Postmodernism is often used as a buzzword to dismiss any thinking or art that has dared to evolve beyond archaic views of reality and into the present.
Like its close relative ‘Cultural Marxism’, the term ‘Postmodernism’ is hardly ever used to self-describe, but instead is reserved for usage in an accusatory tone. Postmodern thinkers have no use for the term, nor do postmodern artists, as the ideology itself defies labels and categorization. And that is probably what really irks the people who bandy the term as an insult.
It is difficult even to define postmodernism as a cohesive strain of thought and art, as the term is not descriptive of the contents designated. It obviously doesn’t mean “after now” as it would literally imply. Instead it is relative to ‘modernism’, a mode of thinking that began to die out somewhere in the 20th century. So to define postmodernism we must first define modernism.
Modernism are the modes of thinking that arose during the age of enlightenment. It is synonymous with reason, rationality and logic; and tends towards rigid structures and intellectual certainty. For all intents and purposes modernism is the WASP-approved worldview and artistic traditions. It is the secular name for Protestant beliefs about the very nature of reality, an orderly affair based on logic and laws. It is the backbone of patriarchy, oligarchy and nation-state authoritarianism.
Now that we have a clear working definition of modernism, it is pretty easy to see what falls under the non-existent jurisprudence of postmodernism. It is essentially any idea or art that eschews structure, certainty and mindless obedience to traditions. It is that which rejects the vain absolutism and infallibility-posturing of postmodernism and its dogmas. It is the honest declaration that, “I do not really know, and neither do you.”
Here is where postmodernism becomes a thorn in the side of WASP worldviews. By rejecting the certainties and structures which its systems and institutions are predicated on, postmodernists seem to pose a threat to civilized society. Yet one must first assume that we actually live in a civilized society for that to make any sense, and when the scale being used to measure civility is a recursive loop between itself and modernist values, the logic clearly becomes a circular affair.
WASP modernism is on such shaky grounds that it cannot even deal with outside ideologies without homogenizing them into derisive terms of rejection and insult. How civilized is that?
Postmodernists might suggest that civilized society is one in which each and every individual marches to the beat of their own drummer, rather than saluting the same flag of beliefs. They might suggest that being uncertain is more admirable than conformity, and that true merit comes not from obedience, but from uniqueness and creativity. The rotten bastards might even promote imagination and exploration above Absolute Truth.
The threat is real.
Who wants to join my Postmodernist Club and help deny our existence while we hijack culture and destroy civilized society?
Clap your knuckles seven times and say my secret name.