The Stupidity of Hedonism

It’s sad to see Pepe Escobar promote Michel Onfray.

Michel Onfray is warmed-over Foucault, but more stupid because Onfray has had the time to learn something from the total failure of 60s hedonism. He should have figured out by now that the cult of hedonism produces the exact opposite of what it promises: not pleasure but the banishment of every kind of pleasure save that of virtue signalling. In the end, the outcome of the 60s was not liberation but the suffocating political correctness that rules today.

(And as to Christianity being a fable, please, indicate a civilization (Roman, Greek, or any other) that wasn’t founded on a fable.)

Epicurus is misused when turned into a advocate of postmodern “diversity.” Like any Greek author, Epicurus operates within the horizon (“discourse” if you prefer the Foucaldian term) of the caste system of the ancient world. Epicurianism is untranscribable to a society in which everyone has “rights.” Contrary to what the idiots of the sixties believed, you cannot have both paganism and equality. Paganism presumes the harshest inequality. Sade understood this: Libertinism is possible only in a society in which the cruelest and the strongest are granted absolute dominion over the rest. The naive utilitarianism Onfray preaches, where everyone is allowed whatever enjoyment can be had without doing injury to others inevitably comes up against the reality that others consider themselves injured by the mere sight of their neighbors having fun. That is why today you’d be hard-pressed to find more earnest killjoys than “open-minded” liberals.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.