Monist Humanism

Now for something completely different: an analysis of contemporary political philosophy and a general philosophical manifesto of this blog.  In current academic vogue is the trend of condensing all one's preferred goals, methods, and assumptions under one single -ism.  It's the rock-band-ification of philosophy which treats all postulates as singles in the discography of a popular -ism.  These -isms even have band members and groupies in the form of eponymous figureheads and fanatical students who attend every lecture and proselytize across campuses and workplaces attempting to convert as many devotees as possible.

The political methods and goals espoused by this blog support none of that fuckery.  As Bruce Lee stated, I seek neither your approval nor to convince you to my way of thinking.  In the lexicon of trendy, hip, vogue, stylized intellectuals, I declare myself a monistic humanist.  I believe that monism is an inherent requirement of any progressive, constructive philosophy.  The whole history of western philosophical progress has consisted of gradually discarding inherent dualisms such as mind-body, nature-nurture, good-evil, and other absolute intractable opposites.

Contemporary philosophy has succumbed to naive relativism and post modernism, which lazily attempt to surpass dualism by simply denying that dualism exists without constructing any suitable alternative.  In consequence, academic philosophy has the character of a wrecking ball which targets first western civilization, then privileged groups, then institutions, then history, then industry, then men (*ahem*... masculinity), until nothing is left to deconstruct and we are all left quoting Marx and the Disciples whilst circle jerking ourselves into tenured positions (all on the backs of tax payers of course).

The alternative to this endless cycle of deconstruction is to actually build something.  Whether the reader approves of this blog or not is irrelevant to its mission.  Every single post lists some method or goal to facilitate greater personal growth for individual readers.  Whether the reader uses it or not is their own baggage.  The post modernist, feminist, socialist academics and their kitschy comrades spend such time attacking others that their own personal growth has been paralyzed.  These individuals are almost archetypically overweight, unmotivated, androgynous, depressed, weak, vicious, amoral, and perverse.  That these individuals increasingly dominate higher education, psychology, and the helping professions is a unique kind of nightmare for true humanists.  These so called helpers of society can barely keep themselves unmedicated, healthy, solvent, and ethical in conduct, yet they are most often employed for the public good.  So much the worse for the public.

If one would like to know whether they belong to this freak parade, a few simple questions should serve to orient them: how many people have you wished to harm today?  What actions did you take to further your own health today?  How many immediate pleasures did you postpone today for a greater reward in the future?  What good have you done for anyone else today?  Anyone willing to answer these questions truthfully will know whether they tend to destroy or construct.

The post modernist hatred of dualism does not automatically imply a transcendence of dualism in their own philosophy.  Feminists, Marxists, and Race Academics (Racists), all presuppose an intractable divide between two groups of people in society where never the twain shall meet.  The bourgeoisie presuppose a revolutionary proletariat, just as a patriarchy presupposes a conscious sisterhood, just as white privilege presupposes an oppressed minority.  All these -isms based on dualism claiming to oppose dualism is an idiocy only the modern academy would allow to go unchallenged. 

So what constructive alternative exists?  Monism.  The belief that all humans, regardless of race, gender, class, etc. are of the same matter interacting on the same planet to accomplish largely similar goals.  What method is presented?  Education through positive reinforcement.  Violence doesn't work.  What groups of people?  All people, no exceptions, no divisions.  What ultimate goal?  Maximizing the self actualization of as many individuals as possible.  Every human being should have the right to strive for personal greatness and promote that striving in others.  This is the human imperative.

Stemming from the human imperative to strive for fulfillment are the masculine and feminine imperatives which exist not as dualistic opposites, but interconnected facilitating elements of the human imperative.  To the extent the masculine and feminine are complementary, construction of society proceeds unobstructed.  When those imperatives are prevented or blocked by social punishment, then deconstruction, long term death, and lost potential are the only possible outcomes.

This author challenges the reader to pick a side in this battle and think deeply upon their obligations as human beings.  Are you here to fuck people over or to prosper while helping others actualize themselves?