The 'Ring' and the remnants of the West

Asia Times ^ | January 11, 2003 | By Spengler

[Centurion2000]

bump

[Sam Cree]

"liberals hate freedom, desire control over others and want a world empire controlling everything"

What Tolkien described as the "dominion over other free wills."

Yeah, good points.

[Sam Cree]

I guess it bears noting that democracy is supposedly one of the foundations of socialism.

[weikel]

No supposedly about it. After the 30 years war the western world was a pretty stable place until "Democracy" was imposed by Wilson upon everyone.

[Sam Cree]

I am not that familiar with the time and concepts of which you speak, tho they sound interesting.

I do believe that the average citizen has been better off under monarchies than under outright socialist governments like the U.S.S.R., or governments derived from similar roots as the socialists, such as the fascists states.

[KeyWest]

Saw your USNA-

USNA 1960, 20th co.

[weikel]

Even Russia didn't go straight from Tsarist rule to Bolshevism. There was a "democratic" provisional government 1st.

[junta]

That last paragraph is fancy daydreaming by the author. To compare Tolkien's created world with our country is a travesty, faulty logic 180 degrees off center. Where is LaBelleDameSansMerci when we need her literary sense?

[B-Chan]

I couldn't agree more. Absolute monarchy is the ultimate private property state. Since the kingdom is his private property, a wise king will always act with rational self-interest to increase its worth and value, thus bringing benefit to its inhabitants. On the other hand, a representative government, while "owned" by the citizens in theory, is actually owned by the bureaucratic mandarin class that administers it, a group with no stake in the welfare or success of the state outside of making sure the checks go out on time. It's the difference between FedEx and the United States Postal Service.

Incidentally, I love Die Meistersinger von Nurnburg. Herr Wagner himself is a different matter. "Lieb der Kunst, Hass der Kunstler."

[2rightsleftcoast]

Wow, that's a fabulous home page.

[MrLeRoy]

Is that from the Silmarillion?

[Alouette]

Great article. I noticed the similarities between LOTR and Der Ring Des Nibelungen a long time ago. It's my opinion that both Tolkien and Wagner based their works on the same mythic elements.

Peter Jackson is probably well aware of the similarities. In particular, by having Arwen instead of Glorfindel carry Frodo to the ford shows a parallel to the valkyrie Brunnhilde.

[victim soul]

"Boorish and gruff as the new American Empire might seem, it is an anti-empire populated by reluctant heroes who want nothing more than to till their fields and mind their homes, much like Tolkien's Hobbits. Under pressure, though, it will respond with a fierceness and cohesion that will surprise its adversaries."

[Mo1]

PLEASE SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC

Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
or you can use
PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com

Become A Monthly Donor
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD

[Dead Dog]

"The New Man would be fearless, sensual, unconstrained, and could make the world according to his will."

The basis of Communism, Nazism, or any other Liberalism. And also a basic principle of satinism, specifically "Be your own God".

[Redcloak]

There are a few things wrong with the analogy. The Elves don't leave the world. They "go into the West", to Valinor, but are still in the world. They are part of the world, hence their immortality. (Men, on the other hand, are not tied to the world the way the Elves are. They were given "the gift of death" by Illúvatar and thus leave the world.) The Elves don't leave Middle Earth "because of Sauron". They were called to Valinor by Manwë and the other Valar ages earlier. They weren't supposed to be in Middle Earth. Those that were there, the Moriquendi and the Noldor, were disobeying the Valar.

[x]

This is a great article. For us now, though, Tolkein does look derivative of Wagner. Maybe our grandchildren will see things differently. In his own day, Wagner, must have struck many as just an imitator of old myths.

But the problem with "Spengler's" article is that Wagner's own "Parzifal" has already been seen as an answer or response to the Ring and its worldview. The innocence, repentence, modesty, and chastity that the author celebrates in Tolkien already found their way into Wagner's later works.

The modest, unprepossessing "English" way in the arts was ridiculed by generations of aesthetes. Today, it's finally come into its own, and that's a good thing. But in art, final victories and final defeats are rare. So I don't think Wagner can be counted out.

[bvw]

I haven't yet digested the fulsome article as yet, yet must comment as some little wisdom I have discovered about Wagmer's Ring Cycle. It is about the waning days of the Roman Empire in Ravenna, that is the germanic roots. Not german at all: Roman.

[x]

"unconstitutional"( absolute) monarchy( which in practice tends to be the most libertarian form of government).

That is a foolish myth spread by Hoppe and other Rockwellites. You could certainly make a case that there was greater liberty and smaller government before the French Revolution than after it. Or that it was easier to evade rulers in pre-modern societies.

But the oriental despotisms of the world prove beyond question that absolute monarchy is far from "the most libertarian form of government." Or, if it is, that says very little for libertarianism.

And while feudalism allowed much freedom from the state and its ruler, it subordinated individuals to other lords to a great extent. Those who take this view ignore what it would have been like to have been bound to the land, and exaggerate the difference between taxes and feudal dues.