Nicholas Berdyaev takes our arguments against equality, enhances them and gives them a strong philosophical foundation on which to tear down all pretentions that egalitarianism is good for society. This excerpt is from his work The Philosophy of Inequality,[1] where he is outlining the bankruptcy of the worldview of the Marxists who overthrew the Russian society, along with all other Revolutionaries,
"But ye have no memory of the good of the past, about the imperishable truth and beauty in it, ye lack memory of the creative and resusciative.
 |
Was Robespierre a new soul, a new man? No, he was to the depths of his being the old man, a man of the old regime, full of the old violent instincts. The French Revolution was made by people of the old soul, and they carried over into it all the old sins and passions. The new soul was born later, after the deep spiritual reaction against the revolution, when Chateaubriand wrote his "Rene" and "The Genius of Christianity". Then began a new era, inwardly distinct from the two preceeding centuries. The new man was born in the Catholic and romantic reaction. This is vouched for in the most positively credible of histories. In vain do you, the makers of the revolution, in the grip of its demons, in vain do ye think, that ye -- are creative people and that your deeds -- are creative deeds. In vain ye do think, that epochs of revolution -- are creative epochs within the life of mankind. Ye are people, completely bereft of creative spirit, cut off from it, hating and destroying creativity. Because indeed creativity -is something aristocratic, it is a deed of the finest, it does not tolerate the grip of the worst, the rule of the mob, whom ye serve. Is there creative a spirit in Robespierre or in Lenin? Have they not exterminated every creative impulse? Creativity does not endure equality, it demands inequality, an uplift, it does not permit of glancing about at neighbours, so as not to outpace them. The spirit of revolution, the spirit of the people of the revolution hates and eradicates genius and the sacred, it is in the grip of black envy towards the great and towards the sublime, it is intolerant of qualities and always thirsts to drown them in the quantitative. Never within an epoch of revolution did there blossom forth spiritual creativity, nor happen a religious and cultural rebirth, nor happen the flourishing of “science and the arts”.
“Creativity does not endure equality, it demands
inequality, an uplift, it does not permit of glancing about at neighbours, so
as not to outpace them.” He Berdyaev puts a spotlight on the issue of equality. Its core problem is that it is simply covetousness or envy granted license to
swing about society and seek after what it wants. Equality is the drive for
people to not allow anyone to have more than they have, to look in suspicion at those that do, and to find a way to correct things so that people are not
allowed to rise above others.
Whereas creativity requires nobility, or as Berdyaev puts
it, “creativity is something aristocratic”. Creativity does not take thought
for how others might not be able to compare to it, it is something people do because they want
to create something unique, something different, something that stands out.
This makes socialism, and particularly the Bolshevik form of socialism, the
enemy of creativity. This is why our modern cities and suburbs are so bland,
this is why modern movies suck, this is why video games are dropping in
quality, and why so many other parts of our society are becoming bland.
Socialism, Marxism, Communism, really oppressive Satanism is a form of evil
that does not want individual brilliance to excel. It drives people to tear
down and ruins their ability to create something in its place.
Berdyaev goes on to argue that this is the driving evil behind
all revolutions, this jealous spirit that wants to take and to crush, and stops people
from being creative. It is necessary for the revolutionary spirit to first die
so that then the Aristocratic spirit can rise up and bring something new in its
place.
This is a compelling book, I am only a little into it and already Berdyaev lends a strong philosophical basis to the many strong arguments against equality that we have all looked at already. Equality is a force for evil, a force
to be opposed, and Berdyaev appears to be a solid philosophical ally in this
good fight.
List of References
[1]
Nicholas Berdyaev, 1923, The Philosophy of Inequality, Published by Friar
Stephen Janos, pp. 8-9.
No comments:
Post a Comment