dixon's action (was: VV the WSC &c)

[lorentzen-nicklaus]

jbor schrieb:

> >From: jporter <jp4321 at IDT.NET>
> > If such horrors and mistakes could have been (or might still be) avoided- by
> > what means? Do the texts tell us? Is "keep cool but care" gonna do it?
> > However, if there is no avoiding them, beyond mere detail, what difference
> > does it make if the referenced horrors are *central* to the texts or not?
> >
> > In another vain, relativism is "inherent to history," or at least the
> > recording of history, but so what? Why should lack of ultimate objectivity
> > cause one to lose the name of action? It didn't stop Dixon.


 > Dixon's "action" is apocryphal at best


   but that's all there is left. for each and every one of - us. dixon's action 
   is, imo, a crucial scene in the universe of trp. a thoureauian act of 
   resistance. helpless, isolated, effective only in the short run. but where 
   should be the alternatives? the "totally socialized society" (adorno) starts 
   to emerge around 1750 and it is already beyond the point of no return in    
   1850. the historian reinhard koselleck calls this period, we learn a lot    
   about in m&d, the "saddle time". it is too late ... in such a situation    
   dixon's action can be read as a paradigmatic fulfillment of the often quoted 
   "keep cool but care!" saying. i really like dixon quite a lot ... 

kai