Re: Sympathetic


Subject: Re: Sympathetic
gogins@pipeline.com
Date: Thu Nov 04 2004 - 12:12:19 EST


Normally I prefer not to discuss religion or politics on this list -- I
enjoy discussing them elsewhere. This time I will comment.

I wish I could agree with you, but if the Nixon war and the Watergate
scandal did not discredit the Republican Party, neither will the Bush war
and some possible future scandal (which I hope doesn't happen, anyway,
though it probably will). The situation as I see it is that the Christian
right in this country is deeply committed to a world-view quite at odds
with reality, and they are committed in what I can't help but see as a
morally hypocritical way (not OK to do abortions, but heavy collateral
killing of women and children in Iraq is OK even though Iraq never attacked
us).

I think the fundamentalist reaction, which is driving both sides of this
war, is intellectually defensive and, from a theological point of view,
idolatrous because it is not truthful. I feel that secular culture, which
inherits late Romanticism, the Enlightenment, and the scientific worldview,
has succeeded in undermining the intellectual foundations of Christianity
without providing an adequate spiritual replacement. This the defensiveness
of fundamentalism is a defensiveness of identity and such reactions are
enormously dangerous.

To remedy the situation may well be beyond politics, but require a
religious awakening quite different from the fundamentalist reaction. I
have no formal religious affiliation myself, I used to be a Christian but
am no longer, I suppose I am some sort of philosophical theist with a
Buddhist tinge, but that is how I see it.

I'd guess my position is as hard to understand for most of the people on
this list as it would be for the Christian right.

Original Message:
-----------------
From: Richard Wentk richard@skydancer.com
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 15:40:12 +0000
To: cec-conference@concordia.ca
Subject: Re: Sympathetic

At 09:29 04/11/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>Isn't the definition of "acousmatic" or "electroacoustic" a deep queston in
>both politics and theology?

Or possibly vice versa.

I'm tending - perhaps optimistically - to see Bush The Sequel as an
opportunity for the far right to over reach itself and eventually burn
itself out. I think the US needs to get this out of its system, and once
the fallout settles (possibly literally) it may yet turn out that everyone
will be a lot more realistic about what a far right agenda means in
practice. Perhaps even in a Never Again kind of a way.

Meanwhile, I doubt that funding new music is going to be high on the agenda
on the new administration, so I hope those in the US who are trying to do
this for a living aren't going to have too hard a time of it.

If nothing I think else we're going to be seeing a *lot* more subversive
art now. Which is not as good a thing as not needing to be subversive in
the first place, but I suppose it's a consolation of sorts.

Richard

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:04 EST