Monday, April 14, 2025

Franklin Parker On Hoffer

 

Franklin Parker and Betty J. Parker wrote a paper, a dialogue between them, about Eric Hoffer and here is the title of the paper which I copy and paste parts of it from its online edition, parts that interest me. Here it is: Parker (P after this):

 

P: “EricHoffer(1902-83)Revisited:BooksandIdeas(A

Dialogue)

byFranklinParkerandBettyJ.Parker

SchoolofEducationandPsychology

WesternCarolinaUniversity,Cullowhee,NC28723

 

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 398 138 SO 026 659

AUTHOR Parker, Franklin; Parker, Betty J.”

 

P: “FRANK:Hoffersawthreekindsofpeoplewhostart,lead,and

consolidatemassmovements:first,menofwords(whomhelater

calledintellectuals)whostartamassmovement.Secondaremenof

actionwholeadtherevolutionaryphaseofthemovementandare

usuallyuncreative,frustrated,self-righteous,pettyandrude.Third

arepracticalmenofaffairswhotakeoverand,ifthemovement

survives,makeleadingthemovementtheircareers.4”

 

My response: Here is the first place (from Page 5 of the Parker dialogue) where I heard mentioned that his technical men-of-words phrase, for the starters of mass movements, are intellectuals. Hoffer seems to suggest that revolutions are not started by the poor, the enslaved, the downtrodden and abused masses, but it is men of words or intellectuals who somehow are angry and dislocated from their prerogative to live and work as part of the ruling class. When these men of words are dispossessed, they work to and sometimes succeed at fomenting mass movements, which sometimes overthrow the status quo.

 

Their motive is not compassion for the masses: their motive is to overthrow the existing dispensation so they can assume their rightful positions of power directing the masses once these intellectuals are running the new dispensation.

 

P: “

--Themodernageistheageoftheintellectuals,thosewhoare

convincedthatthemassesareincapableofself-rule,thatonlythey

andfellowelitesknowwhatthemassesneed.Thebestdefense

againsteliteruleistoraisetheintellectuallevelofeveryoneso

thatnoelitesexistandeveryoneisanintellectual.”

 

My response: From Page 7 of the Parker dialogue, the above-quoted paragraph about knocked me out of my chair, because I thought it was my original thought-which it is—but Hoffer said something quite similar, apparently in his 1967 book, The Temper of Our Times.

Parker attributes to Hoffer the suggestion for free people that wish to remain free and happy that their best defense against elite rule is to raise the intellectual level of everyone so that no elite can exist, and everyone is an intellectual.

 

This is exactly my point in proposing that we raise a generation of individuating supercitizens so no elite can exist, and everyone is an intellectual. When each one of the masses, the vast majority of people in the future should be upper class self-realizers and powerful, engaged, educated, critically thinking supercitizens, running and working in this capitalist constitutional republic—Americans. All citizens are common and about equal in power and income, more or less, and all are so learned, independent thinking, brilliant and original, that none can intellectually dominate anyone, nor even desire to because they are at peace inside, with fulfilling processes of executing self-development.

 

They no longer have the time, energy, or desire to rule others, thereby acquiring bad collectivizing power, a source of no longer needed pseud-pride substitute desirous of group rank and status, directing ruling others and ruining their lives, depriving them of their opportunity to be liberated and indviduated.

 

Individuators are not anti-community but promote community wellness, best realized, and maintained by popularizing the ethics of egoism. Egoist morality disallows for group-living altruistic, groupist elites any long ruling, exploiting, tyrannizing, and enslaving the poor, uneducated, depressed group-living, group-identifying masses, nonindividuating, addicted to and enjoying masochistically the pain of being enslaved and crushed by the unjust system.

 

Here are two paragraphs from Pages 10 and 11 from the Franklins’ dialogue:

 

P: “

BETTY:MylastwordonHoffer:likeotherself-taughtpeople,he

lovedlearningandagoodsentence;hecherishedthinkersandbooks

thatappealedtohim.Hedespisedthecommunist,fascist,andNazi

intellectualsofthe1930swhowroughthavoc.Hefeared

intellectualswithpoliticalambitionsbecauseoftheircompulsion

todominate.Hisremedywasmasseducation.Educateeveryoneso

thatallareintellectualsandnorulingelitescanemerge.Mass

schoolingwouldalsoreleasethegreattalentsHofferwasconvinced

existedincommonworking7eople.Anotherwaytoreleasetalents

wouldbetoencourageplayfulness.Hofferwasconvincedthatthe

playfulmoodbroughtwithitcreativity.’

 

My response: Hoffer instinctively realized that modern ruling elites require their clerisy, and intellectuals, corrupted by centralized power so easily and readily, are most willing to serve as a handmaidens ushering in the new elite, should it win power.

 

Only the masses without elites can be free. They should be educated, and talk egoist morality, the art and science of individuating, and to esteem themselves, and then their talents will blossom and become more perfectly expressed, to the benefit and enjoyment of all.

 

 

FRANK:MylastthoughtisfascinationwithHoffer'sthemethat

humanbeingsareunfinishedcreatureswhomustfinishthemselves,

humanizethemselves.Natureattainsperfiction,butmannever

does.Thereisaperfectant,aperfectbee,butmanisperpetually

unfinished.Hisunfinishednesssetshimapart.Unlikeanimals,he

hasfewerspecializedorgans,isbornwithoutabuilt-intoolkit.He

quotesThomasHardy:"Manbeginswhennatureends.Manandnature

canneverbefriends."Areturntonatureisareturntobruteforce.

fheascentofmanwasanefforttogetoutfromundertheironrule

ofnature.Onlythendidmanhumanizehimself,finishhimselfwith

technology.Indoingso,hebecomesacreator,ahalfgod.Tobe

BESTCOPYAVAILABLE

humanistobefree,tocreate.HoffersaysinOrdealofChange:

"Man'sonlylegitimateendinlifeistofinishGod'swork,tobringto

fullgrowththecapacitiesandtalentsinallofus."It'sagood

thoughttoendon.”

 

My response: We are perpetually unfinished and imperfect, and that is the individuator’s blessing and curse as the good deities command her to get at it and do something with her marvelous if limited capacities.

 

No comments:

Post a Comment