Right versus Left As Moral Deadening

Famously, Camille Paglia – and at least here she’s settled within some tradition – argues that the work of the Marquis de Sade should be read as a potent rebuke of Rousseau naivety, against his innocence-as-natural and natural-as-innocence. As an enthusiast of both Sade and Rousseau works – properly understood!! – I generally pass by what sounds as overly reductive theory, but it might be interesting to push it through just a bit. As we around here know, the political Right and Left – while enclosing some distinct categories underneath their respective komonoes – are essentially intra-mural liberal squabblings within the global liberal totalitarianism. That “man is born free yet everywhere in chains” is a slogan of both left and right; they just disagree over what constitutes the chains and the methods to release man from the basement radiator. Thus, Liberalism – and liberalisms – should always be evaluated fundamentally as political ideology; however, it can be apologetically interesting to consider the Right v Left divide as war over exceptions to objective morality. Importantly, these exceptions are unprincipled – “we believe in the objective nature of the morality subjectively chosen.” Principled exceptions to morality – and here we’re knocking on the door of Sade and his followers – are universally revolting to normal, sane people. Since the morality of right and left is thoroughly relative – though claimed as objective – “revulsion” is of extreme importance. And once revulsion passes through the sausage maker of deadened conscious some principle is excepted. As with any morality right-left liberalism has its excommunications; this is why attempts to live by liberal morality lead to misery.