Commentary on Bowden's Great Civilisation

 >What is western civilization? Western civilization is a particular civilization which is reared in europe north south east and west which is expressed through elites and through individual moments of genius particularized in particular lives. But that can only be so because of the mass of people that these individuals are drawn from.

I see western civilisation, as you could probably guess, from the myth. We are essentially living after the iron age - the fall of christianity may even be the end of this, and we are in some unknown age. I still like  idea that Germany was born of men raised of the corpse of Cerberus. Opposing views on Cerberus from Hölderlin and Nietzsche also strengthen this image.

A more recent outline of a myth I came up with is that of an Actaeon figure born of the only death of the Battle of Anghiari. I think this is good also since it is very close to the figure of The Unknown Soldier.

Of course, such ideas will not be able to spread widely. This is the strength of Schmitt's thinking, he is able to reformulate the secular myth in its own terminology, yet the strength of a religious politics remains. Law is perhaps the highest in the hierarchy of gods, apart from the primordial, and in Pindar law may even be the unifying order of the primordial. Land and Sea contains this strength, a nomos perhaps higher than the Leviathan and may proscribe it in the end (despite Schmitt's pessimism towards the end of his life). My spirit is also of the order of law, so this works well for me.

----

My 'titanic' thinking somewhat precludes the necessity of law acting through the elites. And I think the idea of elites and individual genius is, to a degree, part of secularism, and a weakened Christianity. Essentially the decline. The truly strong individual has an almost anonymous quality, as in Diomedes, Nestor, the anonymous hero of Marathon, and countless early myths.

Oftentimes the hardened image of the great leader comes about in times of crisis, much as an assassination increases the centralisation of power around a government or court. The city closes itself off to nature, even its own surrounding territory, as we see prominently in weakened Christianity and the absolute monarchies. A strong conmection to nature, the surrounding mountainous regions, or even the underworld is associated with the highest leaders. This was written into the very nomos of Rome and the leadership of Cyrus.

I am not entirely sure what Bowden means by the mass of people. I think it refers to the nation, the race of people, as a totality. If so, this is good and resolves some of the reservations I have of secular elements. It suggests that the elites are 'representative' figures of an autochthonous formation of the state. Representative is something of a dangerous word here, but could possibly be used as a way to undermine the liberal order. Before heroic men even slaves would have greater representation than even the highest democratic civilian.

In terms of democracy, I am not entirely opposed to it. I think government is really a providential matter, as Tocqueville said of democracy, and even the highest governmental type can fall to the gods, fate, or the failures of a cursed leadership. Of course, something would have to be written into law to severely limit democracy, ensuring that it transitions back into the strength of the era. Again, this was what Schmitt was attempting to do when he had to work within the limits of constitutional law.I

Where a society is made up of heroic men and beautiful women, anarchy is the best governmental type. This is also true where nature reigns in its wealth.