{Ready to be flabbergasted by a unique book totally unlike any ever encountered before? Author, lecturer, and philosopher Desh Subba, along with editor/part translator/quotation source R. Michael Fisher, have produced such a book: Trans Philosophism.>
First, this book has nothing whatsoever to do with transgender people or “sex changes”, as many might suppose, considering how the word trans is now commonly used. Instead, Mr. Subba uses trans to denote his desire to transfer what he sees as impractical philosophy to practical application, and to transcend just one or two philosophies or philosophical branches, while seemingly attempting to embrace the entire smorgasbord of the philosophical spectrum as an all you can eat buffet. Here philosophism is defined as affectation of philosophical knowledge and the enjoyment of applying it.>
This includes Desh’s extravagant implication that his fear-ism philosophy tops all previous philosophies in some regards, which he attempts to interweave into other philosophies. So, to better understand his current book, being familiar with his previously authored Philosophy of Fearism is prerequisite. Moreover, Desh opines that to best learn philosophy, we should start with its genesis at around six hundred years Before Christ, which began with the Greek philosophers. In fact, the word philosophy comes from the Greek word philosophia, meaning love of wisdom.}
{Another consideration to keep in mind is that Mr. Subba originates from Nepal, and his thoughts, notetaking, and rough drafts rest wholly on the Nepali language, despite his apparent attempt to appeal to western and English-speaking readers. A cursory reading of Desh’s book may give the impression of a chaotic gallimaufry of miscellanea. However, deeper examination should make the subtle systematization of his agglomeration materialize. A prime example is his simultaneous explanation and critique of Marxism which permeates throughout.>
Consider that Nepalese Capitalism was hopelessly infested with neoliberalism, leading to monopolistic and unfettered conditions which shrewd and manipulative citizens used to crush honest and less sophisticated ones. In desperation to escape this “disastrous capitalism”, citizens welcomed Marxist ideology and its inevitable lead to Communism. Consider Nepal’s caste system: a society divided into classes, with the lowest class: Dalits or “Untouchables.”>
This group was/is forced into the filthiest, most dangerous jobs with minimal pay. When Communism then arrived, Communists originally gave this Dalit community far more respect and opportunities, some even taking the revolutionary step of shedding their upper class and upper caste identities. However, the Communist’s steady increase in power coincided with a steady whittling away of these gains, until benefits of this noble aspect have often vanished completely.>
So, considering Marxism’s theoretical claims and temporary successes and alleviations of degradation, destitution, and distress, along with Nepalese Capitalism’s vampiric nature, Mr. Subba naturally wants to avoid making Marxist ideology and Communism vanish without thought or consideration as Capitalists would. Also consider that capitalism is not a new innovation. Rather, it evolved from the preceding feudal age. As Desh points out, the bourgeoisie shattered that feudal system, rebuilding into a capitalist society. However, when the Dr. Jekyll bourgeoisie came to power, their character turned into Mr. Hyde.>
Therefore, Desh sees socialism as a major function of hope. I do too: not “red” Marxist socialism, but a goldenrod nationalistic socialism of Third Position politics like Volkism. So instead, Desh wants to metamorphosize Communism into something else, like beating and polishing the bent rusty sword of oppressive Communist governments into shiny ploughshares to serve the people. This includes removing Marxist aporia (internal contradiction), chief of which is requiring another ruling class (big government) to replace the bourgeoisie in order to be implemented, instead of being purely classless.>
It certainly includes infusing Mr. Subba’s “fear factor”, which I prefer to call original and innate self-preservation impulses, which Marxism fails to adequately address. Specifically, he wants to change Marxism’s dialectic materialism into “fearological materialism.” Desh also declares that Marx “turned upside down on its head much of Hegel” (guiding principles of the great 18th-19th century philosopher Georg Hegel). Also, being a philosopher, Mr. Subba would have been especially impacted by prevailing Marxist ideology. Hence why he continues to mentally wrestle with it. This wrestling continues for most of the book. However, don’t even entertain the notion that Desh considers political solutions as any universal panacea.}
{For example, he declares that even politics (often materialism) and religion (often idealism) combined are insufficient. In fact, he declares them meaningless unless each applies a theory of subsistence. Another example is Desh’s observation that although Hegel gave remarkably valuable insights, he, along with other religious philosophers and theologians, were bewitched by the extreme conclusion that all history was completely ruled by God’s divine will. That is, that ideas could not arise without God, and history was predominantly God revealing Himself, thus leading to inevitable progress with just a smidgen of man’s participation.>
It should be obvious that continued following of this notion would lead to society’s collapse. However, this dogmatism was not birthed by Christianity, but rather by misuse of religion to cope with frightening circumstances by sweeping them under the blanket of vacuous platitudes. Besides, nowhere in Christian scripture does it teach this, despite continued attempts to bend texts to zigzag out of responsibility and avoid the straight and narrow path. Instead, humanity is presented as steward carte blanche of Creation, and recipient of the grave consequences of mismanagement.>
Christianity and Mr. Subba’s fear-ism are compatible and, in my opinion, complementary. He certainly does not consider the sinful fear of cowardice as any basic component. In fact, he insists it must be eliminated to a large extent, if not obliterated. Consider his novel The Tribesman’s Journey to Fearless. But he also recognizes the exception: the law needing to maintain the threat of terror like Cerberus upon society’s potential hooligans, leeches, and predators.}
{For more encompassing considerations, Desh has a whimsical Theory of Playing Cards: In figure 4, he had spades (swords in medieval Latin decks) as everyday needs or class struggle, clubs (wands in Latin, reminiscent of the Bible’s Aaron’s rod that budded supernaturally) as religion, diamonds (coins in Latin) as recurring emotions, and hearts (cups in Latin) as fear. Yet later he has diamonds as needs/class struggle, which is more sensible as it is based around money/wealth. Moreover, he has Hearts as the trump suit.>
Again, Desh uses fear not to denote its common definition as an emotion like any other, but as our inner alarm to maintain subsistence. It can even be non-emotional. Consider that whether our heart beats or not is of primary concern even before birth, which continues endlessly. The other factors not of perpetual pressing concern come later. Though everyone admits to everyday physical needs and wants, and many admit to spiritual needs, we must recognize the impact of other people’s emotions on us, and our emotions on ourselves.>
Earthlings are far more emotional and less logical than they will admit, with emotion driven actions impaling others like swords. We can even be a victim of our overwhelming emotions, which become a spade digging us into an inescapable pit. Desh cleverly refers to people as Fear sapiens. Yet I would remove sapiens (Latin for knowledge or wisdom) and perhaps designate humankind Homo timoribus (Latin for fears). Having an “inflated brain” does not indicate what that brain might be inflated with!>
Humans continuing to wield bombs instead of bananas would be de-evolution or dysgenics if not extinction. Perhaps some are Homo fatua, yet others Homo podex. The random deck shuffling and subsequent hands dealt represents the actions of others, our environment, and our biological limits (Determinism) that we cannot control. The playability of the cards represents our free will. As far as individual cards, Desh leaves that to our imagination, except to suggest that kings represent chosen rulers.}
{Interestingly, Desh applies Newton’s three universal laws of motion to societal motion: “1st Law: a society continues in its state of rest or uniform motion unless compelled by a fear force to change its state. 2nd Law: rate of change of societal momentum is directly proportional to the applied fear and takes in the direction of force. 3rd Law: to every action of fear there is an equal and opposite (relativity) reaction in development.” Also interesting is his personification of various hazards and threatening concerns into characters such as Dracula, Godzilla, and Thanatos (Greek mythology’s embodiment of death).}
{Mr. Subba uses unusual abbreviations that readers may not understand. So, I define them as: B3 = three basic needs: food, shelter, and clothing. D3 = oppression tactics of degrade, disrupt, deny. N6 = Nature’s six common destructive forces that our ancient ancestors had to contend with: hot weather, cold weather, wind, thunderstorms, hail, and earthquakes. P3 = public private partnership.>
S4 = four types of states known in history: slave, feudal, capitalist, socialist. W4 = four oppressed types of workers under the bourgeoisie (ruling class): general working class, peasants or agricultural laborers, proletariat (wage earners whose only possession of monetary value is their labor), and “laborers” (unskilled workers). 5F = five “fear” (impetus) factors: conditional reflexes, environment, incidents, necessities, sense organs.}
{Most extraordinary is Mr. Subba’s following outlook: Since Earth was void for ages before the existence of human beings, the place of humans is purely supplementary. Also, Earth would continue even in the absence of human beings. And when humans reproduce, our planet continues to adopt new creatures. He also notes that any excess of humans either causes the extinction of plants and animals or prevents their birth. This refreshing departure from anthropocentricism seems the result of Desh’s being impacted with eastern religious thought such as Buddhism, Hinduism, and Jainism, which theoretically reverence all of life, whether or not practitioners are loyal to such core principles.>
Though American Christians often have substandard regards here, I see this as the result of Christianity, a religion with Eastern roots, becoming westernized and republicanized. In fact, even panpsychism (universal consciousness) is indicated in Christian scripture. Mark 4:39 & 41: “And he [Jesus] arose, and rebuked the wind and said unto the sea, ‘Peace, be still.’ And the wind ceased, and there was a great calm. And they [His disciples] feared exceedingly, and said one to another, ‘What manner of man is this, that even the wind and sea obey him?'” Creation is actually designed so it is impossible for humans to exist without other life forms. Thus, we are not to dominate, but are born as complimentary.>
Desh applies fear-ism philosophy to aid Mother Earth, Father Ether, and our feathered, furry, and leafy comrades in his section Sober Fear in the Sky. Therein he expounds on the specific problems of global warming, ozone loss, new health crises caused by stress and adaptive viruses (micro-monsters), human overpopulation, pollution, potential threat of asteroid impact, oxygen depletion, and the aforementioned impact on other life forms. This subject is covered in considerably more detail in the book Eco-Fearism which Desh coauthored.}
{He also has some thoughts on social consciousness, the science and technology revolutions, the meaning and impact of language including dialectics, and the significance of art, music, race, and culture. He also has a section: Challenging Questions to Postmodernism. To roughly define postmodernism, we can say that this mode of thinking and discourse rests on hostility toward what it considers the monolithic narratives of “Modernism” (the 17th-18th century Enlightenment). Though the Enlightenment impetus was overly materialistic, it thankfully promoted logic, objective reality, and scientific rigor. This helped defeat old superstitions.>
But poisonous Postmodernism, which mushroomed in the 19th-20th centuries, introduced relativism, rejection of objective reality and morality, rejection of historical and well-established binary oppositions, and the insane concept of hyperreality. This is the supposed inability of consciousness to distinguish reality from a simulation, a direct affront to Descartes’s Cogito, ergo sum. So, in subtle fashion, Mr. Subba derides Derrida, Foucault, and other infamous postmodernists with his fear-y queries.}
{Also, Trans Philosophism contains 474 source references, an index, and a short glossary. Finally, you need not agree with everything Desh postulates (such as feminism and other liberal ideas I find anathema). As stated before, there is a cafeteria of ideas to choose from and explore, some of which seem experimental, unlike his firmly established fear-ism. So, if you are a perspicacious intellectual who is interested in philosophy, I recommend this book. May Mr. Subba’s journey continue, along with his readers’.}
K C Sunbeam; author and video maker
*****My posts organized according to subject =
https://wordpress.com/settings/taxonomies/category/kcsunbeam.wordpress.com
K C Sunbeam 