Which brings me to Kirsch’s article on Zizek. Mr. Rosenbaum’s right to praise Kirsch’s writing. He is exceptional essayist and critic. Indirectly, the article reminded me of a persistent problem in modern thinking – what has been called post-modernism. The quotes referenced in the article hew to a pomo style: discursive, ironic, and hyperbolic. With most pomo inspired writings I’ve encountered, the material is not cogently argued as reason – or if you prefer “reason” – is not highly valued, it is even suspect.

Pomo flourishes in universities. Last month I attended a lecture given by a professor of education subtitled “the 9/11 Myth” in which he asserted that the official story of 9-11 was untrue, that it was an inside job carried out by the Bush administration and U.S. intelligence. He seemed very sincere. His evidence was less than rigorous: a passenger on one of the hijacked planes was recently spotted in Vienna. Secretive organizations such as the Bilderberg group and the Trilateral Commission were mentioned. When I wrote of my strong doubts on this blog about another conspiracy theory, I was rebutted with a long post of what seemed to me a long chain of flimsy connections. (To paraphrase Mr. Zizek: One thing you cannot accuse conspiracy theorist of is “undertheorizing”). The material was credited to George Michael Evica. Out of curiosity I googled the name and found that he too he had been an academic, a professor of literature. Perhaps pomo theory and conspiracy theories are related. They both critique established narratives – or as the cultural theorists call them: texts. There is no authoritative version of what happens, only interpretations. In fact, if an authoritative body such as the Warren Commission or the 9-11 commission issues a report, its veracity must be doubted and the commission members’ motives become suspect. “Truth” is simply a tool of those with power.