tam varētu piekrist.

Tiesa, man vairāk iepatikās starptautiskās publikas iepazīstināšana ar Kūļa pārdomām: His paper “Cultural a priori: shackles or freedom?” that he presented during the readings unfortunately is not published, it remains just as an audio files in the private archives of enthusiasts. Rihards Kūlis structured his speech around Mamardashvili`s provocative statement, quoted by heart and paraphrased, and it sounded like this: “culture – it is an essence of fascism.” [...] In his speech Kūlis is not inviting to take philosopher`s statements literally, he points out that they beg for a question: “but what did he mean by this?” Kūlis believes that it is quite easy to find an answer to this question. Latvian philosopher explains it through the analogy with statement of French existentialist Jean Paul Sartre: “I would gladly burn Mona Lisa.” (Сартр, 1973) But what has Mona Lisa done to Sartre? If Mona Lisa becomes a shackle, if she confines our free active spirit, our creative aspirations, then we have to get rid of it. It is similar with Mamardashvili. If something in the human existence, in the world that is created by the man himself, becomes a bondage, then the culture in certain form of expression is totalitarianism, fascism. (p.111)

Kādu laiciņu pie kafijas krūzes mēģināju saprast to, kā var nokļūt pie kultūras kā fašisma izpausmes. Droši vien tagad neskaitāmi sholasti mēģinās atšifrēt šo mīklu.