wrobert at uci.edu wrote:
>
> Unlike Chris, I have never had any particular interest in Heidegger,
> but I think that he is right to make a distinction between the
> philosophical critiques Heidegger introduced and his politics. It's
> fairly clear that Heidegger, like a lot of conservative Nationalists,
> saw the Nazis as a way of escaping the baleful influence of
> Bolshevism....
And there are many other ways in which a disconnect can emerge within a person's thought (and practice). What Pound _thought_ he sdaw in Mussolini was rather bad politics in itsle, but it was _different_ from what _was_ in Mussolini's policies. One's point of departure in reading Pound must be (a) a recognition that Pound's fascism was not the sdame as Mussolini's and (b) Pound couldn't recognize that. As a result Pound supported Mussolini on grounds Mussolini himself must have smirked at!
It _is_ true that Pound's economic theories generate an anuthoritarian state, but that is yet a different problem from the link to Italian Fascism.
And no one is wholly consistent inhis/her tought and practice -- not even Aristotle, Aquinas, Kant, & Marx.
Carrol