ALL SOLUTIONS PROVISIONAL

J.P. Little, Simone Weil, Waiting on Truth.

'Our political universe', she claims, 'is peopled entirely with myths and monsters; we recognise only entities and absolutes.' Our political vocabulary abounds in words like nation, security, capitalism, Communism, each of which is supposed to represent an absolute, and be treated as such, independent of the particular political circumstances. It is of such stuff that wars have always been made.

Such reflections, with their pessimism and their lack of partisanship, were not calculated to please those whose political ideas or ambitions depended on mystification. Simone Weil's view of force governing conquerors and conquered alike leads logically to a dispassionate and compassionate assessment of the participants, one which she claimed to find in the Iliad. Because of the very even-handedness of some of her remarks on the combatants in the Second World War, her views were often misunderstood: her inability to hate the Germans because of the crimes of their leaders, her desire (for instance in the long essay on the origins of Hitlerism, mentioned in Part I above) to understand the historical processes which had made Hitler possible, and furthermore, her discovery of the same cultural tendencies within the French nation, were severely criticised by those who felt that an enemy was an enemy, and that to try to understand was half-way to condoning.

For Simone Weil, however, it was the first duty of every human being to understand the forces at work in the universe, and man's place in it, because a right understanding of that place was the only source of right action. From Plato again she derived inspiration for that understanding, in particular from his mythical account of humanity chained up in a cave, able to see only the reflections of objects thrown by the light of a fire behind them, and never the objects themselves. Such is our condition, says Simone Weil: we see only shadows, which we take for real objects, and we live and die in an absence of truth. Such an interpretation has profound implications for the world of action: if we can never be certain of being ‘in the truth’, we should treat all solutions to problems, particularly in the field of politics, as provisional. The idea of a Utopia is positively dangerous since, although from time to time and by chance our ideas will contain an element of truth, most of the time they will simply conform to the workings of necessity. Man’s natural condition is darkness, and he should beware of acting as though he were in broad daylight.

Reading Little’s work on Weil has been extremely beneficial. She is a wonderful companion to help unpack what Simone is getting at in her essays. Here’s a passage that gets at one of Simone’s repeated themes (no doubt Plato’s imprint upon her work, as Little points out): the human condition is one of limitation. “We see only shadows.” Beware of those who claim capital letters: Truth, Reality, Good…etc.

It’s from this foundation that Weil does her work. The ongoing resonance of those who came from École Normale (Sartre, de Beauvoir) is this impulse to understand “the forces at work.” But to take on this task inevitably leads to a lowering, a reckoning that dispossesses oneself of all capital letters. To Weil, this is to move away from mythologized absolutes. Perhaps the most significant reservoir of absolutes is to be found in “our political universe.” The political reproduction of power is chained directly to the mystification and even deification of political ideologies and vocabularies.

Political parties cling tightly to delusions, making claims that seemingly bypass the human condition. They are lies of course, but the world loves its lies. These parties deal and operate in a strange mix of psycho-dynamics and mass politics (the power of crowds). To gain, manipulate, coerce, and sustain political power, the political hypnotizer appeals to the crowd’s need for certainty, comfort, and thought-terminating biasing. To do this, they present some Utopian vision – undergirded by the group’s mythology. And to this end, they need monsters and heroes, those presented as utterly void of virtue (them), and those presented with honor and prestige (us). An important rule applied to this practice is to never allow real complexity, nuance, uniqueness, and particularity to muddy up the distinct us/them myth. Most of all, they will claim ownership of the light. “Only we can see, only I can see.” Or, “Only I/we can fix this. And, when I/we do, it will be the greatest renewal (profit, rebuilding, expansion) this nation has ever seen.” Entities and absolutes are woven together in a narrative of myths and monsters.

This is why Simone writes that the first duty of every human being is to understand “the forces at work in the universe.” Whatever she means by this, she is not implying anything like sheer skepticism, paranoia, or some one-sided approach. She addresses this when considering the historical processes that made Hitler possible; she discovers that the same cultural tendencies existed within the French nation. In other words, understanding the forces at work does not mean dualism. Rather, she’s aiming at the human condition, that which we are all in.

Political/partisan identity, then, is a tragedy. It is a delusional catastrophe. It traps us, tricking us into seeing partisan political ideas as a utopian possibility. It blinds us (often through willful obstinacy) to the human condition. The good news, however, is that if we’re willing to wrestle with the human condition, we’ll cling less and joyfully realize that everything is provisional, temporary. We’ll be less likely to even imagine the idea of a Utopia. Our shared security is waiting for us at the bottom of the human condition, below the smoke of the blazes that have been set. When we crawl on our hands and knees, through the dark, we’ll find our way. Weil helps us avoid confusing political fire for daylight, a good friend to have in the dark. A lot of her writing is a recurring whisper, reminding us that we see through a glass, darkly, and every political device is provisional. Beware of anyone or anything that says otherwise. Historically, their solutions are often final, in the worst way.