Using a pseudonym, at the request of my family, as Petar Divjak in honor of my father, I wrote the book “Between the World and Us”, a workingman’s response to “Between the World and Me” by Ta-Nehisi Coates, as a reflex, a both emotional and analytic response to Mr. Coates’ illogical, historically ignorant, and outright inhumane polemic on racism and his damnation of essentially the entire human race based on his perception of past injustices even though he has lived a life of nothing but privilege. Yet, he finds nothing better to do with his life of privilege but to sit in the stands and get rich constantly complaining about those in battle with life’s despair while providing no practical solutions to his complains other than his own racism. This blog is an attempt to continue the analysis that I began in that book.
As I have written elsewhere, in trying to contemplate and write about the general principles that govern these “ism’s” or any “ism’s”, it is not my goal to create an idiocracy or to be an ideologue by oversimplifying the problems. However, our modern technological world is so very complicated that it is easy to forget the basic premises of human thought that have made us successful so far in beating the natural world’s will to kill us and wipe our societies from the universe. For example, mathematics is incredibly complicated, yet all of its incredibly convoluted rationally challenging complexity begins with one operation: addition. If you do not understand 2 + 2 = 4, all of mathematics is worthless farce. To freely operate in an open society, one must accept that “freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two makes four. If that is granted, all else follows” — Orwell’s 1984. The same is true for contemplating social concepts such as racism and classism, they must start with basic truths or all else is nonsense. Modern academic culture loves generating libraries of verbiage that says nothing. One of its methods for denying us freedom is through false concepts of racism and of the basic nature of arbitrary and necessary discrimination in social interaction. To be free in an open society, these false concepts must be seen as false and rejected. By true and false, I mean both pragmatic and existential truth and falsehood. We can then go on to a more subtle contemplation of modern technological society.
“But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate, we can not consecrate, we can not hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. … It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.” Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburg Address.