city of the terminally brain dead~I transmit to you~A Very well~done article about a talented and intelligent man~when was the last time you listened to one of them? I think intelligent men are even rarer than Classical Liberals~Rockefeller Republicans~Gaullists~or my most dear~Catholic Royalists~~

comme ca~~

The Politics of Literature: An interview with Nobel laureate Mario Vargas Llosa

by  Oct 10, 2013 7:21 AM EDT

Why do intellectuals hate democracy? Was Borges a fascist? The contentious 2010 Nobel Laureate Mario Vargas Llosa talks to Michael Moynihan about the big questions in literature and and politics.

      Vargas Llosa, the Peruvian novelist and winner of the 2010 Nobel Prize for Literature, is considered a political novelist because his politics aren’t the politics of most novelists. In the pantheon of modern Spanish-language fiction you’ll find a surplus of writers informed by radical thought—think Jose Saramago, Roberto Bolaño, Eduardo Galeano, Carlos Fuentes, and Gabriel Garcia Marquez. But Vargas Llosa is an outlier, an apostate from radicalism turned habitué of the classical liberal world, a former supporter of the Cuban Revolution transformed into an evangelist for free markets and free trade. And in a literary milieu charged by ideology, this

    means 

      something.

    70050820
    David Levenson/Getty

    It is difficult to separate Vargas Llosa’s politics from his fiction writing—the attentive reader will divine much about his worldview from his novels. But one needn’t read tea leaves because he is an unapologetically political figure. In 1990, Vargas Llosa embarked on a brief, ambitious, and ill-fated political career, running for president of Peru, an election he lost to the corrupt and thuggish Alberto Fujimori. These day he engages the political world with tub-thumping opinion columns in the Spanish daily El Pais.

    Back in May, I sat down with Vargas Llosa at Oslo’s Grand Hotel after he delivered a coruscating speech to the Oslo Freedom Forum on “literature, freedom, and power.” He speaks in heavily-accented English, but fluidly and lyrically, with both force and deliberation. He is thoughtful on topical political matters (“The idea of Europe is a great idea; it deserves to succeed…a counterpoint to the monsters; the United States and now China”) but expansive and polemical when discussing the intersection of politics and literature.

    The following is an edited and slightly condensed transcript of our conversation.

    You said in your Oslo Freedom Forum lecture that “good literature is always subversive.” It reminded me of Orwell’s essay “The Prevention of Literature,” where he attacked those writers in thrall to Soviet communism.

    You don’t perceive the subversiveness of literature when you live in a free society. When you live in a free society you have the feeling that literature is just entertainment. But when democracy disappears, when a totalitarian regime replaces democracy, you feel immediately how literature becomes a very important vehicle to say what you cannot say otherwise. And it’s an instrument to resist what you are facing. Authors are sometimes not aware of what they are accomplishing in an authoritarian society. Literature is a living demonstration that things are not going well in an authoritarian society.

    But this isn’t an advocation of didactic fiction.

    No, not at all. You can make experimental literature and have this subversive effect. And that is the reason why all dictatorships are so suspicious of literature. Otherwise, they would let literature flourish. No, they are always very worried; they want to control it, they establish censorship. On this, there is no exception. Fascist or communist, it is exactly the same. Control literature because there is some kind of danger there. And I think there is some kind of danger, even if it is not immediately identifiable. 

    What about the middle way between authoritarianism and dictatorship? I know you have written about Hugo Chavez, for instance, and one can get Mario Vargas Llosa’s books in Caracas.

    Oh, but with great difficulty. It is because in Caracas you still have a margin of freedom. But in Cuba—ask that Cuban journalist that is here [at the Oslo Freedom Forum]. He was telling me the way in which I am read in Cuba. It’s fantastic, you know? There are lists of people who want to read a certain book. Some times they are rented, sometimes it’s like a library, from individuals. [Dissident writer] Yoani Sanchez told me that she met her husband because she discovered that he had a novel of mine, The War of the End of the World. So she called him and said, “Is it true that you have a novel by Vargas Llosa?” He said, “Yes, but there is a list. But we can meet.” And they got married. I saw her recently and I said, “Is this story true?” She said, “Of course it is true. Thats why I am interested in what you are writing now. My sentimental future depends on it.”

    In open societies you have the impression that you are just enjoying literature, that it won’t have any affect on your life. But literature always has an affect on life, even if it’s not so visible. But when you have a dictatorship, this is so immediately visible. Literature becomes an instrument to resist, to communicate things. And this is so in right-wing dictatorships and in left-wing dictatorships. It becomes a non-conformist activity, reading becomes a risk. It’s very, very important to keep alive this thing that can’t be controlled, because literature can never be totally controlled. Television can. Cinema can.

    Why have so many novelists been swayed by dictatorship? From Gabriel Garcia Marquez to, say, the reaction of many French intellectuals to Solzhenitsyn.

    You remember what Camus wrote, that a very intelligent man in some areas can be stupid in others. In politics, intellectuals have been very stupid in many, many cases. They don’t like mediocrity. And democracy is an indication of mediocrity; democracy is to accept that perfection doesn’t exist in political reality. Everybody must make concessions in order to coexist peacefully and the result of this is mediocrity. But this mediocrity, history has demonstrated, is the most peaceful way to progress, prosperity, and to reduce violence. And intellectuals are much more prone to utopias.

    In politics, intellectuals have been very stupid in many, many cases. They don’t like mediocrity.

    After the collapse of communism, what is the utopian instinct amongst intellectuals and writers now?

    There is none. That is why they are so desperate and confused. You remember Foucault—who was one of the best thinkers of his generation—he supported Ayatollah Khomeini! He was so disappointed with communism that he decided that the Khomeini utopia was the right one! That gives you, I think, a very vivid example of the way in which some intellectuals detest democracy.

    In your case, I have seen more references to your politics—classical liberalism—than I have for many other novelists.

    But the reason is because I am an exception. There are so few writers and intellectuals who are classical liberals without any kind of shame [about their politics].

    Borges didn’t get the Nobel Prize because of his support for Pinochet. Were your politics an issue when you won the Literature Prize?

    Borges unfortunately did wrong things. He accepted the invitation to be decorated by Pinochet, which was a very big mistake. He did it not to make a kind of solidarity, a gesture for the dictatorship; he did it because he despised politics so much that he was prepared to….[trails off]. But I think it was a very, very bad mistake. He was very courageous during the Second World War when Argentina was in favor of fascism. He was a deep defender of the Allies.

    He detested Peronism in such a way that he became so infatuated with the military, which I think was also wrong. But he wasn’t a fascist. He was a conservative. But I don’t think his work is contaminated by these attitudes.

    Should it affect how we read his books, in the way it does with [Norwegian Nobel laureate and Nazi sympathizer] Knut Hamsun or Ezra Pound?

    Oh no, not at all. The literature of Borges is great literature that overcomes all types of political prejudices. He is one of the greatest writers of our times, one of the most original. And from the point of view of language, he has changed the Spanish literary language in the way that only writers like Cervantes have. It’s extraordinary because it’s a language in which emotions, sensations were much more important than ideas. For a long time, there was no writer in the Spanish-speaking world for whom ideas became as important as in Borges’s writing. He was an exception to a very strong tradition—precision, rationality. All this is new.

    What are you working on now?

    I finished a novel, El héroe discrete, that will be published in September in Spanish. It’s a novel set in contemporary Peru. It’s about the changes in Peru over the last ten years which are very, very important. A new middle class. All the new, successful entrepreneurs in Peru come from very poor, poor families—even peasant families. This is the background of the novel.

    Are you glad you didn’t win the Peruvian presidency?

    Now I am glad. I wasn’t when I lost. But I am very lucky. I wouldn’t have survived [had I won]. Certainly not. But it was a very interesting experience. It was pedagogical. I discovered how difficult it was to be honest and coherent in politics.

    Like The Daily Beast on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for updates all day long.

    Michael Moynihan is cultural news editor at The Daily Beast.

    For inquiries, please contact The Daily Beast at editorial@thedailybeast.com.

    I am far, far too old a man to be sexually confused~praise Jesus~but I am yet young enough to be politically confused~in an absolute sense~I am a Catholic Royalist~in a practical sense~I am a Classical Liberal~a Rockefeller Republican~in either sense~my head is soon for the chopping block~to hasten my interlude with Madame La Guillotine~I here transmit a note taken from~what I am told is an abrogately enemy publication called Daily Kos~I’ll not here remark what that name conjures to the Italian mind~but I will say that what I transmit is today startling~in this city of the terminally brain dead~I transmit to you~A Very well~done article about a talented and intelligent man~when was the last time you listened to one of them? I think intelligent men are even rarer than Classical Liberals~Rockefeller Republicans or~my most dear~Catholic Royalists~

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    image002 (20)
    I hold tight to the Republican view of time and money~~I write night and day~~yet~~while impecunious~~I am vastly overpaid~~in that taking pay to do what I love is unfair~~to my employer~~in a fair system~~under such circumstances~~I should pay him~~not he me~~I am far, far too old a man to be sexually confused~~praise Jesus~~but I am yet young enough to be politically confused~~is anyone not~in an absolute sense~~I am a Catholic Royalist~~in a practical sense~~I am a Classical Liberal~~a Gaullist~~a Rockefeller Republican~~in either sense~~my head is soon for the chopping block~~to hasten my interlude with Madame La Guillotine~~

    clip_image002MA9982782-0001

    
    

    ~~Κύριε ἐλέησον~~

    
    

    Rejoice and Glad!!

    
    

    Amen~~

    
    

    clip_image002MA9982782-0001

    
    

    EX LIBRIS

    
    

    ~~THEOS EK MĒCHANĒS~~

    
    

    JOHN DANIEL BEGG

    
    

    At

    
    

    Washington, District of Columbia

    
    

    United States

    Friday, 18th Octobre, Anno Domini Nostri Iesu Christi, 2013

    John Daniel Begg

    
    

    At

    
    

    Washington DC

    
    

    JOHN DANIEL BEGG

    
    

    PRESIDENT

    
    

    john daniel begg public affairs and speechwriting

    
    

    4853 Sedgwick Street

    North West

    Washington, DC 20016-2323533

    USA

    Voice Telephone: 1-(202) 966-8029

    Telefacsimile: 1-(202) 966-4125

    Mobile Telephone: 1-(202) 557-1064

    
    

    http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=tab_pro

    
    

    http://www.facebook.com/JohnDanielBeggPublicAffairs

    
    

    http://www.facebook.com/john.begg.33 http://www.pinterest.com/johnbegg33/boards/

    http://independent.academia.edu/johnbegg/Papers?s=nav#add

    Tweets: @jtdbegg

    
    

    http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=122865699&trk=hb_tab_pro_top

     
    "Jean-Marie Le Pen is a friend. He is dangerous for the political set because he's the only one who's sincere. He says out loud what many people think deep down, and what the politicians refrain from saying because they are either too demagogic or too chicken. Le Pen, with all his faults and qualities, is probably the only one who thinks about the interests of France before his own."~~
    French actor~~Alain Delon
     

    Website: https://johndanielbegg.wordpress.com

    I am far, far too old a man to be sexually confused~praise Jesus~but I am yet young enough to be politically confused~is anyone not~in an absolute sense~I am a Catholic Royalist~in a practical sense~I am a Classical Liberal~a Gaullist~a Rockefeller Republican~in either sense~my head is soon for the chopping block~to hasten my interlude with Madame La Guillotine~I here transmit a note taken from~what I am told is an abrogately enemy publication called Daily Beast~I’ll not here remark what that name conjures to the Italian mind~but I will say that what I transmit is today startling~in this city of the terminally brain dead~I transmit to you~A Very well~done article about a talented and intelligent man~when was the last time you listened to one of them? I think intelligent men are even rarer than Classical Liberals~Rockefeller Republicans~Gaullist~or my most dear~Catholic Royalists~


    Concept of the Catholic and Royal Army of America (CRAA)
    Advertisements

    Leave a Reply

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

    WordPress.com Logo

    You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

    Google+ photo

    You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

    Twitter picture

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

    Facebook photo

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

    Connecting to %s