“The old world is dying, and the new world struggles to be born; now is the time of monsters.”
The quote above comes from Antonio Gramsci (1891–1937), a Marxist philosopher who was also a founding member and one-time leader of the Communist Party in Italy. I happened to stumble upon it today and started thinking about interregnum periods in history and people like Gramsci, who were vigorously active during such times.
Gramsci’s observation immediately struck me as ironic. I doubt he intended it to be self-referential; however, through a historical lens, it is difficult to ignore that Gramsci was clearly among the monsters of his time, together with the fascists whom he vehemently railed against until his untimely death in a Mussolini prison in 1937.
The old world of Gramsci’s day began dying—or died, take your pick—after the First World War. The struggling-to-be-born new world emerged right after the treaties were signed. It did not take long for the monster to appear.
However, there were plenty of monsters in the waning old world order, too. In particular, the psychopaths who willingly sacrificed an entire generation of young men to gain a few yards of blood-soaked mud. Nevertheless, at least the old world maintained some semblance of deference to spiritual matters. The new world monsters were a different breed. They rejected spirit and embraced the will. Their struggles to establish a new world took destruction to a whole new level, eclipsing anything the old world managed to achieve.
As I pondered the quote some more, I found myself wondering if we were living through an interregnum period of sorts. I suppose we may be; however, I tend to see our current circumstances as more of a no man’s land, devoid of any real or meaningful choice for this-worldly good in the form of politics or culture. In that sense, it definitely fits Gramsci’s description of a “time of monsters.”
Although partisanism still pretends to be alive and well, I get the sense that every global politician is working for the same office, albeit with varying aims and goals. Some desire an ordered, patient form of destruction; others have been given marching orders to foment chaos at every turn. The conflicts and squabbles they display to us are merely office politics—entirely irrelevant because the office itself opposes all that is good.
On the one hand, this challenges our overall attitude to temporal affairs. After all, we all want to be “for” something, which inevitably entails being “against” something else. Most people want to make things better for themselves, their families, and the world at large, at least in their minds. However, if we choose between the options currently being offered, we will only be choosing between monsters and choosing to side with one monster over another. Struggling against a specific monster or all monsters will not save us from becoming monsters ourselves (a hat tip to Nietzsche’s famous and overused abyss quote).
On the other hand, current circumstances should make it far easier for us to focus on spiritual and relational matters based in love at a concrete level, particularly with those close to us, including the Divine, which is where our primary focus should be, regardless of whether we are in an old world order, a new world order, or something in between.
At the end of the day, all else is abstraction. Any other focus lures us into the land of monsters.
As I continued to ponder Gramsci’s quote, I found another block of text attributed to him that connects directly to what I have expressed in the paragraph above. Very illuminating and worth reading (bold added):
“How many times have I wondered if it is really possible to forge links with a mass of people when one has never had strong feelings for anyone, not even one's own parents: if it is possible to have a collectivity when one has not been deeply loved oneself by individual human creatures. Hasn't this had some effect on my life as a militant--has it not tended to make me sterile and reduce my quality as a revolutionary by making everything a matter of pure intellect, of pure mathematical calculation?”
The quote above comes from Antonio Gramsci (1891–1937), a Marxist philosopher who was also a founding member and one-time leader of the Communist Party in Italy. I happened to stumble upon it today and started thinking about interregnum periods in history and people like Gramsci, who were vigorously active during such times.
Gramsci’s observation immediately struck me as ironic. I doubt he intended it to be self-referential; however, through a historical lens, it is difficult to ignore that Gramsci was clearly among the monsters of his time, together with the fascists whom he vehemently railed against until his untimely death in a Mussolini prison in 1937.
The old world of Gramsci’s day began dying—or died, take your pick—after the First World War. The struggling-to-be-born new world emerged right after the treaties were signed. It did not take long for the monster to appear.
However, there were plenty of monsters in the waning old world order, too. In particular, the psychopaths who willingly sacrificed an entire generation of young men to gain a few yards of blood-soaked mud. Nevertheless, at least the old world maintained some semblance of deference to spiritual matters. The new world monsters were a different breed. They rejected spirit and embraced the will. Their struggles to establish a new world took destruction to a whole new level, eclipsing anything the old world managed to achieve.
As I pondered the quote some more, I found myself wondering if we were living through an interregnum period of sorts. I suppose we may be; however, I tend to see our current circumstances as more of a no man’s land, devoid of any real or meaningful choice for this-worldly good in the form of politics or culture. In that sense, it definitely fits Gramsci’s description of a “time of monsters.”
Although partisanism still pretends to be alive and well, I get the sense that every global politician is working for the same office, albeit with varying aims and goals. Some desire an ordered, patient form of destruction; others have been given marching orders to foment chaos at every turn. The conflicts and squabbles they display to us are merely office politics—entirely irrelevant because the office itself opposes all that is good.
On the one hand, this challenges our overall attitude to temporal affairs. After all, we all want to be “for” something, which inevitably entails being “against” something else. Most people want to make things better for themselves, their families, and the world at large, at least in their minds. However, if we choose between the options currently being offered, we will only be choosing between monsters and choosing to side with one monster over another. Struggling against a specific monster or all monsters will not save us from becoming monsters ourselves (a hat tip to Nietzsche’s famous and overused abyss quote).
On the other hand, current circumstances should make it far easier for us to focus on spiritual and relational matters based in love at a concrete level, particularly with those close to us, including the Divine, which is where our primary focus should be, regardless of whether we are in an old world order, a new world order, or something in between.
At the end of the day, all else is abstraction. Any other focus lures us into the land of monsters.
As I continued to ponder Gramsci’s quote, I found another block of text attributed to him that connects directly to what I have expressed in the paragraph above. Very illuminating and worth reading (bold added):
“How many times have I wondered if it is really possible to forge links with a mass of people when one has never had strong feelings for anyone, not even one's own parents: if it is possible to have a collectivity when one has not been deeply loved oneself by individual human creatures. Hasn't this had some effect on my life as a militant--has it not tended to make me sterile and reduce my quality as a revolutionary by making everything a matter of pure intellect, of pure mathematical calculation?”
RSS Feed
