Degenerate Moderns: Modernity As Rationalized Sexual Misbehavior

Degenerate Moderns: Modernity As Rationalized Sexual Misbehavior[PDF / Epub] ✩ Degenerate Moderns: Modernity As Rationalized Sexual Misbehavior ☉ E. Michael Jones – In this ground breaking book Jones shows how major determining leaders in modern thought and culture have rationalized their own immoral behavior and projected it onto a universal canvas The main thes In this Modernity As Epub Û ground breaking book Jones shows how major determining leaders in modern thought and culture have rationalized their own immoral behavior and projected it onto a universal canvas The main thesis of this book is that in the intellectual life there are only two ultimate alternatives either the thinker conforms desire to truth or he conforms truth to desire Degenerate Moderns is a marvelous tour de force Reuired reading for anyone who wishes to understand the intellectual fashions of the Twentieth century.

Catholic writer Modernity As Epub Û former professor at Saint Mary's College in Indiana and the current editor of Culture Wars magazineE Micheal Jones is controversial for his criticism against judaism.

Degenerate Moderns: Modernity As Rationalized Sexual
  • Paperback
  • 259 pages
  • Degenerate Moderns: Modernity As Rationalized Sexual Misbehavior
  • E. Michael Jones
  • English
  • 20 October 2015
  • 9780898704471

10 thoughts on “Degenerate Moderns: Modernity As Rationalized Sexual Misbehavior

  1. Robert Tessmer says:

    In 1938 the English novelist Aldous Huxley admitted something that the other literary mandarins of his day probably wished he had kept to himself Huxley's revelation was this the real reason intellectuals of his generation had embraced modernism was that it gave them license to have unlimited sex Modern intellectuals of course often pose as sexual revolutionaries But until recently the sualid sex lives of people like Jean Paul Sartre or Margaret Mead or Bertrand Russell were treated delicately by biographers It is after all difficult to portray as a great friend of humanity someone who on every page is using other people especially sexual partners like KleenexApart from the usual white washing of liberal icons there was another reason for the biographical silence one that has much to do with the spiritual dislocations of our age Since Luther and Descartes there has been in the West a notion that what we do with our bodies has no effect on how we use our minds From this standpoint it is easy to maintain that a Russell or a Sartre always managed to keep their obsessive sexual lives in a sealed container whenever they sat down to write philosophy The selfish and pathological their conduct is revealed to have been the fervently their disciples insist that there is no connection between what people do and what they thinkBut a recent spate of biographies notable for their lurid sexual detail strongly suggest that the private lives of modern intellectuals cannot be breezily dismissed when taking stock of their ideas A classic example is the economist John Maynard Keynes the scratch of whose pen turned the Western democracies into fiscal junkies Keynes was a promiscuous homosexual but his first biographer Sir Roy Harrod refused to admit the existence much less the significance of Keynes's orientation But Keynes would have done a great service if he had begun The General Theory of Employment Interest and Money with the disclosure that he was a Bloomsbury aesthete and practicing homosexual He could have explained how he and his friends did not believe in self denial or consider that they had any obligation to posterity Perhaps as a result we might have lower federal deficitsAs E Michael Jones shows in his brilliant new book Degenerate Moderns Keynes was hardly an isolated case Jones's thesis is simple Modernity is rationalized sexual misbehavior Lust of course is a common enough vice Butthe crucial intellectual event occurs when vices are transmuted into theories when the intellectual sets up shop in rebellion against moral law and therefore in rebellion against truth All modern isms follow as a result of this rebellion All of them can best be understood in light of the moral disorders of their founders proponents and adherentsThe claim that the private vices of intellectuals can spread through the whole fabric of society like an ugly stain will land Jones in the same hot water as Paul Johnson whose Intellectuals was another rogue's gallery of secular prophets who preached public benevolence while leading lives of the utmost moral sualor Both writers show that the twin creeds of modernity personal hedonism and social utopianism are the products of the disordered lives of middle class intellectuals But Jones's book breaks new ground in probing the subtle regions of the human heart where desire confronts truth and rearranges it for its own ends Degenerate Moderns begins with a uote from the German philosopher Josef Pieper whose thoughts about this matter could not be unfashionable or correctSince we nowadays think that all a man needs for acuisition of truth is to exert his brain or less vigorously and since we consider an ascetic approach to knowledge hardly sensible we have lost the awareness of the close bond that links the knowledge of the truth to the condition of purity Thomas |Auinas says that unchastity's first born daughter is blindness of spirit Only he who wants nothing for himself who is not subjectively interested can know the truth On the other hand a selfishly corrupt will to pleasure destroys both resoluteness of spirit and the ability of the psyche to listen in silent attention to the language of realityModern academics unembarrassed by metaphysics will scoff at the notion that the spiritual structure of our personality is deeply sensitive to sexual behavior Nor will they like the idea that under the guise of scientific objectivity thinkers like Freud Jung Margaret Mead and Alfred Kinsey constantly distorted the truth so that it would fit their peculiar sexual agendas But Jones makes a strong case that this indeed is what modernity has been all aboutJones's first degenerate modern he could have found a subtler phrase is the anthropologist Margaret Mead whose reporting of the sexual habits of Samoans became a bible of modern paganism Mead went to Samoa as a young graduate student in 1925; she spent a mere six weeks learning the language and then set about investigating the sex lives of the natives The result was Coming of Age in Samoa which has sold millions of copies in a dozen languages In novelistic detail Mead painted a paradise where sex was plentiful and guilt free A day in Mead's Samoa begins as lovers slip home from trysts beneath the palm trees or in the shadow of beached canoes Her Samoans laugh at stories of romantic love scoff at fidelity and smile on casual homosexual practices Young Samoans according to Mead get so much sex in every direction that their adolescence is entirely free of the stresses which typify this period in advanced culturesMead's book was seized on by intellectuals like Bertrand Russell as proof that the sexual strictures of Judeo Christianity were cultural accidents and that people could get along fine without them Unfortunately as anthropologists like Derek Freeman eventually showed every detail of Mead's book turned out to be false If anything Samoans are puritanical about sex than Westerners and place a far higher premium on female virginity As for Samoan adolescence being a blissful period of sexual ease Freeman found that the suicide rate for this group was and is unusually high and that many of the suicides relate to shame at illicit sexual unions And against Mead's claim that the idea of rape was completely foreign to the Samoan mind Freeman discovered one of the highest rates of forcible rape in the world then and nowComing of Age in Samoa turned out to be in Jones's words about as scientific as the screenplay of Blue Lagoon How then did Mead get everything so wrong? If Samoans are as sexually strict as Freeman and other anthropologists say where did she get the idea that they regard adultery as unimportant? The answer comes from Mead herself At the time she was examining the Samoans Mead who was married had two affairs going one with a man and one with a woman the anthropologist Ruth Benedict who was Mead's lesbian lover until Benedict's death in 1948 The young Mead belonged to a set of New York intellectuals who discovered sexual liberation decades before Haight Ashbury The relatively new discipline of anthropology lent itself to the rationalization of their behavior As one of Mead's bitter ex husbands wrote to her her brand of anthropology was simply a dishonest way of treating your private affairsIt doesn't say much for the discipline of anthropology that Mead's book was and still is treated as a classic As for Mead herself her later life was spent making goofy oracular pronouncements while descending a spiral of drugs Dexedrine sex and the occult This last item is of interest In the thirties Mead and Benedict were visiting a Harlem necromancer as clients not as researchers After being diagnosed with cancer in 1978 Mead started visiting a Chilean psychic with whom she discussed among other things the two spirit guides who accompanied her Mead's biographer Jane Howard uotes someone who knew Mead as saying Many of Margaret's friends were most anxious lest anyone know that she this public essence of rationality went to a faith healer They were jolly lucky that the National Enuirer didn't find outDabbling in the occult Jones demonstrates has been a sideline for a number of modernist figures who are supposed to have been paragons of rationality Freud was obsessed with the devil and first took cocaine on Walpurgisnacht the night of April 30 1884 in liuid form in imitation as a number of commentators agree of the way Faust drank the magic potion in Goethe's play which was being performed in Vienna at the time Carl Jung Freud's disciple who later broke with him was involved with alchemy and UFOs Marx as a young man wrote poems to Satan This is the dark irrational underside of modernity that still awaits its master interpreter It illustrates Chesterton's remark that people who don't believe in God will believe in anythingThe primary villain in Jones's line up is Freud whom Jones correctly views as an ideologue of atheism rather than a scientist One of Freud's disciples wrote to him excitedly in 1930 that psychoanalysis has reversed all values it has conuered Christianity disclosed the Antichrist and liberated the spirit of resurgent life from the ascetic ideal The chief goal of Freud's psychology was the transvaluation of all values And at that it was very successful It certainly hasn't cured many people Toward the end of his life Freud himself lamented that our cures are less effective than Lourdes Freud like many modern rebels seems to have been obsessed by the Catholic Church Jones's brilliant treatment of Freud suggests the reason why in the long run Freud's main impact on the history of psychoanalysis will have been merely to delay the introduction of pharmacology as the primary means of dealing with neurotic disorders The Oedipus complex for which there has never been a shred of scientific evidence turns out to be in Jones's words nothing than Freud's personal history disguised and writ large Freud detested his father whom he called a pervert and had a violent sexual attraction toward his sister in law Minna Bernays which may or may not have been consummated To say that the rest of us have the same compulsion is in Jones's words rather like Bonnie and Clyde telling us that mankind has a universal compulsion to rob banksBut Freud according to disciples like Peter Gay is to be exempted from the sexual analysis that Freudians use to undermine the credibility of everyone else Here we get to the Achilles heel of modernism Darwin Marx and Freud all claimed in one way or another that the human animal is driven by blind irrational forces All thinking writes Gay in his biography of Freud including the most abstract and objective can be shown to have nonrational sources As Jones writes If Gay really means 'all thinking' then he must be speaking of Freudian thinking as well in which case he has demolished his own ideology Freudianism like all modern isms is self cancelling If the human mind is the plaything of blind material forces then its productions including Das Kapital and The Interpretation of Dreams have no objective value whatsoeverSome might disagree with Jones's use of biography to undermine the central tenets of modernity Shouldn't theories be considered on their own merits rather than on the basis of the messy lives of their progenitors? Well yes if the theory is truly scientific and therefore subject to what scientists call falsification Newton was as weird as they come but his theories can be tested and shown to be true for most of material reality But modern ideologies are not scientific; they have an explanation for everything natural selection economic repression the unconscious and so finally explain nothing when they run into contradictions they simply mutate And since many of them began as deliberate distortions of reality the biographies of their founders are very much to the pointLately we have been told that history understood as an Hegelian clash of paradigms is coming to an end According to thinkers like Francis Fukuyama democracy and pluralism despite complications in the Balkans and elsewhere are the final terminus of mankind Books like Degenerate Moderns make one wonder though Is mankind going to spend the rest of its existence in what Jones calls ever constricting ruts of sensuality and materialism? There are disturbances in the modern psyche which can elude a theorist sitting unmolested in a think tank near the Potomac but which may yet play themselves out on a large canvas The uestion is whether modernity turns out to be a free lunch If the lives of its founders are any indication that is a dubious propositionGeorge Sim Johnston is a writer of this review The review originally appeared in The American Spectator 2611 Nov 1993 p76

  2. Sheryl Tribble says:

    I really want to like this book than I do I agree with the fundamental argument I enjoy the Paul Johnson book he's bouncing off of and I find the writing entertaining enough But I always read through the book happily enough until I come to the last chapter where Jones discusses Martin Luther and then I start to doubt everything he’s said about everyone elseLuther was prone to hyperbole which makes it easy for people who want to show him in a bad light to find uotations in support of their claims but he was not the antinomian Jones presents him as Luther may have drawn a firm line between law and gospel but it was not a line between good and bad – Luther presents them both as representing God and both as good From Luther’s perspective the law tells us what we have done wrong while the gospel tells us how we may be made righteous before God According to Luther growing in Christ means to obey God’s laws and he firmly believed that the Bible tells us what God’s laws are Luther’s problem was not with God’s laws per se but with the idea that following those laws is an act of human effort or human will and with the idea that following the laws without love is an accomplishment which latter directly contradicts 1 Corinthians 131 3Luther demands not just physical obedience to the law acts but heart obedience to the law feelings Luther had no time for the argument that faith was an act of will because of verses like Romans 1017 “Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God” or passages like 1 Corinthians 129 or Galatians 522 which list faith as a gift or fruit of the Spirit But at the same time Luther warned people that they would be accountable for their sins if they did not turn to Christ and as a result of that repentance change their ways Even Erasmus Mr Freewill himself recognized that “As in those who lack grace special grace I mean reason is darkened but not destroyed so it is probable that their power of will is not wholly destroyed but has become ineffective for upright actions” Erasmus could not Biblically deny the fact that the Bible presents salvation as in some way an act of God's Grace Where Luther and Erasmus differed is not about God’s act in salvation but in Erasmus’ belief that Christians could through an act of will do good things for God Luther’s position was that we may sometimes think or feel like that’s what’s happening but in actual fact if it is a truly good thing we're doing then it is God working through us not us working for God When Jones so completely misunderstands Martin Luther I hesitate to take his word on other human beings OTOH I have seen people in my own life who demonstrate Jones’ fundamental argument that sinning results in philosophical justifications while my very attempts to verify or disprove his various specific claims about people lead me to interesting places and I have enjoyed a fair number of the books he references For all its faults I have read this book a couple three times now and will probably read it again because it makes me think

  3. P says:

    An unflinching expose of some of the biggest frauds who've been peddling much of the garbage responsible for corrupting our society in their efforts to make it modern aka progressiveJones expertly peels back the onion on these so called intellectuals as he reveals them for the fraudsters and scam artists they've actually beenThe surprising thing is how easily and how often they duped the public into buying all their nonsense as being the final answer in their self anointed fields

  4. Jack Clare says:

    at times a little overlong and prone to repetition nonetheless this book is really very good it's a demonstration of what happens to an intellectual when they don't adhere to the moral law; they lose the ability to know the truth

  5. Jeremy says:

    Apparently the author says that Stanley Fish was influenced by his adulterous affairs to reject classical literature that condemned adultery pp 79 84

  6. Tommy says:

    Exactly the summarized biographic reading you'd expect from a traditional Catholic on intellectuals such as Freud Margaret Mead Keynes Kinsey Picasso as well as some lesser characters he seems to have a personal grudge against This goes as far as claiming Martin Luther was the prototypical cumbrain Every theoretical innovation in practically all fields can be explained away as just rationalized rebellion against a priori natural law Somewhat amusing reading nonethelessif an election were held for this century’s representative man one would be hard pressed to find two better candidates than Anthony Blunt and Pablo Picasso—ideologue subversive artist sexual revolutionary It is the century in a nutshell; the attack on life—cultural moral intellectual and physical—went by the name modernity

  7. J.W.D. Nicolello says:

    This is such a powerful thesis and as such is all but unknownout of print today Invaluable going forward in fact a subject I have long been interested in myself How much of cultural norms and trends are the cumulative byproduct of sexual perversion reprobate minds and hence running on nothing but impulse whilst proclaiming the final revolution which is always just the latest revolution which in terms is not a revolution at all? Hard to believe mere decades ago this Here comes everybody publisher dabbled in something so far beyond the recyclable dispensing of contextual morphine

  8. Stephen Crawford says:

    Stellar A great book to read before diving into his incredible work Libido DominandiOne of the things I like about Jones' writing is that you feel the urge to be a decent and moral person when you're done Despite the limitations of his Catholic worldview you can tell he's a very sincere and decent person His work always edifies

  9. CasaJB says:

    Another must read or in this case for me a must listen narrated by Alex Linder Casting a small bit of light on many of the foundational theorists that make up the modern intellectual pantheon shows how absolutely rotten and without integrity most of the theorist and theories that are pushed by our rootless cosmopolitan overlords actually are

  10. Ben says:

    Fascinating read and insights—could use some general editing though And unfortunately the pages began falling out after just reading through it once at least 3 4 pages fell out while reading

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *