RSS
Where’s the Diversity?
From Eidolon:
How to Be a Good Classicist Under a Bad Emperor
by Donna Zuckerberg
Silicon Valley-based Classics scholar. Editor of Eidolon .
Nov 21A specter is haunting the Internet — the specter of the “alt-right.” The forces of white supremacy and toxic masculinity, fueled by a sense of entitlement dwarfed only by their inflated estimation of their own intelligence, have entered into an unholy alliance to remove feminism, political correctness, and multiculturalism from America. And on November 8th, 2016, after enduring years of mockery, months of being told that the arc of the moral universe would never let it win, the Alt-Right scored its first significant political victory: the election of Donald Trump to the highest office of the most powerful country in the world.
Who are these people? They are part of a group of a few hundred thousand men who have “swallowed the red pill” and belong to a few allied online movements: not just the Alt-Right, but also men’s rights activists, the manosphere, and GamerGate. At times these groups seem more clearly defined by what they oppose than what they support, but they’ve also mobilized to fight for men’s rights in a “gynocentric” society, harass women on Twitter, and redefine Pepe the Frog. They are younger than the typical conservative establishment, white, and male. They are antisemitic, homophobic, transphobic, Islamophobic. Some are self-described Neo-Nazis.
They also love the classics.
This is at once surprising — most classicists I know consider themselves politically liberal — and not, because when we’re truly honest, we see that for many the study of Classics is the study of one elite white man after another. The same texts that are for us sources of beauty and brutality, subjects of commentary and critique, are for these men (and they really are almost exclusively men) proof of the intellectual and cultural superiority of white maleness.
The Alt-Right is hungry to learn more about the ancient world. It believes that the classics are integral to education. It is utterly convinced that classical antiquity is relevant to the world we live in today, a comfort to classicists who have spent decades worrying that the field may be sliding into irrelevance in the eyes of the public.
The next four years are going to be a very difficult time for many people. But if we’re not careful, it could be a dangerously easy time for those who study ancient Greece and Rome. Classics, supported by the worst men on the Internet, could experience a renaissance and be propelled to a position of ultimate prestige within the humanities during the Trump administration, as it was in Nazi Germany in the 1930s. Classics made great again.
This is my call to arms for all classicists. No matter how white and male Classics once was, we are not that anymore. In spite of the numerous obstacles that remain, our field is now more diverse than ever, and that is something to be proud of.
These men are positioning themselves as the defenders of Western Civilization. Classicists, when you see this rhetoric, fight back. We must not allow the Alt-Right to define what Classics will mean in Trump’s America.
Just how interested is the Alt-Right in Classics? On the one hand, it is very interested in the cultural capital of antiquity. An article published yesterday in the New York Times shows how freely they use classical references — “crossing the Rubicon,” “ascending to Olympus.” On the other, the movement appears to have little interest in understanding the ancient world in any way other than the most superficial one.
I know about this interest from personal experience — that is, from Twitter trolls and comments on Eidolon articles. …
Steve Bannon, former Breitbart News executive chairman and newly appointed Chief Strategist to President-Elect Donald Trump, told Mother Jones this August that Breitbart is “the platform for the alt-right.”
Is there any evidence that Bannon was using this rather vague term in the sense that Dr. Zuckerberg is using it?
In recent weeks, Breitbart editors have backtracked on that claim, and they now argue that their site has only one piece of explicitly Alt-Right content: “An Establishment Conservative’s Guide to the Alt-Right” by Allum Bokhari and Milo Yiannopoulos (who, incidentally, was using the Twitter handle “@nero” when he was banned from the platform this summer). In that article, they write that the preservation of Western Culture is of monumental importance to the audiences for Alt-Right content:
[A]ttempts to scrub western history of its great figures are particularly galling to the alt-right, who in addition to the preservation of western culture, care deeply about heroes and heroic virtues. This follows decades in which left-wingers on campus sought to remove the study of “dead white males” from the focus of western history and literature curricula… to a natural conservative, such cultural vandalism may just be their highest priority.
… Unfortunately, I have met a few professional classicists who would prefer that the entire discipline embraced the model Quintus Curtius espouses for “classical knowledge.” Victor Davis Hanson explicitly trumpeted the same views in Who Killed Homer: “This new, ultrasensitive curriculum and its appendages — diversity training, journal writing, gender and racial sensitivity, multiculturalism, situational ethics, personal growth and self-indulgence, and the politics of commitment — ran directly counter to Greek wisdom” (118). For all that he is beloved by the Right, most classicists have little time for VDH these days — but many nevertheless agree, quietly, that as a field we’ve lost something in our increasing focus on race, class and gender in the ancient world. Our field is still, in many ways, in thrall to the Great Men model of history.
Kind of like movies and TV shows with Aaron Sorkin screenplays, such as West Wing, Moneyball, and Steve Jobs?
And others may disagree, but still feel that Daryush “Roosh V” Valizadeh has a point when he writes of the moral vacuum that would exist without an understanding of historical precedent in his article “What is a Social Justice Warrior (SJW)?”:
Even if Aristotle, Seneca, Marcus Aurelius, Thomas Aquinas, or Henry David Thoreau had valuable wisdom that continues to help how millions of people live today, the information derived from their work must be completely discarded since they were white men. Since white men were at the forefront of advancing humanity for the past several centuries, especially after the decline of the Egyptian, Persian, Mongol, and Ottoman empires, this precludes the bulk of moral guidance that we can use to determine right and wrong. SJW’s invent their own moral code but it is often based on what they are upset about in the present moment. It does not serve as a guide for more than a month or two, suggesting that their book of code would have to be written in pencil.
You yourself might be horrified by his sentiment — but have you ever argued that we should study Classics because those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it? Or because Greece and Rome are important to study because they are at the foundation of Western civilization and culture? Valizadeh’s argument here is the most offensive, sarcastically stated version of arguments that are made all the time by those within the discipline in favor of studying the classics.
Next time you hear either of those arguments made, remember: they are also made by a man who tells stories about raping women in his “Bang” series of “game guides,” who believes that “Women Must Have Their Behavior And Decisions Controlled By Men,” who recently rejoiced because the election of Donald Trump “automatically legitimizes masculine behaviors that were previously labeled sexist and misogynist” — a man who was rejected by the Alt-Right for being insufficiently white himself.
It is time for Classics as a discipline to say to these men: we will not give you more fodder for your ludicrous theory that white men are morally and intellectually superior to all other races and genders. We do not support your myopic vision of “Western Civilization.” Your version of antiquity is shallow, poorly contextualized, and unnuanced. When you use the classics to support your hateful ideas, we will push back by exposing just how weak your understanding is, how much you have invested in something about which you know so little.
Last week, I gave two lectures about my research on Classics and the manosphere. Both times, people asked me afterwards, “But what can we do?” I don’t have an answer to that question that I’m completely satisfied with.
But I do have a few ideas, and I hope we can start a dialogue within the discipline to discuss the problems further.
When you hear someone —be they a student, a colleague, or an amateur — say that they are interested in Classics because of “the Greek miracle” or because Classics is “the foundation of Western civilization and culture,” challenge that viewpoint respectfully but forcefully. Engage them on their assumed definitions of “foundation,” “Western,” “civilization,” and “culture.” Point out that such ideas are a slippery slope to white supremacy. Seek better reasons for studying Classics.
In your scholarship, focus on the parts of antiquity that aren’t elite white men. Read and cite the work of scholars who write about race, gender, and class in the ancient world. Be open about the marginalization and bias that exists within our discipline. Model a kind of Classics that isn’t quite so congenial to the neo-Nazis of the Alt-Right.
As the Alt-Right becomes more vocal and normalized, we may face pressure to frame our research and teaching in a way that will appeal to this new audience of Classics enthusiasts. Resist that pressure.
Do not write content for these men. …
Consider coming out in support of progressive student and community movements. Classics has a long history of regressive politics, and if we are serious about social justice and activism, we must speak out.
Write to professional Classics organizations, including the Society for Classical Studies, and encourage them to take a stand against these groups. Samuel Huskey has written and shared a lovely example of such a letter.
If you are so inclined, engage with the classical reception that these men produce. There is a narrative blooming that you can see in that Breitbart Guide to the Alt-Right, where the writers claim, “Skinheads, by and large, are low-information, low-IQ thugs driven by the thrill of violence and tribal hatred. The alternative right are a much smarter group of people — which perhaps suggests why the Left hates them so much. They’re dangerously bright.” But the Alt-Right are not “dangerously bright.” They are young men — if you’ll excuse the pun, the kids are alt-right — whose inane readings of classical texts often provide a window into their intellectual shortcomings.
I am considering creating a Tumblr to document examples of Alt-Right Classics. If you are interested in contributing, contact the Eidolon team ([email protected]).
… But classicists are uniquely positioned to fight back against the self-mythologizing of the Alt-Right. When we see Classics used to support a hateful politics, we must push back — unless we want to live through a second wave of fascist classical reception.
Donna Zuckerberg is the Editor-in-Chief of Eidolon . She received her PhD in Classics from Princeton and teaches for Stanford Continuing Studies and the Paideia Institute. Her book Not All Dead White Men , a study of the reception of Classics in Red Pill communities, is due to be released in Fall 2017 by Harvard University Press. Read more of her work here.
Fight the Power!
Of course, Dr. Donna Zuckerberg’s brother happens to be the most elite white man of his generation, as measured in gigabucks, and also perhaps the most powerful due to his being the chief owner and operator of the world’s most powerful communications platform, Facebook.
Scott Locklin responded to Donna Zuckerberg that Mark Zuckerberg is a huge fan of that most Dead White Man book of them all, The Aeneid. From Jose Antonio Vargas’s article about Mark Zuckerberg in The New Yorker in 2010:
He first read the Aeneid while he was studying Latin in high school, and he recounted the story of Aeneas’s quest and his desire to build a city that, he said, quoting the text in English, “knows no boundaries in time and greatness.” Zuckerberg has always had a classical streak, his friends and family told me. (Sean Parker, a close friend of Zuckerberg, who served as Facebook’s president when the company was incorporated, said, “There’s a part of him that—it was present even when he was twenty, twenty-one—this kind of imperial tendency. He was really into Greek odysseys and all that stuff.”) At a product meeting a couple of years ago, Zuckerberg quoted some lines from the Aeneid.
On the phone, Zuckerberg tried to remember the Latin of particular verses. Later that night, he IM’d to tell me two phrases he remembered, giving me the Latin and then the English: “fortune favors the bold” and “a nation/empire without bound.”
“Nation/Empire without bound” is likely the single most explanatory phrase I could imagine coming out of Mark Zuckerberg’s mouth. Mark has always struck me as somebody who would be a conservative nationalist if he lived in the nation of Israel, but who can make more money as a liberal globalist in the America empire.
P.S. Here’s Dr. Zuckerberg’s Facebook page, Sugar Mountain Treats, of delicious-looking desserts she bakes.
Sorry about the format being messed up initially. Click on the headline of the posting to see the post in proper formatting.
Those Darned Russians!
Greek looks really stylish and intellectual in lower case minuscules, but those long postdated most of the Greeks who count for anything.
Shorter version: Whoops, we fucked up by pushing identity politics for everybody else while conspicuously excluding white men, and now white men are using our own tools against us. Now we have to stuff that toothpaste back in the tube by telling white guys that not only are they not allowed to talk about anybody else’s culture and history, they’re not allowed to talk about their own culture and history, either. We, the SJWs, own it all.
While we’re at it, we own the space program, too, you haters. Haven’t you seen “Hidden Figures?” All Your Base Are Belong To Us.
I assume they’ll eventually get around to telling Sailer he’s not allowed to use statistics, because Racism.
This sure seems like a terrific recipe for social harmony.
Now I can't read Homer or Plato or Plutarch without being a racist. Always, everywhere, whatever I do, I'm somehow scheming to put blacks back in chains and women in the kitchen. No pleasure I can have escapes the stain of my distant ancestors.
All accounts must be settled, all crooked roads must be made straight, all mountains and valleys must be leveled to achieve perfect justice. Apparently there is just something in human nature that turns some people into theocratic bullies. It's an urge so strong it manifests itself even in people who don't believe in God.
I'm beginning to understand why wise gurus supposedly went to live on mountaintops, away from all human contact.
There'll be Plutarch and Homer way past when the last SJW passes away. If nothing else, Chinese scholars will be trying to understand where we went wrong to avoid repeating our mistakes.
That was some weird formatting, alright.
Those Darned Russians!
Funny that Alt Right is all about ‘entitlement’ when they are the most blacklisted and marginalized political movement in America.
Is he though ? As an article here a few days back already mentioned, when Donna Zuckerberg mentions white men, I doubt she counts her brother as being part of that group.
I am sure Mark Zuckerberg's Chinese wife and his Chinese in-laws see him as a Gweilo, which is Cantonese for White man. Mark Zuckerberg sure as hell would not be physically seen as a Person Of Color in China.
“could experience a renaissance and be propelled to a position of ultimate prestige within the humanities during the Trump administration, as it was in Nazi Germany in the 1930s”
I’m not even sure this is true, Hitler was a great admirer of the Greeks and Romans (and of certain individuals like Julian the apostate), but other Nazis had more narrowly Nordicist conceptions with a focus on ancient Germanic peoples like the Goths, so Nazism’s stance towards Greco-Roman antiquity was probably somewhat ambivalent.
That Zuckerberg woman comes across as pretty unpleasant and rather unscholarly with her open call for politicization of her discipline…she’s probably on to something however. Given the pro-mass immigration stance of the Christian churches in most Western countries it’s not hard to see why right-wingers look to the pre-Christian past for inspiration…I increasingly feel myself drawn into that direction.
Most mentally healthy people see shared interests as an opportunity to bond with people they might otherwise never have reason to talk to. But a certain sort of incredibly nasty, petty person looks at it and says: "Hey, there's a bunch of people I don't like enjoying something that I also enjoy. I should go over there and confiscate it from them, because they're probably enjoying it in ways I don't approve of."
From my experience, Classical culture, art, and symbology are the simultaneously inspirational and aspirational "missing link" that connects us to a past purposefully pressed into the shadows. Whether nefarious or efficient in nature, this severing of a connection post-WWII resulted in an engineered tabula rasa ripe for postmodern redesign--the consumerist "American Dream".
As materialism is roundly rejected by the AR in favor of spiritualism, identity, and racial collectivism, we must rely upon the Classical thoughts, words, and deeds to act as a psychic and intellectual bridge to the past. Zuckerberg has clearly identified this as critical cultural infrastructure that must be made "a bridge too far".
She's striking at our roots. And worse yet, imploring a professional society to join in and then salt the earth with something I can (from the article) only describe as Cultural Marxism.
I think the issue, which Dr. Z conveniently ignores, is that virtually all scholarly disciplines were Nazified under the Nazis. Nazi Classics didn't exist because the Classics were important to Nazis, it existed because Nazis infiltrated and controlled academia.
The other thing she ignores is the way Classics was a much larger part of European intellectual life in the 30s. (You can see from this Arion article, "Lycurgus in Leaflets and Lectures: The Weiße Rose and Classics at Munich University, 1941–45", that (a) there were Classicists opposed to Nazism and (b) they thought Classical themes were ubiquitous enough among the educated to be used against the Nazis.) What she's arguing for now isn't a defense of Classics against misuse but for continued control of Classics by an elite minority of scholars.
While we're at it, we own the space program, too, you haters. Haven't you seen "Hidden Figures?" All Your Base Are Belong To Us.
I assume they'll eventually get around to telling Sailer he's not allowed to use statistics, because Racism.
This sure seems like a terrific recipe for social harmony.
You know, just screw these people. I’ve just had it. I can’t play video games without being a racist, I can’t watch sports without being a racist, I can’t listen to music without being a racist. Fine, whatever.
Now I can’t read Homer or Plato or Plutarch without being a racist. Always, everywhere, whatever I do, I’m somehow scheming to put blacks back in chains and women in the kitchen. No pleasure I can have escapes the stain of my distant ancestors.
All accounts must be settled, all crooked roads must be made straight, all mountains and valleys must be leveled to achieve perfect justice. Apparently there is just something in human nature that turns some people into theocratic bullies. It’s an urge so strong it manifests itself even in people who don’t believe in God.
I’m beginning to understand why wise gurus supposedly went to live on mountaintops, away from all human contact.
For example, I ordered a book advertised as a mystery. It soon turned out the bad guy was against immigration and was portrayed as evil. The good guys were all helping Mexicans in.
I didn't finish it and I'm more careful now. Still, the book description on Amazon didn't note the immigration angle. It can be hard to avoid. Mysteries set in the past are safer.
Americans are stuck in a horrible marriage because we can't get out of the mortgage and move to separate homes, so we grumble through the days with the occasional full-on screaming match. It can't last. At some point, one side would rather burn the house down than spend another hour in this nightmare, especially if they feel as though they're going to lose the house anyway.
“A specter is haunting the Internet . . .”
“. . . unholy alliance . . .”
“. . . arc of the moral universe . . .”
You’d think someone steeped in the classics could write an opening paragraph with fewer cliches and vapid nonsenses.
What a sad article this is, really — so “fueled by a sense of entitlement dwarfed only by [her] inflated estimation of [her] own intelligence”, to borrow a misguided scholar’s own not-very-euphonious phrasing.
The classical tradition in philosophy can be characterized by Man's acknowledgement of the limits imposed by Nature. In classical philosophy, Man himself is a product of this nature, which imposes limitations upon him that he can understand but not fully overcome. His task is to educate himself to understand nature, and work within the limits imposed by it. The task of human society, and political society, is to be able to delineate between the different natural abilities of individual humans, and use those differences for the benefit of the entire society.
For instance, in Book I of Aristotle's Politics, Aristotle argued that all of Nature is hierarchical -- and this is true of individual humans, too. Aristotle lists a series of social relationships from highest to lowest, and each "level" by nature rules over its inferiors. At the top of the list is the human Male; next are females, then children, then slaves, and finally animals. Each of these "levels" of human society is based upon the ability to partake in reason and suppress emotion. Thus, Aristotle sees the male as most rational, the female less so, the child less than the female, the slave less than the child, and the animal less than the slave. Each layer of society is symbiotic, and society functions most harmoniously when the superior parts rule over the inferior parts. For Aristotle, "justice" is "equality among equals, and inequality among unequals."
(Similarly, Plato describes a hierarchical list of types of political societies. First is his Ideal Republic ruled by the Guardian Class; then a military rule; then a business oligarchy; then a democracy; and finally, a dictatorship, which inevitably arises from too much democratic equality. Democracy, for Plato, is a perversion of nature).
The culmination of classical philosophy is Christianity, which places true justice not in the hands of the political system, but in the hands of an Almighty God, who is the author of Nature itself and the Creator of these levels of distinction. The task of the Christian is to understand the defects of his nature, and to submit to the grace of the Almighty to remedy it in the hereafter.
Now, Modern philosophy attacks the notion that man must accept the limits of his nature. Modern philosophy seeks to use science and technology to change and modify man's Natural environment so as to remove Nature's impediments. (In other words, Modernity seeks to create an artificial, not a natural, society).
Democracy is a Modern artifact because men are not inherently equal. Feminism is a Modern artifact because males and females are inherently unequal. And racial egalitarianism is a Modern artifact because the races are inherently unequal. Democracy, feminism, and racial egalitarianism are all artificial. The Alt-right recognizes this; consequently, it looks to the classical tradition for guidance.
Karl Marx is the ultimate Modern philosopher, because he believed that science, technology, and economic prosperity would ultimately lead to the abolition of all natural differences and distinctions, resulting in a global communist Utopia of complete equality. For Marx, Man's nature itself will evolve, and the Post-modern communist man will be a different species entirely from the Classical Man.
Prof. Zuckerberg, the so-called "classicist," is really a Marxist who enjoys reading ancient literature, but obviously, she does not believe any of it.
“A specter is haunting the Internet — the specter of the “alt-right.””
hahaha
“A SPECTER is haunting Eastern Europe: the specter of what in the West is called “dissent.””
http://www.vaclavhavel.cz/showtrans.php?cat=eseje&val=2_aj_eseje.html&typ=HTML
The last line in the first quote is not from Dr. Z.
High priestess doin what they do. Lack of self-awareness is always astounding and entertaining. Affirmation and dismissal of VDH is particularly fun. But even while jealousy guarding her turf, she genuflects to her idols, the leftist talking points. Precious.
That Zuckerberg woman comes across as pretty unpleasant and rather unscholarly with her open call for politicization of her discipline...she's probably on to something however. Given the pro-mass immigration stance of the Christian churches in most Western countries it's not hard to see why right-wingers look to the pre-Christian past for inspiration...I increasingly feel myself drawn into that direction.
Given the pro-mass immigration stance of the Universities in most Western countries it’s not hard to see why right-wingers look to the pre-Calculus past for computation…
Babies, bathwater…
There is no East or West, no Jew or Greek in Christ. Somehow they think they can skip the in Christ part and everything will be hunky-dory. That’s not Christianity’s fault.
“Funny that Alt Right is all about ‘entitlement’ when they are the most blacklisted and marginalized political movement in America.”
The mainstream media is more tolerant of Muslim terrorists, cop killers, and pedophile NAMBLA than they are of the Alt-Right.
Remember when Rolling Stone tried to paint one of the Tsarnaev brothers as a rock star. Could you see Rolling Stone ever doing that to Richard Spencer?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eidolon_%28apparition%29
“In ancient Greek literature, an eidolon (plural: eidola or eidolons) (Greek εἴδωλον: “image, idol, double, apparition, phantom, ghost”) is a spirit-image of a living or dead person; a shade or phantom look-alike of the human form.”
Interesting choice for a name.
Now I’m going to dig up my copies of Homer, Thucydides, and Marcus Aurelius.
I went to the “How to Be a Good Classicist Under a Bad Emperor” link, and there I found the Eidolon website, where Donna Zuckerberg writes:
Yung In Chae is an Associate Editor of Eidolon and studies Classics at Cambridge.
So, then I clicked on “a poem”, which took me to the poem that Yung In Chae wrote. Her poem’s idea is to rhyme “chair” and “fake hair” in order to mock Donald Trump. Here are some excerpts from the poem:
https://eidolon.pub/introducing-idle-musings-bd9fb59494a2#.oonxgobs8
https://medium.com/idle-musings/ode-of-a-classicist-craftsman-poet-who-also-wants-to-do-a-trump-comparison-30d327ceda95#.o870fav1h
The devil will find work for idle hands to do
I stole and I lied, and why ?
Because you asked me to !
But now you make me feel so ashamed
Because I've only got two hands
Well, I'm still fond of you, oh-ho-oh
So, what difference does it make ?
Oh, what difference does it make ?
Oh, it makes none
But now you have gone
And your prejudice won't keep you warm tonight
Princeton University, Classics, Department Member
I graduated from Princeton University in 2015 with an A.B. in Classics and certificates in Values and Public Life and Interdisciplinary Studies in the Humanities. I am currently pursuing a Master's in History and Civilizations at the École des hautes études en sciences sociales in Paris, writing a thesis on Simone de Beauvoir's classical education.
Supervisors: Melissa Lane, Anthony Grafton, and Dinah Ribard
____________________________
Yung In Chae works at Princeton University and you don't. Female by the way. She is gettin' paid! At least it seems so. What is a Department Member? Whatever it is she is gettin' paid. If you aren't gettin' paid for you cuckoo leftist/anti-Patrirachy writings then you just are not happening!
Her folks got off the boat from Korea. Ran a small business and produced this useless, anti-white critter who (photo at website) is not much to look at.
China had Middle Kingdom mentality. A certain national pride.
Japanese have had island domain mentality. Though part of Asia, also particular and independent of Asia.
In contrast, Korea survived as a servile kingdom of China. Its mental habit is to suck up to the Great Power.
Any surprise that Koreans became such fanatical Christians when the US, the great power, was a Christian nation?
And since US is now a PC nation, these Koreans in America are turning into the biggest teacher's pets. It's not just this fool but the two Seoul Brothers, Jay and Alvin and other chipmunks.
No agency. Also, fools like that aren't only anti-white. My guess is she is a globalist shill who will attack ANY nationalism, including her own. Smugly ensconced in the First World and selected by elite institutions, she glibly feels part of the Superior Elites and looks down all patriots all over the world. She has no independence of mind, no individuality. She wants to belong, to win approval. And in her world, she gets pats on her head like good little doggy when she writes drivel like that.
Well, as crazy as PC is, at least we can give credit to Jews and whites for coming up with it. They at least have claim of originality. In contrast, this yellow pet is just a monkey-see-monkey-doer.
Her poem... I mean it is so dime-a-dozen and by the numbers. Zzzzzzz.
Regression towards the mean.
The word left then in your comment could be enough:
Regression.
Steve, your first link is broken. It should go here:
https://eidolon.pub/how-to-be-a-good-classicist-under-a-bad-emperor-6b848df6e54a#.yzmtqirqt
That’s a pretty silly essay. However, it makes me wonder, where does the Enlightenment fit in with the Alt-Right? Is it disliked because it eventually gave rise to post-modernism? I would think that Alt-Right would embrace it because it’s much closer in time, more connected with modern European states, and gave us fantastic things, e.g. science!
The reason some people reject the 'Enlightenment' is the ideologically-motivated ignorance it has perpetuated - even in the 21st C. Try reading some books on science in the 'Dark Ages'. The Enlightenment isn't the beginning of Western civilization, but it might be its end.
Sic Transit Gloria Mundi
Took Ms. Big Brains all of 2 paragraphs to break out the Adolfian “N”‘ word. Which means she doesn’t really have an argument beside….feelings. Child, please.
Typical white liberal female.
“Is he though ? As an article here a few days back already mentioned, when Donna Zuckerberg mentions white men, I doubt she counts her brother as being part of that group.”
I am sure Mark Zuckerberg’s Chinese wife and his Chinese in-laws see him as a Gweilo, which is Cantonese for White man. Mark Zuckerberg sure as hell would not be physically seen as a Person Of Color in China.
Just goes to show you. When say, the sister of one of the most powerful, influential, and wealthy men in the world can’t celebrate his achievement and brag on just how awesome White people are; but instead has to go on a rant about how awful White men are, well it says it all.
It says that women ARE really enemies, of most White men (even their brothers) if they are not involved in either their kids or Kawai stuff like Japanese women. IMHO that self-sorting into enemy status is due to a desire to compete against White men; social approval from non-White women; and resentment of the men in and around their life for being beta. Does his own sister really despise Mark Zuckerberg for being a beta male? Evidence says, yes.
After all, if the woman in question really wanted to talk about the Alt-Right and the Classics, she might mention that the Roman and Hellenistic world ruled considerable amounts of non-Europeans; that Jewish monotheism and Greek Humanism combined to create classical Christianity. That Jesus himself is a semi-Socrates in his method of teaching. That the classical world moved fairly rapidly from polytheism to monotheism Christianity. In short, argue that yes the Classical World was in fact, quite awesome and White. But was open to things from other peoples.
Instead, its just more denigrating White men. Her own brother did something pretty impressive, and she can’t even brag on him. Not a little. Or talk about how indeed White men are awesome. Its all about how awful we are.
Conclusion: there is nothing women will not punish in men who are beta. Nothing.
I sent this message to a conservative friend today:
"I think the greatest threat to our country has been, is and will be liberal white women. If you think about it, you will realize they have supported and advanced every single policy, movement and individual that's been most destructive to our country. I don't understand it. The conservative women I know are salt of the earth, principled and strong. But something about liberalism appeals to the worst in the worst of women."
Let alone placing their whiteness over their Judaicness.
The Classics are so far back in time that they can be and are used to justify all sorts of conflicting ideologies. Straussians, Victor Davis Hanson, Donald Kagan (classicist and father of Robert Kagan), etc., use them to justify neoconservatism. Others have used them throughout history and in contemporary times to justify liberalism, universalism, multiethnic empire, etc.
Why the Alt Right represents the Soul and Spirit of the West.
Most of humanity through most of history stuck with the tried-and-true, conformed to status quo, adhered to dogma & orthodoxy. They hardly thought outside the box. They were emotionally and/or intellectually ill-equipped for revolutionary consciousness. They were weak of will or lacking in imagination.
Therefore, much of the world failed to develop complex civilization, and even the ones who did build great civilizations, like the Persians, Hindus, and Chinese, came to be stalled in stasis or trapped in cycles of rises and falls.
What was true of most of humanity was also true of most white people. Most white people prefer stasis, conformity, dogma, and/or herd mentality. In this, most white people are very much like rest of humanity. The power of Political Correctness is proof that most white people lack vision, individuality, the power of will, and independence of mind.
Even so, more than other races, the white race has had a larger proportion of strong-willed visionaries who’ve dared to think new thoughts, question status quo, stand firmly on principle, defy orthodoxy, speak truth to power, and discover the truth.
And it was because of such special individuals and visionary groups that the West made the leaps that eluded other races and cultures(except in imitation of the West).
Today, the reigning dogma, orthodoxy, and power of the West are controlled by the GLOB that seeks to cripple and control the White Race forever. This should be obvious to any brave, honest, and intelligent white soul, but tragically, most white people are like the rest of humanity and trapped in herd-mentality. They slavishly follow the narrative, bark like dogs for their globo masters, and can’t see or think outside the box devised by the Glob.
However, members of the Alt Right are different. Though threatened with loss of status, wealth, and comfort, they stand firm on principles and possess the will to envision a future in which the white race is liberated from the chain of Globalists who would have every white pair of hands serve Jews and have every white womb hatch non-white babies.
Alt Right has the honesty, courage, and the will to break free and see the truth, and it has the vision to forge a new path for the survival and victory for the white race.
Also, Alt Right is different from mere conservatives who, lacking vision and creativity, stick with the tried-and-true or suck up to the Establishment in the Current Year. If the current elites say ‘gay marriage’ is the ‘new normal’, hapless Conservatives just go along. They too have a herd-mentality.
And most Liberals are not rational free-thinkers. They are just shallow hive-minds who go with every new fad and fashion for lack of roots and vision for their race. The entirety of their culture is Pop Culture(junk food for the soul) and PC(poison for the mind).
The Western spirit/soul has never been present in the majority of white folks who are like the rest of humanity in their conformism, herd-mentality, and lack of will & agency. The Western spirit/soul has always belonged to a small minority of white people who served as the vanguard as thinkers, warriors, explorers, scientists, artists, and traders.
The power of PC has suppressed this soul/spirit among white people, even among the intelligent. It goes to show intelligence isn’t enough as even people of intelligence are generally lacking in will, courage, and vision. After all, China had many intelligent people through the ages, but its progress got stalled under thick layers of orthodoxy and stasis.
No, there must be more than intelligence. There must be vision and will. It’s like a pile of wood isn’t enough to make fire. There must be a spark that ignites the wood. That soul/spirit is lacking among most races. It is lacking even among most whites. But there are more individuals with the spark among whites than among other races.
And Alt Right now represents that spark that can set the world on fire. It has the will to strike the match over the Eurosphere Wood on which Jews piss on to prevent the White Fire.
Trump is a classical hero in his willingness to stand up for what's right, regardless of the personal cost. Anti-white Leftism has been on the march through America's political, cultural, and commercial institutions for the past century. It has inexorably gained ground under both Republican and Democrat administrations. Can a Trump Administration turn back the tide? It remains to be seen, but for the first time there is hope, which might explain Michelle Obama's hopelessness.
And I posted while listening to countryradio.cz. So Miss Z take your “thoughts” and shove it.
I wonder what Dr. Z’s non-myopic vision of “Western Civilization” looks like. A vision that supports her love-filled ideas no doubt.
I also wonder what grade a student who leans alt-right and doesn’t keep it to him or her self can expect from Doctor-Commissar Z. I mean a student with those views cannot possibly understand the classics in the correct way, right?
That Zuckerberg woman comes across as pretty unpleasant and rather unscholarly with her open call for politicization of her discipline...she's probably on to something however. Given the pro-mass immigration stance of the Christian churches in most Western countries it's not hard to see why right-wingers look to the pre-Christian past for inspiration...I increasingly feel myself drawn into that direction.
This. She’d hate the comparison, but she sounds EXACTLY like certain Bible-thumping fundamentalists I knew growing up in the South.
Most mentally healthy people see shared interests as an opportunity to bond with people they might otherwise never have reason to talk to. But a certain sort of incredibly nasty, petty person looks at it and says: “Hey, there’s a bunch of people I don’t like enjoying something that I also enjoy. I should go over there and confiscate it from them, because they’re probably enjoying it in ways I don’t approve of.”
Oh, I do hope so.
There’s a phrase.
The smartest fellow-student of mine was Dorothea Wender, nee Schmidt. Get this: her parents were Plymouth Brethern handing out tracts on the street (unless she made that up), and she earned a living winning commerical jingle contests. She said she won a new Cadillac once that way and got $5000 out of selling it to a Cadillac dealership. I don't remember what her diss. was on. She didn't do much publishing-wise but I do remember something she got published where she was able to work in something about Susie Creamcheese. She had a tragic life, divorced with 2 daughters, teaching at Wheaton College in Norton, MA, she had a major stroke at a young age, but by dint of much effort, was able to re-assemble most of your mind.
Back to Donna Zuckerberg's piece in Jezebel. I can only feel sorry for her that she took up Classics. In the ancient world, women were subservient, and there is precious little to write about from a feminist viewpoint. Much less to justify reading Classics to female students with a background in Diversity Studies (c). So she twists herself up in pretzels to establish a standing point. Highly politicized and polarized, she wants to prevent Alt-Right from classicizing the ancient texts. Unless she can transcend her existential reality she will never do useful work in her chosen field. This is an unhappy-making pickle to find oneself in. Randi and Arielle her sisters are doubtless doing something with their lives.
The Kagans using the disastrous Athenian misadventure of pointlessly invading Sicily in the middle of its war with Sparta to justify the US invading Iraq was always a real head-scratcher.
So when a Kagan inflamed the tensions in Ukraine, she was really an Alcibiades that will turn traitor and defect to Sparta-Russia in the future.
/sarcStrauss
The Kagans using the disastrous Athenian misadventure of pointlessly invading Sicily in the middle of its war with Sparta to justify the US invading Iraq was always a real head-scratcher.
https://eidolon.pub/how-to-be-a-good-classicist-under-a-bad-emperor-6b848df6e54a#.yzmtqirqt
That's a pretty silly essay. However, it makes me wonder, where does the Enlightenment fit in with the Alt-Right? Is it disliked because it eventually gave rise to post-modernism? I would think that Alt-Right would embrace it because it's much closer in time, more connected with modern European states, and gave us fantastic things, e.g. science!
Thanks.
We are just reappropriating our own culture, reconstructing it after her attempts at deconstruction. We are the phoenix rising from the ashes!
In other words, we are Making White Culture Great Again.
“Of course, Dr. Donna Zuckerberg’s brother happens to be the most elite (((white man))) of his generation”
FTFY
Lots of liberal hand-wringing these days is inspired by the experience of getting trolled on Twitter. If you’re used to only getting congratulated for voicing liberal shibboleths, it must be harrowing when the response is an immediate barrage of mockery instead.
Journalists also vastly overrate the effect of the alt-right on Trump’s success because of this. They are great targets for trolls because they’re all on Twitter and they love to promote conventional wisdom. To the extent that the alt-right influenced the election, it may have been mostly by driving journalists into ever greater heights of hysteria in their Trump coverage.
One would think that scholars would leap at the chance to educate a public curious about their academic specialty. She's quite sure you shouldn't look into the classics because they're a foundation of Western Civilization but also not quite sure why they're relevant at all.
While we're at it, we own the space program, too, you haters. Haven't you seen "Hidden Figures?" All Your Base Are Belong To Us.
I assume they'll eventually get around to telling Sailer he's not allowed to use statistics, because Racism.
This sure seems like a terrific recipe for social harmony.
I just watched last Sunday’s episode of Legends and Lies on Fox News. Did you know without the 88 blacks in the Rhode Island 1st Regiment, the Battle of Yorktown would have been lost? It was news to me. They also told us honorary non white Alexander Hamilton asked to lead them in the assult on Redoubt 10. To be fair, the previous installments were better than this one.
Seems that even some people on the Left find Donna Zuckerberg’s notions a tad extreme:
http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/a-question-of-purpose-what-do-the-classics-mean-in-todays-political-climate
https://www.thenation.com/article/why-are-the-media-taking-the-cias-hacking-claims-at-face-value/
I know we whiteys are supposed to laugh at lines like these. But lately I’ve been getting the feeling that many of the people who write such things don’t really care about justice or fairness or other noble sentiments. They just hate white people and want to see us “put in our place”. And I think this feeling I have is spreading.
White privilege is genetic and it's not "supremacy" it's simply the ability to create nicer places to live - on our own - without them.
The celebrated Ta Nehesi Coates' celebrated Between The World And Me speaks to your thesis.
In the final three pages, Coates assumes the voice of an Old Testament prophet. He calls down a curse upon white people, for the stain of their bloodlines and their ongoing sinfulness: enslavement, the Middle Passage, redlining, escalator etiquette. Although heretofore unmentioned, Coates adds one count of Global Warming to the indictment -- if catnip is at hand, might as well sprinkle it atop that dish best served cold.
There’s a lot of projection going on in this article. In my experience, it’s that the multicultural left that’s “fueled by a sense of entitlement” and has “an inflated estimation of their own intelligence.”
the “communist 1%”:
“LET US now imagine that one day something in our greengrocer snaps and he stops putting up the slogans merely to ingratiate himself. He stops voting in elections he knows are a farce. He begins to say what he really thinks at political meetings. And he even finds the strength in himself to express solidarity with those whom his conscience commands him to support. In this revolt the greengrocer steps out of living within the lie. He rejects the ritual and breaks the rules of the game. He discovers once more his suppressed identity and dignity. He gives his freedom a concrete significance. His revolt is an attempt to live within the truth.
The bill is not long in coming. He will be relieved of his post as manager of the shop and transferred to the warehouse. His pay will be reduced. His hopes for a holiday in Bulgaria will evaporate. His children’s access to higher education will be threatened. His superiors will harass him and his fellow workers will wonder about him. Most of those who apply these sanctions, however, will not do so from any authentic inner conviction but simply under pressure from conditions, the same conditions that once pressured the greengrocer to display the official slogans. They will persecute the greengrocer either because it is expected of them, or to demonstrate their loyalty, or simply as part of the general panorama, to which belongs an awareness that this is how situations of this sort are dealt with, that this, in fact, is how things are always done, particularly if one is not to become suspect oneself. The executors, therefore, behave essentially like everyone else, to a greater or lesser degree: as components of the post-totalitarian system, as agents of its automatism, as petty instruments of the social auto-totality.””
http://www.vaclavhavel.cz/showtrans.php?cat=eseje&val=2_aj_eseje.html&typ=HTML
Hi Brendan Eich
One of the articles in the Eidolon website is titled “Giving It Up in the Classroom: Feminist Classics and the Burden of Authority” and is written by Lisl Walsh, who is identified as “an Assistant Professor of Classics and Critical Identity Studies. Yoga enthusiast and instructor. Feminist. Uncertified neologician and portmantologist”.
Walsh’s article begins:
At some point, Walsh decided that her problem was that she had “a non-authoritative body” while her students were “a bunch of authoritarians”. She decided to assign her “bunch of authoritarians” to themselves design her course’s syllabus.
Here was my question: how does a person occupying a non-authoritative body teach a bunch of authoritarians living in a racist, sexist, ableist society what a responsible postmodern approach to Greco-Roman antiquity looks like? ….That body thing again. What's up with that? Body lives matter? Paging Mr. Coates.“expect” .... “know”When they put mundane words in ironic parenthetics, you know they're hopeless.For example, if students want extra tutoring sessions, and I’m already overwhelmed, I tell them so and ask them to find a solution (e.g., extra credit for students who are willing to tutor, or having them mark each others’ exams to free me up to lead a tutoring session).Fucking lazy is what your are, like half the associate profs on any campus. Overwhelmed with what? Having to grade two assignments the whole semester? High school English teachers do that and much more in less than a month.
Therefore, some male Classics scholar did not get the job.
If they weren't responsible for the decline of the West, some pity would be in order. As it is I'm reminded of C.S. Lewis' remarks about Satan eating his own servants.
Why would anyone care what this slacker had to say about Rome? One would be better served by just reading Mommsen or Gibbon. A lot - perhaps most - of modern academia is a completely no-value-added proposition.
Remember this Ezra Pound chestnut:
And these two phrases really demonstrate a devotion to classics: “crossing the Rubicon,” “ascending to Olympus.” That’s like the mile-high club, amirite?
Speaking of which, where does she get off referring to her field as “classic.”
That Zuckerberg woman comes across as pretty unpleasant and rather unscholarly with her open call for politicization of her discipline...she's probably on to something however. Given the pro-mass immigration stance of the Christian churches in most Western countries it's not hard to see why right-wingers look to the pre-Christian past for inspiration...I increasingly feel myself drawn into that direction.
Hitler seems to have enjoyed mocking some of the more extreme examples of Nazi Nordicism:
I’ve a controversial idea, on top of another one, of course.
Whereas the Zionists revived Hebrew as a language for their nation, we could revive Latin as the language for Our Fair Republic.
hey.... stop stealing an idea i've been trying to push for 3 years!
what's the MOST LIKELY place where you could actually pull off - and a few hundred bucks as a pushstart) to start a Latin-only kindergarden (which is what it would take)?
A hilltop in Samaria.
Talk to the guys at the Shomron Regional Council. They are QUITE SYMPATHETIC to Euro Nativist nationalism.
U.Kentucky has a number of guys who can actually speak the language.
We'll give them an open-ended visa, if they bring us some hot bluegrass picking once or twice a year.
Deal?
Et cum spiritu tuo.
While we're at it, we own the space program, too, you haters. Haven't you seen "Hidden Figures?" All Your Base Are Belong To Us.
I assume they'll eventually get around to telling Sailer he's not allowed to use statistics, because Racism.
This sure seems like a terrific recipe for social harmony.
They’re not going to win–the stuff’s in the public domain and, thanks, at least in part, to (((James Loeb))), there are cheap classics editions all over the place.
There’ll be Plutarch and Homer way past when the last SJW passes away. If nothing else, Chinese scholars will be trying to understand where we went wrong to avoid repeating our mistakes.
The Japanese have some interest but in a mostly superficial way. Like, in an anime, kawaii William Shakespeare will show up and do something silly. Or all the characters will be named after ones from The Three Musketeers.
“Daughter, dismiss thy fears; to thy desire
The fates of thine are fix’d, and stand entire.
Thou shalt behold thy wish’d Lavinian walls;
And, ripe for heav’n, when fate Aeneas calls,
Then shalt thou bear him up, sublime, to me:
No councils have revers’d my firm decree.
And, lest new fears disturb thy happy state,
Know, I have search’d the mystic rolls of Fate:
Thy son (nor is th’ appointed season far)
In Italy shall wage successful war,
Shall tame fierce nations in the bloody field,
And sov’reign laws impose, and cities build,
Till, after ev’ry foe subdued, the sun
Thrice thro’ the signs his annual race shall run:
This is his time prefix’d. Ascanius then,
Now call’d Iulus, shall begin his reign.
He thirty rolling years the crown shall wear,
Then from Lavinium shall the seat transfer,
And, with hard labor, Alba Longa build.
The throne with his succession shall be fill’d
Three hundred circuits more: then shall be seen
Ilia the fair, a priestess and a queen,
Who, full of Mars, in time, with kindly throes,
Shall at a birth two goodly boys disclose.
The royal babes a tawny wolf shall drain:
Then Romulus his grandsire’s throne shall gain,
Of martial tow’rs the founder shall become,
The people Romans call, the city Rome.
To them no bounds of empire I assign,
Nor term of years to their immortal line.
Ev’n haughty Juno, who, with endless broils,
Earth, seas, and heav’n, and Jove himself turmoils;
At length aton’d, her friendly pow’r shall join,
To cherish and advance the Trojan line.
The subject world shall Rome’s dominion own,
And, prostrate, shall adore the nation of the gown.
An age is ripening in revolving fate
When Troy shall overturn the Grecian state,
And sweet revenge her conqu’ring sons shall call,
To crush the people that conspir’d her fall.
Then Caesar from the Julian stock shall rise,
Whose empire ocean, and whose fame the skies
Alone shall bound; whom, fraught with eastern spoils,
Our heav’n, the just reward of human toils,
Securely shall repay with rites divine;
And incense shall ascend before his sacred shrine.
Then dire debate and impious war shall cease,
And the stern age be soften’d into peace:
Then banish’d Faith shall once again return,
And Vestal fires in hallow’d temples burn;
And Remus with Quirinus shall sustain
The righteous laws, and fraud and force restrain.
Janus himself before his fane shall wait,
And keep the dreadful issues of his gate,
With bolts and iron bars: within remains
Imprison’d Fury, bound in brazen chains;
High on a trophy rais’d, of useless arms,
He sits, and threats the world with vain alarms.”
Aeneid, Dryden’s translation
in Zuck's case Fortune shows that who she really favors are the bold, immoral and ruthless.
If Blacks wuz kangs…
…then Jews wuz Greeks.
Now I can't read Homer or Plato or Plutarch without being a racist. Always, everywhere, whatever I do, I'm somehow scheming to put blacks back in chains and women in the kitchen. No pleasure I can have escapes the stain of my distant ancestors.
All accounts must be settled, all crooked roads must be made straight, all mountains and valleys must be leveled to achieve perfect justice. Apparently there is just something in human nature that turns some people into theocratic bullies. It's an urge so strong it manifests itself even in people who don't believe in God.
I'm beginning to understand why wise gurus supposedly went to live on mountaintops, away from all human contact.
At the same time, you are only being blamed for your ancestors’ sins, but not being praised for their achievements.
Suppose white men are to blame for slavery etc etc. (They are not. Christians are the only ones who ever abolished slavery no a large scale.) Fine.
Then white men are to be praised for inventing the entire modern world.
Yes, Hitler didn’t really hold the ancient Germanic peoples in high regard whereas he was obsessed with Greco-Roman antiquity (in a Nordicised version, somewhat like Afrocentrists lay claim to ancient Egypt), and Sparta with its subjugation of the helots definitely figured as an example for what was intended after the conquest of Lebensraum. But I’m not sure if it isn’t an exgaggeration to claim that classics held the highest position in humanities under Nazism.
https://youtu.be/Pz_URtSSPgw
https://eidolon.pub/how-to-be-a-good-classicist-under-a-bad-emperor-6b848df6e54a#.yzmtqirqt
That's a pretty silly essay. However, it makes me wonder, where does the Enlightenment fit in with the Alt-Right? Is it disliked because it eventually gave rise to post-modernism? I would think that Alt-Right would embrace it because it's much closer in time, more connected with modern European states, and gave us fantastic things, e.g. science!
They generally dislike it because it gave rise to universalism and thus modern liberalism. Of course they have no problems using science–which is really quite reasonable, you can use Einstein’s equations to run a GPS without having to swallow all his liberal ideals, or use Newton’s laws of motion and not believe in alchemy.
This is all a circular argument. A circle-jerk, like "even".
Without the Classics, there would be no modern world, and therefore: No Platform for FemFisters to voice their complaints in the first place.
First Principles, People.
The fates of thine are fix'd, and stand entire.
Thou shalt behold thy wish'd Lavinian walls;
And, ripe for heav'n, when fate Aeneas calls,
Then shalt thou bear him up, sublime, to me:
No councils have revers'd my firm decree.
And, lest new fears disturb thy happy state,
Know, I have search'd the mystic rolls of Fate:
Thy son (nor is th' appointed season far)
In Italy shall wage successful war,
Shall tame fierce nations in the bloody field,
And sov'reign laws impose, and cities build,
Till, after ev'ry foe subdued, the sun
Thrice thro' the signs his annual race shall run:
This is his time prefix'd. Ascanius then,
Now call'd Iulus, shall begin his reign.
He thirty rolling years the crown shall wear,
Then from Lavinium shall the seat transfer,
And, with hard labor, Alba Longa build.
The throne with his succession shall be fill'd
Three hundred circuits more: then shall be seen
Ilia the fair, a priestess and a queen,
Who, full of Mars, in time, with kindly throes,
Shall at a birth two goodly boys disclose.
The royal babes a tawny wolf shall drain:
Then Romulus his grandsire's throne shall gain,
Of martial tow'rs the founder shall become,
The people Romans call, the city Rome.
To them no bounds of empire I assign,
Nor term of years to their immortal line.
Ev'n haughty Juno, who, with endless broils,
Earth, seas, and heav'n, and Jove himself turmoils;
At length aton'd, her friendly pow'r shall join,
To cherish and advance the Trojan line.
The subject world shall Rome's dominion own,
And, prostrate, shall adore the nation of the gown.
An age is ripening in revolving fate
When Troy shall overturn the Grecian state,
And sweet revenge her conqu'ring sons shall call,
To crush the people that conspir'd her fall.
Then Caesar from the Julian stock shall rise,
Whose empire ocean, and whose fame the skies
Alone shall bound; whom, fraught with eastern spoils,
Our heav'n, the just reward of human toils,
Securely shall repay with rites divine;
And incense shall ascend before his sacred shrine.
Then dire debate and impious war shall cease,
And the stern age be soften'd into peace:
Then banish'd Faith shall once again return,
And Vestal fires in hallow'd temples burn;
And Remus with Quirinus shall sustain
The righteous laws, and fraud and force restrain.
Janus himself before his fane shall wait,
And keep the dreadful issues of his gate,
With bolts and iron bars: within remains
Imprison'd Fury, bound in brazen chains;
High on a trophy rais'd, of useless arms,
He sits, and threats the world with vain alarms."
Aeneid, Dryden's translation
Didn’t quite work out that way, though 2000 years is a pretty good run, or 1300 if you don’t count Byzantium. Though the Pope still speaks Latin.
Maybe there’s a lot of sibling rivalry going on here?
The devil will find work for idle hands to do
I stole and I lied, and why ?
Because you asked me to !
But now you make me feel so ashamed
Because I’ve only got two hands
Well, I’m still fond of you, oh-ho-oh
So, what difference does it make ?
Oh, what difference does it make ?
Oh, it makes none
But now you have gone
And your prejudice won’t keep you warm tonight
I thought the article by Sister Facebook was pretty weak. In the first place, she clearly confuses and conflates “the classics” (in the sense of any of the great writings of European civilization) with “Classics” (in the sense of the literature of Greece and Rome).
In the second place the article lacks any specifics in what she wants to see achieved, in terms of preventing “the Classics” from being turned into a reserve for Elite White Males. Of course the elephant in the room when she starts talking in this way is that homosexuality was common in both Greece and Rome, which, by modern standards, must mean that Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, etc. were “born gay”; and why wouldn’t we want to study the Gay Elite White Males who founded Western Civilization? Isn’t that like “homophobic”?
Perhaps she wants us to read Sappho and Catullus instead of Caesar or Homer, but why not bring in the thoroughly discredited Black Athena thesis while you are at it? Or, at least, attempt to discuss some possible or probable linkages of Ancient Greece and Rome with other civilizations, e.g., Minoan, Egyptian, Persian, Indian, etc. etc.?
However, she doesn’t do anything of the kind, she simply uses her platform to deliver a lot of moral exhortations, which tends to make the audience ask, who the heck are you? And she delivers nothing to demonstrate her knowledge, intellectual skill, subtlety, or other bases for authority. Altogether, a waste of time.
“…an unholy alliance to remove feminism, political correctness, and multiculturalism from America.”
Sounds like a plan. Where can I join?
The fates of thine are fix'd, and stand entire.
Thou shalt behold thy wish'd Lavinian walls;
And, ripe for heav'n, when fate Aeneas calls,
Then shalt thou bear him up, sublime, to me:
No councils have revers'd my firm decree.
And, lest new fears disturb thy happy state,
Know, I have search'd the mystic rolls of Fate:
Thy son (nor is th' appointed season far)
In Italy shall wage successful war,
Shall tame fierce nations in the bloody field,
And sov'reign laws impose, and cities build,
Till, after ev'ry foe subdued, the sun
Thrice thro' the signs his annual race shall run:
This is his time prefix'd. Ascanius then,
Now call'd Iulus, shall begin his reign.
He thirty rolling years the crown shall wear,
Then from Lavinium shall the seat transfer,
And, with hard labor, Alba Longa build.
The throne with his succession shall be fill'd
Three hundred circuits more: then shall be seen
Ilia the fair, a priestess and a queen,
Who, full of Mars, in time, with kindly throes,
Shall at a birth two goodly boys disclose.
The royal babes a tawny wolf shall drain:
Then Romulus his grandsire's throne shall gain,
Of martial tow'rs the founder shall become,
The people Romans call, the city Rome.
To them no bounds of empire I assign,
Nor term of years to their immortal line.
Ev'n haughty Juno, who, with endless broils,
Earth, seas, and heav'n, and Jove himself turmoils;
At length aton'd, her friendly pow'r shall join,
To cherish and advance the Trojan line.
The subject world shall Rome's dominion own,
And, prostrate, shall adore the nation of the gown.
An age is ripening in revolving fate
When Troy shall overturn the Grecian state,
And sweet revenge her conqu'ring sons shall call,
To crush the people that conspir'd her fall.
Then Caesar from the Julian stock shall rise,
Whose empire ocean, and whose fame the skies
Alone shall bound; whom, fraught with eastern spoils,
Our heav'n, the just reward of human toils,
Securely shall repay with rites divine;
And incense shall ascend before his sacred shrine.
Then dire debate and impious war shall cease,
And the stern age be soften'd into peace:
Then banish'd Faith shall once again return,
And Vestal fires in hallow'd temples burn;
And Remus with Quirinus shall sustain
The righteous laws, and fraud and force restrain.
Janus himself before his fane shall wait,
And keep the dreadful issues of his gate,
With bolts and iron bars: within remains
Imprison'd Fury, bound in brazen chains;
High on a trophy rais'd, of useless arms,
He sits, and threats the world with vain alarms."
Aeneid, Dryden's translation
Taylor’s translation (1907)
Yes, exactly. Zuckerberg and her SJW ilk tear down western culture, then try to reassemble bits of its rubble into the perpetual post-Christian Tower of Babel all cultural Marxists are trying to build. The fact that they have no clear plan or ultimate purpose for this utopian delusion seems to bother them not at all. It’s the destruction and power they relish.
The devil can quote Scripture for his own purpose, as another dead white male wrote–in (((The Merchant of Venice))), of all places.
Now I can't read Homer or Plato or Plutarch without being a racist. Always, everywhere, whatever I do, I'm somehow scheming to put blacks back in chains and women in the kitchen. No pleasure I can have escapes the stain of my distant ancestors.
All accounts must be settled, all crooked roads must be made straight, all mountains and valleys must be leveled to achieve perfect justice. Apparently there is just something in human nature that turns some people into theocratic bullies. It's an urge so strong it manifests itself even in people who don't believe in God.
I'm beginning to understand why wise gurus supposedly went to live on mountaintops, away from all human contact.
Maybe theocratic bullies, and I’m including climate change zealots in this class, lack humility and faith in a greater scheme. Maybe they feel exposed and vulnerable because they lack whatever it is in the brain that brings calm to individuals under stress. Whatever it is, I’d rather they kept it to themselves instead of obsessively worrying others with their plight.
Most mentally healthy people see shared interests as an opportunity to bond with people they might otherwise never have reason to talk to. But a certain sort of incredibly nasty, petty person looks at it and says: "Hey, there's a bunch of people I don't like enjoying something that I also enjoy. I should go over there and confiscate it from them, because they're probably enjoying it in ways I don't approve of."
Well, she does have a certain point though…someone like Richard Spencer certainly doesn’t have a scholarly approach to classics, but wants to use them for his own political project. Problem is her own attitude isn’t much different, after all she wants to explicitly politicize classical studies in the service of “progressive” causes.
It is telling that Dr. Zuckerberg cites no Classical authority throughout her entire rant supposedly defending the Classics. The authority she does cite is SJWism, which she cites a priori as though it were self evidently true.
Of the two, Zuckerberg is far worse than Spencer. The alt-right proceeds from the Classics because they believe they are proceeding from the meaning of what the Classics actually say. They may or may not be correct, but they are arguing in good faith. Dr. Zuckerberg openly admits that the Classics are just a vehicle of convenience for her true calling: being a Social Justice Xanthippe (I wonder is she would even recognize the reference) as she openly calls on other Classicists to warp their field of study to achieve a prejudiced and exclusionary political objective.
Truly she is what she rails against. The lady doth project too much.
Walsh's article begins:At some point, Walsh decided that her problem was that she had "a non-authoritative body" while her students were "a bunch of authoritarians". She decided to assign her "bunch of authoritarians" to themselves design her course's syllabus.
Lisl Walsh, an Assistant Professor of Classics and Critical Identity Studies, continues to explain to her Eidolon readers how she is dealing with her problem of having “a non-authoritative body” while her students are “a bunch of authoritarians”.
https://eidolon.pub/giving-it-up-in-the-classroom-14c1afcfd69#.95wvserwj
After a disastrous first experience of teaching, caused by her own stupidity and conceits, Lisl found she could improve her evaluation scores by not really teaching anymore, while hanging on to the privileges and pay of the office of "teacher".
You go grrl!
To be fair to her, in her case, not teaching is almost certainly an improvement on teaching, as her students apparently noticed.
To be fair though, it has allowed her to find a way to be less controlling and insecure while avoiding the hard self-reflection that would normally be required.
In the second place the article lacks any specifics in what she wants to see achieved, in terms of preventing "the Classics" from being turned into a reserve for Elite White Males. Of course the elephant in the room when she starts talking in this way is that homosexuality was common in both Greece and Rome, which, by modern standards, must mean that Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, etc. were "born gay"; and why wouldn't we want to study the Gay Elite White Males who founded Western Civilization? Isn't that like "homophobic"?
Perhaps she wants us to read Sappho and Catullus instead of Caesar or Homer, but why not bring in the thoroughly discredited Black Athena thesis while you are at it? Or, at least, attempt to discuss some possible or probable linkages of Ancient Greece and Rome with other civilizations, e.g., Minoan, Egyptian, Persian, Indian, etc. etc.?
However, she doesn't do anything of the kind, she simply uses her platform to deliver a lot of moral exhortations, which tends to make the audience ask, who the heck are you? And she delivers nothing to demonstrate her knowledge, intellectual skill, subtlety, or other bases for authority. Altogether, a waste of time.
Reminds me of an online challenge from a while back. People were supposed to only read works written by women, or POC, or Gays for a year. My response? Great! I’ll spend a year reading Plato, Oscar Wilde, Francis Bacon, Willa Cather (a two-for, woman +Gay), Christopher Marlowe, …..
How many books written by Black published authors do not use Blackness as the main central theme of their book? Even all of Barack Hussein Obama's books makes Blackness the main course and not the appetizer. It gets boring pretty quickly because it makes Black authors look one dimensional monolithic.
Notice the presence of facts in your rebuttal. Now go back and compare the original screed.
In all those endless paragraphs, not one reference to an actual, you know, Classic. Is is she trying to no platform the very subjects of her putative study?
That Zuckerberg woman comes across as pretty unpleasant and rather unscholarly with her open call for politicization of her discipline...she's probably on to something however. Given the pro-mass immigration stance of the Christian churches in most Western countries it's not hard to see why right-wingers look to the pre-Christian past for inspiration...I increasingly feel myself drawn into that direction.
“To destroy a people, you must first sever their roots.” – Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
From my experience, Classical culture, art, and symbology are the simultaneously inspirational and aspirational “missing link” that connects us to a past purposefully pressed into the shadows. Whether nefarious or efficient in nature, this severing of a connection post-WWII resulted in an engineered tabula rasa ripe for postmodern redesign–the consumerist “American Dream”.
As materialism is roundly rejected by the AR in favor of spiritualism, identity, and racial collectivism, we must rely upon the Classical thoughts, words, and deeds to act as a psychic and intellectual bridge to the past. Zuckerberg has clearly identified this as critical cultural infrastructure that must be made “a bridge too far”.
She’s striking at our roots. And worse yet, imploring a professional society to join in and then salt the earth with something I can (from the article) only describe as Cultural Marxism.
That was the message to the uninitiated, those who look at the esoteric truth would see that the Kagans were really pro-Sparta, and see the US as a decadent Athens to be destroyed.
So when a Kagan inflamed the tensions in Ukraine, she was really an Alcibiades that will turn traitor and defect to Sparta-Russia in the future.
/sarcStrauss
In the second place the article lacks any specifics in what she wants to see achieved, in terms of preventing "the Classics" from being turned into a reserve for Elite White Males. Of course the elephant in the room when she starts talking in this way is that homosexuality was common in both Greece and Rome, which, by modern standards, must mean that Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, etc. were "born gay"; and why wouldn't we want to study the Gay Elite White Males who founded Western Civilization? Isn't that like "homophobic"?
Perhaps she wants us to read Sappho and Catullus instead of Caesar or Homer, but why not bring in the thoroughly discredited Black Athena thesis while you are at it? Or, at least, attempt to discuss some possible or probable linkages of Ancient Greece and Rome with other civilizations, e.g., Minoan, Egyptian, Persian, Indian, etc. etc.?
However, she doesn't do anything of the kind, she simply uses her platform to deliver a lot of moral exhortations, which tends to make the audience ask, who the heck are you? And she delivers nothing to demonstrate her knowledge, intellectual skill, subtlety, or other bases for authority. Altogether, a waste of time.
Just wait til the Alt-Right culturally appropriates Maimonides.
Something like the alt right with its race-based identitarianism would have been impossible pre-Enlightenment so it’s paradoxical if they completely reject the Enlightenment. It’s not as if there wasn’t a significant racist (at least by today’s standards) strain present in the thought of many Enlightenment thinkers.
It's also possible to reject some parts of the Enlightenment without rejecting the whole thing (the Enlightenment itself was just a loose conglomeration of several different strains of thought, some of whom were at each others' throats all the time), and that's precisely what many people are doing, so I'm not sure what your complaint is here.
Besides, of course race was seen by people before Darwin - racism is certainly possible without Darwinism or IQ studies. You can simply acknowledge that different races exist (based on your lying eyes), and then start from there. And some people are loosely sympathetic to the alt-right without much thinking about genetics research or modern science.
So I'm not sure what your complaint is.
We got bigger fish to fry presently than the Left:
https://www.thenation.com/article/why-are-the-media-taking-the-cias-hacking-claims-at-face-value/
FTFY
Does a name like “Zuckerberg” actually need the triple parentheses treatment?Seems a tad redundant to me….
Second it's not only meant to inform some but to intentionally upset, insult, disquiet. Part of its use is 'oh, you don't like when I do this?'... and so doing it. Less for you and more for when (((DONNA))) or her tribal kin read through the comments.
Last some use it to underscore the pervasiveness of Jewish power and influence... so its function is not for the present article being read alone but over a span of articles & comments to effect a cumulative awareness when encountered over and over.. the redundancy is a feature not a bug
Neil Young had a song about that.
Oh, to live on Sugar Mountain
With the barkers and the colored balloons,
You can't be twenty on Sugar Mountain
Though you're thinking that
you're leaving there too soon,
You're leaving there too soon.
It's so noisy at the fair
But all your friends are there
And the candy floss you had
And your mother and your dad.
Oh, to live on Sugar Mountain
With the barkers and the colored balloons,
You can't be twenty on Sugar Mountain
Though you're thinking that
you're leaving there too soon,
You're leaving there too soon.
There's a girl just down the aisle,
Oh, to turn and see her smile.
You can hear the words she wrote
As you read the hidden note.
Oh, to live on Sugar Mountain
With the barkers and the colored balloons,
You can't be twenty on Sugar Mountain
Though you're thinking that
you're leaving there too soon,
You're leaving there too soon.
Now you're underneath the stairs
And you're givin' back some glares
To the people who you met
And it's your first cigarette.
Oh, to live on Sugar Mountain
With the barkers and the colored balloons,
You can't be twenty on Sugar Mountain
Though you're thinking that
you're leaving there too soon,
You're leaving there too soon.
Now you say you're leavin' home
'Cause you want to be alone.
Ain't it funny how you feel
When you're findin' out it's real?
Oh, to live on Sugar Mountain
With the barkers and the colored balloons,
You can't be twenty on Sugar Mountain
Though you're thinking that
you're leaving there too soon,
You're leaving there too soon.
Oh, to live on Sugar Mountain
with the barkers and the colored balloons,
You can't be twenty on Sugar Mountain
Though you're thinking that
you're leaving there too soon,
You're leaving there too soon.
The best part about Trump’s election is how the Left is taking it all in stride.
Seriously, the hyperventilating is only escalating as the coronation, ahem, inauguration draws near.
I noticed Keith Olbermann recently reappeared from his filthy hole to add to the hysteria and giggles. Seems that Keith is loved by the Left when they’re out of power, good for rallying Mr. Soros’s troops to riot and attack when they’re disheartened by reality. But he quickly lost his eminence once Obama took over.
According to certain Russian friends of mine, the Third Rome is still around…..
religious country, certainly nothing like
Italy. In my experience Russians tend to be
cynics, if not outright nihilists. Apparently,
70 years of Marxist dialectical materialism has
had its effect
Shorter:
Those people are stupid. They’re stupid because I just said they’re stupid. Now that we’ve established that they’re stupid, we need to tell them how stupid they are.
The fates of thine are fix'd, and stand entire.
Thou shalt behold thy wish'd Lavinian walls;
And, ripe for heav'n, when fate Aeneas calls,
Then shalt thou bear him up, sublime, to me:
No councils have revers'd my firm decree.
And, lest new fears disturb thy happy state,
Know, I have search'd the mystic rolls of Fate:
Thy son (nor is th' appointed season far)
In Italy shall wage successful war,
Shall tame fierce nations in the bloody field,
And sov'reign laws impose, and cities build,
Till, after ev'ry foe subdued, the sun
Thrice thro' the signs his annual race shall run:
This is his time prefix'd. Ascanius then,
Now call'd Iulus, shall begin his reign.
He thirty rolling years the crown shall wear,
Then from Lavinium shall the seat transfer,
And, with hard labor, Alba Longa build.
The throne with his succession shall be fill'd
Three hundred circuits more: then shall be seen
Ilia the fair, a priestess and a queen,
Who, full of Mars, in time, with kindly throes,
Shall at a birth two goodly boys disclose.
The royal babes a tawny wolf shall drain:
Then Romulus his grandsire's throne shall gain,
Of martial tow'rs the founder shall become,
The people Romans call, the city Rome.
To them no bounds of empire I assign,
Nor term of years to their immortal line.
Ev'n haughty Juno, who, with endless broils,
Earth, seas, and heav'n, and Jove himself turmoils;
At length aton'd, her friendly pow'r shall join,
To cherish and advance the Trojan line.
The subject world shall Rome's dominion own,
And, prostrate, shall adore the nation of the gown.
An age is ripening in revolving fate
When Troy shall overturn the Grecian state,
And sweet revenge her conqu'ring sons shall call,
To crush the people that conspir'd her fall.
Then Caesar from the Julian stock shall rise,
Whose empire ocean, and whose fame the skies
Alone shall bound; whom, fraught with eastern spoils,
Our heav'n, the just reward of human toils,
Securely shall repay with rites divine;
And incense shall ascend before his sacred shrine.
Then dire debate and impious war shall cease,
And the stern age be soften'd into peace:
Then banish'd Faith shall once again return,
And Vestal fires in hallow'd temples burn;
And Remus with Quirinus shall sustain
The righteous laws, and fraud and force restrain.
Janus himself before his fane shall wait,
And keep the dreadful issues of his gate,
With bolts and iron bars: within remains
Imprison'd Fury, bound in brazen chains;
High on a trophy rais'd, of useless arms,
He sits, and threats the world with vain alarms."
Aeneid, Dryden's translation
It’s kind of telling that Mark Zuckerberg especially liked the parts of the Aeneis that are imperial propaganda (which many other readers would regard as diminishing the artistic value of the poem). Certainly a very intelligent guy, but quite a flawed character imo.
Whence comes this delusion of Dr. Zuckerberg that she and her ilk have any gate-keeping power whatever when it comes to anybody’s reading, enjoying, and interpreting the classics?
What’s she going to do? Make Amazon stop selling us books? Get our names on a National Shitlist so the county library branch won’t let us check out classical authors? Cut off our subscriptions to Eidolon?
Please don't give her any ideas!
That Zuckerberg woman comes across as pretty unpleasant and rather unscholarly with her open call for politicization of her discipline...she's probably on to something however. Given the pro-mass immigration stance of the Christian churches in most Western countries it's not hard to see why right-wingers look to the pre-Christian past for inspiration...I increasingly feel myself drawn into that direction.
Good point, too many right wingers think we have to be a christian nation. Instead their are plenty of Pentecostals among Central Americans. This guy that was against Jews complain about Hart-Caller but has not Hart-Caller increase Catholics from Mexico and Pentecostals from Central America but the guy complain that Hart-Caller made us less of a christian nation but the biggest immigrant group Mexicans are Catholics. Also, the right in the US has been a lot on emotionalism. The alt-right has more self-taught folks than either the skinheads all emotion or regular conservatives which the only ancient history they basically know is the bible. In fact I’m seeing less of an intellectual movement on the left and more emotion for the rise of Gen M and the Bernie Sanders movement and more of a intellectualism with the alt-right.
introduced in the Hebrew Scriptures, is something that
needs to be rejected. This belongs with the childhood of
humanity. The ancient Greeks laughed at this claim in
view of the presence of evil and suffering. Of course, that's
what atheists do - they reject the claim that God created the
Universe and the concept of the Supreme Being altogether.
But one doesn't need to reject Christianity completely. There
are versions of Christianity which are more intellectually
satisfying than the standard one. And I don't mean Deism
(i.e., belief in the creator God who became an absentee landlord)
which was such a favorite with the Founders. However, going back
to the Ancient Greeks is a good start. They certainly didn't believe
that the world needed a creator. The world, in the view of many Greek
thinkers, just is. Many such issues need to be rethought. E.g., modern physics
produces growing evidence that the Universe is actually a simulation, i.e., a virtual
Universe, ultimately not real. This is an exciting time but you cannot get closer to the
truth without facing the abyss, as the existentialists already realized
The first of those two quotes are not from the classics, they are from Marx. Thus, Prof. Zuckerberg reveals herself to be not a true classicist, but a postmodern Jewish Marxist. Since I have spent a fair amount of time studying philosophy, I will attempt to school her in the error of her ways:
The classical tradition in philosophy can be characterized by Man’s acknowledgement of the limits imposed by Nature. In classical philosophy, Man himself is a product of this nature, which imposes limitations upon him that he can understand but not fully overcome. His task is to educate himself to understand nature, and work within the limits imposed by it. The task of human society, and political society, is to be able to delineate between the different natural abilities of individual humans, and use those differences for the benefit of the entire society.
For instance, in Book I of Aristotle’s Politics, Aristotle argued that all of Nature is hierarchical — and this is true of individual humans, too. Aristotle lists a series of social relationships from highest to lowest, and each “level” by nature rules over its inferiors. At the top of the list is the human Male; next are females, then children, then slaves, and finally animals. Each of these “levels” of human society is based upon the ability to partake in reason and suppress emotion. Thus, Aristotle sees the male as most rational, the female less so, the child less than the female, the slave less than the child, and the animal less than the slave. Each layer of society is symbiotic, and society functions most harmoniously when the superior parts rule over the inferior parts. For Aristotle, “justice” is “equality among equals, and inequality among unequals.”
(Similarly, Plato describes a hierarchical list of types of political societies. First is his Ideal Republic ruled by the Guardian Class; then a military rule; then a business oligarchy; then a democracy; and finally, a dictatorship, which inevitably arises from too much democratic equality. Democracy, for Plato, is a perversion of nature).
The culmination of classical philosophy is Christianity, which places true justice not in the hands of the political system, but in the hands of an Almighty God, who is the author of Nature itself and the Creator of these levels of distinction. The task of the Christian is to understand the defects of his nature, and to submit to the grace of the Almighty to remedy it in the hereafter.
Now, Modern philosophy attacks the notion that man must accept the limits of his nature. Modern philosophy seeks to use science and technology to change and modify man’s Natural environment so as to remove Nature’s impediments. (In other words, Modernity seeks to create an artificial, not a natural, society).
Democracy is a Modern artifact because men are not inherently equal. Feminism is a Modern artifact because males and females are inherently unequal. And racial egalitarianism is a Modern artifact because the races are inherently unequal. Democracy, feminism, and racial egalitarianism are all artificial. The Alt-right recognizes this; consequently, it looks to the classical tradition for guidance.
Karl Marx is the ultimate Modern philosopher, because he believed that science, technology, and economic prosperity would ultimately lead to the abolition of all natural differences and distinctions, resulting in a global communist Utopia of complete equality. For Marx, Man’s nature itself will evolve, and the Post-modern communist man will be a different species entirely from the Classical Man.
Prof. Zuckerberg, the so-called “classicist,” is really a Marxist who enjoys reading ancient literature, but obviously, she does not believe any of it.
Better it evolve like a biome, rather than a parking lot.
What sort of gig is “Silicon Valley-based Classics scholar”? I wonder if that means she’s got no permanent employment (couldn’t get a permanent paid position), but teaches the occasional adult education extension (no credit) class and of course is spending a few hours a week volunteering for all the right non-profits.
Stanford Continuing Studies… wasn’t it Stanford that made famous “Hey, hey, ho, ho, Western Civ has got to go!”?
Check out the masthead image at her blog site:
“Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema, “A Reading from Homer” (1885)”
Seems pretty racist to me. Only a real racist would try to blame it all on other evil racists. Someone should inform the diversity police!
“Reminds me of an online challenge from a while back. People were supposed to only read works written by women, or POC, or Gays for a year. My response? Great! I’ll spend a year reading Plato, Oscar Wilde, Francis Bacon, Willa Cather (a two-for, woman +Gay), Christopher Marlowe, …..”
How many books written by Black published authors do not use Blackness as the main central theme of their book? Even all of Barack Hussein Obama’s books makes Blackness the main course and not the appetizer. It gets boring pretty quickly because it makes Black authors look one dimensional monolithic.
Since I hate waiting
According to certain Russian friends of mine, the Third Rome is still around…..
It’s interesting to me that she actually mentions VDH and Roosh V.
Maybe it’s finally dawning on them that the all Westboro Baptist/Richard Spencer all the time strategy has only “worked” in the “reign in Hell” sense.
Is this the Region, this the Soil, the Clime,
Said then the lost Arch-Angel, this the seat
That we must change for Heav’n, this mournful gloom
For that celestial light? Be it so, since he
Who now is Sovran can dispose and bid
What shall be right: fardest from him is best
Whom reason hath equald, force hath made supream
Above his equals. Farewel happy Fields
Where Joy for ever dwells: Hail horrours, hail
Infernal world, and thou profoundest Hell
Receive thy new Possessor: One who brings
A mind not to be chang’d by Place or Time.
The mind is its own place, and in it self
Can make a Heav’n of Hell, a Hell of Heav’n.
What matter where, if I be still the same,
And what I should be, all but less then he
Whom Thunder hath made greater? Here at least
We shall be free; th’ Almighty hath not built
Here for his envy, will not drive us hence:
Here we may reign secure, and in my choyce
To reign is worth ambition though in Hell:
Better to reign in Hell, then serve in Heav’n.
- Milton, Paradise Lost, Book 1
Jews are white when it’s convenient/beneficial for them to be perceived as white. They are not when it’s not.
There’s a lot of pseudo-sophisticated LARPing in the “Alt-Right,” and Spencer is nowhere near the worst offender. Since “The Daily Shoah” is the source of a lot of the “Alt-Right’s” memes, I’ve been sampling its wares for the last few weeks. On one of their podcasts, they actually started talking about how the German language is not gendered……
lol, funny. I've only read Spencer's (now deleted) Twitter account and don't intend to delve any further into alt right memes, but your description of it as LARPing seems fitting. Also often left intentionally ambiguous if it's meant somewhat ironically or totally seriously.
Pretty demented stuff, but to some degree I can understand why it attracts people.
Why, yeah, actually I can see why everyone considers Stanford such a great school:
“Western Civilization isn’t dead yet”, The Stanford Review, Op Ed, 2016:
Hang in there guys. Don’t get discouraged. The road goes on forever and the battle never ends.
Below are excerpts from an Eidolon article titled “After the Manifesto”, written by Donna Zuckerberg, Silicon Valley-based Classics Scholar, Editor of Eidolon.
https://eidolon.pub/after-the-manifesto-a2d772f54868#.utohxkcel
” They are younger than the typical conservative establishment, white, and male.”
But I’m not white and I identify as alt-right. Clearly I don’t exist.
But I’m not white and I identify as alt-right. Clearly I don’t exist."
I'm not young or male and I identify as alt-right. Clearly I don't exist even less than you do.
...then Jews wuz Greeks.
Well, there is this bit from 1 Maccabees
(12:20-23)
This seems like a wonderful endorsement of studying the classics on your own terms outside of a formal class.
Walsh's article begins:At some point, Walsh decided that her problem was that she had "a non-authoritative body" while her students were "a bunch of authoritarians". She decided to assign her "bunch of authoritarians" to themselves design her course's syllabus.
All this is rationalization, which is one of the psychological defense mechanisms. She’s trying to rationalize away the fact that she’s a lousy teacher. She needs a shrink, not some hapless students just trying to get an education. I expect she’d be an okay kindergarten teacher. Little kids do fine with hippie teachers.
Now I can't read Homer or Plato or Plutarch without being a racist. Always, everywhere, whatever I do, I'm somehow scheming to put blacks back in chains and women in the kitchen. No pleasure I can have escapes the stain of my distant ancestors.
All accounts must be settled, all crooked roads must be made straight, all mountains and valleys must be leveled to achieve perfect justice. Apparently there is just something in human nature that turns some people into theocratic bullies. It's an urge so strong it manifests itself even in people who don't believe in God.
I'm beginning to understand why wise gurus supposedly went to live on mountaintops, away from all human contact.
They’re fighting a stealth war using culture – the end goal is as deadly as a regular war, just less noisy.
Mark Zuckerberg likes the classics. He has a Chinese wife and kid. I think he and Donna will team up to write revisionist history about how Jews and Asians developed Greek-Roman societies that produced the classics.
You guys are finished
You should be scared
Your “culture” belongs to us and we will erase your history
Wade. Didn’t hear from him in long time.
My impression from reading “The Closing of the American Mind” was that Bloom thought the campus identity politics movements of his time had their roots in Nietzsche, and a lot of other German dudes from the early 20th century and 19th century. He was annoyed by moral relativism, and thought it had come as enlightenment ideas and classical Greek ideas had been pushed out.
Accordingly, I hear Richard Spencer quoting people like Oswald Spengler and Nietzsche. In fact his whole shtick is basically just Nietzsche. So it seems to me (as a layperson) like Ms. Zuckerberg hasn’t really done her homework on the alt-right. She seems to be thinking of things in terms of the canon wars, where the right was into the whole great books thing, and against identity politics.
Ms. Zuckerberg has a high IQ, but she has been crime-stopped so much that she can’t think straight.
Calling Roosh white is really stretching the term white. Yeah I know the US govt classifies him as white but that may change soon. Nothing against Roosh but lets call a spade a spade for lack of a better term.
I wonder what thought crimes may be hidden in Revilo Oliver’s scholarly articles (which were almost certainly not thought crimes back then):
http://lichen.csd.sc.edu/dbcs/index.php?page=person&id=1148
So much hate.
It’s getting to the point where if you see a college catalogue with a high ratio of female professors, you’d better not go there if you want a decent education.
http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/arnold/writings/4.html
“The uppermost idea with Hellenism is to see things as they really are; the uppermost idea with Hebraism is conduct and obedience. Nothing can do away with this ineffaceable difference; the Greek quarrel with the body and its desires is, that they hinder right thinking, the Hebrew quarrel with them is, that they hinder right acting. “He that keepeth the law, happy is he;” “There is nothing sweeter than to take heed unto the commandments of the Lord;”+ — that is the Hebrew notion of felicity; and, pursued with passion and tenacity, this notion would not let the Hebrew rest till, as is well known, he had, at last, got out of the law a network of prescriptions to enwrap his whole life, to govern every moment of it, every impulse, every action. The Greek notion of felicity, on the other hand, is perfectly conveyed in these words of a great French moralist: “C’est le bonheur des hommes” — when? when they abhor that which is evil? — no; when they exercise themselves in the law of the Lord day and night? — no; when they die daily? — no; when they walk about the New Jerusalem with palms in their hands? — no; but when they think aright, when their thought hits, — “quand ils pensent juste.” At the bottom of both the Greek and the Hebrew notion is the desire, native in man, for reason and the will of God, the feeling after the universal order, — in a word, the love of God. But, while Hebraism seizes upon certain plain, capital intimations of the universal order, and rivets itself, one may say, with unequalled grandeur of earnestness and intensity on the study and observance of them, the bent of Hellenism is to follow, with flexible activity, the whole play of the universal order, to be apprehensive of missing any part of it, of sacrificing one part to another, to slip away from resting in this or that intimation of it, however capital. An unclouded clearness of mind, an unimpeded play of thought, is what this bent drives at. The governing idea of Hellenism is spontaneity of consciousness; that of Hebraism, strictness of conscience.”
It’s jealousy.
White privilege is genetic and it’s not “supremacy” it’s simply the ability to create nicer places to live – on our own – without them.
“Yes, Hitler didn’t really hold the ancient Germanic peoples in high regard whereas he was obsessed with Greco-Roman antiquity (in a Nordicised version, ”
So Adolf Hitler was the first person to spread the false rumor that Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome were majority blond societies. This false rumor spread like a wildfire in the White Nationalist community. And now White Nationalists believe the average Ancient Greek and average Ancient Roman was as blond as the first German terrorist that John McClane kills in Die Hard.
Well, Greco-Roman classics are one of the few fields of study that is guaranteed to focus on a body of texts by non-Jewish writers. That probably counted for something under a regime that spent considerable effort in de-legitimizing the work of Jewish authors and anyone who used the work of Jewish authors even in fields like physics.
It says that women ARE really enemies, of most White men (even their brothers) if they are not involved in either their kids or Kawai stuff like Japanese women. IMHO that self-sorting into enemy status is due to a desire to compete against White men; social approval from non-White women; and resentment of the men in and around their life for being beta. Does his own sister really despise Mark Zuckerberg for being a beta male? Evidence says, yes.
After all, if the woman in question really wanted to talk about the Alt-Right and the Classics, she might mention that the Roman and Hellenistic world ruled considerable amounts of non-Europeans; that Jewish monotheism and Greek Humanism combined to create classical Christianity. That Jesus himself is a semi-Socrates in his method of teaching. That the classical world moved fairly rapidly from polytheism to monotheism Christianity. In short, argue that yes the Classical World was in fact, quite awesome and White. But was open to things from other peoples.
Instead, its just more denigrating White men. Her own brother did something pretty impressive, and she can't even brag on him. Not a little. Or talk about how indeed White men are awesome. Its all about how awful we are.
Conclusion: there is nothing women will not punish in men who are beta. Nothing.
LEFT-WING women, Whiskey!
I sent this message to a conservative friend today:
“I think the greatest threat to our country has been, is and will be liberal white women. If you think about it, you will realize they have supported and advanced every single policy, movement and individual that’s been most destructive to our country. I don’t understand it. The conservative women I know are salt of the earth, principled and strong. But something about liberalism appeals to the worst in the worst of women.”
Off-topic,
Lucia Festival in Sweden. Quite beautiful:
Lucia Festival in Sweden. Quite beautiful:"
It's a good thing there are no MENA Muslim men in that Swedish church . They would get the urge to rape looking at all of those pretty blonde females. They are not used to seeing so much blondeness back in their inbred desert countries.
War on normal people must not stop!
hahaha
"A SPECTER is haunting Eastern Europe: the specter of what in the West is called "dissent.""
http://www.vaclavhavel.cz/showtrans.php?cat=eseje&val=2_aj_eseje.html&typ=HTML
The phrase originated as the famous opening line of Marx’s Communist Manifesto.
Of course Marx was arguing that communism was the inevitable result of the progression of world herstory. Seems that Zuck’s sis isn’t that well-read a classicist, unless she intended the reference to be ironic.
Could be that a "learn enough to pass the test and then forget it" type can be an Ivy League PhD these days.
“On one of their podcasts, they actually started talking about how the German language is not gendered……”
lol, funny. I’ve only read Spencer’s (now deleted) Twitter account and don’t intend to delve any further into alt right memes, but your description of it as LARPing seems fitting. Also often left intentionally ambiguous if it’s meant somewhat ironically or totally seriously.
Pretty demented stuff, but to some degree I can understand why it attracts people.
Lucia Festival in Sweden. Quite beautiful:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vl6o4mG25Ec
“Off-topic,
Lucia Festival in Sweden. Quite beautiful:”
It’s a good thing there are no MENA Muslim men in that Swedish church . They would get the urge to rape looking at all of those pretty blonde females. They are not used to seeing so much blondeness back in their inbred desert countries.
OT
The NYT is too (((white))):
https://twitter.com/BrentNYT/status/810242590280912896
Revolution, Devour Thine Own!
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/265143/lefts-trump-fascist-smear-paul-gottfried
This is so unfair cuz I’m the only true fascist.
You’re gonna tell me MemeSpouter420 isn’t actually an autodidact polyglot genius?
There'll be Plutarch and Homer way past when the last SJW passes away. If nothing else, Chinese scholars will be trying to understand where we went wrong to avoid repeating our mistakes.
My impression is that the Chinese just aren’t very interested in Western high culture. It’s understandable they don’t care about the writings of dead white males; it’s not like we’re interested in dead Chinese males except Sun Tzu as a low-middlebrow self-help book that comes and goes.
The Japanese have some interest but in a mostly superficial way. Like, in an anime, kawaii William Shakespeare will show up and do something silly. Or all the characters will be named after ones from The Three Musketeers.
Would that we were so superficial in our interest!
Thermae Romae is a Japanese comic about a Roman who dives to the bottom of his Roman bath and exits into a Japanese hot spring, made into a live action film.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1K1kO2qdRKE
The unfortunate truth about the Chinese is that they don't seem to be interested in much of anything except money and status signalling. There is plenty of demand for western things, like whisky, which is adversely affecting the market for the rest of us.
I think there is a lot more interest in Chinese history in the West. The problem is that Chinese composition is not very accessible to westerners. Sun Tzu has been successful not because of its topic but because of its aphoristic style.
Take the behavior of women, for example. Antigone can be seen as a complex evaluation of a defiant woman but that is special only when the expected behavior of her sex is mild and therefore her attitude is justified out of love for her family, to the extent of even denying herself. That is indeed glorious because she violates the norm out of love for a greater norm(loyalty of family); none of this tries to praise the self-interested motives of progressives.
Or Lady MacBeth - her murderous conduct is specifically contrasted with the life giving function of the feminine impulse, and therefore it is seen as something particularly poisoned and disturbing. Such behavior is shocking only because it is atypical, the impact is lost if it is normalized.
Chinese stories tend to punish those who violate the norm even further, denying them sometimes even the memory of heroism, but ultimately, the classics do not differ in that they expect that the world to be ordered along natural lines, beyond human comprehension and condemning human hubris. I don't see how someone could read anything modern into the classics.
I can’t remember off the top of my head, but there was another bloody and pointless war where Athens imposed democracy on some small island for no good reason.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Melos
Though the Athenians didn't bring democracy there but rather killed and enslaved the inhabitants. They did however impose pro-Athenian democracies on "allies" during the era of the Delian league/Peloponnesian war.
Walsh's article begins:At some point, Walsh decided that her problem was that she had "a non-authoritative body" while her students were "a bunch of authoritarians". She decided to assign her "bunch of authoritarians" to themselves design her course's syllabus.
I was troubled (read: terrified) that I was receiving not-so-stellar teaching evaluations that occasionally questioned my competency, skill, and intelligence. ….
Had a prof like her, and like her, after the shit evaluations came through, her excuses bled through her pedagogy.
Here was my question: how does a person occupying a non-authoritative body teach a bunch of authoritarians living in a racist, sexist, ableist society what a responsible postmodern approach to Greco-Roman antiquity looks like? ….
That body thing again. What’s up with that? Body lives matter? Paging Mr. Coates.
“expect” …. “know”
When they put mundane words in ironic parenthetics, you know they’re hopeless.
For example, if students want extra tutoring sessions, and I’m already overwhelmed, I tell them so and ask them to find a solution (e.g., extra credit for students who are willing to tutor, or having them mark each others’ exams to free me up to lead a tutoring session).
Fucking lazy is what your are, like half the associate profs on any campus. Overwhelmed with what? Having to grade two assignments the whole semester? High school English teachers do that and much more in less than a month.
Maybe this (famous from Thuycidides’ Melian dialogue):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Melos
Though the Athenians didn’t bring democracy there but rather killed and enslaved the inhabitants. They did however impose pro-Athenian democracies on “allies” during the era of the Delian league/Peloponnesian war.
The Japanese have some interest but in a mostly superficial way. Like, in an anime, kawaii William Shakespeare will show up and do something silly. Or all the characters will be named after ones from The Three Musketeers.
Would that we were so superficial in our interest!
Whereas the Zionists revived Hebrew as a language for their nation, we could revive Latin as the language for Our Fair Republic.
> Whereas the Zionists revived Hebrew as a language for their nation, we could revive Latin as the language for Our Fair Republic
hey…. stop stealing an idea i’ve been trying to push for 3 years!
what’s the MOST LIKELY place where you could actually pull off – and a few hundred bucks as a pushstart) to start a Latin-only kindergarden (which is what it would take)?
A hilltop in Samaria.
Talk to the guys at the Shomron Regional Council. They are QUITE SYMPATHETIC to Euro Nativist nationalism.
U.Kentucky has a number of guys who can actually speak the language.
We’ll give them an open-ended visa, if they bring us some hot bluegrass picking once or twice a year.
Deal?
Would that we were so superficial in our interest!
I was thinking more about literature, but yes, the East Asians do love classical music.
Despite her claims to being a scholar, a classicist, etc., au fond, Zuckerberg is just another hysterical woman.
I wonder what Prof. Dr. Zuckerberg would make of Juvenal’s complaint about immigration -
Jampridem Syrus in Tyberim defluxit Orontes
et linguam et mores et cum tibicine chordas
obliquas nec non gentilia tympana secum
vexit et ad circum iussas prostare puellas.
[Sat. iij.61-5]
I cannot abide, Quirites, an America of Hispanics; and yet what fraction of our dregs comes from Iberia? Amerind rivers have long since overwhelmed the Spanish rivulet, bringing with it its lingo and its manners, its flutes and its slanting harp-strings
the most elite white man of his generation
Actually, he’s (((not))).
as measured in gigabucks
Thanks for clarifying that.
as it was in Nazi Germany
Yes, no discussion of
the Classicsthe alt-right is complete without mentioning Nazi Germany.Engage them on their assumed definitions of “foundation,” “Western,” “civilization,” and “culture.”
“LOL” — or Bill Clinton on his definition of “is”.
I could continue to make fun of this woman, but it’s a bit too easy — so I’ll just get to the point: she’s stupid to the point of being infantile — and lying (“white supremacy”) to the point of being evil — not to mention her sophomoric, hand-wringing prose.
Anyway, re the Classics, particularly The Aeneid and The Odyssey, I highly recommend the translations by Robert Fitzgerald, which I think are superb — even if he is a white man.
STORMFRONT guy: Zuckerberg's not White
Heavyset Black lady: You crazy; he's Whiter than a vanilla milkshake! Next.
Funny that she goes after Milo Yiannopolous and Roosh, who are more eastern by heritage. The former is Jewish and the latter Persian/Armenian.
The real founders of the so-called alt-right are more “obscure” types like Sam Francis and F. Roger Devlin, both of whom were raised Catholic IIRC. I encourage discriminating readers to ignore the background noise and seek out the gems, which are there to be found, and will outlast even Donna’s brother’s little digital empire.
http://ethnicelebs.com/milo-yiannopoulos
I’ll just put this out there: Plato and Aristotle, not to mention Homer and a bunch more poets and dramatists, would have fucking despised Ms. Zuckerberg. And, having read and understood them, I woud agree with them over her every single time.
I am a white man and a european-american with an interest in classical antiquity. The hijacking of the field of Classics by Donna Zuckerberg and her ilk is an act of cultural appropriation.
Certainly when it comes to European history, we have every right to say:
This is ours. Not yours. Ours.
Spencer probably understands the thinking of someone like Plato, Aristotle, or Livy better than Ms. Zuckerberg does. And in turn, they would understand Spencer. Zuckerberg they would merely view as a mad woman.
Jampridem Syrus in Tyberim defluxit Orontes
et linguam et mores et cum tibicine chordas
obliquas nec non gentilia tympana secum
vexit et ad circum iussas prostare puellas.
[Sat. iij.61-5]
Seems to me that Juvenal’s lines are well suited for describing the situation in Anglo-America. Simply swap Hispanic for Greek, then note what a small fraction actually comes from Iberia, rivers of Amerind blood having long since overwhelmed the Spanish rivulet:
I cannot abide, Quirites, an America of Hispanics; and yet what fraction of our dregs comes from Iberia? Amerind rivers have long since overwhelmed the Spanish rivulet, bringing with it its lingo and its manners, its flutes and its slanting harp-strings
That Zuckerberg woman comes across as pretty unpleasant and rather unscholarly with her open call for politicization of her discipline...she's probably on to something however. Given the pro-mass immigration stance of the Christian churches in most Western countries it's not hard to see why right-wingers look to the pre-Christian past for inspiration...I increasingly feel myself drawn into that direction.
Nazis did co-opt or promote antiquity to some extent. You can see in Hitler’s plans for Welthauptstadt Germania, the future Reich capital, that his mundane pan-European design included neo-Classical elements.
I think the issue, which Dr. Z conveniently ignores, is that virtually all scholarly disciplines were Nazified under the Nazis. Nazi Classics didn’t exist because the Classics were important to Nazis, it existed because Nazis infiltrated and controlled academia.
The other thing she ignores is the way Classics was a much larger part of European intellectual life in the 30s. (You can see from this Arion article, “Lycurgus in Leaflets and Lectures: The Weiße Rose and Classics at Munich University, 1941–45″, that (a) there were Classicists opposed to Nazism and (b) they thought Classical themes were ubiquitous enough among the educated to be used against the Nazis.) What she’s arguing for now isn’t a defense of Classics against misuse but for continued control of Classics by an elite minority of scholars.
This is not remotely true. In classics there were only a few desultory attempts to write ancient history as a reflection of racial ideology. The so-called Deutsche Physik was a negligible and marginal presence in physics. So it was across the great majority of academia.
So did the Founding Fathers. That's why we have a President with veto power, and a Senate, whose chambers are even decorated with fasces. To say nothing of our public architecture from 1787 through about 1940.
The real founders of the so-called alt-right are more "obscure" types like Sam Francis and F. Roger Devlin, both of whom were raised Catholic IIRC. I encourage discriminating readers to ignore the background noise and seek out the gems, which are there to be found, and will outlast even Donna's brother's little digital empire.
According to Ethni-Celebs, Yiannopoulos is Greek and Irish on his father’s side
http://ethnicelebs.com/milo-yiannopoulos
Jampridem Syrus in Tyberim defluxit Orontes
et linguam et mores et cum tibicine chordas
obliquas nec non gentilia tympana secum
vexit et ad circum iussas prostare puellas.
[Sat. iij.61-5]
Since I hate waiting
Seems to me that Juvenal’s lines are well suited for describing the situation in Anglo-America. Simply swap Hispanic for Greek, then note what a small fraction actually comes from Iberia, rivers of Amerind blood having long since overwhelmed the Spanish rivulet:
I cannot abide, Quirites, an America of Hispanics; and yet what fraction of our dregs comes from Iberia? Amerind rivers have long since overwhelmed the Spanish rivulet, bringing with it its lingo and its manners, its flutes and its slanting harp-strings
The fates of thine are fix'd, and stand entire.
Thou shalt behold thy wish'd Lavinian walls;
And, ripe for heav'n, when fate Aeneas calls,
Then shalt thou bear him up, sublime, to me:
No councils have revers'd my firm decree.
And, lest new fears disturb thy happy state,
Know, I have search'd the mystic rolls of Fate:
Thy son (nor is th' appointed season far)
In Italy shall wage successful war,
Shall tame fierce nations in the bloody field,
And sov'reign laws impose, and cities build,
Till, after ev'ry foe subdued, the sun
Thrice thro' the signs his annual race shall run:
This is his time prefix'd. Ascanius then,
Now call'd Iulus, shall begin his reign.
He thirty rolling years the crown shall wear,
Then from Lavinium shall the seat transfer,
And, with hard labor, Alba Longa build.
The throne with his succession shall be fill'd
Three hundred circuits more: then shall be seen
Ilia the fair, a priestess and a queen,
Who, full of Mars, in time, with kindly throes,
Shall at a birth two goodly boys disclose.
The royal babes a tawny wolf shall drain:
Then Romulus his grandsire's throne shall gain,
Of martial tow'rs the founder shall become,
The people Romans call, the city Rome.
To them no bounds of empire I assign,
Nor term of years to their immortal line.
Ev'n haughty Juno, who, with endless broils,
Earth, seas, and heav'n, and Jove himself turmoils;
At length aton'd, her friendly pow'r shall join,
To cherish and advance the Trojan line.
The subject world shall Rome's dominion own,
And, prostrate, shall adore the nation of the gown.
An age is ripening in revolving fate
When Troy shall overturn the Grecian state,
And sweet revenge her conqu'ring sons shall call,
To crush the people that conspir'd her fall.
Then Caesar from the Julian stock shall rise,
Whose empire ocean, and whose fame the skies
Alone shall bound; whom, fraught with eastern spoils,
Our heav'n, the just reward of human toils,
Securely shall repay with rites divine;
And incense shall ascend before his sacred shrine.
Then dire debate and impious war shall cease,
And the stern age be soften'd into peace:
Then banish'd Faith shall once again return,
And Vestal fires in hallow'd temples burn;
And Remus with Quirinus shall sustain
The righteous laws, and fraud and force restrain.
Janus himself before his fane shall wait,
And keep the dreadful issues of his gate,
With bolts and iron bars: within remains
Imprison'd Fury, bound in brazen chains;
High on a trophy rais'd, of useless arms,
He sits, and threats the world with vain alarms."
Aeneid, Dryden's translation
“Fortuna audentes iuvat”, Fortune favors the bold. I have been reluctant to use that one since I finally read The Aenid. In the poem it was uttered by Turnus, as he led the Italian coalition into battle against the Trojans. He lost the battle and was only saved from immediate death by being ignominiously tricked into deserting the fight by Juno who wanted to save his life. Aeneas eventually caught up with him anyway and hacked him up.
in Zuck’s case Fortune shows that who she really favors are the bold, immoral and ruthless.
Nemesis, Nemesis not so much. When she gets her claws in you, she doesn't let go. Zuck won't be able to dodge her snares forever.
A lot of academia now believes in nothing but false and ridiculous nonsense. It is well worth reading western literature on its’ own terms and not through the distorted lens of left-wing critics and theorists.
I remember reading “Heart of Darkness”, and then reading the “scholarly” commentary and notes that accompanied it in the Penguin edition. It was obvious from a plain reading of the novella, and from what I knew about the author, that the critics had gotten the whole thing wrong. Their interpretation was nothing but re-heated marxist anti-imperialism. The main thrust of the book wasn’t even to do with imperialism, and certainly wasn’t a critique of it as such. The modern critics didn’t understand the story, because they couldn’t understand a man like Conrad or the world he lived in.
The real founders of the so-called alt-right are more "obscure" types like Sam Francis and F. Roger Devlin, both of whom were raised Catholic IIRC. I encourage discriminating readers to ignore the background noise and seek out the gems, which are there to be found, and will outlast even Donna's brother's little digital empire.
And it seems that there is some doubt as to whether Yiannopoulos is even partially Jewish:
http://ethnicelebs.com/milo-yiannopoulos
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milo_Yiannopoulos#External_linksMilo Yiannopoulos is the George Zimmerman of Jews, no Jewish Social Justice Warrior wants to claim him, Milo is an Honorary Goy. Hispanics don't want to claim George, they all say the White Gringos can have him. George Zimmerman is an Honorary White Gringo.
The Japanese have some interest but in a mostly superficial way. Like, in an anime, kawaii William Shakespeare will show up and do something silly. Or all the characters will be named after ones from The Three Musketeers.
No mention of the Japanese superficial interest in European history can be complete without mention of Paris Syndrome or Thermae Romae!
I expect cases of Paris Syndrome to increase when Notre Dame is turned into a mosque.
Thermae Romae is a Japanese comic about a Roman who dives to the bottom of his Roman bath and exits into a Japanese hot spring, made into a live action film.
The unfortunate truth about the Chinese is that they don’t seem to be interested in much of anything except money and status signalling. There is plenty of demand for western things, like whisky, which is adversely affecting the market for the rest of us.
I think there is a lot more interest in Chinese history in the West. The problem is that Chinese composition is not very accessible to westerners. Sun Tzu has been successful not because of its topic but because of its aphoristic style.
She went down this road because she had nothing but empty accusations to prop up her death cult ideology.
Typical white liberal female.
in Zuck's case Fortune shows that who she really favors are the bold, immoral and ruthless.
Fortuna is nothing is not fickle.
Nemesis, Nemesis not so much. When she gets her claws in you, she doesn’t let go. Zuck won’t be able to dodge her snares forever.
Maybe it's finally dawning on them that the all Westboro Baptist/Richard Spencer all the time strategy has only "worked" in the "reign in Hell" sense.
Is this the Region, this the Soil, the Clime,
Said then the lost Arch-Angel, this the seat
That we must change for Heav'n, this mournful gloom
For that celestial light? Be it so, since he
Who now is Sovran can dispose and bid
What shall be right: fardest from him is best
Whom reason hath equald, force hath made supream
Above his equals. Farewel happy Fields
Where Joy for ever dwells: Hail horrours, hail
Infernal world, and thou profoundest Hell
Receive thy new Possessor: One who brings
A mind not to be chang'd by Place or Time.
The mind is its own place, and in it self
Can make a Heav'n of Hell, a Hell of Heav'n.
What matter where, if I be still the same,
And what I should be, all but less then he
Whom Thunder hath made greater? Here at least
We shall be free; th' Almighty hath not built
Here for his envy, will not drive us hence:
Here we may reign secure, and in my choyce
To reign is worth ambition though in Hell:
Better to reign in Hell, then serve in Heav'n.
- Milton, Paradise Lost, Book 1
It’s because she’s writing a book on the relationship between the alt-right and Classics. In fact, if you take iSteve as an example of alt-right writing, there isn’t much connection between Classics and Red-Pilling, but as she’s got to have those connections to write her book, they must exist. How did she get the idea of writing a book on the alt-right? Maybe it has to do with being the sister of a social media tycoon?
Or maybe she has noticed that nerds who hit on her and have an interest in the Classics tend to be more Alt-Right than SJW.
Who cares if the MSM craps all over the Alt Right? They did the same to the Tea Party (and then the Koch brothers and politicians co-opted it with money and access.) Let the MSM spend their time focused on the “Alt Right”. When the next election comes along, the free and creative will spawn another movement, and the MSM will forget the previous battle and thrust their myoptic spear at the next closest Hydra head.
And when the Left starts knocking the Classics and those that pay attention to the Classics – well, let’s just say that if dismissing 2900 years of literature, history, and myth doesn’t make one look like an ill-educated petulant child, then it’s hard to say what does. Beauty has a timeless attraction. Convincing people that the beautiful is ugly is a angry, short-lived game.
At best, the AR is a loose set of ideas--you can find a guide, or a definition, or lists of principles if you web surf. Those ideas don't disappear because the WaPo, the NYT, or a Silicon Valley-based Classicist says the AR is a horrible bunch of racist misogynists. Name-calling, to be effective, has to be used against someone, some person--not ideas. And the AR is not centered on any one person or group, despite the lapdog media attempt to label certain people as leaders.
As it is, the verbal abuse has become a mark of pride for the AR--for adherents and not-so-adherent alike, i.e. adoption of "the deplorables" was a middle fingered response to HRC and the prog-left.
!!!!!!
Yeah, I have to agree with you about that: I’m sure that every author studied in the Classics would have despised Ms. Zuckerberg and what she stands for.
Really, how is she any different from the anti-intellectuals she looks down on? Who, reading and understanding the Classics, would dismiss and belittle them as she does, or take away from them the unutterably stupid and trivial story she is telling about race and gender?
She is the hidden, rotten core of identity politics: the destruction of all Greatness, American or otherwise.
Western Civilization itself becomes pearls before swine.
According to Forbes, Zuckerberg is the 10th most powerful person in the world. 8 out of 10 of the most powerful people are in their 60s or older, which would make Zuckerberg the 2nd most powerful person in the world under 60, and the most powerful person in the world under 40:
How many divisions does the 'Book have?
It’s not, that line has been explicitly severed in 1917. (And if we’re actually being serious and scholarly about it, in 1761.)
Journalists also vastly overrate the effect of the alt-right on Trump's success because of this. They are great targets for trolls because they're all on Twitter and they love to promote conventional wisdom. To the extent that the alt-right influenced the election, it may have been mostly by driving journalists into ever greater heights of hysteria in their Trump coverage.
It’s that, plus they have Sore Spots. You can disagree with them all day on, for instance, the issues mainstream conservatives blah-blah about all day. But not on the Sore Spots.
Trump is basically a centrist liberal, I always say, except on the most important issues. He’s anti-Globalist, anti-PC, and anti-empire. The alt-right is on his side on all these issues. These are Sore Spots. SJWs would be out of work if people were allowed to entertain alternative ideas on any of them. (Or, they imagine, burned at the stake. But that’s because they’re projecting what they’d do with the whip hand.) So they notice when they Spots are poked.
Because Who/Whom makes the world go round, Trump and the alt-right are on the Other Gang together, and are viewed as one. By implication people are led to believe there’s actual intercourse between the two, or that Trump is staffing his administration with alt-righters, or something.
But no. Trump is in the mainstream. To the right of the mainstream concerning the Sore Spots, but still mainstream overall. Still, a victory for Trump is a victory for the alt-right because who/whom. Ifsoever we are going to take over (retake?) the country, this is how it would start.
Nemesis, Nemesis not so much. When she gets her claws in you, she doesn't let go. Zuck won't be able to dodge her snares forever.
Yung In Chae is guilty of cultural misappropriation. The Authorities should be informed.
"My interests are perhaps best exemplified by my job at the Paideia Institute, a nonprofit organization for classical study, where I am a Research Fellow and edit its online journal for writing about the ancient world in modern ways, Eidolon."
Paideia? Isn't that Barbara Specter's institute?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFE0qAiofMQ
Specter who says that Europe cannot 'survive' unless it is swamped by non-Europeans?
And why is an Asian following in the heels of Jewesses?
What yellow running dogs.
No spark. Just follow and imitate.
Related to this is the resurgence of interest in Stoicism. Another example of Tom Wolfe being ahead of the curve.
The Kagans run the successor to PNAC, called FPI and are big promoters of U.S. intervention in Ukraine and demonizing Russia. They are very evil people and probably part of the deep state. Tillerson and Mattis if confirmed would do well to fire the Kagans from their positions along with their addlepatted followers that have infested the Pentagon and State.
A specter is haunting the internet? Tell me again there’s no cultural Marxism.
No, I assume too much. She’s just starting off with a cliche because she heard it once and is lazy.
Anyway, I often wonder what progressive classicists do all day. Because if they took their subject matter seriously they’d never stop vomiting, or they’d be converted a bit. They certainly couldn’t remain good PC soldiers, because they’d know too much.
You can only deconstruct so much without turning into a Visigoth. You have to let some of it go, admit the value of some of it. Oherwise should someone outside the scam accidentally read your paper or sit in on a class, they might wonder why there’s a classics department at all.
The ancient world is part of Western Civilization, but it’s alien to us and very unmodern. Although, I did watch a documentary on PBS recently on Ancient Greece, and it was basically all Whig History about the glorious unfolding of egalitarianism, or whatever. I underestimate their capacity for simple lying.
Which is partly why classicism is dying. I can’t possibly imagine being spurred to reading Xenophon or Caesar by this harpy.
hahaha
"A SPECTER is haunting Eastern Europe: the specter of what in the West is called "dissent.""
http://www.vaclavhavel.cz/showtrans.php?cat=eseje&val=2_aj_eseje.html&typ=HTML
Great link. Great connection. Thanks.
She and most of those on the Left are nothing more than Visigoths who learned to read. At heart they are still mindless savages that will do their damnest to tear down civilization.
Neil Postman had this bloody lot nailed in a speech have gave before college graduation ceremony.
https://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2009/06/athenians-and-visigoths-neil-postmans-graduation-speech/
It’s worth a read. Such a speech could never again be given on a college campus.
Also, I think his use of Visigoths, when perhaps Mongols or Philistines would have been more fitting, was a bit of ethnic CYA. After all, the Visigoths conquered Rome on the grounds that the Romans did not abide by their own treaty, and having conquered it, they tried to continue it. By contrast, the Mongols typically exterminated those they conquered, then burned their cities down.
You don’t have to be a scholar to use things scholars just so happen to trick us into paying them to write unread articles about.
Why are you even bringing up what’s “scholarly” in the realm of politics? Like the other side cares. (Only insofar as bridges still have to stay built.) Scholars to them are whoever wears robes and those stupid hats and tells them what they want to hear. (Or decides what they should want to hear then conditions them to want it then tells it to them.)
The alt-right is not a highbrow movement. Can’t be, because the entire intellectual class in Western society is sick. The universities, think tanks, MSM, etc. are a lost cause, obviously. But so are the clerks, the teachers, the professionals, basically everyone who makes a living off the mind. We’re really in a very desperate situation, thanks to the brain rot of PC.
The alt-right probably isn’t anti-intellectual enough, actually. We need a common sense movement.
...is why I find so little to read that is interesting anymore. Our entire cultural output now is on a par with the schlock churned out by totalitarian Communist states.
In that case, the only stuff worth reading is that which was created by the dissidents.
Really, everything one reads, even if it is on a completely non-controversial topics, has the unmistakeable stench of purposefully self-hobbled minds that accept and purvey lies as facts.
I said elsewhere she’s being lazy. But it shows you what phrases have currency in their world.
She doesn’t want the “specter” of the alt-right to win, though of course Marx said his communism would win, no matter what. (I don’t believe him, elsewise why would he try so hard to subvert the existing order? Why would he try to ameliorate the workers’ lives? The worse the better, according to him. But I digress.) She puts herself in the mindset of a Good Burgher, aghast at the thick-necked mass of proles demanding dinner. Interesting, isn’t it?
Yet more unintentional reaction from so-called progressives. They could go on winning for millennia and still fancy themselves the outsider rebels taking on the Man. Even if their Man is a bunch of internet trolls.
I find very endearing the fact that Zuckerberg Sr., after receiving more than $100 million in Facebook stock from his son, decided to continue working as a dentist out of the same nice but not very lavish suburban house.
BFD. I'd be a lot more impressed with him if he'd worked to raise daughters respectful toward the white men who founded and maintained the culture and traditions his Silicon Valley based classicist studies without any real understanding, appreciation or gratitude.
hahaha
"A SPECTER is haunting Eastern Europe: the specter of what in the West is called "dissent.""
http://www.vaclavhavel.cz/showtrans.php?cat=eseje&val=2_aj_eseje.html&typ=HTML
Well this is it. I am afraid that the game is up gentlemen. Without the support of the classical scholars our whole attempt to reshape western society is doomed. I am afraid that this must mean being sent to the library with a bottle of decent whiskey and your service revolver. You did your best, but you should probably finish yourselves off before they feed you to the lions or crucify you.
Would that we were so superficial in our interest!
There are so many performances of Beethoven’s 9th around New Years that the Japanese talk about 9th pollution.
(Zuckerberg re-interpreting the Classics)
François-René de Chateaubriand–
There are fits of forgetfulness or deceit which terrify; you open your ears, you rub your eyes, not knowing whether you are awake or asleep. When the imperturbable individual to whom you owe such assertions descends from the rostrum and takes his seat impassively, you follow him with your gaze, suspended as you are, between a kind of astonishment and a sort of admiration; you are unsure whether the man has not received some authority from nature giving him the power to recreate or annihilate the truth.
Or just be careful in college and make sure the class is taught by an old school professor who loves ancient Greece and Rome.
That sort of “we wuz hellenez” LARPing influences the OT, and the genesis of Jewry itself, far beyond the one forgery you cite.
Juvenal was an intellectual from a modest Italian family, and he was in economic competition with Greeks, as well as Romans who were proud they had been expensively educated in Greece. But the reference to “The Syrian Orontes” makes it sound as if he is referring to Greek-speaking immigrants from Roman Syria.
I hardly think the ancient Hellenes and Romans of classical antiquity were “white” as Anglo-Saxons use the term. Tacitus, for instance, used several paragraphs of text in his Treaty on Germanics Peoples to describe the tremendous phenotypical differences between Romans and Germans. The most important points he emphasized is that Germans were taller and lighter in color than Romans. And Tacitus was of noble ancestry, living during a time when the Roman elites were still unadultered and could trace their lineages back to the time of the king Ancus Marcius. And yet, he emphasized how different Germans were from himself physically. This means that white racists cannot even use the argument that Romanns and German looked similar originally, but that race-mixing made the Romans darker than they originally were.
This woman is clearly an idiot, and even though she is right that the alt.right is composed mostly of the drags of Society, she is missing the main argument against the alt.right: that the values of the ancient Hellenes were of political tolerance, respect for individual rights and scientific rationalism, all things that the conservatives who support Trump, for the most part, reject. She doesen’t notice the profound irony of the alt.right fetichizing the Ancients, when the Ancients would find the alt.right repulsive.
...so they forced Socrates to commit suicide.
well apart from that Slavery thing they had going on.
But it was mostly White folks getting chained up, so it doesn't count, as usual.
If you think the SJWs are paragons of political tolerance, respect for individual rights, or scientific rationalism, I don't know what to tell you.
"Tolerence" as an intellectual idea is a modern thing from Britain, dating from around the time of its kin "disinterestedness", and first reported on in depth by Voltaire.
To correct your wider cluelessness about the ancient world would detain me all day.
https://twitter.com/dpinsen/status/810363372978008065
Unlike Wolfe’s hero, this guy seems never to have experienced any kind of adversity himself. Just shilling from day one.
Yes, Western Europeans created the modern world … the social, moral, religious, political, judicial, technical, medical, and economic bases for society. It created science and the concept of the nation state. It pressed the Christian concept of equality under God and the law, outlawed slavery, elevated the status of women, and introduced democracy to the world. It split the atom and took humankind to the moon while the rest of the world herded goats and continued to live in primitive family, clan, and tribal associations.
How do I know this? Because I’ve studied history and the classics and see the footprint of Western Civilization everywhere I look in the world.
At their most confident, Western Europeans colonized the rest of the world, providing it a patina of modernity and westernization. Then, in the name of equality, they invited the colonized to come and live with them as brothers and sisters. Immigration to the West started as a drip, then it became a flood, and it ended as a tsunami. Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America displaced their populations and cultures to the Western nation states, eventually making the Western Europeans political and cultural minorities in their own countries — a redux of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire.
If one does not have a Western European background, however, there is a tendency to feel bad about oneself. In the extreme, this creates a feeling of self-hate for not being white and European … or, for the feminists (also a European invention) being white, European, and male. You are wracked with cognitive dissonance. You hate white males and Western Civilization as you ironically try everything you can to become part of what they created. To salvage your self-esteem, you retcon history to press the illusion that the West expropriated your history, your science, and your technology. Indeed, as the ultimate projection, the white man is a vile thief who stole your civilization and now makes you feel bad about yourself. Reparations are due, as you demand that the white man “cash out” the fruits of the only civilization on planet earth that has anything worth “cashing out” and award them to you in the name of justice. You demand affirmative action to replace the white man within his institutions one person at a time in the name of equality. As borders fold and immigration becomes a torrent, numbers favor this. This is democracy, your know!
My take: Let them bask in their illusions and projections as the “right” tries to salvage what is left of Western Civilization. In the meantime, I will continue to enjoy the Greek and Roman classics even as the modern world is shaken to the core under the lastest barbarian attacks. We’ve been there before. There will be another Renaissance … and I know what they will be studying.
Sad we may never see this next Renaissance.
And if you could magically reset the West to the way it was a century or two ago we'd destroy ourselves all over again.
We need to take a long hard look at our civilisation, identify its weaknesses and ruthlessly eradicate those weaknesses. There's a lot of good within western civilisation but there's a lot of sickness as well.
We can't blame a bunch of Africans living in mud huts, or Islam, or China, or any other culture, for destroying us. They don't have the capacity to do so, they never have had and never will have. Western civilisation wasn't murdered, it committed suicide.
Nothing is known about Juvenal’s origins; Ronald Syme made a case for him coming from Africa.
Some Jews even tried to weasel out of Monica Lewinsky. They claimed she was Polish!
And Meryl Streep:http://ethnicelebs.com/meryl-streep
Yes. And I see no evidence that her brother is really on a higher level than she is.
Perhaps the single greatest lesson that the ancient Greeks and Romans had for us today is one of moral fortitude and clarity of purpose. The first rule of war is to identify who your enemy is. If you cannot do that, then you can’t do anything. The West cannot fight ISIS, or highly violent political pressure groups, not because it doesen’t have the means to, but because in order to do that it would require the West to “point the finger”, which is “devisive” and “culturally insensitive”. The ancient Romans, for instance, never hesitated to identify who their enemy was, and they were not concerned if that was upsetting to anybody. They would do it even to their own. Here is Augustus ending his alliance with Anthony and declaring war on Egypt:
Oddly enough, the fields of ancient and medieval history have largely been free of leftist retconning and activism, although, after 9/11, that changed slightly for medieval history (crusades bad, Moors in Spain good, etc.)
Leftist academics, so far, haven’t really been interested in saying guys like Julius Caesar “committed genocide and war crimes” or “owned slaves.” The Arch of Titus in Rome, depicting Titus’s victory over the Jews, has, to my knowledge, not been labeled “anti-semetic.”
Generally, for leftists, the Nuremberg Trial of Western Civilization begins in 1492 with Columbus.
As the SJW-Left seeks to protect its recently gained institutional power, the Right must respond be revisiting some to the tools the formerly disempowered Left used to gain power. Among them is Marxism, the Frankfurt School with its Critical Theory, Foucault, and of course Edward Said’s “Orientalism”.
Donna Zuckerberg is blatantly asserting her cultural hegemony over marginalized white men by attempting to appropriate their precious cultural inheritance passed down to them by the Great White Men of antiquity. Can you imagine the outrage if a group of Goyim tried to monopolize the study of the Torah because Likudniks had been using it to justify oppressing Palestinians?
Although most don’t realize it, much of the alt-Right derives from the works of French philosopher Alain de Benoist; who identifies as a pagan and prefers polytheism over monotheism. And so indeed as time goes on the alt-Right is going to delve deeper and deeper into their cultural heritage and the Classics are going to become more and more influential as America turns alt-Right intellectually and spiritually. Red-pilled parents will be pushing their school systems to dump the Manderin immersion and to teach their children Ancient Greek instead. Embracing the Classics will soon be an open sign of dissidence against the rot brought on by an illegitimate elite in the Western world.
Feminists/SJW are blatantly engaging in Occidentalism in attempting to fetishize and marginalize the oeuvre of the Great White Men. And so to paraphrase a yet to appear alt-Right Edward Said: the praxis of cultural imperialism reduces (essentializes) those Great White Men as culturally static and intellectually undeveloped; the fabrication of cultural superiority is that alt-Right culture is a thing (an Other) that can be studied, depicted, and reproduced. Implicit to the Occidentalist fabrication is the culturally opposite idea that Feminist/SJW society is developed, rational, flexible, and thereby superior, whilst Alt-Right intellectuals are inferior for being undeveloped, irrational, and inflexible. This results in the alienation of white men when confronted with the reification of SJW superiority in the form of restrictions and barriers to the study of the Great White Men.
The greatest difference between the alt-Right and the Enlightenment philosophies is in the idea of "self-evident truths." The traditionalist sect asserts morality derives only from God. The atheist/neo-Paganist view is that morality is man's power over man. The philosophies stemming from the Enlightenment state that morality is "self-evident." The alt-Right is concrete, the Enlightenment is not.
Criticism and comment welcome.
Side note: I do feel that I understand the philosophy behind the traditionalist sect of the alt-Right far better than I do the atheist and neo-Paganist sects.
Daryush Valizadeh: that’s an Iranian name. Are they counted as white, or a has group of Iranians wing nuts started lobbying for a separate race classification?
I also wonder what grade a student who leans alt-right and doesn't keep it to him or her self can expect from Doctor-Commissar Z. I mean a student with those views cannot possibly understand the classics in the correct way, right?
I wonder too. I suspect her version of “Western Civilization” doesn’t and can’t really exist which is why she doesn’t and can’t elaborate what it is.
Such as?
Such as?
Lysistrata? We only have her because she was invented by a white man.
Such as?
I know these exist, Exhibit A: Dr. Zuckerberg, but there’s not much for them to say, Exhibit A: Dr. Zuckerberg again.
Such as the marginalization and bias that Dr. Zuckerberg is promoting?
Dr. Zukerberg’s whole spiel is parasitical. If dead white males didn’t create the classics, there would be nothing for her to rage against.
Now I can't read Homer or Plato or Plutarch without being a racist. Always, everywhere, whatever I do, I'm somehow scheming to put blacks back in chains and women in the kitchen. No pleasure I can have escapes the stain of my distant ancestors.
All accounts must be settled, all crooked roads must be made straight, all mountains and valleys must be leveled to achieve perfect justice. Apparently there is just something in human nature that turns some people into theocratic bullies. It's an urge so strong it manifests itself even in people who don't believe in God.
I'm beginning to understand why wise gurus supposedly went to live on mountaintops, away from all human contact.
Another problem is buying a novel and finding out the author is an SJW.
For example, I ordered a book advertised as a mystery. It soon turned out the bad guy was against immigration and was portrayed as evil. The good guys were all helping Mexicans in.
I didn’t finish it and I’m more careful now. Still, the book description on Amazon didn’t note the immigration angle. It can be hard to avoid. Mysteries set in the past are safer.
All contemporary fiction, in all genres, should be avoided. All of it is tainted. I won't read any fiction written in the past 40 years and I'm very suspicious of anything written post-WW2.
“the values of the ancient Hellenes were of political tolerance, respect for individual rights and scientific rationalism”
…so they forced Socrates to commit suicide.
Richard Spencer & co. may or may not have scholarly approach to Classicism, but Dr. Zuckerberg certainly doesn’t, which is the greater misdeed because she is a Classicist (or at least promotes herself as such and has a doctorate to attest that other Classicists think she is too).
It is telling that Dr. Zuckerberg cites no Classical authority throughout her entire rant supposedly defending the Classics. The authority she does cite is SJWism, which she cites a priori as though it were self evidently true.
Of the two, Zuckerberg is far worse than Spencer. The alt-right proceeds from the Classics because they believe they are proceeding from the meaning of what the Classics actually say. They may or may not be correct, but they are arguing in good faith. Dr. Zuckerberg openly admits that the Classics are just a vehicle of convenience for her true calling: being a Social Justice Xanthippe (I wonder is she would even recognize the reference) as she openly calls on other Classicists to warp their field of study to achieve a prejudiced and exclusionary political objective.
Truly she is what she rails against. The lady doth project too much.
I had to look it up... LOL.
Journalists also vastly overrate the effect of the alt-right on Trump's success because of this. They are great targets for trolls because they're all on Twitter and they love to promote conventional wisdom. To the extent that the alt-right influenced the election, it may have been mostly by driving journalists into ever greater heights of hysteria in their Trump coverage.
Even encountering contrary opinions on twitter or a comment section seems to be shocking to them. It doesn’t even have to be trolling. In the case of Ms. Zuck merely asserting that Western Civilization is a Civilization and that her field is important to understanding it causes her to shriek and look under the bed for Literally Hitler. A few dozen guys with complicated haircuts have a rent-free bachelor pad condo in her head.
One would think that scholars would leap at the chance to educate a public curious about their academic specialty. She’s quite sure you shouldn’t look into the classics because they’re a foundation of Western Civilization but also not quite sure why they’re relevant at all.
Lucia Festival in Sweden. Quite beautiful:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vl6o4mG25Ec
Nice video, but this is what Lucia 2025 will look like if the Swedes keep up with the African immigration…..
https://youtu.be/jm48QEigkko?t=21s
With plenty of side helpings of this:
https://youtu.be/5gOvT9dmpA4
BTW, it seems that the SJWs going after video games was a bridge too far in their assault on Western culture. The fallout of that misadventure provided and continues to provide a lot of foot soldiers for their opponents. A tactical retreat on their part would seem to be in order, but they cannot force themselves to shut up about the subject.
Thank God I’m not religious.
Perhaps the secular is the fruit of the sacred rather than it's antithesis.
Or there is both East and West & Jew and Greek in Christ(ianity).
Some people envy/hate the “storied pomp” of others. Such greatness must be deconstructed and slighted by any means necessary.
One would think that scholars would leap at the chance to educate a public curious about their academic specialty. She's quite sure you shouldn't look into the classics because they're a foundation of Western Civilization but also not quite sure why they're relevant at all.
asserting that Western Civilization is a Civilization
The assertion is actually more radical than that. The assertion is that Western Civilization is Civilization. All other cultures, to the extent that they reject Western Civilization, are uncivilized, barbaric.
Walsh's article begins:At some point, Walsh decided that her problem was that she had "a non-authoritative body" while her students were "a bunch of authoritarians". She decided to assign her "bunch of authoritarians" to themselves design her course's syllabus.
IOW, tl;dr version: “Because I have poor self-esteem and am terrified of my career being derailed by insufficiently positive student reviews, I made my class an easy-A to win their favor”.
Lolwut!
The degree to which this is not true is demonstrated by a bizarre episode in intellectual history (1940s -80s) in which liberals searched for their intellectual heritage in the pre-Socratic sophists, until eventually they got too embarrassed about writing entire books analyzing the political philosophy of half-sentence fragments. Karl Popper was the most famous advocate of this hilarious waste of time,* which, in its own way, was as odd as the whole Black Athena thing.
The most important was Eric Havelock.
Shorter Lisl Walsh:
After a disastrous first experience of teaching, caused by her own stupidity and conceits, Lisl found she could improve her evaluation scores by not really teaching anymore, while hanging on to the privileges and pay of the office of “teacher”.
You go grrl!
To be fair to her, in her case, not teaching is almost certainly an improvement on teaching, as her students apparently noticed.
All this hectoring, this jewsplaining, would be bearable if they weren’t the most powerful people on earth.
After a disastrous first experience of teaching, caused by her own stupidity and conceits, Lisl found she could improve her evaluation scores by not really teaching anymore, while hanging on to the privileges and pay of the office of "teacher".
You go grrl!
To be fair to her, in her case, not teaching is almost certainly an improvement on teaching, as her students apparently noticed.
You said it better than me.
In other Jew News, Trump’s new ambassador is a strong settler advocate and Putin fan. He also favors Assad in Syria. Here’s an article he wrote a year ago:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/17964
She sounds like she was an insecure controlling b*tch and rather than blaming herself for her students’ understandable reaction to that, she has constructed a ludicrously complex way to explain it away and save her ego. And hilariously she has grounded her defence mechanism in multicultural victimology mumbo jumbo. Amazing!
To be fair though, it has allowed her to find a way to be less controlling and insecure while avoiding the hard self-reflection that would normally be required.
“Morality which is based on relative emotional values is a mere illusion, a thoroughly vulgar conception which has nothing sound in it and nothing true.” Socrates
I would like to add my voice to those commentators who wonder how bright Ms. Z actually is. That is a risibly crude rant, wholly inappropriate for a classics scholar one would have thought.
Makes me wonder about Mark Z – did he merely push against a door that modern technology had enabled?
A bit like Bill Gates and his crew, who benefiting from IBM PCs taking off and dominating the business computing market, but Gates gets a lot of credit for making his proprietary operating system grow on top of and evolve, for decades afterward, around the original DOS kernel that he bought cheap back in 1980. He also maintained Microsoft's market dominance in the face of competition and change.
Zuckerberg and Sandberg have done far less.
The New Humanities offer splendid opportunities to work out one’s personal issues through the vehicles of intellectualizing and cogitation and present it all to the world as scholarship. It’s all good, I’m told.
I would like to add my voice to those commentators who wonder how bright Ms. Z actually is. That is a risibly crude rant, wholly inappropriate for a classics scholar one would have thought.
Makes me wonder about Mark Z - did he merely push against a door that modern technology had enabled?
Two longtime software entrepreneurs I’ve known for decades and respected take that view on him. Mark Zuckerberg got lucky, but he was enough of a sharp businessman to see Facebook through the early stages.
A bit like Bill Gates and his crew, who benefiting from IBM PCs taking off and dominating the business computing market, but Gates gets a lot of credit for making his proprietary operating system grow on top of and evolve, for decades afterward, around the original DOS kernel that he bought cheap back in 1980. He also maintained Microsoft’s market dominance in the face of competition and change.
Zuckerberg and Sandberg have done far less.
That's just extraordinarily rare, and at his age, rarer still. He's the greatest entrepreneur and CEO of his generation.
Lucia Festival in Sweden. Quite beautiful:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vl6o4mG25Ec
There are strong forces in action trying to destroy Lucia. This year black boys were used as Lucia and there are other things going on.
War on normal people must not stop!
Speaking of which, where does she get off referring to her field as "classic."
Her claim that there are in America “a few hundred thousand men” — of any political persuasion — who “love the classics” seems to me more than a little questionable.
I remember reading "Heart of Darkness", and then reading the "scholarly" commentary and notes that accompanied it in the Penguin edition. It was obvious from a plain reading of the novella, and from what I knew about the author, that the critics had gotten the whole thing wrong. Their interpretation was nothing but re-heated marxist anti-imperialism. The main thrust of the book wasn't even to do with imperialism, and certainly wasn't a critique of it as such. The modern critics didn't understand the story, because they couldn't understand a man like Conrad or the world he lived in.
It wasn’t?
No, it wasn't.
A bit like Bill Gates and his crew, who benefiting from IBM PCs taking off and dominating the business computing market, but Gates gets a lot of credit for making his proprietary operating system grow on top of and evolve, for decades afterward, around the original DOS kernel that he bought cheap back in 1980. He also maintained Microsoft's market dominance in the face of competition and change.
Zuckerberg and Sandberg have done far less.
Credit where credit is due: Zuck didn’t invent the social network idea – Friendster and MySpace came before – but he absolutely crushed it. He got a billion people to use his platform and turned Google’s effective monopoly on online advertising into a duopoly, and created a profitable, $345 billion market cap company.
That’s just extraordinarily rare, and at his age, rarer still. He’s the greatest entrepreneur and CEO of his generation.
I find this interesting because i can't remember single piece of advertising I saw on facebook.
What Zuckerberg attributes do you think made/make him so successful? How successful do you think he would have been in any other time (micro scale, think business and technology cycles) or place (company/field scale)?
He's a smart guy AFAICT, but I don't think he is in the same intellectual class as Bill Gates and Paul Allen. And Microsoft also enjoyed a lot of situational advantage and luck along with an assist from good negotiation and legal contract work early.
Two things I give Zuckerberg massive credit for are:
1. He is well on his way to matching what I consider Bill Gates's signature achievement--managing a company from zero to world dominance himself (see adversity comment above for why I don't give full credit yet).
2. Masterfully identifying and exploiting a market opportunity of a lifetime. While still maintaining full control.
Perhaps that is enough to justify "greatest entrepreneur and CEO of his generation"?
One more thing, how do you compare Zuckerberg to Page and Brin?
P.S. To support my not the same class statement above I'll just note there are no Mark Zuckerberg in Math 55 type stories (that I have seen) and link to this for a bit more detail: https://www.quora.com/Was-Mark-Zuckerberg-one-of-the-top-students-academically-at-Harvard
The NYT is too (((white))):
https://twitter.com/BrentNYT/status/810242590280912896
Ah yes,
Revolution, Devour Thine Own!
Holy cow this ‘Dr’ Zuckerperson needs medication and therapy to deal with her anger issues vs white men and western civilization. Sounds like she has gone off the deep end. She is in good company today, of course, and she could take most of the female humanities ‘professors’ in the US with her. And that person from Cambridge who ‘studies’ classics (does one get a paycheck for studying classics @ Cambridge?). Take your pills, ladies, do some meditation and deep breathing, just let it go….. good grief what a bunch of froot loops feminism has wrought. I get a kick out of watching spineless jellyfish university administrators and their fellow liberal pussies going through mental and verbal contortions in trying to take these people seriously.
Would you mind if I’d cross out “towards the mean” in your sentence?
The word left then in your comment could be enough:
Regression.
Donna Zuckerberg is blatantly asserting her cultural hegemony over marginalized white men by attempting to appropriate their precious cultural inheritance passed down to them by the Great White Men of antiquity. Can you imagine the outrage if a group of Goyim tried to monopolize the study of the Torah because Likudniks had been using it to justify oppressing Palestinians?
Although most don't realize it, much of the alt-Right derives from the works of French philosopher Alain de Benoist; who identifies as a pagan and prefers polytheism over monotheism. And so indeed as time goes on the alt-Right is going to delve deeper and deeper into their cultural heritage and the Classics are going to become more and more influential as America turns alt-Right intellectually and spiritually. Red-pilled parents will be pushing their school systems to dump the Manderin immersion and to teach their children Ancient Greek instead. Embracing the Classics will soon be an open sign of dissidence against the rot brought on by an illegitimate elite in the Western world.
Feminists/SJW are blatantly engaging in Occidentalism in attempting to fetishize and marginalize the oeuvre of the Great White Men. And so to paraphrase a yet to appear alt-Right Edward Said: the praxis of cultural imperialism reduces (essentializes) those Great White Men as culturally static and intellectually undeveloped; the fabrication of cultural superiority is that alt-Right culture is a thing (an Other) that can be studied, depicted, and reproduced. Implicit to the Occidentalist fabrication is the culturally opposite idea that Feminist/SJW society is developed, rational, flexible, and thereby superior, whilst Alt-Right intellectuals are inferior for being undeveloped, irrational, and inflexible. This results in the alienation of white men when confronted with the reification of SJW superiority in the form of restrictions and barriers to the study of the Great White Men.
I’d argue that the more traditionalist sect of the alt-Right stems from the works of the Catholic French Counter-Enlightenment philosophers like Maistre and Bonald, and more recently, G.K. Chesterton while the atheist and neo-Paganist sects stem from the philosophy of Nietzsche (specifically, the idea that “God is dead” and it is up to man to create morality). Both are united in an honesty and clarity of purpose as well as a common enemy. Furthermore, both views are far more consistent than the Enlightenment doctrines asserting certain “truths to be self-evident” which are clearly not self-evident; the alt-Right rejects Rationalism (though not rationality nor science) and utilitarianism.
The greatest difference between the alt-Right and the Enlightenment philosophies is in the idea of “self-evident truths.” The traditionalist sect asserts morality derives only from God. The atheist/neo-Paganist view is that morality is man’s power over man. The philosophies stemming from the Enlightenment state that morality is “self-evident.” The alt-Right is concrete, the Enlightenment is not.
Criticism and comment welcome.
Side note: I do feel that I understand the philosophy behind the traditionalist sect of the alt-Right far better than I do the atheist and neo-Paganist sects.
That's just extraordinarily rare, and at his age, rarer still. He's the greatest entrepreneur and CEO of his generation.
Allright, except that it’s not very – ehem roman or greek (= “cllassic”), to claim, that the most successful would be the greatest. It’s classical indeed though to go as far as to claim, that success – sucks… (Socrates, Seneca, Petronius, Epikur, Mark Aurel, Zeno, Augustine…).
And here’s the (future) classic Neil Young:
“Oh, to live on Sugar Mountain
With the barkers and the colored balloons,
You can’t be twenty on Sugar Mountain
Though you’re thinking that
you’re leaving there too soon,
You’re leaving there too soon.
It’s so noisy at the fair
But all your friends are there
And the candy floss you had
And your mother and your dad.”
Another possibility is that Dr. Zuckerberg finds herself unaccountably attracted to Aryan Richard Spencer-type men, just as her brother is attracted to feminine East Asian girls.
Zuck's wife is NOT feminine. She looks like a rough peasant girl with tree trunk legs.
(They were misinformed.)
As consolation I offer this news item from 2012:
But I'm not white and I identify as alt-right. Clearly I don't exist.
” ‘They are younger than the typical conservative establishment, white, and male.’
But I’m not white and I identify as alt-right. Clearly I don’t exist.”
I’m not young or male and I identify as alt-right. Clearly I don’t exist even less than you do.
Now, now. There really should not be a victimhood Olympics on the alt-right. The left fills that niche quite nicely. ; )
lol, funny. I've only read Spencer's (now deleted) Twitter account and don't intend to delve any further into alt right memes, but your description of it as LARPing seems fitting. Also often left intentionally ambiguous if it's meant somewhat ironically or totally seriously.
Pretty demented stuff, but to some degree I can understand why it attracts people.
Last I checked, his Twitter account was re-instated and he’s back at it.
“The forces of white supremacy and toxic masculinity, fueled by a sense of entitlement dwarfed only by their inflated estimation of their own intelligence, have entered into an unholy alliance to remove feminism, political correctness, and multiculturalism from America. ”
Now, if only that were true… Because feminism, PC enforcement and multiculturalism are destroying civilization. Donna Z. seems fine with that, just like his brother, as long as they get theirs.
Seeing as her occupation is the lucrative one of "Silicon-Valley-based Classics scholar," she may be getting hers from his.
Actually, the Swedes would be lucky to end up with such Zulu dancing. They are much more likely to end up with this:
With plenty of side helpings of this:
If he shaved off his beard he wouldn’t look out of place in most of Southern Europe, including Southern France. Roosh is half-Turkish by the way, not totally Persian.
That last facebook link: Sad, distasteful tripe, designed to appeal to the basest instincts.
No gelatinous desserts, just starch, fat, sugar, salt, chocolate and some more starch. Then again, the absence of jello might be a… cultural thing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Melos
Though the Athenians didn't bring democracy there but rather killed and enslaved the inhabitants. They did however impose pro-Athenian democracies on "allies" during the era of the Delian league/Peloponnesian war.
That’s right, it was Paros, a member of the Delian League. This is the only short reference to the episode on wikipedia, I recall a longer description online but can’t find it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paros#Antiquity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Melos
Though the Athenians didn't bring democracy there but rather killed and enslaved the inhabitants. They did however impose pro-Athenian democracies on "allies" during the era of the Delian league/Peloponnesian war.
That’s right, it was Paros, a member of the Delian League. This is the only short reference to the episode on wikipedia, I recall a longer description online but can’t find it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paros#Antiquity
It is telling that Dr. Zuckerberg cites no Classical authority throughout her entire rant supposedly defending the Classics. The authority she does cite is SJWism, which she cites a priori as though it were self evidently true.
Of the two, Zuckerberg is far worse than Spencer. The alt-right proceeds from the Classics because they believe they are proceeding from the meaning of what the Classics actually say. They may or may not be correct, but they are arguing in good faith. Dr. Zuckerberg openly admits that the Classics are just a vehicle of convenience for her true calling: being a Social Justice Xanthippe (I wonder is she would even recognize the reference) as she openly calls on other Classicists to warp their field of study to achieve a prejudiced and exclusionary political objective.
Truly she is what she rails against. The lady doth project too much.
> [Dr. Zuckerberg's] true calling: being a Social Justice Xanthippe (I wonder is she would even recognize the reference)
I had to look it up… LOL.
> But lately I’ve been getting the feeling that many of the people who write such things [clumsy leftish doggerel] don’t really care about justice or fairness or other noble sentiments. They just hate white people and want to see us “put in our place”.
The celebrated Ta Nehesi Coates’ celebrated Between The World And Me speaks to your thesis.
In the final three pages, Coates assumes the voice of an Old Testament prophet. He calls down a curse upon white people, for the stain of their bloodlines and their ongoing sinfulness: enslavement, the Middle Passage, redlining, escalator etiquette. Although heretofore unmentioned, Coates adds one count of Global Warming to the indictment — if catnip is at hand, might as well sprinkle it atop that dish best served cold.
Yes, if the cultural winds were blowing the right way, Rolling Stone would laud Spencer. Individuals have morals, but organizations and amorphous groups have internal politics and institutional incentives instead.
A weird undercurrent of the ‘war party’ in the build up to the Iraqistan fiasco was classical scholarship, also from California. This may be because Victor Davis Hanson was already on the payroll but I vaguely remember a sideshow during Vietnam was discussions with the utmost gravitas about Athens (USA#1) vs Sparta (Commies) and how hubris (goddess Nemisis) lead to the destruction of (not really) democratic Athens. So the ‘war party’ might have prepared for an assault from classical scholars.
Search on [victor davis hanson war nerd ] for a spitball fight between neo con national review intellect Victor Davis Hanson and upstart internet sensation War Nerd. Who won? I don’t know, not being a classical scholar myself, but the argument stopped when War Nerd got a very lucrative contract to teach English in Erbil Kurdistan or Iraq during the Iraqistan fiasco. All communication from War Nerd stopped during this period and resumed after he quit, War Nerd is a man of his word.
Although things worked out well for Athens for the next 1000 years after the Romans took over the world and routed all flights to the middle east through Athens Marco Polo airport. After that, the Athenians were screwed when Byzantium took over as the major airline hub city. As a side note, the major cities in the Sparta Athens dust up where Sparta, Athens, and Syracuse. Sparta is a nothing little provincial town now and Syracuse is a slum in upstate NY.
#FirstWorldProblemsIWishWeHad
Donna Z. seems fine with that, [destroying civilization] just like her brother, as long as they get theirs.
Seeing as her occupation is the lucrative one of “Silicon-Valley-based Classics scholar,” she may be getting hers from his.
Thanks Steve for digging up this curiousity, that Donna & Mark are siblings. I write learned articles for classical philology journals, some of which get published. Eidelon of which Donna is editor (that’s the way you learn to write when trying to get stuff past mean-spirited referees) actually exists. Their TOS is very interesting. They offer to pay money for publishing your article. Interestingly, in their advice to contributors they point out that if your article is suitable to be submitted to real classical philology journals, it doesn’t belong in Eidelon. So I skipped merrily to scholar.google.com and scholar.googled her. By Jiminy, she’s published a number of articles in top tier journals, one of which I’m about to get a rejection notice any day now, a top tier journal which promises a 10 week long review process!
Classical philology science works on the premise that atomic facts on very tiny subjects like chips of mosaics, if reasonably established to be the case, once assembled and memorized, add up to “knowing” the ancient world (Greece & Rome). Granted that her focus on diversity in antiquity is piffle, she does her piffle on a very demanding level.
I have an unpublishable article, unpublishable because it bites off too big a subject. For a moment, I thought Prof. Zuckerberg here I come. But their word count limit is ~3000 words and mine is 8852 words. 4000 to 8000 or 10,000 words is the usual length of learned articles in that field.
The basic substance of her missive is that only scholars like her can interpret the classics for the masses. Because she was taught the “sophisticated” way to understand and apply the writings of our ancients, she retains the sole ability to accurately assess their historical significance. She may even be of the school that feels one should only read the classics in their original language.
Essentially she is arguing from a pre-Reformation clergy position on interpreting the Bible. The bible should be printed in Latin only and taught only by priests. It is only those men, the clergy, who can be a portal to God because they were taught by the sophisticated academics of their time.
I imagine she is incapable of this type of self-reflection.
I loved the arts classes because basically the method was, humanities been already coopted but not yet eliminated by leftists, was read something and then make up some mindless bullsh*t about what the piece "really means".
I'm a good writer, so I had a ball, I'd just make up whatever silly thought came into my mind and write it down in my characteristically compelling prose.
Made A's in everything, my essays very often being held up as examples of outstanding work in just about all of these classes.
That was when I realized that all these hippie retreads were a bunch of completely substance-free jackasses on a free ride in life and haven't changed my opinion since.
And they all gave me A's, worshiped my stuff, tried to get me to change my major from Physics to whatever field they were in the process of bowdlerizing, I remember English, German Literature, and Philosophy professors making significant appeals to me.
Of course, I listened politely but inside I would always be thinking, "Are you out of your f*cking mind? Can't you tell I hold you and your rabble in utter contempt?"
I do have to admit having one English professor that despite being a complete Cultural Marxist, at least a proto one, had a very incisive mind. I guess the best of the lot got sent first in to this fray, it was a long time ago, early 1980s.
The alt-right is not a tightly led organization, it’s rather a loose conglomeration of several different strains of thought. Something like the Dark Enlightenment, which usually includes cultural absolutism (i.e. some cultures are worth more than others), Darwinism and HBD (the sexes are innately different for biological reasons, same thing for races, ethnic groups, social classes), some corrections of liberal retconning of history (e.g. how far to the right people like Lincoln or Churchill would be, were they still alive), discoveries or rediscoveries of some more esoteric earlier authors as well as some more esoteric or rightist contemporary authors (like Evola or Ezra Pound or Alain de Benoist), and only some of these reject the Enlightenment.
It’s also possible to reject some parts of the Enlightenment without rejecting the whole thing (the Enlightenment itself was just a loose conglomeration of several different strains of thought, some of whom were at each others’ throats all the time), and that’s precisely what many people are doing, so I’m not sure what your complaint is here.
Besides, of course race was seen by people before Darwin – racism is certainly possible without Darwinism or IQ studies. You can simply acknowledge that different races exist (based on your lying eyes), and then start from there. And some people are loosely sympathetic to the alt-right without much thinking about genetics research or modern science.
So I’m not sure what your complaint is.
One big Leftist tell is that they are all autocratic imperialists at heart. It doesn’t occur to normal people that you have to change your craft when the person in the Oval Office changes. Yet this seems to be the Prime Directive for Lefties.
We don’t have an emperor. Yet the Left insists that we treat whoever is in the Oval Office as if he is, whether that means slavish devotion (Obama) or mindless opposition (Trump).
These people are not suited for a republic.
Triple parenthesis treatment isn’t for you then but for others, those ‘trained ‘ to look past, to not notice.. to hammer it home , make it unavoidable. (There is considerable investment in the’not noticing’culture, as well as a double standard.. when they want to crow about Jewish supremacy in some context, usually among their own, then they are proudly JEWISH, but don’t let anyone non-Jew point it out. )
Second it’s not only meant to inform some but to intentionally upset, insult, disquiet. Part of its use is ‘oh, you don’t like when I do this?’… and so doing it. Less for you and more for when (((DONNA))) or her tribal kin read through the comments.
Last some use it to underscore the pervasiveness of Jewish power and influence… so its function is not for the present article being read alone but over a span of articles & comments to effect a cumulative awareness when encountered over and over.. the redundancy is a feature not a bug
A shaft of light enters the cave!
Enoch Powell thought the Classics were a distillation of timeless human lives and societies, an indispensable guide for ready understanding of experiences and events going on now. Nonetheless:
Yes the SJW are the West, not all of it but an important part; probably the original pre neolithic hunter gather inhabitants of Europe were inclined to the SJW way.
So all we have to do is … hang on through a thousand year Dark Age?
Methinks Dr. Zuckerberg doth protest too much.
It seems to me that liberal academics have a guilty conscience. They are intellectual elitists par excellence who nevertheless increasingly find themselves leading a coalition of relatively downscale constituent blocs. Indeed, they don’t just lead those downscale constituencies; they ostentatiously venerate them. People with IQs well into the triple-digit range will hold up a Michael Brown as a victim-hero of our age.
There’s a lot of cognitive dissonance to this kind of faculty lounge elitism, and this psychic tension is resolved by attacking the Middlebrow Menace of generic white guys. As always, it’s about the Blue Tribe defending its cultural hegemony against the Red Tribe, with the minorities Dr. Z celebrates being essentially beside the point. They’re props to be used for bashing uppity young white men with higher-than-normal agency and intellect who are curious about their people’s heritage.
In the case of Dr. Zuckerberg, there may also be the old ethnic angle at play here. I recall Steve writing before about the awkward relationship Jewish intellectuals have to European (and particularly German) traditions. Jewish success in the arts and sciences is an outgrowth of the European Enlightenment. It’s not something that arose spontaneously on the shtetl or in the Holy Land.
So a Jewish classicist like Dr. Z obviously loves European civilization and its cultural patrimony, but at the same time has at least a vestigial sense of being victimized by that civilization. Again, there is psychic tension, and, again, it is taken out on middle-class Middle America.
Enoch Powell was a better classicist than either of these two non-contributing ideologues and poseurs will ever be.
God has apparently seen fit to make some of us just that way. Not coincidentally, it tends to correlate historically with high achievement.
Perhaps the secular is the fruit of the sacred rather than it’s antithesis.
Walsh's article begins:At some point, Walsh decided that her problem was that she had "a non-authoritative body" while her students were "a bunch of authoritarians". She decided to assign her "bunch of authoritarians" to themselves design her course's syllabus.
For sure, Lisl Walsh got this rare job teaching Classics because she is female.
Therefore, some male Classics scholar did not get the job.
If that’s a worst case scenario, culturally, then there is some consolation in it.
values of the ancient Hellenes were of political tolerance, respect for individual rights
well apart from that Slavery thing they had going on.
But it was mostly White folks getting chained up, so it doesn’t count, as usual.
That Zuckerberg woman comes across as pretty unpleasant and rather unscholarly with her open call for politicization of her discipline...she's probably on to something however. Given the pro-mass immigration stance of the Christian churches in most Western countries it's not hard to see why right-wingers look to the pre-Christian past for inspiration...I increasingly feel myself drawn into that direction.
“Given the pro-mass immigration stance of the Christian churches in most Western countries it’s not hard to see why right-wingers look to the pre-Christian past for inspiration…I increasingly feel myself drawn into that direction.”
Given the fact that it is — yet again — the largely Catholic central European heartland (i.e., “Big, bad, Visegrad) that serves as the primary bulwark against Merkel’s folly (not to mention “Zombie Catholicism” in countries like France doing their part) it *is* surprising that any sane individual would take an opinion like yours seriously.
I mean, yeah, we get it. The Pope is in some ways more in line with the elites than with the flock he is supposed to be shepherding. And likewise, much of the rest of Christendom is swaying along with the latest trends and fads. That shouldn’t be a big surprise to anyone who pretends to know anything about history. But really, anyone who is willing to rip out the very foundations of what made the West great any time the odds go against him was never worth saving.
Anyway, maybe my perspective is limited and even I accept that certain aspects of Christianity were a moral advance on the pre-Christian world (like a concern for the poor that didn't exist previously, and in the very long term a rejection of slavery). It's just that I can't ignore that in my own country right now the most fanatical agitators for mass immigration tend to be committed Christians.
I suspect the common sense of Visegrad has more to do with basic, unreconstructed nationalism, experience of economic hardship within living memory and lack of cultural marxist infiltration. Marxist-Leninism was certainly a strong bullwark against the Frankfurt school.
Merkel is an outspoken Christian. She insists that her political decisions are guided by her christian faith and she keeps reprimanding Germans for their lack of faith and christian practice. The current president of Germany, Joachim Gauck, is a lutheran pastor who keeps preaching open borders and constantly scolds Germans for not being welcoming and generous enough.The western catholic flock loves and adores Pope Francis. The catholic church ladies fall over themselves, trying to welcome, help and pamper muslim immigrants.
Both the christian elites and most church-goers of Western Europe would react in utter disbelief if anybody argued that Christianity demands anything but unlimited love and charity for complete strangers. The minority of christian immigration restrictionists don't disagree. They just argue that it is more affordable and efficient to help muslims in their homelands.
Even the evangelicals in Germany are fully behind and enthusiastic about Merkels invitation. They believe that this is a great opportunity to convert Muslims. A foolish idea. They failed to convert hardly any of the millions of Muslims who were already present in Gemany. (German evangelicalism is basically a US import and closely tied to the american mother ship)
I very much doubt that a Socialist Jewish Whiner like Donna Zuckerberg considers either herself or her brother to be white.
https://twitter.com/intlspectator/status/809945730257326080
* weird double post
https://twitter.com/intlspectator/status/809945730257326080
Zuckerberg is the 10th most powerful person in the world.
How many divisions does the ‘Book have?
That's just extraordinarily rare, and at his age, rarer still. He's the greatest entrepreneur and CEO of his generation.
Tech industry success often stems from something boring but important hiding in plain sight.
Example: Microsoft’s OS wasn’t first or best best, but Gates had long been obsessed with the boring but important technical and financial detail that most OS users never paid for their OS. Gates’s greatest achievement? DOS? No. Windows? No. Making a dozen biddable manufacturers his paying customers instead of a billion anarchic end-users? YES!
Example: All networks are by definition social. What is different about Facebook? Zuckerberg found the right formula to make the resource producers: the “users” (actually the used) produce output for the real customers: marketers and advertisers. Previous social network entrepreneurs were misled by surface appearances into thinking that the users were the customers. Reality: users = cattle; advertisers = slaughterhouse. How To Serve Man indeed.
It says that women ARE really enemies, of most White men (even their brothers) if they are not involved in either their kids or Kawai stuff like Japanese women. IMHO that self-sorting into enemy status is due to a desire to compete against White men; social approval from non-White women; and resentment of the men in and around their life for being beta. Does his own sister really despise Mark Zuckerberg for being a beta male? Evidence says, yes.
After all, if the woman in question really wanted to talk about the Alt-Right and the Classics, she might mention that the Roman and Hellenistic world ruled considerable amounts of non-Europeans; that Jewish monotheism and Greek Humanism combined to create classical Christianity. That Jesus himself is a semi-Socrates in his method of teaching. That the classical world moved fairly rapidly from polytheism to monotheism Christianity. In short, argue that yes the Classical World was in fact, quite awesome and White. But was open to things from other peoples.
Instead, its just more denigrating White men. Her own brother did something pretty impressive, and she can't even brag on him. Not a little. Or talk about how indeed White men are awesome. Its all about how awful we are.
Conclusion: there is nothing women will not punish in men who are beta. Nothing.
Donna is not white, Mark is not white. As well you know.
They may well be drags, man, and almost guaranteed to harsh your mellow, but if all you’re seeing are the dregs, you might want to look more closely, or maybe cast your net more widely.
Neither the ancient Hellenes nor today’s alt-right/Trump supporters (don’t be fooled, the vast majority of the latter are not the former, but they do share this characteristic) are perfect adherents to those values. What they are, in both cases, are closer adherents than the alternatives in which they were/are in competition.
If you think the SJWs are paragons of political tolerance, respect for individual rights, or scientific rationalism, I don’t know what to tell you.
Having studied Latin, turning the classics into SJW fodder is a hopeless task. This article reminds me yet again, there is no mercy in the heart of a SJW. Think of what Obama did to higher education pressuring to remove the most basic rights in cases of accusations of sexual assault. NO rights for the accused, confrontation of the accuser, laws of evidence deleted.
Isn’t it great how SJWs are able to read other people’s minds. They get to fill in the blanks without actually having to talk to any of those icky Trump supporters.
Now I can't read Homer or Plato or Plutarch without being a racist. Always, everywhere, whatever I do, I'm somehow scheming to put blacks back in chains and women in the kitchen. No pleasure I can have escapes the stain of my distant ancestors.
All accounts must be settled, all crooked roads must be made straight, all mountains and valleys must be leveled to achieve perfect justice. Apparently there is just something in human nature that turns some people into theocratic bullies. It's an urge so strong it manifests itself even in people who don't believe in God.
I'm beginning to understand why wise gurus supposedly went to live on mountaintops, away from all human contact.
Yep. I’ve moved past the argument stage with these people. I want a divorce. We simply have incompatible views of the world. No amount of discussion will solve that.
Americans are stuck in a horrible marriage because we can’t get out of the mortgage and move to separate homes, so we grumble through the days with the occasional full-on screaming match. It can’t last. At some point, one side would rather burn the house down than spend another hour in this nightmare, especially if they feel as though they’re going to lose the house anyway.
the values of the ancient Hellenes were of political tolerance, respect for individual rights and scientific rationalism, all things that the conservatives who support Trump, for the most part, reject.
“Tolerance” as an intellectual idea is a modern one that appears on the stage first in Britain, around the time of its kin, “disinterestedness”. Reported in detail first by Voltaire.
For example, I ordered a book advertised as a mystery. It soon turned out the bad guy was against immigration and was portrayed as evil. The good guys were all helping Mexicans in.
I didn't finish it and I'm more careful now. Still, the book description on Amazon didn't note the immigration angle. It can be hard to avoid. Mysteries set in the past are safer.
I trust you supplied a warning review on Amazon.
Perhaps the secular is the fruit of the sacred rather than it's antithesis.
“>Not coincidentally, it tends to correlate historically with high achievement.”
Yes and no. Atheism, for example, has been around a lot longer than any of the religions in vogue today, and despite that overwhelming head start and its overwhelming intellectual edge (at least, that’s what many of them seem to believe) hasn’t managed to do much in the civilization-building department. The ones who have done in the last few centuries recently did so because, in the words of Newton, they stood on the shoulders of giants.
But a brief chat with most any of the innumerable village atheists who busy themselves by spreading the gospel of Dawkins and Hitchens to the benighted masses should quickly disabuse anyone that atheism in its current state will achieve much of anything, except, perhaps to serve as regressive-left useful idiots for the Salafists with their assurances that all religions are the same.
One can find that same lack in such figures as Franklin, Washington, Churchill, etc...
Or maybe you are defining "the religions in vogue today" as the post-WWII versions of these religions (post-Vatican II Catholicism, secular-humanist mainline Protestantism, neo-Salafist Islam, etc.)?
So we wuz emporers after all. Det ante mig.
Inside herself she knows her position is built on nothing. We have logic, morality and nature on our side. She knows her authority is just a boot stamping on a human face, power for it’s own sake.
From Dark Ages to Spark Ages
There is a distinction between atheism, which is its own sort of dysfunctional religion, and a mere lack of strong religious feeling, as was expressed by Errican here, refreshingly free of the usual malangelical proselytizing that characterizes atheism.
One can find that same lack in such figures as Franklin, Washington, Churchill, etc…
At first I bristled at the usual anti-white-male stuff, but by the end of the article I actually came to like this Zuckerburg sister. I sort of feel bad for her, I feel like at some level she gets it. She has moments of being fair to her enemies and sees merit in some of their arguments.
She’s cute too, and apparently a good cook.
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/747804904383643648/0rU5Tbqm.jpg
“feminine East Asian girls”
Zuck’s wife is NOT feminine. She looks like a rough peasant girl with tree trunk legs.
That's just extraordinarily rare, and at his age, rarer still. He's the greatest entrepreneur and CEO of his generation.
“He got a billion people to use his platform and turned Google’s effective monopoly on online advertising into a duopoly, and created a profitable, $345 billion market cap company.”
I find this interesting because i can’t remember single piece of advertising I saw on facebook.
don’t progs like uplifting “drags of society”? why not here?
And it’s spelled “dregs.”
“There is no East or West, no Jew or Greek in Christ.”
Or there is both East and West & Jew and Greek in Christ(ianity).
One can find that same lack in such figures as Franklin, Washington, Churchill, etc...
“>One can find that same lack in such figures as Franklin, Washington, Churchill, etc…”
Oh, I can list a few other figures with much the same mind-set towards religion that would balance out that list. I mean, Jeffrey Dahmer distinguished himself, too, but I’m not going to tar the irreligious with lame anecdotal evidence like that, just as I’m likewise not going to pass out cookies to this way of thinking or that on the basis of George Washington.
No doubt those who are able to think for themselves will have an edge when it comes to gumption and willingness to break new ground, but all that depends on the sea in which they swim. So, to the extent that absence of religion becomes the norm in universities and Silicon valleys, it will be those who are likewise willing to buck *that* consensus who will have an edge in innovation. But if that happens, that won’t in and of itself make religion any more true. By the same token, arguments like the ones you made, based on lists of people who were all shaped to a large extent by the society in which they were raised, won’t tell us much.
My money's on the products of the religious civilization.
I'm sure there are Bushmen who bucked convention as well. Have they made it to the moon?
Steve, I meant that you have a typo in your article…
https://www.gatescambridge.org/members-area/connect/directory/scholar/9472
“My interests are perhaps best exemplified by my job at the Paideia Institute, a nonprofit organization for classical study, where I am a Research Fellow and edit its online journal for writing about the ancient world in modern ways, Eidolon.”
Paideia? Isn’t that Barbara Specter’s institute?
Specter who says that Europe cannot ‘survive’ unless it is swamped by non-Europeans?
And why is an Asian following in the heels of Jewesses?
What yellow running dogs.
No spark. Just follow and imitate.
Good Paideia:
http://www.paideiainstitute.org
Bad Paideia:
http://www.paideia-eu.org
Both paideias are garbage organizations, though.
Walsh's article begins:At some point, Walsh decided that her problem was that she had "a non-authoritative body" while her students were "a bunch of authoritarians". She decided to assign her "bunch of authoritarians" to themselves design her course's syllabus.
You all laugh, but the overproduction of Ph.Ds means they are all on extremely thin ice, dependent on student reviews, and need to curry favor with students. This one was simply more clever than most in spinning excuses about the means of survival in the modern university.
If they weren’t responsible for the decline of the West, some pity would be in order. As it is I’m reminded of C.S. Lewis’ remarks about Satan eating his own servants.
None of these "classicists" could hold a candle to the real Classicists of old. And I don't even mean the professors with a yard's worth of scholarly tomes to their names.
Ronald Knox, and most other gifted schoolboys of his time from Eton, Harrow, or Winchester, could write both Greek and Latin poetry to order: fluently, grammatically, correctly, and with only a minimal recourse to a dictionary.
I knew a Spanish priest (a Dominican) for whom Latin was simply a tool rather than his principal area of expertise (which was philosophy), who could translate at sight and at speed from any text put before him, from any period, on any subject.
Few of these vaporing woman have ever even imagined such mastery, much less set about acquiring it.
The celebrated Ta Nehesi Coates' celebrated Between The World And Me speaks to your thesis.
In the final three pages, Coates assumes the voice of an Old Testament prophet. He calls down a curse upon white people, for the stain of their bloodlines and their ongoing sinfulness: enslavement, the Middle Passage, redlining, escalator etiquette. Although heretofore unmentioned, Coates adds one count of Global Warming to the indictment -- if catnip is at hand, might as well sprinkle it atop that dish best served cold.
How can you read this stuff? I have a subscription to “The Atlantic”. The subscription lasts for another 18 months and I can’t even look at the covers anymore.
I read about half of Donna Zuckerberg’s article in Jezebel, about 40% (going from the vertical cursor). She is very long-winded. Perhaps they pay by the word. I feel her pain. Women classicists there are, Jane Harrison comes to mind. There were a few women graduate students when I was in graduate school. Reading Homer in Greek will blow your mind. Other writings read in the original take your head to a far distant place. Or if you’re into poetry, reading Sappho or Horace can get you very turned on if you’re still into poetry. But you have to make an imaginative jump, because if you were back there, say in 5th-century BC Athens, you would be an a resident foreign metic at best, or a foreign slave-woman, or a foreign male slave being worked to death in the silver mines of Laurium. You take what you can get from whatever writings you choose to read and leave the rest.
The smartest fellow-student of mine was Dorothea Wender, nee Schmidt. Get this: her parents were Plymouth Brethern handing out tracts on the street (unless she made that up), and she earned a living winning commerical jingle contests. She said she won a new Cadillac once that way and got $5000 out of selling it to a Cadillac dealership. I don’t remember what her diss. was on. She didn’t do much publishing-wise but I do remember something she got published where she was able to work in something about Susie Creamcheese. She had a tragic life, divorced with 2 daughters, teaching at Wheaton College in Norton, MA, she had a major stroke at a young age, but by dint of much effort, was able to re-assemble most of your mind.
Back to Donna Zuckerberg’s piece in Jezebel. I can only feel sorry for her that she took up Classics. In the ancient world, women were subservient, and there is precious little to write about from a feminist viewpoint. Much less to justify reading Classics to female students with a background in Diversity Studies (c). So she twists herself up in pretzels to establish a standing point. Highly politicized and polarized, she wants to prevent Alt-Right from classicizing the ancient texts. Unless she can transcend her existential reality she will never do useful work in her chosen field. This is an unhappy-making pickle to find oneself in. Randi and Arielle her sisters are doubtless doing something with their lives.
The subservient one isn't the ancient one.
Like Hamilton.
Black-face and black-womb the West.
https://eidolon.pub/recasting-call-fd39aae416b8#.etvhzf9ej
Michael-Jacksonization of the world.
That Postman speech has potential, but I don’t think Postman foresaw how thoroughly the “Visigoths” would infiltrate the institutions of the “Athenians”, then adopt the “Athenian” garb, language, laws and customs to further the “Visigoth” end.
Also, I think his use of Visigoths, when perhaps Mongols or Philistines would have been more fitting, was a bit of ethnic CYA. After all, the Visigoths conquered Rome on the grounds that the Romans did not abide by their own treaty, and having conquered it, they tried to continue it. By contrast, the Mongols typically exterminated those they conquered, then burned their cities down.
Steve, reading stuff like this on a daily basis makes me feel like I’m going to lose my mind.
Hopefully in the next few years a VDARE/Unz meetup-type thing, wherein we can all commiserate about the Donna Zuckerbergs of this cursed world, will commence.
Yes, it seems Dr. Z and her ilk have a confused relationship to what they have made the center of their lives. Deep down they love Western culture and Western achievement. Deep down they hate the fact that it was white males who were primarily responsible.
I reckon I’m in trouble with the SJWs since a set of Great Books of the Western World is what I used in conjunction with a library card to complete my education once I bailed from school at 15.
I realized that I was not going to learn anything of value. The goal seemed to be learn to sit still and be quiet and do what you’re told without questioning. I always had problems doing what I was told.
Yes, that was my point.
We’ll see then.
My money’s on the products of the religious civilization.
I’m sure there are Bushmen who bucked convention as well. Have they made it to the moon?
Another thing–the battle over the classics is, in microcosm, the conflict at the heart of Western identity. Are the universally applicable achievements of Western Civ (“The same texts that are for us sources of beauty and brutality, subjects of commentary and critique…”) the essence of Western identity? Or is the particular heritage of the West (European race/ethnicity, Christianity, etc) the essence of Western identity? Do we like the classics because they’re objectively great, or because they’re ours?
This does not necessarily have to be an either-or question; personally, I’d rather not have to choose. But the issue has now been forced. The specific ethnic, racial, cultural, and religious heritage of the West is being systematically undermined in the name of those universal ideas that are themselves claimed by such people as Dr Z to be the essence of “who we are.” An existential conflict has been created pitting one Western self-conception against the other.
One might say the West is being loved to death by universalists. People like Dr Z insist on keeping the more identitarian, conservative school of thought at bay because, for them, the West’s heritage is too valuable a part of human heritage to be surrendered to the Right. If Dr Z lived in Turkmenistan, I doubt she’d feel threatened by Turkmen nationalism, because (no offense) Turkmen heritage is not an outsized part of the story of human civilization. But she lives in America and presumably considers herself a kind of citoyen du monde, so it’s imperative for her that the West (and America) must be defined as encompassing that monde.
This is why, ultimately, some kind of systematic political separation may be necessary. There are a lot of liberals (Jewish, WASP, or otherwise) who will never accept nationalism in Western countries. For them, because of the classical (and modern) achievements of the West, universalism *is* the West, and the West *is* universalism. They have too much to lose if a rightist self-conception is installed among the European peoples.
Now, if greater San Francisco were a special autonomous region (which I think it should be), the idea of (say) President Trump wouldn’t cause people like Dr Z such intense anxiety. They could define and embrace their Western heritage however they like. Their self-conception happens to be self-destructive and untenable, but it won’t be our problem. At the same time, they will have less ability and desire to resist nationalism in those places where we want it (i.e. the vast majority of the territory of the USA).
Again, I doubt the suicidal, minoritarian, passive-aggressive view of Western heritage espoused by Dr Z is long for this world. That’s precisely why I think we have to let the Dr Zuckerbergs of the West go in order to cultivate a less maladaptive concept of Western identity.
The Mongols did nothing to advance humanity – quite the contrary. Whatever gains that emerged from their empire were 1) not made by Mongols, except in an administrative sense (i.e., “I’ve enslaved both of you, so you should exchange ideas”), and 2) were more than offset by all the death and destruction they wrought. Who knows how many brilliant minds, from civilized peoples, were snuffed out by those savages? For all we know, the Mongols were decisive in Russia’s retarded development, and the subsequent, related disasters of the 20th century. For all we know, without the Mongols, Russia wouldn’t have been so backward as to put the Communists in power, and without the October revolution, maybe the National Socialists wouldn’t have gained power, and without Hitler in power, World War II might have been averted.
SJW idiocy. Over at TOR, they've been running a re-watch commentary/review of TOS Star Trek. They went into total "point-and-sputter" mode over the Season 3 ep, "The Savage Curtain," which involved aliens creating simulations of "good" and "bad" people from the past. Since Genghis Khan was one of the bad'uns, the SJW commentators went to town about how racist the portrayal was, "how dare Genghis Khan be put on the evil side, when he should have been on the good side with Kirk," etc
Three generations, starting with this one. That’s my prediction.
But I’m not white and I identify as alt-right. Clearly I don’t exist."
I'm not young or male and I identify as alt-right. Clearly I don't exist even less than you do.
“I’m not young or male and I identify as alt-right. Clearly I don’t exist even less than you do.”
Now, now. There really should not be a victimhood Olympics on the alt-right. The left fills that niche quite nicely. ; )
Donna Zuckerberg is named after her mother Donna. That is messed up. Photos of the Zuck family of Dobbs Ferry NY — UK Daily Mail
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2140881/How-Facebooks-Mark-Zuckerbergs-parents-sisters-refuse-work.html
https://eidolon.pub/how-to-be-a-good-classicist-under-a-bad-emperor-6b848df6e54a#.yzmtqirqt
That's a pretty silly essay. However, it makes me wonder, where does the Enlightenment fit in with the Alt-Right? Is it disliked because it eventually gave rise to post-modernism? I would think that Alt-Right would embrace it because it's much closer in time, more connected with modern European states, and gave us fantastic things, e.g. science!
“gave us fantastic things, e.g. science!”
The reason some people reject the ‘Enlightenment’ is the ideologically-motivated ignorance it has perpetuated – even in the 21st C. Try reading some books on science in the ‘Dark Ages’. The Enlightenment isn’t the beginning of Western civilization, but it might be its end.
Most of humanity through most of history stuck with the tried-and-true, conformed to status quo, adhered to dogma & orthodoxy. They hardly thought outside the box. They were emotionally and/or intellectually ill-equipped for revolutionary consciousness. They were weak of will or lacking in imagination.
Therefore, much of the world failed to develop complex civilization, and even the ones who did build great civilizations, like the Persians, Hindus, and Chinese, came to be stalled in stasis or trapped in cycles of rises and falls.
What was true of most of humanity was also true of most white people. Most white people prefer stasis, conformity, dogma, and/or herd mentality. In this, most white people are very much like rest of humanity. The power of Political Correctness is proof that most white people lack vision, individuality, the power of will, and independence of mind.
Even so, more than other races, the white race has had a larger proportion of strong-willed visionaries who've dared to think new thoughts, question status quo, stand firmly on principle, defy orthodoxy, speak truth to power, and discover the truth.
And it was because of such special individuals and visionary groups that the West made the leaps that eluded other races and cultures(except in imitation of the West).
Today, the reigning dogma, orthodoxy, and power of the West are controlled by the GLOB that seeks to cripple and control the White Race forever. This should be obvious to any brave, honest, and intelligent white soul, but tragically, most white people are like the rest of humanity and trapped in herd-mentality. They slavishly follow the narrative, bark like dogs for their globo masters, and can't see or think outside the box devised by the Glob.
However, members of the Alt Right are different. Though threatened with loss of status, wealth, and comfort, they stand firm on principles and possess the will to envision a future in which the white race is liberated from the chain of Globalists who would have every white pair of hands serve Jews and have every white womb hatch non-white babies.
Alt Right has the honesty, courage, and the will to break free and see the truth, and it has the vision to forge a new path for the survival and victory for the white race.
Also, Alt Right is different from mere conservatives who, lacking vision and creativity, stick with the tried-and-true or suck up to the Establishment in the Current Year. If the current elites say 'gay marriage' is the 'new normal', hapless Conservatives just go along. They too have a herd-mentality.
And most Liberals are not rational free-thinkers. They are just shallow hive-minds who go with every new fad and fashion for lack of roots and vision for their race. The entirety of their culture is Pop Culture(junk food for the soul) and PC(poison for the mind).
The Western spirit/soul has never been present in the majority of white folks who are like the rest of humanity in their conformism, herd-mentality, and lack of will & agency. The Western spirit/soul has always belonged to a small minority of white people who served as the vanguard as thinkers, warriors, explorers, scientists, artists, and traders.
The power of PC has suppressed this soul/spirit among white people, even among the intelligent. It goes to show intelligence isn't enough as even people of intelligence are generally lacking in will, courage, and vision. After all, China had many intelligent people through the ages, but its progress got stalled under thick layers of orthodoxy and stasis.
No, there must be more than intelligence. There must be vision and will. It's like a pile of wood isn't enough to make fire. There must be a spark that ignites the wood. That soul/spirit is lacking among most races. It is lacking even among most whites. But there are more individuals with the spark among whites than among other races.
And Alt Right now represents that spark that can set the world on fire. It has the will to strike the match over the Eurosphere Wood on which Jews piss on to prevent the White Fire.
I don’t quite agree with you that most white people just follow the herd. Voting for Trump was a revolutionary act, and 60% of white voters acted. Previously, the top down selection of political candidates deprived them of an opportunity to vote for their own interests in primaries. The MSM suffocated the expression of their opinions, and the public schools shamed their children from daring to think freely about their condition.
Trump is a classical hero in his willingness to stand up for what’s right, regardless of the personal cost. Anti-white Leftism has been on the march through America’s political, cultural, and commercial institutions for the past century. It has inexorably gained ground under both Republican and Democrat administrations. Can a Trump Administration turn back the tide? It remains to be seen, but for the first time there is hope, which might explain Michelle Obama’s hopelessness.
Trump presidency is a seismic moment in US history, BUT most Trump voters had rather mainstream reasons: economy, border security, jobs. Trump only seemed 'radical' because the New Normal in America has become so nuts.
Also, the fact that white Americans waited THIS LONG to support a man like Trump --- and that the crucial Trump voters in 2016 had voted for Obama twice in 2008 and 2012 --- indicates that most white Americans do lack the spark.
I think Alt Right has the spark/spirit. Now, some Alt Right people are rather nutty and weird. And many lack special smarts or talent. But they have the spirit-thing.
This spark does wonders when combined with high intelligence and special talent, but even most smart people lack the spirit.
This spark is a derring-do, a refusal to go with the flow, the will to stick to one's vision and principle, a strong sense of conviction, and an openness to new possibilities.
Being part of the Alt Right means pariah-status and hard times for careerists. There is so much to lose, but those in the AR movement are willing to risk all because they have spirit that is lacking among most Conservatives who stick to Heritage Foundation homilies or most Liberals who stick to PC narrative.
This will to step outside the box despite disapproval from all of society requires a kind of special spirit. There are lots of things about Richard Spencer I don't like. But given his image and connections, I think he could have gone far as pundit or even politician if he had decided to play ball and taken the 30 pieces of silver. He didn't, and he paid a price along the way. That requires spirit and spine. Spencer and some of his crowd may not be the smartest people(though smart enough) nor the most sensible(they do dumb things at times), but they do have devil-may-care and damn-the-torpedoes kind of spirit that can really move mountains.
And even though Trump is hardly a 'radical', he has some of this spirit too. He just hope he uses it wisely, mainly in not creating trouble with Iran and China. Let's not have Taiwan pull an 'Israel' on the US and stir up a mess. If Trump has problems with China, he should stick to economic issues, not military ones over Taiwan.
At any way, I don't think revolutions begin necessarily with people of high intelligence. It begins with people with the spirit and spark. They may or may not be of high intelligence, but the crucial factor is that they have this extra 'zing', this inner energy. They are the ones who are willing to break down walls and explore new realms of land and mind. And it is when this spirit spreads and infects even people of high intelligence that the truly great changes happen. But for intelligent people to be infected with the spirit, the spirit has to exist in the first place, and it often originates with individuals with the extra zing of human electricity.
We see this in cinema. Some of the most intelligent people didn't become the best directors. I think Sydney Pollack was a very intelligent director, but he lacked vision. He understood the form and the craft. But he didn't have the spirit and vision of someone like Peckinpah. There were many directors more intelligent than Kurosawa, but what vision he had. He made films like Zeus hurled thunderbolts.
Consider the scene in EXCALIBUR where all the knights are fearful of championing the queen but the squire Perceval, though hardly a seasoned warrior, comes forth. He has a special spirit lacking in even the best of knights.
In both Nibelungen and Parsifal, it is the outsider-fool-hero who has the power to challenge the order that has grown rigid and static.
This archetype is more common in Western legends and mythology than in other cultures.
As of now, Alt Right doesn't have the talent, resources, or numbers to make a difference. But they do have the spirit that is lacking in just about all other cultural and political sectors. Unlike the 'far right' of the past, they are not dogmatically beholden to some 'tradition'(like arch-catholicism or monarchism), crazy WWII fetishes, or rigid formulas(though there are some who do). Instead, there is the spirit of being willing to talk about anything freely. Indeed, a leftist is more likely to have a free and open discussion with an Alt Right person than with anyone else.
Alt Right is almost taboo-free even if it has strong positions. Whatever it believes, it says LET'S TALK ABOUT IT. And that is a truly Western spirit.
The hope is that Alt Right will maintain the spirit/spark to the point where it will spread to others with more intelligence, talent, and resources. And then, things can change in very big ways.
Now, the Alt Right must be sensible. They must be caretakers of this flame than arsonists. After all, Lenin, Hitler, and Mao were men of powerful spirit, but they were careless with the fire and burned the world.
How do people like Donna Zuck and others at Paideia square the fact that bad emperor Trump drew his inspiration from the nationalist Likudation party of Israel?
You can’t get to the source of Trumpism without addressing Zionist nationalism.
Also, Alt Right is essentially Zionism for whites.
The difference is Jews serve their narrow tribalism by encouraging non-whites to hate whites whereas whites just want to serve their own interests without degrading others.
If there is Alt Right anger at Jews, it is reactive and defensive. It hates the fact that Jewish groups are directly involved in the invasion and destruction of the West. If not for Jewish anti-whiteness, much of Alt right hostility against Jews would vanish.
As for 14/88 morons, that’s another story.
Actually their mind-set was diametrically opposed to the likes of Dahmer and our present atheist elites (sic), though of course Dahmer is sui generis. They shared the same lack of religious feeling, but what they thought about it and how they acted on those thoughts was nearly the opposite of your typical atheists. Churchill as buttress of the Church, supporting it from outside, Washington serving as a deacon, etc… They understood the sacred as the fertile soil in which they grew.
Walsh's article begins:At some point, Walsh decided that her problem was that she had "a non-authoritative body" while her students were "a bunch of authoritarians". She decided to assign her "bunch of authoritarians" to themselves design her course's syllabus.
From Rate My Professors about Lisl Walsh: “She found an uncommon way of relating many classical myths to 80′s movies with Sylvester Stallone.”
Good God. What an airheaded chick. At least we know what type of guy this dumbass man-addled ‘professor’ wants to have sex with. If any of my profs had wasted my money yammering on about Sylvester Stallone in Classics I would have told the administration to fire her.
Whatever the shortcomings or sins of Western Civilization, it’s the great benefactor to the rest of humanity.
“I find very endearing the fact that Zuckerberg Sr., after receiving more than $100 million in Facebook stock from his son, decided to continue working as a dentist out of the same nice but not very lavish suburban house.”
BFD. I’d be a lot more impressed with him if he’d worked to raise daughters respectful toward the white men who founded and maintained the culture and traditions his Silicon Valley based classicist studies without any real understanding, appreciation or gratitude.
“It wasn’t?”
No, it wasn’t.
Yung In Chae
Princeton University, Classics, Department Member
I graduated from Princeton University in 2015 with an A.B. in Classics and certificates in Values and Public Life and Interdisciplinary Studies in the Humanities. I am currently pursuing a Master’s in History and Civilizations at the École des hautes études en sciences sociales in Paris, writing a thesis on Simone de Beauvoir’s classical education.
Supervisors: Melissa Lane, Anthony Grafton, and Dinah Ribard
____________________________
Yung In Chae works at Princeton University and you don’t. Female by the way. She is gettin’ paid! At least it seems so. What is a Department Member? Whatever it is she is gettin’ paid. If you aren’t gettin’ paid for you cuckoo leftist/anti-Patrirachy writings then you just are not happening!
Her folks got off the boat from Korea. Ran a small business and produced this useless, anti-white critter who (photo at website) is not much to look at.
That's just extraordinarily rare, and at his age, rarer still. He's the greatest entrepreneur and CEO of his generation.
Look, the extraordinarily fast domination of Facebook in its market is a testament to two things: the relative simplicity of the underlying software required to create a viable platform, and the power of network effects.
The basic fact is that, due to network effects, one standard in Facebook’s social media realm had to prevail, and the sooner the better. The window for winning this monopoly was open only for a few years, in the early stages of settling on a standard, and it happened that Facebook had the platform most appealing to the majority of users. It is quite plausible that a good portion of this attraction was the snob appeal of a platform based on the print version of Facebook used at Harvard. This gave it immediate press — for the media worships Harvard like nothing else — and pulled in influencers of all types.
Once a monopoly like this is established, it’s almost impossible for it to be lost, given the inherent advantages. Zuckerberg has managed not to lose it.
And the size of the monopoly, and so the money it commands, hangs almost entirely on the size of the market itself. The market for a social media platform like Facebook has turned out to be quite enormous, and rose very quickly indeed.
At least it can be said of Bill Gates that he built his monopoly very painstakingly, over many years. Indeed, one of the reasons he managed to do so is because virtually no one but he had the vision to see the potential size of the market — certainly not IBM, which made concessions to him in their contracts that gave away the long game to Microsoft.
What did Facebook require for adoption by hundreds of millions of users? Some simple software and vast hordes of internet connections. The internet connections were already there, and the software took a year or two at most to put in place.
It’s often been said that monopolies won’t exist anymore in the technology realm because technology changes so fast. This is the opposite of the truth. In realms like the Internet, monopolies need to be everywhere, to take advantage of network effects, and to be established as fast as possible.
A lot of this wasn't obvious at all. A long time angel investor wrote a book called The Social Media Business Plan several years ago in which he predicted the future for social media would be niche communities, and Facebook would fail because it wasn't one.
In 2010, Ruby on Rails inventor (and O-1 immigrant) David Hennemeier Hansson argued Facebook wasn't worth its then $33 billion market cap. It's worth more than 10x that now.
https://twitter.com/rsg/status/662386781044649984
“…I’d argue that the more traditionalist sect of the alt-Right stems from the works…”
I don’t think books or works have that much to do with the development of the mindset that people are calling “alt-Right” (which is not an organized ‘thing’ or particular body of works). Rather, it stems from knowing modern liberals, leftists, and SJWs up close and in person. Close, direct experience reveals that these are not nice people. An advantage of giving them positions of power in universities is that it reveals who they really are. Much can also be learned of them from what they write. And yes, you then discover that we’ve been down this road before and that there are many great works that examine the problem and seek to sustain civilization.
BFD. I'd be a lot more impressed with him if he'd worked to raise daughters respectful toward the white men who founded and maintained the culture and traditions his Silicon Valley based classicist studies without any real understanding, appreciation or gratitude.
ZuckMaster_of_the_universe must have laid the same amount on his three sisters. Donna is not nutty. She is nutty with many millions pushing behind her giving her an inflated valuation of her smarts, IQ and self worth.
The Japanese have some interest but in a mostly superficial way. Like, in an anime, kawaii William Shakespeare will show up and do something silly. Or all the characters will be named after ones from The Three Musketeers.
I’m not sure about that. One of my fundamental influences was actually, almost at random, Sophocles. There are universal notions of hubris and heroism which speak to me even in a different culture. Which is also why Zuckenberg(2)’s goals seem extremely pointless – I’m not sure how she can accomplish anything beyond trying to negate the very message of the classics, which were not at all screeds of equality and which specifically gained their impact for establishing norms.
Take the behavior of women, for example. Antigone can be seen as a complex evaluation of a defiant woman but that is special only when the expected behavior of her sex is mild and therefore her attitude is justified out of love for her family, to the extent of even denying herself. That is indeed glorious because she violates the norm out of love for a greater norm(loyalty of family); none of this tries to praise the self-interested motives of progressives.
Or Lady MacBeth – her murderous conduct is specifically contrasted with the life giving function of the feminine impulse, and therefore it is seen as something particularly poisoned and disturbing. Such behavior is shocking only because it is atypical, the impact is lost if it is normalized.
Chinese stories tend to punish those who violate the norm even further, denying them sometimes even the memory of heroism, but ultimately, the classics do not differ in that they expect that the world to be ordered along natural lines, beyond human comprehension and condemning human hubris. I don’t see how someone could read anything modern into the classics.
If the accomplishments of the Caucasian race are greater, by far, than the accomplishments of the other races—as of course they are—how exactly is it beyond the pale, or even wrong, to conclude that the Caucasian race, compared with the other races, is superior?
Yeah, but some non-Jews in the West do like to claim Jewish ancestry. E.g., Courtney Love:
http://ethnicelebs.com/courtney-love
And Meryl Streep:
http://ethnicelebs.com/meryl-streep
Walsh's article begins:At some point, Walsh decided that her problem was that she had "a non-authoritative body" while her students were "a bunch of authoritarians". She decided to assign her "bunch of authoritarians" to themselves design her course's syllabus.
So she dealt with being a bad teacher by foisting her duties off on her students, thereby becoming both a bad and a lazy teacher. And she sacrificed any standards she might have had, in order to dole out A’s and get favorable reviews.
Why would anyone care what this slacker had to say about Rome? One would be better served by just reading Mommsen or Gibbon. A lot – perhaps most – of modern academia is a completely no-value-added proposition.
Dunno. Last time I checked, Cary Grant, Richard Nixon,Clark Gable, and Catherine Zeta-Jones all counted as White….
I’m not sure the that the Visegrad countries are really that pious anymore, apart from the obvious exception of Poland. Czechs certainly are among the most atheist peoples in the world.
Anyway, maybe my perspective is limited and even I accept that certain aspects of Christianity were a moral advance on the pre-Christian world (like a concern for the poor that didn’t exist previously, and in the very long term a rejection of slavery). It’s just that I can’t ignore that in my own country right now the most fanatical agitators for mass immigration tend to be committed Christians.
This is just my memory I m sure there are spelling mistakes:
Arma virumque cano”
“I sing of arms and a man”
That was the beginning of the Aeneid
My view of the Aeneid is that it s a copy of the Greek Homer s The Oddesey
Rome conquered Greece but Greek culture conquered Rome.
The upper class Romans had Greek slaves teachers who generally dismissed Roman culture as well Texan – lot s of money, military power but no real knowledge high art.
The Romans got pissed at always being insulted by these Greeks so they commissioned their best poet Virgil to come up with a pro Roman epic tale to show the Greeks that they were also great.
This is pretty much the same as big Texas oil money trying to buy culture for the George Bush presidential library.
The Roman arts generally lack the depth and refinement of Greece, and at the former's best, the two cultures are neck-to-neck, but Latin poetry far surpassed Greek poetry.
She was probably dumped by an alt-righty guy.
Or maybe she has noticed that nerds who hit on her and have an interest in the Classics tend to be more Alt-Right than SJW.
He is. He’s implying that most of the “Greeks” in Rome aren’t really Greek, just Hellenized Orientals.
Really? I can’t think of any examples of atheists before the 18th century.
Or maybe you are defining “the religions in vogue today” as the post-WWII versions of these religions (post-Vatican II Catholicism, secular-humanist mainline Protestantism, neo-Salafist Islam, etc.)?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism#History
Russian nationalists like to LARP
the Classicsthe alt-right is complete without mentioning Nazi Germany.Engage them on their assumed definitions of “foundation,” “Western,” “civilization,” and “culture.”"LOL" -- or Bill Clinton on his definition of "is".I could continue to make fun of this woman, but it's a bit too easy -- so I'll just get to the point: she's stupid to the point of being infantile -- and lying ("white supremacy") to the point of being evil -- not to mention her sophomoric, hand-wringing prose.Anyway, re the Classics, particularly The Aeneid and The Odyssey, I highly recommend the translations by Robert Fitzgerald, which I think are superb -- even if he is a white man.At the office of racial classification:
STORMFRONT guy: Zuckerberg’s not White
Heavyset Black lady: You crazy; he’s Whiter than a vanilla milkshake! Next.
A CASE FOR GENETIC JEWISHNESS -- Harry Ostrer, a geneticist at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, when he and his colleagues published a study showing that Jews in three different geographical areas had certain collections of genes that made them more biologically similar to one another than they were to non-Jews in the same regions...Ostrer’s new book, Legacy: A Genetic History of the Jewish People, goes further, making a convincing case that there is, in fact, a biological basis for Jewishness:...
Well written.
Sad we may never see this next Renaissance.
Whereas the Zionists revived Hebrew as a language for their nation, we could revive Latin as the language for Our Fair Republic.
That notion makes my Anglo soul recoil in disgust.
You didn't scoff at the given existence of Our Fair Republic.
It's also possible to reject some parts of the Enlightenment without rejecting the whole thing (the Enlightenment itself was just a loose conglomeration of several different strains of thought, some of whom were at each others' throats all the time), and that's precisely what many people are doing, so I'm not sure what your complaint is here.
Besides, of course race was seen by people before Darwin - racism is certainly possible without Darwinism or IQ studies. You can simply acknowledge that different races exist (based on your lying eyes), and then start from there. And some people are loosely sympathetic to the alt-right without much thinking about genetics research or modern science.
So I'm not sure what your complaint is.
I don’t really complain at all, and if I understand you correctly I’m mostly in agreement with you (especially with this: “It’s also possible to reject some parts of the Enlightenment without rejecting the whole thing “). Personally I just think wholesale rejection of the Enlightenment is silly (but tbh I don’t know if that position is even held by any alt righters, sounds more like a position for very reactionary Christians of the throne and altar type), and I don’t think most of our current problems can be blamed on the Enlightenment which, as you rightly write, contained many different and sometimes contradictory strains of thought.
“I hardly think the ancient Hellenes and Romans of classical antiquity were “white” as Anglo-Saxons use the term.”
You should have stopped with “I hardly think”. Of course the ancient Greeks and Romans were white. Nobody has ever said they were not – including northern european classicists of the 18th and 19th centuries.
“Tacitus, for instance,………”
Tacitus was interested in noticing and describing distinctions between his people and others. When minor differences are all that apparent, they get made out to be bigger than they are. The Romans never thought that, because they were not as pale as Germans, that they were then somehow kindred of Nubians.
“This woman is clearly an idiot,……”
Not quite as clearly as you are.
“……that the values of the ancient Hellenes were of political tolerance, respect for individual rights and scientific rationalism, all things that the conservatives who support Trump, for the most part, reject. She doesen’t notice the profound irony of the alt.right fetichizing the Ancients, when the Ancients would find the alt.right repulsive.”
Utter nonsense of course. The ancient Greeks would find far more in common with the alt-right than they would with you. Of course, you are too dim to realize that the alt-right is a tiny fringe movement and is quite distinct from the much broader category of “conservatives who support Trump”. And even the “drags of society” who “fetichize” things, know how to spell “dregs” and “fetishize”.
If you wish to come across as smart, it would help if you were – you know – smart. You aren’t.
Wow, you’re right, I wonder how he managed to get back there. Thanks for the information!
Jampridem Syrus in Tyberim defluxit Orontes
et linguam et mores et cum tibicine chordas
obliquas nec non gentilia tympana secum
vexit et ad circum iussas prostare puellas.
[Sat. iij.61-5]
Probably claim that it satirizes xenophobes (if I’m not mistaken there really is such an interpretation of that poem).
Or maybe you are defining "the religions in vogue today" as the post-WWII versions of these religions (post-Vatican II Catholicism, secular-humanist mainline Protestantism, neo-Salafist Islam, etc.)?
“>I can’t think of any examples of atheists before the 18th century.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism#History
I think the issue, which Dr. Z conveniently ignores, is that virtually all scholarly disciplines were Nazified under the Nazis. Nazi Classics didn't exist because the Classics were important to Nazis, it existed because Nazis infiltrated and controlled academia.
The other thing she ignores is the way Classics was a much larger part of European intellectual life in the 30s. (You can see from this Arion article, "Lycurgus in Leaflets and Lectures: The Weiße Rose and Classics at Munich University, 1941–45", that (a) there were Classicists opposed to Nazism and (b) they thought Classical themes were ubiquitous enough among the educated to be used against the Nazis.) What she's arguing for now isn't a defense of Classics against misuse but for continued control of Classics by an elite minority of scholars.
And what groups does this description fit in the US? Remember, SJWs always project.
I cannot abide, Quirites, an America of Hispanics; and yet what fraction of our dregs comes from Iberia? Amerind rivers have long since overwhelmed the Spanish rivulet, bringing with it its lingo and its manners, its flutes and its slanting harp-strings
You’re even more impatient than I am. Can you really not wait more than seven minutes for Steve to approve your comment? Or are you just bidding to be put on the auto-approve list (I’m assuming one exists given the pattern of new comments appearing)? The I hate waiting shtick was funny the first few times I saw it, but that was a while ago. Now the double posts are just a nuisance.
If you think the SJWs are paragons of political tolerance, respect for individual rights, or scientific rationalism, I don't know what to tell you.
I don’t know about ‘dregs’, but it does draw from the working class heavily, which makes sense as they’re the most victimized by diversity.
Whereas the Zionists revived Hebrew as a language for their nation, we could revive Latin as the language for Our Fair Republic.
I guess you could try that if you were founding it in Europe, but here in the USA everyone speaks English already. And the Europeans all have their own languages they’re fond of.
>”but what they thought about it and how they acted on those thoughts was nearly the opposite of your typical atheists…”
No one is claiming that all non-religious are the same. I’m certainly not. I submitted atheists as but one example of the non-religious (explicitly so, since I began my post with “Atheism, for example…”) in order to cast doubt on your assertion that lack of religion “tends to correlate historically with high achievement”, which given its lack of context is fairly meaningless, if not misleading.
I repeat: *some* of those not bound by existing conventions may indeed have an edge in certain types of “achievement” and when the existing conventions are based on or informed by Christianity, then all sorts of oddballs who find themselves embattled by this consensus for one reason or another will distinguish themselves, be they gays, or Jews, or free-thinkers, etc. However, one could provide plenty of evidence that this outsider oddball status can also lead to a more pronounced form of villainry (and in the case of Jews and gays, that counter-argument is frequently made here, ad nauseum).
In other words, it cuts both ways. If you want to claim the correlation between non-religion and achievement is actually positive, the onus is on you to do so systematically, by weighting the numbers of both the Dahmers and the Washingtons — and any in between — appropriately.
My claim is that among the highest achievers, lack of religious feeling has been more common historically than among the general population.
Nor is it absolute, as my namesake is an outstanding counterexample and chosen for that reason.
Women/SJWs follow the same pattern over & over.
1. Identify a space where men/whites are dominant & comfortable.
2. Force themselves into that space by appeals to fairness/diversity/inclusion.
3. Bask in the attention of “breaking boundaries” to be there.
4. Begin changing that space to make themselves & those like them more dominant & comfortable by appeals to fairness/diversity/inclusion.
5. Turn that space into a space where men/whites have no control & don’t want to be. The end-point is the transformation of that space into another producer of crusading women/SJWs.
One of the reasons the Alt Right is so hated is because we recognize the game.
When valuing fairness/diversity/inclusion is consistently turned into a weapon, it’s time to stop doing that.
Yours is one of the best comments in the iSteve realm is a long time. Vox Day should have had that schematic in is SJW book. It really crystallizes how they operate, particularly in an era of shysters like Anita Sarkessian.
It was interesting that in the comments most people attacked him for attributing his negative descriptions to Visigoths. But not a word about mapping those descriptions to a majority (“so many more “) of our current population. And not a word about the power of the piece if you think of it as metaphor rather than literal truth.
Nick Diaz is astonishingly ignorant about antiquity, but so are you about the study of pre-Socratic philosophy (to which Karl Popper never had the slightest connection).
https://www.jstor.org/stable/4544602?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
What's she going to do? Make Amazon stop selling us books? Get our names on a National Shitlist so the county library branch won't let us check out classical authors? Cut off our subscriptions to Eidolon?
They can’t forestall your access to the classics (for now). But they can stremgthen their hand as Cultural Gatekeepers, and he more deliberate about controlling the classical Narrative. They already have more or less of a monopoly on making a living teaching or disseminating classicism. They al
http://stuartschneiderman.blogspot.com/2016/12/is-america-idea.html
People on the Right reject the idear that ‘America’ is an idear.. but I think I will dissent.
I now believe ‘America’ is an idear.
And because it is an idear, people around the world no longer need to come to America to have ‘America’ as an idear.
It’s like democracy as an idear. To have democracy, you don’t have to come to the US to practice democracy. You can implement the idear of democracy in your own country.
Idears are portable and transferable. Idears are not fixed in one place. It’s like some mountain in Tibet is fixed in that place, but Buddhism is an idear, and you don’t have to go to Tibet to be a Buddhist. You can be a Buddhist anywhere. You can even take that idear into outer-space.
So, let us say there is the United States as a fixed nation with its distinct history, heritage, and culture. It is about power and history within a fixed territory.
In contrast, there is ‘America’ as an idear, and it is universal and can be transported or transposed to anyone, anywhere, anytime.
So, our message to all the people around the world is that they don’t have to come to the United States to partake in the idear of America.
They can have it at home. And what is this big idear of ‘America’ they can have in their own home nation?
The American Idear is as follows: pig out on junk food, obsess over video games, twerk, listen to rap, worship black athletes, indulge in hedonism, promote slut culture, celebrate militarism, drink soda and burp, get tattoos on ass, push interracism, hail Zionism, watch trash TV, break down barrier between mainstream culture(even for kids) and pornography, praise homos and trannies, enforce PC, destabilize national borders, allow mass invasion, cook up hate hoaxes about KKK and neo-nazis, flip oit over micro-aggressions, spread fears of blonde rapists, promote cuck attitudes among the men, declare your folks to be ‘exceptional’ and ‘indispensable’, and blame ‘Russia’ for everything.
Yes, that is ‘America’ as an Idear in the Current Year. And any people in any nation can practice those ‘idears’ and be ‘American’ without coming to America.
So, save your money on that plane ticket.
Just stay in your country and embrace the IDEAR of ‘America’.
We should devise a American Idear Kit as universal formula for the world and sell it all over. Or even hand it out for free. It’d be like a Chemistry Kit. Ameristry Kit.
It’d be like handing out the New Testament or Mormon Book. After all, you don’t have to go to Utah to be a Mormon. You can be a Mormon in Mexico or India. And you don’t need to be in the territory of the United States to have your idear of ‘America’.
The NYT is too (((white))):
https://twitter.com/BrentNYT/status/810242590280912896
The most surprising fact: 21 sports reporters! Considering the sports coverage by the NYT, I’d have guessed half that many.
The Japanese have some interest but in a mostly superficial way. Like, in an anime, kawaii William Shakespeare will show up and do something silly. Or all the characters will be named after ones from The Three Musketeers.
It seems they care:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/10294488/China-embraces-British-Model-ditching-Mao-for-Edmund-Burke.html
I think the issue, which Dr. Z conveniently ignores, is that virtually all scholarly disciplines were Nazified under the Nazis. Nazi Classics didn't exist because the Classics were important to Nazis, it existed because Nazis infiltrated and controlled academia.
The other thing she ignores is the way Classics was a much larger part of European intellectual life in the 30s. (You can see from this Arion article, "Lycurgus in Leaflets and Lectures: The Weiße Rose and Classics at Munich University, 1941–45", that (a) there were Classicists opposed to Nazism and (b) they thought Classical themes were ubiquitous enough among the educated to be used against the Nazis.) What she's arguing for now isn't a defense of Classics against misuse but for continued control of Classics by an elite minority of scholars.
“Monumental architecture” of the Third Reich period was all neoclassical, internationally. Everyone was “co-opting” it. You saw the same thing in Washington, London, Paris, Moscow, and, yes, Berlin. There’s nothing particularly Nazi about it, except that the most famous neoclassical architect of the era was Albert Speer.
This has gone down the memory hole, for whatever reason. If I had to guess I’d say it was a conspiracy of the International Style, that ugly, modernist, box-obsessed cabal that took over the architectural world in the previous century. Anything you can get associated in the public consciousness with Nazis you can destroy I’m the post-WWII West
And you just called Mark Zuckerberg white. More proof you’re shameless controlled opposition.
that the values of the ancient Hellenes were of political tolerance
“Tolerence” as an intellectual idea is a modern thing from Britain, dating from around the time of its kin “disinterestedness”, and first reported on in depth by Voltaire.
Tacitus wasn’t noble; he didn’t belong to any of the patrician families of Cornelii from Rome. We don’t know exactly where he came from, but it may well have been what is now the south of France.
To correct your wider cluelessness about the ancient world would detain me all day.
That's just extraordinarily rare, and at his age, rarer still. He's the greatest entrepreneur and CEO of his generation.
I’ll be more of a believer in that once I’ve seen Facebook go through some real adversity.
What Zuckerberg attributes do you think made/make him so successful? How successful do you think he would have been in any other time (micro scale, think business and technology cycles) or place (company/field scale)?
He’s a smart guy AFAICT, but I don’t think he is in the same intellectual class as Bill Gates and Paul Allen. And Microsoft also enjoyed a lot of situational advantage and luck along with an assist from good negotiation and legal contract work early.
Two things I give Zuckerberg massive credit for are:
1. He is well on his way to matching what I consider Bill Gates’s signature achievement–managing a company from zero to world dominance himself (see adversity comment above for why I don’t give full credit yet).
2. Masterfully identifying and exploiting a market opportunity of a lifetime. While still maintaining full control.
Perhaps that is enough to justify “greatest entrepreneur and CEO of his generation”?
One more thing, how do you compare Zuckerberg to Page and Brin?
P.S. To support my not the same class statement above I’ll just note there are no Mark Zuckerberg in Math 55 type stories (that I have seen) and link to this for a bit more detail: https://www.quora.com/Was-Mark-Zuckerberg-one-of-the-top-students-academically-at-Harvard
Fear not. As Robert Bork suggested, it is possible to live a good, fulfilling life as darkness descends upon civilization. It just takes prescience to avoid being taken in by the tempestuousness of the times … which for our age are the socially and morally destructive slogans and metaphors of Liberalism.
I had 4 years of Latin at a college-prep secondary school in
Europe, and that turned out to be one of the best (time)
investments of my life. By all means, encourage your
children to take Latin in high school. By the time they
get to college it’s too late. With languages you’ve got
to start young. Then in college I had two semesters of
Western Civ (several decades ago it was still required),
and this deepened my appreciation of the glories of the
Western culture (not perfect, but then again, what is?)
I think Facebook’s strategy of starting as an exclusive within elite universities and then gradually expanding both within more universities and with friends of graduates doesn’t get enough credit for the early success. When I started using it in 2006 it definitely had a “cool elite kids” vibe to it (where IMHO MySpace had more of a “cool rebellious kids” vibe).
I'll stick to the older generation's perception of Facebook: Those that think they have "300" friends don't have any friends.
That is, unfortunately, supported by two tragic incidents in our greater extended family when two young people in the millennial generation committed suicide. Both isolate themselves as "social network jockeys" on the Internet. I'm guessing that one day they woke up and realized they had no real relationships and they had no real friends ... and they didn't know what to do about it.
Donna should be in the kitchen making Reuben sammiches.
And when the Left starts knocking the Classics and those that pay attention to the Classics - well, let's just say that if dismissing 2900 years of literature, history, and myth doesn't make one look like an ill-educated petulant child, then it's hard to say what does. Beauty has a timeless attraction. Convincing people that the beautiful is ugly is a angry, short-lived game.
I think this is right: “Who cares?”
At best, the AR is a loose set of ideas–you can find a guide, or a definition, or lists of principles if you web surf. Those ideas don’t disappear because the WaPo, the NYT, or a Silicon Valley-based Classicist says the AR is a horrible bunch of racist misogynists. Name-calling, to be effective, has to be used against someone, some person–not ideas. And the AR is not centered on any one person or group, despite the lapdog media attempt to label certain people as leaders.
As it is, the verbal abuse has become a mark of pride for the AR–for adherents and not-so-adherent alike, i.e. adoption of “the deplorables” was a middle fingered response to HRC and the prog-left.
It says that women ARE really enemies, of most White men (even their brothers) if they are not involved in either their kids or Kawai stuff like Japanese women. IMHO that self-sorting into enemy status is due to a desire to compete against White men; social approval from non-White women; and resentment of the men in and around their life for being beta. Does his own sister really despise Mark Zuckerberg for being a beta male? Evidence says, yes.
After all, if the woman in question really wanted to talk about the Alt-Right and the Classics, she might mention that the Roman and Hellenistic world ruled considerable amounts of non-Europeans; that Jewish monotheism and Greek Humanism combined to create classical Christianity. That Jesus himself is a semi-Socrates in his method of teaching. That the classical world moved fairly rapidly from polytheism to monotheism Christianity. In short, argue that yes the Classical World was in fact, quite awesome and White. But was open to things from other peoples.
Instead, its just more denigrating White men. Her own brother did something pretty impressive, and she can't even brag on him. Not a little. Or talk about how indeed White men are awesome. Its all about how awful we are.
Conclusion: there is nothing women will not punish in men who are beta. Nothing.
Do either of them even identify as white?
Let alone placing their whiteness over their Judaicness.
Godfrey, we have a mission for you.
You don't even have to parse the whole of it. Just don't take "depends" for an answer.
According to surveys, Russia is not a very
religious country, certainly nothing like
Italy. In my experience Russians tend to be
cynics, if not outright nihilists. Apparently,
70 years of Marxist dialectical materialism has
had its effect
religious country,"
The Russians are nowhere near as Christian as their Slavic cousins the Polacks. Poland has an extremely high church attendance rate.
And Meryl Streep:http://ethnicelebs.com/meryl-streep
I think those are more likely cases of Jews officiously presenting any celebrity with a backstory of Jewish ancestors, to acquire some of their reflected glory, such as it is.
I think the issue, which Dr. Z conveniently ignores, is that virtually all scholarly disciplines were Nazified under the Nazis. Nazi Classics didn't exist because the Classics were important to Nazis, it existed because Nazis infiltrated and controlled academia.
The other thing she ignores is the way Classics was a much larger part of European intellectual life in the 30s. (You can see from this Arion article, "Lycurgus in Leaflets and Lectures: The Weiße Rose and Classics at Munich University, 1941–45", that (a) there were Classicists opposed to Nazism and (b) they thought Classical themes were ubiquitous enough among the educated to be used against the Nazis.) What she's arguing for now isn't a defense of Classics against misuse but for continued control of Classics by an elite minority of scholars.
[virtually all scholarly disciplines were Nazified under the Nazis]
This is not remotely true. In classics there were only a few desultory attempts to write ancient history as a reflection of racial ideology. The so-called Deutsche Physik was a negligible and marginal presence in physics. So it was across the great majority of academia.
This Pope speaks Latin? I doubt that he can even read it fluently.
He looks a good deal like Yogi Berra, just not with any of the light behind the eyes.
To understand this Eidolon post, it helps to read this public statement from the leadership of the Society for Classical Studies (SCS):
“The mission of the Society for Classical Studies is ‘to advance knowledge, understanding, and appreciation of the ancient Greek and Roman world and its enduring value.’ That world was a complex place, with a vast diversity of peoples, languages, religions, and cultures spread over three continents, as full of contention and difference as our world is today. Greek and Roman culture was shared and shaped for their own purposes by people living from India to Britain and from Germany to Ethiopia. Its medieval and modern influence is wider still. Classical Studies today belongs to all of humanity.
For this reason, the Society strongly supports efforts to include all groups among those who study and teach the ancient world, and to encourage understanding of antiquity by all. It vigorously and unequivocally opposes any attempt to distort the diverse realities of the Greek and Roman world by enlisting the Classics in the service of ideologies of exclusion, whether based on race, color, national origin, gender, or any other criterion. As scholars and teachers, we condemn the use of the texts, ideals, and images of the Greek and Roman world to promote racism or a view of the Classical world as the unique inheritance of a falsely-imagined and narrowly-conceived western civilization.”
- See more at: https://classicalstudies.org/scs-news/from-scs-leadership#sthash.KoDDEtbx.dpuf
https://classicalstudies.org/scs-news/from-scs-leadership
The SCS leadership published that statement on their website on Nov. 28, which is one week after Zuckerberg’s Eidolon post (published on Nov. 21). Coincidence? The SCS annual meeting is coming in early January.
P.S. The Society for Classical Studies (SCS) used to be known as the American Philological Association (APA).
The alt-right had a short-lived Alain de Benoist phase, followed by an Alexander Dugin phase. Both avenues were dead ends as are most attempts to find intellectual grounding. I suspect that individuals who are high in the conscientiousness personality trait have this urge to justify their beliefs by reading them into ancient traditions and texts, be it the constitution, the bible, the classics or into the works of dead or almost dead philosophers and thinkers.
But this kind of thinking is an angle of attack for the Donna Zuckerbergs of the world to tie us down in endless exegetic debates and to turn us into cuckolds.
All the alt-right really needs for justification is HBD, objectively observable hatefacts and the embrace of instinctual self-preservation and self-interest.
@Millennial:
You’ve got your narrative backwards. The romanticization and whitewashing of Islam began in the 18th century and was hegemonic in the 1990ies. 9/11 actually caused a pushback towards a new justification of the crusades, a rediscovery of the horrors of Islamic expansion and oppression and a reevaluation of the so-called golden age of Islam.
-
Contrarian
The claim that God (Supreme Being) created the world,
introduced in the Hebrew Scriptures, is something that
needs to be rejected. This belongs with the childhood of
humanity. The ancient Greeks laughed at this claim in
view of the presence of evil and suffering. Of course, that’s
what atheists do – they reject the claim that God created the
Universe and the concept of the Supreme Being altogether.
But one doesn’t need to reject Christianity completely. There
are versions of Christianity which are more intellectually
satisfying than the standard one. And I don’t mean Deism
(i.e., belief in the creator God who became an absentee landlord)
which was such a favorite with the Founders. However, going back
to the Ancient Greeks is a good start. They certainly didn’t believe
that the world needed a creator. The world, in the view of many Greek
thinkers, just is. Many such issues need to be rethought. E.g., modern physics
produces growing evidence that the Universe is actually a simulation, i.e., a virtual
Universe, ultimately not real. This is an exciting time but you cannot get closer to the
truth without facing the abyss, as the existentialists already realized
If they weren't responsible for the decline of the West, some pity would be in order. As it is I'm reminded of C.S. Lewis' remarks about Satan eating his own servants.
Bullseye.
None of these “classicists” could hold a candle to the real Classicists of old. And I don’t even mean the professors with a yard’s worth of scholarly tomes to their names.
Ronald Knox, and most other gifted schoolboys of his time from Eton, Harrow, or Winchester, could write both Greek and Latin poetry to order: fluently, grammatically, correctly, and with only a minimal recourse to a dictionary.
I knew a Spanish priest (a Dominican) for whom Latin was simply a tool rather than his principal area of expertise (which was philosophy), who could translate at sight and at speed from any text put before him, from any period, on any subject.
Few of these vaporing woman have ever even imagined such mastery, much less set about acquiring it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Fitzgerald
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Fagles
* corrected a typo
Proper understanding of classics leads to this:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/?icid=hjx004
The Westboro church of the ‘left’.
When Liberalism was for tolerance of deviants/freaks, okay, I can go with that.
When Liberalism was for equalization of normal folks and deviants/freaks, bad idea.
When Liberalism is for apotheosis of deviants/freaks as the New Normal, it lost its bearings.
Now that Liberalism cannot say NO to freak demands, its brand is being tarred by images like this. Or, trannies in women’s sports.
Even Huff Post surely knows something is wrong here.
Liberalism went from the freedom to think different/weird to forcing society to accept mentally-deranged-and-imbalanced as just fine and dandy, indeed more so than regular folks.
Once freakery is promoted, even normal people lose standards and turn to tattoos and piercings.
None of these "classicists" could hold a candle to the real Classicists of old. And I don't even mean the professors with a yard's worth of scholarly tomes to their names.
Ronald Knox, and most other gifted schoolboys of his time from Eton, Harrow, or Winchester, could write both Greek and Latin poetry to order: fluently, grammatically, correctly, and with only a minimal recourse to a dictionary.
I knew a Spanish priest (a Dominican) for whom Latin was simply a tool rather than his principal area of expertise (which was philosophy), who could translate at sight and at speed from any text put before him, from any period, on any subject.
Few of these vaporing woman have ever even imagined such mastery, much less set about acquiring it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richmond_Lattimore
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Fitzgerald
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Fagles
https://www.newcriterion.com/articles.cfm/A-classic-restored-8428
If i understood the gibberish this clueless gobshite wrote,for her the classics should be rewritten to suit her sjw delusions.I’m not a fan of Benoist and his ilk but this is utterly stupid.
None of these "classicists" could hold a candle to the real Classicists of old. And I don't even mean the professors with a yard's worth of scholarly tomes to their names.
Ronald Knox, and most other gifted schoolboys of his time from Eton, Harrow, or Winchester, could write both Greek and Latin poetry to order: fluently, grammatically, correctly, and with only a minimal recourse to a dictionary.
I knew a Spanish priest (a Dominican) for whom Latin was simply a tool rather than his principal area of expertise (which was philosophy), who could translate at sight and at speed from any text put before him, from any period, on any subject.
Few of these vaporing woman have ever even imagined such mastery, much less set about acquiring it.
Favorite anecdote about James Garfield: He could Latin with one hand and Greek with the other, simultaneously
* made a typo
The Dahmers have nothing to do with it.
My claim is that among the highest achievers, lack of religious feeling has been more common historically than among the general population.
Nor is it absolute, as my namesake is an outstanding counterexample and chosen for that reason.
None of these "classicists" could hold a candle to the real Classicists of old. And I don't even mean the professors with a yard's worth of scholarly tomes to their names.
Ronald Knox, and most other gifted schoolboys of his time from Eton, Harrow, or Winchester, could write both Greek and Latin poetry to order: fluently, grammatically, correctly, and with only a minimal recourse to a dictionary.
I knew a Spanish priest (a Dominican) for whom Latin was simply a tool rather than his principal area of expertise (which was philosophy), who could translate at sight and at speed from any text put before him, from any period, on any subject.
Few of these vaporing woman have ever even imagined such mastery, much less set about acquiring it.
A. E. Housman.
Interesting to note that Steve’s article here resulted in 20x the number of responses. Zuck responds in her comment section to other comments. Why dont readers from here more go there and interact with her?
https://eidolon.pub/after-the-manifesto-a2d772f54868#.u2ha3g4nb
Well, technically the working-class voters that have emerged to support Trump are indeed an alternative to the panty-waist right we’ve had recently, I don’t think they’re whom anyone is referring to when using the term alt-right.
“And it seems that there is some doubt as to whether Yiannopoulos is even partially Jewish:”
Wikipedia has Milo Yiannopoulos listed as having Jewish ancestry.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milo_Yiannopoulos#External_links
Milo Yiannopoulos is the George Zimmerman of Jews, no Jewish Social Justice Warrior wants to claim him, Milo is an Honorary Goy. Hispanics don’t want to claim George, they all say the White Gringos can have him. George Zimmerman is an Honorary White Gringo.
The eternal conflict between Jerusalem and Athens is being replayed in Jewish minds. Is it because they are unable to forgive Greeks for what they think Greeks did to them 2000 years ago? Or is it because they can’t erase the memory of clearly superior civilization to whatever constituted the Jewish civilization?
Extended exposure to Latin inevitably results in precision of thought and brevity of expression. If this Donna Zuckerberg, so far only alleged to exist, were a Latin expert, she would have expressed her views succinctly and memorably. Having read this column, I conclude that she read everything in translation and not in Latin. She is a meta-classicist who spends no time with primary sources, instead using translated and abridged summaries of classic writing for her feminist and anti-white navel gazing. Her “research” and opinions are therefore useless and can be ignored without penalty by classicist and non-classicist, alike.
The “bucking convention” theory is entirely yours and has nothing to do with what I’m saying.
This does not necessarily have to be an either-or question; personally, I'd rather not have to choose. But the issue has now been forced. The specific ethnic, racial, cultural, and religious heritage of the West is being systematically undermined in the name of those universal ideas that are themselves claimed by such people as Dr Z to be the essence of "who we are." An existential conflict has been created pitting one Western self-conception against the other.
One might say the West is being loved to death by universalists. People like Dr Z insist on keeping the more identitarian, conservative school of thought at bay because, for them, the West's heritage is too valuable a part of human heritage to be surrendered to the Right. If Dr Z lived in Turkmenistan, I doubt she'd feel threatened by Turkmen nationalism, because (no offense) Turkmen heritage is not an outsized part of the story of human civilization. But she lives in America and presumably considers herself a kind of citoyen du monde, so it's imperative for her that the West (and America) must be defined as encompassing that monde.
This is why, ultimately, some kind of systematic political separation may be necessary. There are a lot of liberals (Jewish, WASP, or otherwise) who will never accept nationalism in Western countries. For them, because of the classical (and modern) achievements of the West, universalism *is* the West, and the West *is* universalism. They have too much to lose if a rightist self-conception is installed among the European peoples.
Now, if greater San Francisco were a special autonomous region (which I think it should be), the idea of (say) President Trump wouldn't cause people like Dr Z such intense anxiety. They could define and embrace their Western heritage however they like. Their self-conception happens to be self-destructive and untenable, but it won't be our problem. At the same time, they will have less ability and desire to resist nationalism in those places where we want it (i.e. the vast majority of the territory of the USA).
Again, I doubt the suicidal, minoritarian, passive-aggressive view of Western heritage espoused by Dr Z is long for this world. That's precisely why I think we have to let the Dr Zuckerbergs of the West go in order to cultivate a less maladaptive concept of Western identity.
“Now, if greater San Francisco were a special autonomous region (which I think it should be)”
I believe California should become it’s own separate country and have a divorce from The United States, what say you?
First, the US would keep most of the territory. Much of California (geographically speaking) is sparsely populated and/or conservative. The state has significant natural resources. Perhaps more importantly, certain locations such as Yosemite are integral parts of the country's natural heritage and must not be surrendered. IOW, they get the Third World megalopoles on the coast; we keep John Muir's California.
Second, while I'd allow full internal autonomy for the CalExiters, including with respect to immigration policies, ultimate sovereignty must remain with the US. If Californians had an independent foreign policy, it would create the possibility of a foreign power (most likely China) gaining a strategic foothold on our continent.
Overall, the model for CalExit (or, more precisely, SF/Sacramento/LA/San Diego Exit) should be Hong Kong. One country, two systems.
What Zuckerberg attributes do you think made/make him so successful? How successful do you think he would have been in any other time (micro scale, think business and technology cycles) or place (company/field scale)?
He's a smart guy AFAICT, but I don't think he is in the same intellectual class as Bill Gates and Paul Allen. And Microsoft also enjoyed a lot of situational advantage and luck along with an assist from good negotiation and legal contract work early.
Two things I give Zuckerberg massive credit for are:
1. He is well on his way to matching what I consider Bill Gates's signature achievement--managing a company from zero to world dominance himself (see adversity comment above for why I don't give full credit yet).
2. Masterfully identifying and exploiting a market opportunity of a lifetime. While still maintaining full control.
Perhaps that is enough to justify "greatest entrepreneur and CEO of his generation"?
One more thing, how do you compare Zuckerberg to Page and Brin?
P.S. To support my not the same class statement above I'll just note there are no Mark Zuckerberg in Math 55 type stories (that I have seen) and link to this for a bit more detail: https://www.quora.com/Was-Mark-Zuckerberg-one-of-the-top-students-academically-at-Harvard
If Page and Brin make automatic cars work and take over the car business, then they’re #1 of all time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milo_Yiannopoulos#External_linksMilo Yiannopoulos is the George Zimmerman of Jews, no Jewish Social Justice Warrior wants to claim him, Milo is an Honorary Goy. Hispanics don't want to claim George, they all say the White Gringos can have him. George Zimmerman is an Honorary White Gringo.
Yeah, but Ethni-Celebs (which is pretty good at tracking down ancestry) isn’t so sure:
http://ethnicelebs.com/milo-yiannopoulos
Wikipedia is pretty good at tracking down ancestry, after all Wikipedia has always had Courtney Love listed as a Shiksa, so they don't throw around the Jew label loosely.
Let alone placing their whiteness over their Judaicness.
Somebody should definitely make a point of asking, then.
Godfrey, we have a mission for you.
You don’t even have to parse the whole of it. Just don’t take “depends” for an answer.
Mark has always struck me as somebody who would be a conservative nationalist if he lived in the nation of Israel, but who can make more money as a liberal globalist in the America empire.
If Zuckerberg is inclined towards right-wing Zionism for the Israeli mothership and liberal internationalism for America why did he marry a Chinawoman instead of a Jewess? If he were at all motivated by an ethnic agenda he would want to keep his Ashkenazi bloodline racially pure no matter what country he’s stationed in.
Dare we suppose he’s maybe not ethnocentric?
Sooner or later every Jewish classicist cannot resist the attraction of the force field emanating form Jerusalem when he is forced to abandon the classical ideas he adopted in his youth. In Saul Bellow’s novel Ravelstein Allan Bloom’s life perfectly illustrates this process. This is a real play of the Jewish version of prodigal son myth.
i just did a dramatic reading of the first 2 paragraphs for the girlfriend……her response…who wrote that….when i told her she said. “that woman is insane”
The only real value of great wealth is to free people from the tedious labors required to feed, cloth, and house in order to pursue higher things. With $100m, he can’t think of anything better to do with himself than continue his job?
In other Jew News, Trump’s new ambassador is a strong settler advocate and Putin fan. He also favors Assad in Syria. Here’s an article he wrote a year ago:
Ambassador (((Friedman)))! Now there’s a real (((white))) man defending the racial interests of European civilization.
The Altright ought to be thrilled with the pull he now has within the incoming Trump White House.
Dunno. As far as I can tell, Streep and Courtney Love developed their notions of Jewish ancestry on their own.
“Dunno. Last time I checked, Cary Grant, Richard Nixon,Clark Gable, and Catherine Zeta-Jones all counted as White….”
This is how you know Richard Nixon does not have a Nordic phenotype, out of all the actors who have played him the Syrian Jew Dan Hedaya is the one who most closely resembles him.
Too bad we will never know what is in Richard Nixon’s DNA. He is quite ethnic looking for a WASP.
Like the Johnsons, and even the Carters (although they’re bit more Westmorland/Yorkie). Kennedys are up towards Trump Turnberry.
Whae’s Jefferson are ye?
“Yeah, but Ethni-Celebs (which is pretty good at tracking down ancestry) isn’t so sure:
Wikipedia is pretty good at tracking down ancestry, after all Wikipedia has always had Courtney Love listed as a Shiksa, so they don’t throw around the Jew label loosely.
That would be a bit petty, wouldn’t it? After all, 2,000 years ago, the Greeks were superior to everybody….
There’s no real point to talking to Leftists. Have you ever tried to communicate with cultists? Its the same barrier.
"The mission of the Society for Classical Studies is 'to advance knowledge, understanding, and appreciation of the ancient Greek and Roman world and its enduring value.' That world was a complex place, with a vast diversity of peoples, languages, religions, and cultures spread over three continents, as full of contention and difference as our world is today. Greek and Roman culture was shared and shaped for their own purposes by people living from India to Britain and from Germany to Ethiopia. Its medieval and modern influence is wider still. Classical Studies today belongs to all of humanity.
For this reason, the Society strongly supports efforts to include all groups among those who study and teach the ancient world, and to encourage understanding of antiquity by all. It vigorously and unequivocally opposes any attempt to distort the diverse realities of the Greek and Roman world by enlisting the Classics in the service of ideologies of exclusion, whether based on race, color, national origin, gender, or any other criterion. As scholars and teachers, we condemn the use of the texts, ideals, and images of the Greek and Roman world to promote racism or a view of the Classical world as the unique inheritance of a falsely-imagined and narrowly-conceived western civilization."
- See more at: https://classicalstudies.org/scs-news/from-scs-leadership#sthash.KoDDEtbx.dpuf
https://classicalstudies.org/scs-news/from-scs-leadership
The SCS leadership published that statement on their website on Nov. 28, which is one week after Zuckerberg's Eidolon post (published on Nov. 21). Coincidence? The SCS annual meeting is coming in early January.
Or – you could just note the surname (saves a lot of time).
The Czech republic is more atheist than Sweden. Hungary, Slovakia and Slovenia are comparable to Austria and Germany in terms of religiosity. Poland is genuinely catholic. I would say there is not even a correlation there, much less a bulwark inspired by Catholicism.
I suspect the common sense of Visegrad has more to do with basic, unreconstructed nationalism, experience of economic hardship within living memory and lack of cultural marxist infiltration. Marxist-Leninism was certainly a strong bullwark against the Frankfurt school.
Merkel is an outspoken Christian. She insists that her political decisions are guided by her christian faith and she keeps reprimanding Germans for their lack of faith and christian practice. The current president of Germany, Joachim Gauck, is a lutheran pastor who keeps preaching open borders and constantly scolds Germans for not being welcoming and generous enough.
The western catholic flock loves and adores Pope Francis. The catholic church ladies fall over themselves, trying to welcome, help and pamper muslim immigrants.
Both the christian elites and most church-goers of Western Europe would react in utter disbelief if anybody argued that Christianity demands anything but unlimited love and charity for complete strangers. The minority of christian immigration restrictionists don’t disagree. They just argue that it is more affordable and efficient to help muslims in their homelands.
Even the evangelicals in Germany are fully behind and enthusiastic about Merkels invitation. They believe that this is a great opportunity to convert Muslims. A foolish idea. They failed to convert hardly any of the millions of Muslims who were already present in Gemany. (German evangelicalism is basically a US import and closely tied to the american mother ship)
The data doesn't agree with you. And I'm not sure why you're lumping Austria and Germany together as if their religiosity were the same. It isn't. Kulturkampf never made it to Austria. Moreover, when it comes to xenophobia there's a decided difference between those two countries, though if you're ethnically German, you might not have experienced it first-hand.>I suspect the common sense of Visegrad has more to do with basic, unreconstructed nationalism, experience of economic hardship within living memoryYou're assuming that nationalism is distinct from traditional Catholicism. Scratch a Pole, or a Croat or a Slovakian, or for that matter, a Frenchman leaning towards Marion Le Pen, and you'll see it isn't. Moreover, when it comes to the invaders from the East, be they from Istanbul or Damascus, the shared concept of "Antemurale Christianitatis" whether explicit or implicit, is a key component of national identity throughout much of that region, Poland especially, but elsewhere throughout that region. Given that Western Europe, Germany included, left it to those benighted Eastern and Southern Catholic/Orthodox Europeans to spill blood so as to keep them safe from Ottomans/Tatars/Saracens for the last couple of centuries, I'm not surprised why people in those countries, Merkel included, have a different outlook on the current immigration mess and what it's all about.> and lack of cultural marxist infiltration.Half a century within the Warsaw pact and you regard that as "lack of cultural marxist infiltration"? Seriously? Or else, to the extent that you mean the marxists were never able to get as far as they wanted into the hearts and minds of the common folk, well, again, ask yourself the reason for that.
Oliver Stone’s first choice to play Nixon was Tom Hanks, who is half-Portuguese.
For the life of me I cannot recall the source.
http://ethnicelebs.com/milo-yiannopoulos
His claim to be Jewish struck me as (humorous) flame.
religious country, certainly nothing like
Italy. In my experience Russians tend to be
cynics, if not outright nihilists. Apparently,
70 years of Marxist dialectical materialism has
had its effect
“According to surveys, Russia is not a very
religious country,”
The Russians are nowhere near as Christian as their Slavic cousins the Polacks. Poland has an extremely high church attendance rate.
Europe, and that turned out to be one of the best (time)
investments of my life. By all means, encourage your
children to take Latin in high school. By the time they
get to college it's too late. With languages you've got
to start young. Then in college I had two semesters of
Western Civ (several decades ago it was still required),
and this deepened my appreciation of the glories of the
Western culture (not perfect, but then again, what is?)
All it takes is a little for the thin gruel of PC to pale in comparison. That’s why it’s been no platformed.
Harvard had the effect that the new social network was upscale, for many people it was their highest income friend who was already a member. It spread from higher SES people to the lower classes, which is always easier, because the rich are rarely keen on networking with the poor, but the poor are of course more than keen on networking with the rich. Facebook didn’t need the media for this, just pure and simple human nature.
Ambassador (((Friedman)))! Now there's a real (((white))) man defending the racial interests of European civilization.
The Altright ought to be thrilled with the pull he now has within the incoming Trump White House.
Israel for Jews, America for Americans. What’s the problem?
We agree, I somehow had the impression we didn’t.
What’s nutty about using your brother’s generosity to study the Classics, bake delicious desserts, and delve into forbidden but interesting ideas, while tut-tutting against them?
Twitter just announced to reinstate him after his successful speech in Texas.
I think he’s on the list, but when modifying them, they sometimes go back to pre-moderation.
If that is the case, a request to syonredux. Why not just delete your original comment by changing it to be blank then create the new one?
syonredux:
“Dunno. Last time I checked, Cary Grant, Richard Nixon,Clark Gable, and Catherine Zeta-Jones all counted as White…”
The people you mention are all of primarilly Anglo-Saxon descent. What is your point exactly, genius?
And Zeta Jones is mostly Welsh......
Yeah, Russian history without the Mongols sounds a lot better for all concerned.
Mr.Anon
“You should have stopped with “I hardly think”. Of course the ancient Greeks and Romans were white. Nobody has ever said they were not – including northern european classicists of the 18th and 19th centuries.”
“Tacitus, for instance,………”
Tacitus was interested in noticing and describing distinctions between his people and others. When minor differences are all that apparent, they get made out to be bigger than they are. The Romans never thought that, because they were not as pale as Germans, that they were then somehow kindred of Nubians.
“This woman is clearly an idiot,……”
Not quite as clearly as you are.
“……that the values of the ancient Hellenes were of political tolerance, respect for individual rights and scientific rationalism, all things that the conservatives who support Trump, for the most part, reject. She doesen’t notice the profound irony of the alt.right fetichizing the Ancients, when the Ancients would find the alt.right repulsive.”
Utter nonsense of course. The ancient Greeks would find far more in common with the alt-right than they would with you. Of course, you are too dim to realize that the alt-right is a tiny fringe movement and is quite distinct from the much broader category of “conservatives who support Trump”. And even the “drags of society” who “fetichize” things, know how to spell “dregs” and “fetishize”.
If you wish to come across as smart, it would help if you were – you know – smart. You aren’t.
If Zuckerberg is inclined towards right-wing Zionism for the Israeli mothership and liberal internationalism for America why did he marry a Chinawoman instead of a Jewess? If he were at all motivated by an ethnic agenda he would want to keep his Ashkenazi bloodline racially pure no matter what country he's stationed in.
Dare we suppose he's maybe not ethnocentric?
His favorite quotes make it pretty clear he’s on the empire team, not the nation/local community team. Nor is his vision for said empire in any way humble.
She's cute too, and apparently a good cook.
Yup.
Mr.Anon:
“You should have stopped with “I hardly think”. Of course the ancient Greeks and Romans were white. Nobody has ever said they were not – including northern european classicists of the 18th and 19th centuries.”
You clearly can’t read. Wrong. The ancient Hellenes and Romans would not qualify as “white” in the way *Anglo-Saxons use the word*. Many European scholars, like Gunther considered the Hellenes and Romans to be nordic, at least the upper classes. The point that I was making is that the evidence suggests that the Hellenes and Romans were clearly not of northwestern European phenotype. Therefore, they wouldn’t qualify as “white”. It’s not my fault you can’t read.
“Tacitus was interested in noticing and describing distinctions between his people and others. When minor differences are all that apparent, they get made out to be bigger than they are. The Romans never thought that, because they were not as pale as Germans, that they were then somehow kindred of Nubians.”
Funny that Tacitus noticed far less phenotypical differences between Hellenes and Romans than between those two peoples and Celts and Germans. That is exactly my point: the ancient Romans were not of the same ethnic stock as Germans, not even the upper classes.
“Not quite as clearly as you are.”
You are one of the dumbest people that posts here. You should more humble because condescension does not suit you. You calling me an idiot is laughable. Just laughable.
“Utter nonsense of course. The ancient Greeks would find far more in common with the alt-right than they would with you.”
Don’t make me laugh. You truly are an imbecile. Aristotle, Plato, Solon, etc, supported ideals that were ultra-liberal for their time. Hell, Plato even argued that slavery was immoral in his “Republic”. That kind of thinking was ultra-liberal for it’s time. Plato himself was a homosexual, like many other Greeek philosophers. Most homosexuals loath the alt.right, Milos notwithstanding. Go get yourself a brain, idiot.
“Of course, you are too dim to realize that the alt-right is a tiny fringe movement and is quite distinct from the much broader category of “conservatives who support Trump”.
They are all the same, you imbecile:in favor of closed borders, intolerant, racist, sexist and of low intelligence. No wonder you are one of them.
“And even the “drags of society” who “fetichize” things, know how to spell “dregs” and “fetishize”.”
No one care about orthography on the internet, sport. I can spell pretty well and not only in English but in other 5 languages. Also, unlike you I don’t bother using spell-checkers to try to prove that I’m smart because even a monkey can learn how to spell words correctly. Just look at you.
“If you wish to come across as smart, it would help if you were – you know – smart. You aren’t.”
Fuck you, moron: I would be willing to bet my *life* that I am way smarter than you. I would decimate you in any sort of intellectual debate, and you know it. The opinion of a little turd like you is, ultimately, to me, irrelevant.
Too funny – a Jew woman dedicated to the actual destruction of Palestine getting righteous and uppity about minorities.
She should start with the Jew male – who clearly has no liking for the non-Jew and treats women as second class tribal members.
Peace — Art
3.8 billion per year in military aid.
religious country,"
The Russians are nowhere near as Christian as their Slavic cousins the Polacks. Poland has an extremely high church attendance rate.
The everyday rituals that Catholics and Protestants associate with deep religiosity, such as prayer before meals, Bible study, weekly church attendance etc., are not as dominant features for the devout in the Orthodox church. That said, a lot of Russians could be said to fall under the “culturally and philosophically religious, yet spiritually agnostic or atheist” category.
If you are not attending a place of worship on a regular basis than you are not a religiously devout anything. Even a Scientologist is more devout than you.
I suspect the common sense of Visegrad has more to do with basic, unreconstructed nationalism, experience of economic hardship within living memory and lack of cultural marxist infiltration. Marxist-Leninism was certainly a strong bullwark against the Frankfurt school.
Merkel is an outspoken Christian. She insists that her political decisions are guided by her christian faith and she keeps reprimanding Germans for their lack of faith and christian practice. The current president of Germany, Joachim Gauck, is a lutheran pastor who keeps preaching open borders and constantly scolds Germans for not being welcoming and generous enough.The western catholic flock loves and adores Pope Francis. The catholic church ladies fall over themselves, trying to welcome, help and pamper muslim immigrants.
Both the christian elites and most church-goers of Western Europe would react in utter disbelief if anybody argued that Christianity demands anything but unlimited love and charity for complete strangers. The minority of christian immigration restrictionists don't disagree. They just argue that it is more affordable and efficient to help muslims in their homelands.
Even the evangelicals in Germany are fully behind and enthusiastic about Merkels invitation. They believe that this is a great opportunity to convert Muslims. A foolish idea. They failed to convert hardly any of the millions of Muslims who were already present in Gemany. (German evangelicalism is basically a US import and closely tied to the american mother ship)
Well said, I totally agree with you.
Arma virumque cano"
"I sing of arms and a man"
That was the beginning of the Aeneid
My view of the Aeneid is that it s a copy of the Greek Homer s The Oddesey
Rome conquered Greece but Greek culture conquered Rome.
The upper class Romans had Greek slaves teachers who generally dismissed Roman culture as well Texan - lot s of money, military power but no real knowledge high art.
The Romans got pissed at always being insulted by these Greeks so they commissioned their best poet Virgil to come up with a pro Roman epic tale to show the Greeks that they were also great.
This is pretty much the same as big Texas oil money trying to buy culture for the George Bush presidential library.
This is pretty much the same as big Texas oil money trying to buy culture for the George Bush presidential library.
The Roman arts generally lack the depth and refinement of Greece, and at the former’s best, the two cultures are neck-to-neck, but Latin poetry far surpassed Greek poetry.
Zuck sister is right about one thing; if comment thread length is an indication of anything, and if iSteve is a bastion of alt-right thinking, then she hit a nerve with this column; alt-righters do take the Classics seriously.
I don’t think many people, even those who consider themselves woke, understand the basic logic of the Samizdat. For someone who is in a vulnerable position to spread forbidden thoughts, it is necessary to surround them with tut-tuts.
Where can I read Bork on this?
General Mattis, the much dreaded (by the left) SecDef nominee, always carried a copy of Marcus Aurelius’s Meditations into battle, on his person. Doctor-Comissar Zuckerberg needs to propose a solution to this problem….
STORMFRONT guy: Zuckerberg's not White
Heavyset Black lady: You crazy; he's Whiter than a vanilla milkshake! Next.
STORMFRONT guy: Zuckerberg’s not White
A CASE FOR GENETIC JEWISHNESS — Harry Ostrer, a geneticist at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, when he and his colleagues published a study showing that Jews in three different geographical areas had certain collections of genes that made them more biologically similar to one another than they were to non-Jews in the same regions…Ostrer’s new book, Legacy: A Genetic History of the Jewish People, goes further, making a convincing case that there is, in fact, a biological basis for Jewishness:…
There is also a biological basis for Germans, Frenchmen, Englishmen, Swedes, etc these are not just passport ethnic groups but also genetic ethnic groups. Hence why 23AndMe was able to determine that I am genetically 80 percent Italian.
Office of Racial Cassification:
STORMFRONT guy: Ashkenazi Jews are genetically distinct from other Europeans
Heavyset Black lady who's been to community college: So are Finns.Next!https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2014/06/24/ashkenazi-ancestry/
“The everyday rituals that Catholics and Protestants associate with deep religiosity, such as prayer before meals, Bible study, weekly church attendance etc., are not as dominant features for the devout in the Orthodox church.”
If you are not attending a place of worship on a regular basis than you are not a religiously devout anything. Even a Scientologist is more devout than you.
The Roman arts generally lack the depth and refinement of Greece, and at the former's best, the two cultures are neck-to-neck, but Latin poetry far surpassed Greek poetry.
Roman busts were better than comparable Greek sculptures, I think, they were more realistic and expressed more about the person. A bust of Gaius Marius tells me more about Marius the person than a bust of Alcibiades about Alcibiades the person. But maybe that’s just me.
As pure artists, the Greeks were hugely superior, as the Romans themselves recognised.
She's cute too, and apparently a good cook.
Definitely more appealing than her human weasel of a brother:
She wrote a follow-up to that article. She deleted a lot of the comments. While I have no doubt she got a lot of ad-hominem criticisms, yet she gives me scarce reason to believe she allowed the entirety of reasoned critique to stay on the site. Her webpage Eidolon and scholarly pursuits from all that I can see there, on Twitter, and Jezebel, ought to be renamed PRESENTISM in the loudest, shriekiest font, and in typical leftist form, she’s about to publish an entire book, Not All White Men, taking to task white-identity groups for (allegedly) doing the same thing. The Classics for me, but not for ye.
https://eidolon.pub/after-the-manifesto-a2d772f54868#.u2ha3g4nb
The smartest fellow-student of mine was Dorothea Wender, nee Schmidt. Get this: her parents were Plymouth Brethern handing out tracts on the street (unless she made that up), and she earned a living winning commerical jingle contests. She said she won a new Cadillac once that way and got $5000 out of selling it to a Cadillac dealership. I don't remember what her diss. was on. She didn't do much publishing-wise but I do remember something she got published where she was able to work in something about Susie Creamcheese. She had a tragic life, divorced with 2 daughters, teaching at Wheaton College in Norton, MA, she had a major stroke at a young age, but by dint of much effort, was able to re-assemble most of your mind.
Back to Donna Zuckerberg's piece in Jezebel. I can only feel sorry for her that she took up Classics. In the ancient world, women were subservient, and there is precious little to write about from a feminist viewpoint. Much less to justify reading Classics to female students with a background in Diversity Studies (c). So she twists herself up in pretzels to establish a standing point. Highly politicized and polarized, she wants to prevent Alt-Right from classicizing the ancient texts. Unless she can transcend her existential reality she will never do useful work in her chosen field. This is an unhappy-making pickle to find oneself in. Randi and Arielle her sisters are doubtless doing something with their lives.
Mary Lefkowitz. The woman deserves a medal for taking on the Black Athena rubbish:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Lefkowitz
Lloyd Jones was a visiting professor at Berkeley in 1969 and I attended some at least of his lectures. He was very fierce, very opinionated, very amusing. PC hadn't been invented yet; he would have been against it and "rubbish!" would have been the least of his put-downs.
How much is this her freaking out that whites discover they have a culture outside of secular hedonism.
I think the issue, which Dr. Z conveniently ignores, is that virtually all scholarly disciplines were Nazified under the Nazis. Nazi Classics didn't exist because the Classics were important to Nazis, it existed because Nazis infiltrated and controlled academia.
The other thing she ignores is the way Classics was a much larger part of European intellectual life in the 30s. (You can see from this Arion article, "Lycurgus in Leaflets and Lectures: The Weiße Rose and Classics at Munich University, 1941–45", that (a) there were Classicists opposed to Nazism and (b) they thought Classical themes were ubiquitous enough among the educated to be used against the Nazis.) What she's arguing for now isn't a defense of Classics against misuse but for continued control of Classics by an elite minority of scholars.
“Nazis did co-opt or promote antiquity to some extent.”
So did the Founding Fathers. That’s why we have a President with veto power, and a Senate, whose chambers are even decorated with fasces. To say nothing of our public architecture from 1787 through about 1940.
https://eidolon.pub/after-the-manifesto-a2d772f54868#.u2ha3g4nb
Ms. Zuckerberg seems strangely drawn to the ideas and personalities of the alt-right. ]
It’s all research so she can expose them as the hateful misogynists, yet oddly compellingly masculine … but … Anyway, that’s not the point, the point is that it’s all research.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-1BD8dOz30
A CASE FOR GENETIC JEWISHNESS -- Harry Ostrer, a geneticist at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, when he and his colleagues published a study showing that Jews in three different geographical areas had certain collections of genes that made them more biologically similar to one another than they were to non-Jews in the same regions...Ostrer’s new book, Legacy: A Genetic History of the Jewish People, goes further, making a convincing case that there is, in fact, a biological basis for Jewishness:...
“A Genetic History of the Jewish People, goes further, making a convincing case that there is, in fact, a biological basis for Jewishness:…”
There is also a biological basis for Germans, Frenchmen, Englishmen, Swedes, etc these are not just passport ethnic groups but also genetic ethnic groups. Hence why 23AndMe was able to determine that I am genetically 80 percent Italian.
The good press that the Mongols have been getting recently is surely the height of PC-
SJW idiocy. Over at TOR, they’ve been running a re-watch commentary/review of TOS Star Trek. They went into total “point-and-sputter” mode over the Season 3 ep, “The Savage Curtain,” which involved aliens creating simulations of “good” and “bad” people from the past. Since Genghis Khan was one of the bad’uns, the SJW commentators went to town about how racist the portrayal was, “how dare Genghis Khan be put on the evil side, when he should have been on the good side with Kirk,” etc
SJW idiocy."Not without precedent though, iirc H.G.Wells already had a very positive appraisal of Mongol rule in his Outline of history (something along the lines of "united Eurasia and promoted trade and general peace"...by contrast he was pretty negative about the Romans). I thought this was pretty bizarre when I read it as a teenager...and that view has been confirmed by everything I've read about the Mongols since (e.g. some Latin sources about their invasion of Hungary and Dalmatia were among the most chilling medieval texts I've ever read, you really do get a sense that the Mongols' violence was in a different category from "normal" behaviour at the time both among Christians and Muslims).
SJW idiocy. Over at TOR, they've been running a re-watch commentary/review of TOS Star Trek. They went into total "point-and-sputter" mode over the Season 3 ep, "The Savage Curtain," which involved aliens creating simulations of "good" and "bad" people from the past. Since Genghis Khan was one of the bad'uns, the SJW commentators went to town about how racist the portrayal was, "how dare Genghis Khan be put on the evil side, when he should have been on the good side with Kirk," etc
“The good press that the Mongols have been getting recently is surely the height of PC-
SJW idiocy.”
Not without precedent though, iirc H.G.Wells already had a very positive appraisal of Mongol rule in his Outline of history (something along the lines of “united Eurasia and promoted trade and general peace”…by contrast he was pretty negative about the Romans). I thought this was pretty bizarre when I read it as a teenager…and that view has been confirmed by everything I’ve read about the Mongols since (e.g. some Latin sources about their invasion of Hungary and Dalmatia were among the most chilling medieval texts I’ve ever read, you really do get a sense that the Mongols’ violence was in a different category from “normal” behaviour at the time both among Christians and Muslims).
Here’s something that I like pointing out to SJWs: According to current SJW orthodoxy, Andrew Jackson is one of the vilest rulers of all time, a true monster.Jackson’s worst crime? The Trail of Tears/Amerind relocation. Death-toll: less then 20,000. Deaths resulting from the Mongol Conquests: Approx. 40 million
That atlas is full of crap. It doesn't pass the math test. It's par for the course for anyone authoring anything about massacres to wildly inflate the numbers (which we have no way of verifying via a census) to set off that 'Gosh!' factor in gullible readers.
Steve: I don’t normally go in for ye olde slippery slope of history arguments, but I think that sequence is a pretty solid (a relative term, to be sure) example of the breed.
They weren’t just bad. They were the worst the world has ever seen. The Aztecs were viler, but on a much smaller scale. So they win the optical evil gold medal. But the Mongols get the utility evil award, by far. Nobody’s even close.
Really, I hope leftists never change. The shocking contrast between them and goodness is far too useful. I couldn’t script a more racist* bunch if I tried. Stupid, too; it’s not like they really care to know the history, they just hear “non-white” and their knees jerk.
*See their take on Nazis vs. the Mongols for details.
Seems to me the one without substance, context, nuance or consistency is Zuckerberg.
A CASE FOR GENETIC JEWISHNESS -- Harry Ostrer, a geneticist at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, when he and his colleagues published a study showing that Jews in three different geographical areas had certain collections of genes that made them more biologically similar to one another than they were to non-Jews in the same regions...Ostrer’s new book, Legacy: A Genetic History of the Jewish People, goes further, making a convincing case that there is, in fact, a biological basis for Jewishness:...
There’s also a genetic basis for “Finnishness”…..
Office of Racial Cassification:
STORMFRONT guy: Ashkenazi Jews are genetically distinct from other Europeans
Heavyset Black lady who’s been to community college: So are Finns.Next!
https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2014/06/24/ashkenazi-ancestry/
Different times, different reasons, different folks, but all the same, inbred is the word ... Our old friend Y. pestis is a suspect for the Finnfolk, I suppose "antisemitism" accounts for the others.
Western Europeans also gave the world socialism, feminism, postmodernism, atheism, mindless consumerism, cultural and moral relativism, celebrity culture, democracy, the worship of sexual degeneracy and self-hatred. Let’s face it, we destroyed ourselves. No-one else had the power to destroy us.
And if you could magically reset the West to the way it was a century or two ago we’d destroy ourselves all over again.
We need to take a long hard look at our civilisation, identify its weaknesses and ruthlessly eradicate those weaknesses. There’s a lot of good within western civilisation but there’s a lot of sickness as well.
We can’t blame a bunch of Africans living in mud huts, or Islam, or China, or any other culture, for destroying us. They don’t have the capacity to do so, they never have had and never will have. Western civilisation wasn’t murdered, it committed suicide.
SJW idiocy."Not without precedent though, iirc H.G.Wells already had a very positive appraisal of Mongol rule in his Outline of history (something along the lines of "united Eurasia and promoted trade and general peace"...by contrast he was pretty negative about the Romans). I thought this was pretty bizarre when I read it as a teenager...and that view has been confirmed by everything I've read about the Mongols since (e.g. some Latin sources about their invasion of Hungary and Dalmatia were among the most chilling medieval texts I've ever read, you really do get a sense that the Mongols' violence was in a different category from "normal" behaviour at the time both among Christians and Muslims).
Yeah. The thing about the Mongol Conquests is that mass slaughter was routine.Hence, the Sack of Baghdad in 1258 (90,000+ people butchered) stands out only because the city was so famous. In terms of death-toll, it was just another in a long list of cities obliterated by the Mongol juggernaut (Maru,Herat, Nishapur, etc)
Rather reminds me of all those Feminists who , while eagerly awaiting the next ep of Mad Men , kept on talking about Don Draper’s sexism….
Thanks! That makes sense (I probably should have thought of that…).
If that is the case, a request to syonredux. Why not just delete your original comment by changing it to be blank then create the new one?
For example, I ordered a book advertised as a mystery. It soon turned out the bad guy was against immigration and was portrayed as evil. The good guys were all helping Mexicans in.
I didn't finish it and I'm more careful now. Still, the book description on Amazon didn't note the immigration angle. It can be hard to avoid. Mysteries set in the past are safer.
Mysteries written in the past are safer.
All contemporary fiction, in all genres, should be avoided. All of it is tainted. I won’t read any fiction written in the past 40 years and I’m very suspicious of anything written post-WW2.
"You should have stopped with “I hardly think”. Of course the ancient Greeks and Romans were white. Nobody has ever said they were not – including northern european classicists of the 18th and 19th centuries."
You clearly can't read. Wrong. The ancient Hellenes and Romans would not qualify as "white" in the way *Anglo-Saxons use the word*. Many European scholars, like Gunther considered the Hellenes and Romans to be nordic, at least the upper classes. The point that I was making is that the evidence suggests that the Hellenes and Romans were clearly not of northwestern European phenotype. Therefore, they wouldn't qualify as "white". It's not my fault you can't read.
"Tacitus was interested in noticing and describing distinctions between his people and others. When minor differences are all that apparent, they get made out to be bigger than they are. The Romans never thought that, because they were not as pale as Germans, that they were then somehow kindred of Nubians."
Funny that Tacitus noticed far less phenotypical differences between Hellenes and Romans than between those two peoples and Celts and Germans. That is exactly my point: the ancient Romans were not of the same ethnic stock as Germans, not even the upper classes.
"Not quite as clearly as you are."
You are one of the dumbest people that posts here. You should more humble because condescension does not suit you. You calling me an idiot is laughable. Just laughable.
"Utter nonsense of course. The ancient Greeks would find far more in common with the alt-right than they would with you."
Don't make me laugh. You truly are an imbecile. Aristotle, Plato, Solon, etc, supported ideals that were ultra-liberal for their time. Hell, Plato even argued that slavery was immoral in his "Republic". That kind of thinking was ultra-liberal for it's time. Plato himself was a homosexual, like many other Greeek philosophers. Most homosexuals loath the alt.right, Milos notwithstanding. Go get yourself a brain, idiot.
"Of course, you are too dim to realize that the alt-right is a tiny fringe movement and is quite distinct from the much broader category of “conservatives who support Trump”.
They are all the same, you imbecile:in favor of closed borders, intolerant, racist, sexist and of low intelligence. No wonder you are one of them.
"And even the “drags of society” who “fetichize” things, know how to spell “dregs” and “fetishize”."
No one care about orthography on the internet, sport. I can spell pretty well and not only in English but in other 5 languages. Also, unlike you I don't bother using spell-checkers to try to prove that I'm smart because even a monkey can learn how to spell words correctly. Just look at you.
"If you wish to come across as smart, it would help if you were – you know – smart. You aren’t."
Fuck you, moron: I would be willing to bet my *life* that I am way smarter than you. I would decimate you in any sort of intellectual debate, and you know it. The opinion of a little turd like you is, ultimately, to me, irrelevant.
Last time I checked, Anglo-Saxons think that Sophia Loren is White…..
Bah, another doublepost ..
"Dunno. Last time I checked, Cary Grant, Richard Nixon,Clark Gable, and Catherine Zeta-Jones all counted as White…"
The people you mention are all of primarilly Anglo-Saxon descent. What is your point exactly, genius?
That they are rather swarthy, dear boy….like many Italians and Greeks….
And Zeta Jones is mostly Welsh……
Nixons père are Borderers. Middle March, English side.
Like the Johnsons, and even the Carters (although they’re bit more Westmorland/Yorkie). Kennedys are up towards Trump Turnberry.
Whae’s Jefferson are ye?
Nice work, if you can get it….
http://ethnicelebs.com/richard-nixon
“There are a lot of liberals (Jewish, WASP, or otherwise) who will never accept nationalism in Western countries. For them, because of the classical (and modern) achievements of the West, universalism *is* the West, and the West *is* universalism.”
The more time you spend with elites from non-Western places in the world, the more you appreciate that a lot of people in the world just _hate_ the idea that they and their ancestors might not always have been the most enlightened, superior, and advanced people since the dawn of time. The whole idea of identifiable white Westerners bringing the modern world to “the others” is simply an idea they will not mentally hold. Thus the West _must_ be a universal, with they and their ancestors leading the charge all along.
Wikipedia is pretty good at tracking down ancestry, after all Wikipedia has always had Courtney Love listed as a Shiksa, so they don't throw around the Jew label loosely.
Well, here’s how WIKIPEDIA currently lists Milo:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milo_Yiannopoulos
Trump is a classical hero in his willingness to stand up for what's right, regardless of the personal cost. Anti-white Leftism has been on the march through America's political, cultural, and commercial institutions for the past century. It has inexorably gained ground under both Republican and Democrat administrations. Can a Trump Administration turn back the tide? It remains to be seen, but for the first time there is hope, which might explain Michelle Obama's hopelessness.
“I don’t quite agree with you that most white people just follow the herd. Voting for Trump was a revolutionary act, and 60% of white voters acted.”
Trump presidency is a seismic moment in US history, BUT most Trump voters had rather mainstream reasons: economy, border security, jobs. Trump only seemed ‘radical’ because the New Normal in America has become so nuts.
Also, the fact that white Americans waited THIS LONG to support a man like Trump — and that the crucial Trump voters in 2016 had voted for Obama twice in 2008 and 2012 — indicates that most white Americans do lack the spark.
I think Alt Right has the spark/spirit. Now, some Alt Right people are rather nutty and weird. And many lack special smarts or talent. But they have the spirit-thing.
This spark does wonders when combined with high intelligence and special talent, but even most smart people lack the spirit.
This spark is a derring-do, a refusal to go with the flow, the will to stick to one’s vision and principle, a strong sense of conviction, and an openness to new possibilities.
Being part of the Alt Right means pariah-status and hard times for careerists. There is so much to lose, but those in the AR movement are willing to risk all because they have spirit that is lacking among most Conservatives who stick to Heritage Foundation homilies or most Liberals who stick to PC narrative.
This will to step outside the box despite disapproval from all of society requires a kind of special spirit. There are lots of things about Richard Spencer I don’t like. But given his image and connections, I think he could have gone far as pundit or even politician if he had decided to play ball and taken the 30 pieces of silver. He didn’t, and he paid a price along the way. That requires spirit and spine. Spencer and some of his crowd may not be the smartest people(though smart enough) nor the most sensible(they do dumb things at times), but they do have devil-may-care and damn-the-torpedoes kind of spirit that can really move mountains.
And even though Trump is hardly a ‘radical’, he has some of this spirit too. He just hope he uses it wisely, mainly in not creating trouble with Iran and China. Let’s not have Taiwan pull an ‘Israel’ on the US and stir up a mess. If Trump has problems with China, he should stick to economic issues, not military ones over Taiwan.
At any way, I don’t think revolutions begin necessarily with people of high intelligence. It begins with people with the spirit and spark. They may or may not be of high intelligence, but the crucial factor is that they have this extra ‘zing’, this inner energy. They are the ones who are willing to break down walls and explore new realms of land and mind. And it is when this spirit spreads and infects even people of high intelligence that the truly great changes happen. But for intelligent people to be infected with the spirit, the spirit has to exist in the first place, and it often originates with individuals with the extra zing of human electricity.
We see this in cinema. Some of the most intelligent people didn’t become the best directors. I think Sydney Pollack was a very intelligent director, but he lacked vision. He understood the form and the craft. But he didn’t have the spirit and vision of someone like Peckinpah. There were many directors more intelligent than Kurosawa, but what vision he had. He made films like Zeus hurled thunderbolts.
Consider the scene in EXCALIBUR where all the knights are fearful of championing the queen but the squire Perceval, though hardly a seasoned warrior, comes forth. He has a special spirit lacking in even the best of knights.
In both Nibelungen and Parsifal, it is the outsider-fool-hero who has the power to challenge the order that has grown rigid and static.
This archetype is more common in Western legends and mythology than in other cultures.
As of now, Alt Right doesn’t have the talent, resources, or numbers to make a difference. But they do have the spirit that is lacking in just about all other cultural and political sectors. Unlike the ‘far right’ of the past, they are not dogmatically beholden to some ‘tradition’(like arch-catholicism or monarchism), crazy WWII fetishes, or rigid formulas(though there are some who do). Instead, there is the spirit of being willing to talk about anything freely. Indeed, a leftist is more likely to have a free and open discussion with an Alt Right person than with anyone else.
Alt Right is almost taboo-free even if it has strong positions. Whatever it believes, it says LET’S TALK ABOUT IT. And that is a truly Western spirit.
The hope is that Alt Right will maintain the spirit/spark to the point where it will spread to others with more intelligence, talent, and resources. And then, things can change in very big ways.
Now, the Alt Right must be sensible. They must be caretakers of this flame than arsonists. After all, Lenin, Hitler, and Mao were men of powerful spirit, but they were careless with the fire and burned the world.
If Zuckerberg is inclined towards right-wing Zionism for the Israeli mothership and liberal internationalism for America why did he marry a Chinawoman instead of a Jewess? If he were at all motivated by an ethnic agenda he would want to keep his Ashkenazi bloodline racially pure no matter what country he's stationed in.
Dare we suppose he's maybe not ethnocentric?
Maybe Zuck just can’t get a White woman?
Yeah there is not a single White female gold digger on the planet who is open to marrying the wealthiest man in the world who is under the age of 40.
Office of Racial Cassification:
STORMFRONT guy: Ashkenazi Jews are genetically distinct from other Europeans
Heavyset Black lady who's been to community college: So are Finns.Next!https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2014/06/24/ashkenazi-ancestry/
That’s because the one ring that binds them all is a fairly recent demographic bottleneck, about one or two thousand years ago.
Different times, different reasons, different folks, but all the same, inbred is the word … Our old friend Y. pestis is a suspect for the Finnfolk, I suppose “antisemitism” accounts for the others.
None of these "classicists" could hold a candle to the real Classicists of old. And I don't even mean the professors with a yard's worth of scholarly tomes to their names.
Ronald Knox, and most other gifted schoolboys of his time from Eton, Harrow, or Winchester, could write both Greek and Latin poetry to order: fluently, grammatically, correctly, and with only a minimal recourse to a dictionary.
I knew a Spanish priest (a Dominican) for whom Latin was simply a tool rather than his principal area of expertise (which was philosophy), who could translate at sight and at speed from any text put before him, from any period, on any subject.
Few of these vaporing woman have ever even imagined such mastery, much less set about acquiring it.
Favorite anecdote about James Garfield: He could write* Latin with one hand and Greek with the other, simultaneously
* corrected a typo
Favorite anecdote about James Garfield: He could write* Latin with one hand and Greek with the other, simultaneously
* made a typo
Asians lack agency. They are such dogs. This may especially true of Koreans.
China had Middle Kingdom mentality. A certain national pride.
Japanese have had island domain mentality. Though part of Asia, also particular and independent of Asia.
In contrast, Korea survived as a servile kingdom of China. Its mental habit is to suck up to the Great Power.
Any surprise that Koreans became such fanatical Christians when the US, the great power, was a Christian nation?
And since US is now a PC nation, these Koreans in America are turning into the biggest teacher’s pets. It’s not just this fool but the two Seoul Brothers, Jay and Alvin and other chipmunks.
No agency. Also, fools like that aren’t only anti-white. My guess is she is a globalist shill who will attack ANY nationalism, including her own. Smugly ensconced in the First World and selected by elite institutions, she glibly feels part of the Superior Elites and looks down all patriots all over the world. She has no independence of mind, no individuality. She wants to belong, to win approval. And in her world, she gets pats on her head like good little doggy when she writes drivel like that.
Well, as crazy as PC is, at least we can give credit to Jews and whites for coming up with it. They at least have claim of originality. In contrast, this yellow pet is just a monkey-see-monkey-doer.
Her poem… I mean it is so dime-a-dozen and by the numbers. Zzzzzzz.
What the hell is she even talking about? Once a work of art is put before the public, it can be interpreted any which way people like. That’s the beauty of art. That’s what makes it interesting.
In “Feminine Endings,” for example, Susan McClary likens the great symphonies to sexual intercourse. If we’re going to claim there’s a “correct” way to interpret art, books like this will soon come under fire as well, because they’re equally (if not more) unorthodox in their interpretations.
In other words, the left is going to get shot with its own gun. You can’t claim some ideas are “wrong” without someone turning around and point the finger at your ideas.
I don’t think this is the direction in which writers and/or professors should be heading. Academia is turning into the PMRC — more about censoring and shutting down people than provoking original ideas.
Syonredux:
“That they are rather swarthy, dear boy….like many Italians and Greeks….
And Zeta Jones is mostly Welsh…”
They are Anglo-Saxons, born into Anglo-Saxon nations and not black or Latino. Therefore, they are automatically considered white in the Anglo-Saxon world.
Also, you are making the assumption that the ancient Hellenes and Romasn were not swarthi*er* than the people you mentioned.
Look at Roman mosaics and protraits, and a lot of the people shown there had curly hair and olive skin. Not one of the people you mention is that swarthy.
Think before you post, dear girl.
https://www.google.com/search?q=cary+grant+to+catch+a+thief+beach&biw=1366&bih=638&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiHvp_uo__QAhUrr1QKHUjmCf4Q_AUIBigB&dpr=1#tbm=isch&q=cary+grant+to+catch+a+thief+
Interesting that the Classics are still with us. George Soros’ ubiquitous charity “The Open Society” was named after the book The Open Society and Its Enemies” written by Karl Popper, Soros’ college professor. Popper believed that the roots of the fascism expressed in Nazi Germany trace back to Plato’s Republic.
In a way, Soros has been expending hundreds of millions of dollars to prevent a cohesive and strong European society from developing under the influence of Plato. By promoting revolutions in the former Eastern Bloc and massive Third World immigration to the West, Soros is working to guarantee an “Open Society” which just so happens to be the sort of society that can not check his influence and power. Zuckerberg’s politics are likely not very far off from those of Soros.
Whites do not consider the Zookerbergs or their kind to be Whites, just converted parasites.
Regarding her hate-filled screed, it’s par for the course for (((them))). “Here’s why its OK to hate Whites, did you know gods of color invented everything?”
Whether or not they would be considered White in China is irrelevant… Whites in America would probably see the Uighur as Chinese, I would not be surprised if Han Chinese never fail to make the distinction themselves.
I suspect the common sense of Visegrad has more to do with basic, unreconstructed nationalism, experience of economic hardship within living memory and lack of cultural marxist infiltration. Marxist-Leninism was certainly a strong bullwark against the Frankfurt school.
Merkel is an outspoken Christian. She insists that her political decisions are guided by her christian faith and she keeps reprimanding Germans for their lack of faith and christian practice. The current president of Germany, Joachim Gauck, is a lutheran pastor who keeps preaching open borders and constantly scolds Germans for not being welcoming and generous enough.The western catholic flock loves and adores Pope Francis. The catholic church ladies fall over themselves, trying to welcome, help and pamper muslim immigrants.
Both the christian elites and most church-goers of Western Europe would react in utter disbelief if anybody argued that Christianity demands anything but unlimited love and charity for complete strangers. The minority of christian immigration restrictionists don't disagree. They just argue that it is more affordable and efficient to help muslims in their homelands.
Even the evangelicals in Germany are fully behind and enthusiastic about Merkels invitation. They believe that this is a great opportunity to convert Muslims. A foolish idea. They failed to convert hardly any of the millions of Muslims who were already present in Gemany. (German evangelicalism is basically a US import and closely tied to the american mother ship)
>Hungary, Slovakia and Slovenia are comparable to Austria and Germany in terms of religiosity.
The data doesn’t agree with you. And I’m not sure why you’re lumping Austria and Germany together as if their religiosity were the same. It isn’t. Kulturkampf never made it to Austria. Moreover, when it comes to xenophobia there’s a decided difference between those two countries, though if you’re ethnically German, you might not have experienced it first-hand.
>I suspect the common sense of Visegrad has more to do with basic, unreconstructed nationalism, experience of economic hardship within living memory
You’re assuming that nationalism is distinct from traditional Catholicism. Scratch a Pole, or a Croat or a Slovakian, or for that matter, a Frenchman leaning towards Marion Le Pen, and you’ll see it isn’t. Moreover, when it comes to the invaders from the East, be they from Istanbul or Damascus, the shared concept of “Antemurale Christianitatis” whether explicit or implicit, is a key component of national identity throughout much of that region, Poland especially, but elsewhere throughout that region.
Given that Western Europe, Germany included, left it to those benighted Eastern and Southern Catholic/Orthodox Europeans to spill blood so as to keep them safe from Ottomans/Tatars/Saracens for the last couple of centuries, I’m not surprised why people in those countries, Merkel included, have a different outlook on the current immigration mess and what it’s all about.
> and lack of cultural marxist infiltration.
Half a century within the Warsaw pact and you regard that as “lack of cultural marxist infiltration”? Seriously? Or else, to the extent that you mean the marxists were never able to get as far as they wanted into the hearts and minds of the common folk, well, again, ask yourself the reason for that.
? What's that statement supposed to mean?
Your Gallup data is from 2001-2004...probably still somewhat useful, but not exactly up to date.
"> and lack of cultural marxist infiltration.
Half a century within the Warsaw pact and you regard that as “lack of cultural marxist infiltration”?"
No, I agree with Austrian, in Germany the difference between the former West and the former East Germany is fairly striking. East Germans are much more open and vehement in their rejection of Islamic mass immigration, and they're mostly godless (e.g. the PEGIDA movement in Dresden). By contrast many West Germans have totally internalized a multiculturalist world view, with Islamophilia a main component. And despite your protestations Christians, both Protestant and Catholic, are very prominent in this regard, with the highest levels of the church hierarchy (e.g. the archbishop of Cologne) agitating massively in favour of mass immigration.
Pegida is based in East Germany and AFD his its biggest support there. East Germany is almost completely atheist.
Demographics of atheism
Religion in Europe
Here is the official statement of the polish catholic church on immigration: The Church in Poland: welcoming refugeesThe assumption here is that the future of Poland should be multi-racial, multicultural and even multi-religious. Hillary Clinton would approve.Please show me some evidence of the great catholic bullwark against immigration and the alleged catholic support for nationalism and the preservation of ethnostates. I wish it would exist. All I am aware of is a few fringe figures and obscure bloggers. The bulk of the catholic church, from top to bottom, is more extreme than Angela Merkel and more destructive than all of George Soros' NGOs combined.
Normie conservatives identify with their country and its traditional religion and they assume that both must be inherently linked. They are also skeptical of mass-immigration. But these sentiments can be attributed to common sense and instinctual tribal loyalty.
I was about to rail against the institution that sponsors Eidolon, assuming it was some new charity set up Mme. Zuckerberg and likely funded by Faceberg. But, in fact, it turns out to be the Paideia Institute, which from all accounts seems to be doing good work:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-people-who-are-bringing-latin-to-life-1466786605
https://www.thenation.com/article/latin-lives/
Anglo-Saxon is an ethnic/racial designation, dear boy. Anglo is the cultural designation. Zeta Jones is Anglo, but not Anglo-Saxon.
Some were, some weren’t. Go to Italy today, dear boy. It has a wide range of phenotypes, from the swarthy to the fair.
Dunno about that, dear boy. Have you taken a look at Cary Grant after a day at the beach:
https://www.google.com/search?q=cary+grant+to+catch+a+thief+beach&biw=1366&bih=638&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiHvp_uo__QAhUrr1QKHUjmCf4Q_AUIBigB&dpr=1#tbm=isch&q=cary+grant+to+catch+a+thief+
If by fair you mean fair haired, the vast majority of fair people in Italy are either women (mostly dye jobs) or children. There are not a lot of adult men in Italy who are as blond as actor Philip Seymour Hoffman for example.
There were no Haven Monahans among any of the Italian men on The Sopranos or The Godfather.
"My interests are perhaps best exemplified by my job at the Paideia Institute, a nonprofit organization for classical study, where I am a Research Fellow and edit its online journal for writing about the ancient world in modern ways, Eidolon."
Paideia? Isn't that Barbara Specter's institute?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFE0qAiofMQ
Specter who says that Europe cannot 'survive' unless it is swamped by non-Europeans?
And why is an Asian following in the heels of Jewesses?
What yellow running dogs.
No spark. Just follow and imitate.
No, two different Paideias:
Good Paideia:
http://www.paideiainstitute.org
Bad Paideia:
http://www.paideia-eu.org
I propose Donna & Barbara meet to discuss the potential relevance of the Hippocratic Oath of "First Do No Harm" as it might pertain to mass immigration from the 3rd world into Europe & America. Hippocrates would approve of such deliberations.
All contemporary fiction, in all genres, should be avoided. All of it is tainted. I won't read any fiction written in the past 40 years and I'm very suspicious of anything written post-WW2.
Some good post-WW2 stuff, Flannery O’Connor, John Updike, Cozzens’ Guard of Honor, Tom Wolfe, Stoppard, …
Well, actually these days he also does half-day/day seminars on how to tailor FB for marketing in the medical practice environment.
She's cute too, and apparently a good cook.
Get your eyes checked out.
Anyway, I don’t know if this is fake or she deleted it but I’ve seen two separate, differently-colored screenshots of this tweet: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cz91JLxXEAEeR8A.jpg:large
Reading her Twitter I find her inseparable from the world of lunatic resentment she inhabits: https://twitter.com/EllieMackin/status/804790272374743040
Appropriating our culture to explain it back to us in anti-white, anti-male social justice terms; and then shaming us into accepting her monopoly on knowledge. An outsider gatekeeping our history so it can only be used against us. How is she sympathetic?
My claim is that among the highest achievers, lack of religious feeling has been more common historically than among the general population.
Nor is it absolute, as my namesake is an outstanding counterexample and chosen for that reason.
>The Dahmers have nothing to do with it.
If all you have is blanket assertions, and ad hoc decisions about who to exclude from the data set and who to keep in, then whatever you conclude at the end is not going to convince anyone who doesn’t already agree with you. And if the subject is, say, mathematics, the giants of the last few centuries are, if anything, more religious than the general population. Yes, the last century is different, but see my earlier comment about standing on the shoulders of giants.
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/747804904383643648/0rU5Tbqm.jpg
Looks like Mark except for the eyeliner and hair.
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/747804904383643648/0rU5Tbqm.jpg
Surely the HBD conclusion would be that this literal Dark Age will be permanent.
No, it wasn't.
Take it as an invitation to expound, because as you pointed out all the critics have but one angle.
Maybe Zuck should try gender-reassignment surgery? The features do seem to work better on a woman….
… Walker Percy, Shusaku Endo, Vikram Seth, Nicholas Kilmer, A.S. Byatt, etc.
The data doesn't agree with you. And I'm not sure why you're lumping Austria and Germany together as if their religiosity were the same. It isn't. Kulturkampf never made it to Austria. Moreover, when it comes to xenophobia there's a decided difference between those two countries, though if you're ethnically German, you might not have experienced it first-hand.>I suspect the common sense of Visegrad has more to do with basic, unreconstructed nationalism, experience of economic hardship within living memoryYou're assuming that nationalism is distinct from traditional Catholicism. Scratch a Pole, or a Croat or a Slovakian, or for that matter, a Frenchman leaning towards Marion Le Pen, and you'll see it isn't. Moreover, when it comes to the invaders from the East, be they from Istanbul or Damascus, the shared concept of "Antemurale Christianitatis" whether explicit or implicit, is a key component of national identity throughout much of that region, Poland especially, but elsewhere throughout that region. Given that Western Europe, Germany included, left it to those benighted Eastern and Southern Catholic/Orthodox Europeans to spill blood so as to keep them safe from Ottomans/Tatars/Saracens for the last couple of centuries, I'm not surprised why people in those countries, Merkel included, have a different outlook on the current immigration mess and what it's all about.> and lack of cultural marxist infiltration.Half a century within the Warsaw pact and you regard that as "lack of cultural marxist infiltration"? Seriously? Or else, to the extent that you mean the marxists were never able to get as far as they wanted into the hearts and minds of the common folk, well, again, ask yourself the reason for that.
“Moreover, when it comes to xenophobia there’s a decided difference between those two countries, though if you’re ethnically German, you might not have experienced it first-hand.”
? What’s that statement supposed to mean?
Your Gallup data is from 2001-2004…probably still somewhat useful, but not exactly up to date.
“> and lack of cultural marxist infiltration.
Half a century within the Warsaw pact and you regard that as “lack of cultural marxist infiltration”?”
No, I agree with Austrian, in Germany the difference between the former West and the former East Germany is fairly striking. East Germans are much more open and vehement in their rejection of Islamic mass immigration, and they’re mostly godless (e.g. the PEGIDA movement in Dresden). By contrast many West Germans have totally internalized a multiculturalist world view, with Islamophilia a main component. And despite your protestations Christians, both Protestant and Catholic, are very prominent in this regard, with the highest levels of the church hierarchy (e.g. the archbishop of Cologne) agitating massively in favour of mass immigration.
Percy’s The Moviegoer is great.
Walker Percy is a kindred spirit to Steve Sailer.
Good Paideia:
http://www.paideiainstitute.org
Bad Paideia:
http://www.paideia-eu.org
The Good Idea Paideia Donna Zuckerberg is a much more pleasant site than the rather nefarious Bad Idea Paideia Barbara Lerner Specter.
I propose Donna & Barbara meet to discuss the potential relevance of the Hippocratic Oath of “First Do No Harm” as it might pertain to mass immigration from the 3rd world into Europe & America. Hippocrates would approve of such deliberations.
twitter.com/DouthatNYT/status/810482413155524608
twitter.com/ChrisBataluk/status/810528155807059968
"Dunno. Last time I checked, Cary Grant, Richard Nixon,Clark Gable, and Catherine Zeta-Jones all counted as White…"
The people you mention are all of primarilly Anglo-Saxon descent. What is your point exactly, genius?
Celtic, not Anglo-Saxon.
"My interests are perhaps best exemplified by my job at the Paideia Institute, a nonprofit organization for classical study, where I am a Research Fellow and edit its online journal for writing about the ancient world in modern ways, Eidolon."
Paideia? Isn't that Barbara Specter's institute?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFE0qAiofMQ
Specter who says that Europe cannot 'survive' unless it is swamped by non-Europeans?
And why is an Asian following in the heels of Jewesses?
What yellow running dogs.
No spark. Just follow and imitate.
I did a quick check and Donna’s Paideia seems different from Barbara’s Paideia.
Both paideias are garbage organizations, though.
His entire ouvere is worth a (re-)read.
Walker Percy is a kindred spirit to Steve Sailer.
At best, the AR is a loose set of ideas--you can find a guide, or a definition, or lists of principles if you web surf. Those ideas don't disappear because the WaPo, the NYT, or a Silicon Valley-based Classicist says the AR is a horrible bunch of racist misogynists. Name-calling, to be effective, has to be used against someone, some person--not ideas. And the AR is not centered on any one person or group, despite the lapdog media attempt to label certain people as leaders.
As it is, the verbal abuse has become a mark of pride for the AR--for adherents and not-so-adherent alike, i.e. adoption of "the deplorables" was a middle fingered response to HRC and the prog-left.
A good deal of the online Alt-Right is anonymous for reasons of personal safety. It’s more difficult to ostracize them when they start pointing out hate-facts in the comments section.
The hypothesis concerns high achievers. Dahmer is not in that category.
No way were there 40 million people alive in Mongol territories in the 13th or 14th centuries. Let me explain the math behind my reasoning. In that era, there was no birth control and people had large families. Start with 40 million living people, namely 20 million men and 20 million women. Each pair had 4 children that survived to adulthood to marry (an average number in a family that could produce maybe 10 children). This gives a next generation total of 160 million. Repeat the 4 kids in the next generation and you’re up to 640 million. Next generation, the third, and you’re already at 2,560,000,000 people. That’s 2.560 billion–with a ‘b’–by the third generation, in the 13th century. 4th generation? 10.24 billion. NO WAY. Nonsense. The population was a heck of a lot smaller back then, otherwise the world would have become wildly overpopulated centuries ago, and it wasn’t.
That atlas is full of crap. It doesn’t pass the math test. It’s par for the course for anyone authoring anything about massacres to wildly inflate the numbers (which we have no way of verifying via a census) to set off that ‘Gosh!’ factor in gullible readers.
Donna, this is stupid stuff…
That atlas is full of crap. It doesn't pass the math test. It's par for the course for anyone authoring anything about massacres to wildly inflate the numbers (which we have no way of verifying via a census) to set off that 'Gosh!' factor in gullible readers.
That was really funny. Top-notch satire.
Bah.
This is all a circular argument. A circle-jerk, like “even”.
Without the Classics, there would be no modern world, and therefore: No Platform for FemFisters to voice their complaints in the first place.
First Principles, People.
“The thing about the Mongol Conquests is that mass slaughter was routine.”
An interesting lesson from skimming Wikipeida is that, for all that and given their current legend, they appear far from invincible in Europe proper (in forest, not open horse country), even though they may have won most of the famous battles. Even Saxons (well, Transylvania Saxons, not Anglo-Saxons) sometimes beat them:
Mongol invasion of Europe:
“Take it as an invitation to expound, because as you pointed out all the critics have but one angle.”
Writing to a friend of his, Conrad described the Universe as being a machine:
“It knits us in and it knits us out. It has knitted time space, pain, death, corruption, despair and all the illusions – and nothing matters. I’ll admit however that to look at the remorseless process is sometimes amusing.”
As it did on many thoughtful people of the 19th century, I suspect that Darwinism made a great impression on Conrad. The realization that there might well be no God underlying nature, but only evolution – thoughtless, Godless mechanism – must have been unsettling to people so steeped in christianity as were 19th century Europeans; especially, I would imagine, a polish catholic. I think that Heart of Darkness is a meditation on evolution – the realization of the implications of Darwinian evolution. It seems clear that Conrad was an athiest, that he came not to believe in God, but I think he realized that there are consequences to the dethronement of God; that it might tend to drive men mad – as Kurtz was driven mad in the jungle, faced with no truth and no will higher than his own.
“He struggled with himself, too. I saw it — I heard it. I saw the inconceivable mystery of a soul that knew no restraint, no faith, and no fear, yet struggling blindly with itself.”
It is not a political novel – a critique of colonialism, as you would read from a marxist academic. The very idea of that is rather laughable; it says more about the modern academics who read everything through the prism of their own ideology, than it does about an english sea captain of the late 19th century. Rather, Heart of Darkness is a personal, and rather pessimistic story, about the loss of religious faith.
At least, this is what I construed out of it after a close reading. And this is why, I believe that Heart of Darkness is one of the most profound and important novels of the 19th century, and perhaps of the 20th century as well.
When Darwinism finally rolled around in the 19th century, it was much more an effect, rather than a cause, of the the already centuries-long waning influence of religion in Western thought and life.
It seemed we had reached PeakCuck or the Cuckularity when the Neocons recruited Egghead McMuffin to run his insurgent 3rd party kamikaze candidacy.
Have we now reached PeakZuck or a Zuckularity with the team of Donna & Mark both trying to sculpt the future Narrative with the prongs of social media censorship and sermonizing op-eds about “toxic masculinity”.
& btw: the Roosh thing has been rebutted – it was a thought experiment fer goodness sakes.
The data doesn't agree with you. And I'm not sure why you're lumping Austria and Germany together as if their religiosity were the same. It isn't. Kulturkampf never made it to Austria. Moreover, when it comes to xenophobia there's a decided difference between those two countries, though if you're ethnically German, you might not have experienced it first-hand.>I suspect the common sense of Visegrad has more to do with basic, unreconstructed nationalism, experience of economic hardship within living memoryYou're assuming that nationalism is distinct from traditional Catholicism. Scratch a Pole, or a Croat or a Slovakian, or for that matter, a Frenchman leaning towards Marion Le Pen, and you'll see it isn't. Moreover, when it comes to the invaders from the East, be they from Istanbul or Damascus, the shared concept of "Antemurale Christianitatis" whether explicit or implicit, is a key component of national identity throughout much of that region, Poland especially, but elsewhere throughout that region. Given that Western Europe, Germany included, left it to those benighted Eastern and Southern Catholic/Orthodox Europeans to spill blood so as to keep them safe from Ottomans/Tatars/Saracens for the last couple of centuries, I'm not surprised why people in those countries, Merkel included, have a different outlook on the current immigration mess and what it's all about.> and lack of cultural marxist infiltration.Half a century within the Warsaw pact and you regard that as "lack of cultural marxist infiltration"? Seriously? Or else, to the extent that you mean the marxists were never able to get as far as they wanted into the hearts and minds of the common folk, well, again, ask yourself the reason for that.
The Warsaw pact was stalinist and marxist-leninist. Cultural marxism turned classical marxism upside down and was considered a heresy in the soviet bloc.
Pegida is based in East Germany and AFD his its biggest support there. East Germany is almost completely atheist.
Demographics of atheism
Religion in Europe
Here is the official statement of the polish catholic church on immigration: The Church in Poland: welcoming refugees
The assumption here is that the future of Poland should be multi-racial, multicultural and even multi-religious. Hillary Clinton would approve.
Please show me some evidence of the great catholic bullwark against immigration and the alleged catholic support for nationalism and the preservation of ethnostates. I wish it would exist. All I am aware of is a few fringe figures and obscure bloggers. The bulk of the catholic church, from top to bottom, is more extreme than Angela Merkel and more destructive than all of George Soros’ NGOs combined.
Normie conservatives identify with their country and its traditional religion and they assume that both must be inherently linked. They are also skeptical of mass-immigration. But these sentiments can be attributed to common sense and instinctual tribal loyalty.
No one is denying that the elites of the Catholic church are doing what the rest of elites are doing. We're talking about the rank and file. You claim the situation is the same "top to bottom" but provide no evidence.
Consider the situation in the US. The bishops are overwhelmingly pro-immigration (and don't even seem to recognize the concept of illegal or undocumented). The ones in the pews regard the matter differently. The disconnect between the top and bottom was enough -- according to Steve Sailer anyway -- to cost Clinton the election.
Oh, and with regard to not pretending that Austria and Germany are the same, I forgot to mention Hofer's near win, the most obvious evidence. That didn't happen because only "a few fringe figures and obscure bloggers" voted for him. If AfD does as well in Germany, I'll concede I was wrong. Otherwise, it's all the more reason to put them with the Visegrad group than with Germany.
situation has changed drastically in the last 3-4 years,
partly due to the severe recession that has gripped Russia,
Belarus, and even more so Ukraine. One of the factors is the
low price of oil, currently at about $55 per barrel, while Russia
needs oil to be at at least $70 per barrel to balance its budget.
Currently Poland is hosting over a million Ukrainians, most on short-
term work permits and university students, an unknown but growing
number of Belarusians, and 8,000 Chechens. There also legal immigrants,
incl. 10,000 Russians (some are escapees from Putin's Russia), 70,000
Vietnamese, and 5,000 or so Tatars who have lived in Poland for centuries.
Unlike the predominantly male migrants in W. Europe, the sex ratio among
the Ukrainians is normal. Poland has successfully avoided the unhealthy migrant
sex ratios that are plaguing W. Europe, esp. in the 15-35 demographic. Ukrainian
women work in housekeeping, child and elder care, and some Ukrainian girls even
work in retail. Since Ukrainian is a heavily polonized eastern Slavic language (due to
to the fact that western Ukraine was for many centuries ruled by Poland), most
Ukrainians find Polish fairly easy to learn.
As I pointed out many times on this forum, "geography is destiny" seems like a good zeroth
order approximation in the power series expansion of history, and Poland, due to its
location in Europe, appears to be returning to its former incarnation as a Polish- Lithuanian Commonwealth (where Lithuania actually included today's Belarus, and parts of western
Ukraine). That vast entity that existed for 300 years was multiethnic, multiconfessional,
and even multiracial (Tatars, etc)
In fact, it was Europe's outlier in that respect.
- and how did that end up?
Thanks. Will reread.
Thanks for entertaining my pet theory. Let me know what you think.
“Thanks. Will reread.”
Thanks for entertaining my pet theory. Let me know what you think.
“No way were there 40 million people alive in Mongol territories in the 13th or 14th centuries.”
For what it’s worth, the wikipedia page List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death tollclaims the minimum estimate of deaths due to the Mongol conquest is 30 million and the maximum estimate 40 million. Most of the casualties were likely in China. It might be worth investigating the sources they reference. (Wikipedia is just the messenger here).
Wikipedia also has a world population estimates page. This lists a 2015 United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs estimate of the world population in 1250 as 400 million. (There are estimates by 9 other sources as well, 400 million seems reasonably within range of all.)
2. Force themselves into that space by appeals to fairness/diversity/inclusion.
3. Bask in the attention of "breaking boundaries" to be there.
4. Begin changing that space to make themselves & those like them more dominant & comfortable by appeals to fairness/diversity/inclusion.
5. Turn that space into a space where men/whites have no control & don't want to be. The end-point is the transformation of that space into another producer of crusading women/SJWs.One of the reasons the Alt Right is so hated is because we recognize the game. When valuing fairness/diversity/inclusion is consistently turned into a weapon, it's time to stop doing that.
Hosswire,
Yours is one of the best comments in the iSteve realm is a long time. Vox Day should have had that schematic in is SJW book. It really crystallizes how they operate, particularly in an era of shysters like Anita Sarkessian.
Pegida is based in East Germany and AFD his its biggest support there. East Germany is almost completely atheist.
Demographics of atheism
Religion in Europe
Here is the official statement of the polish catholic church on immigration: The Church in Poland: welcoming refugeesThe assumption here is that the future of Poland should be multi-racial, multicultural and even multi-religious. Hillary Clinton would approve.Please show me some evidence of the great catholic bullwark against immigration and the alleged catholic support for nationalism and the preservation of ethnostates. I wish it would exist. All I am aware of is a few fringe figures and obscure bloggers. The bulk of the catholic church, from top to bottom, is more extreme than Angela Merkel and more destructive than all of George Soros' NGOs combined.
Normie conservatives identify with their country and its traditional religion and they assume that both must be inherently linked. They are also skeptical of mass-immigration. But these sentiments can be attributed to common sense and instinctual tribal loyalty.
“>Here is the official statement of the polish catholic church on immigration…”
No one is denying that the elites of the Catholic church are doing what the rest of elites are doing. We’re talking about the rank and file. You claim the situation is the same “top to bottom” but provide no evidence.
Consider the situation in the US. The bishops are overwhelmingly pro-immigration (and don’t even seem to recognize the concept of illegal or undocumented). The ones in the pews regard the matter differently. The disconnect between the top and bottom was enough — according to Steve Sailer anyway — to cost Clinton the election.
Oh, and with regard to not pretending that Austria and Germany are the same, I forgot to mention Hofer’s near win, the most obvious evidence. That didn’t happen because only “a few fringe figures and obscure bloggers” voted for him. If AfD does as well in Germany, I’ll concede I was wrong. Otherwise, it’s all the more reason to put them with the Visegrad group than with Germany.
? What's that statement supposed to mean?
Your Gallup data is from 2001-2004...probably still somewhat useful, but not exactly up to date.
"> and lack of cultural marxist infiltration.
Half a century within the Warsaw pact and you regard that as “lack of cultural marxist infiltration”?"
No, I agree with Austrian, in Germany the difference between the former West and the former East Germany is fairly striking. East Germans are much more open and vehement in their rejection of Islamic mass immigration, and they're mostly godless (e.g. the PEGIDA movement in Dresden). By contrast many West Germans have totally internalized a multiculturalist world view, with Islamophilia a main component. And despite your protestations Christians, both Protestant and Catholic, are very prominent in this regard, with the highest levels of the church hierarchy (e.g. the archbishop of Cologne) agitating massively in favour of mass immigration.
>? What’s that statement supposed to mean?
Ask a black guy or a Jew who has had to work in both Germany and Austria (though Vienna is likely an exception). I’m pretty sure he’ll notice a difference, based on what I’ve seen.
And anyway, as I stated earlier, Hofer’s performance in Austria is in and on itself proof enough that it shouldn’t be lumped with Germany.
>No, I agree with Austrian, in Germany the difference between the former West and the former East Germany is fairly striking.
I’m not arguing about East Germany. Moreover, the fact that East Germany caved in to Marxism more so than Poland or Slovakia actually supports my thesis. Bismarck’s Kulturkampf never happened in those countries either. And anyone who wants to pretend that Catholicism wasn’t the main opposition to Marxism in the Visegrad group is kidding themselves.
>with the highest levels of the church hierarchy (e.g. the archbishop of Cologne) agitating massively in favour of mass immigration.
Again, no one is arguing about what the elites want. The ones who have to actually deal with immigration head-on see the matter differently.
Various states in history have abrogated the church's prerogative to choose its own leaders. In the West this is done with soft power rather than hard, but it is very much what is going on. Those in the pews (and even more so those who would be in the pews were their churches not occupied by a hostile power) are increasingly skeptical of the globalist program and thus at odds with their putative leadership.
This battle, this moral conflict between the left and right has no beginning and no end, it always has been and always will be. It was present in lives of the stone aged people, the hunter gatherer. I imagine back then as hunter gatherer tribes, where each member of the tribe had a skill that allowed him to share in the fruits of the collective essentially allowing him to survive. One might think that there was no place for the left in the prehistoric time of man, he might be right in thinking that, but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t there. I assume that in a prehistoric tribe the men were the ones who did the hunting, those who made the kill were probably allowed to take the biggest portion for himself. Perhaps he was able to keep the hide and say to who it went or what it was used for.
This would give is where it would be advantageous for a man to be strong, not only for hunting but fighting marauders. But hold on, that isn’t necessarily going to make you leader of the tribe because in many instances brains trumps brawn. I can see lefty rearing head back in those early days of man.
There was probably someone who wasn’t as skilled a hunter, not a strong fighter. He would be left to rely on the generosity of the group. He probably wasn’t allowed to mate, probably had wear old furs that others were done with he’s surviving but that’s it. Then one day something started little prehistoric brain, an emotion that made him think about himself and compare himself to his superior tribesmen. This made him resentful of what they had this feeling would be described in the bible as one of the seven original sins “envy.” So in this inferior human grows great envy of what others have. He doesn’t dare try and steal the other tribe members things for surely he would get killed.
But he keeps thinking and solution comes to him slowly over a period of time. He is lucky to be with a clan that is merciful and is inclined to protect and feed all the members. I don’t know if the bible had a name for the first envious man but for the sake of this story I’ll just call him lefty. As time goes by Lefty notices that there are other in tribe like him they also are left to survive on the scraps of others. These other men were clueless and satisfied with what they and content to help the tribe in any thing they were asked. After awhile a light bulb goes off in Lefty’s head. He can’t confront the others to demand a bigger piece of the pie because they would just laugh at him and possibly cast him out and then he would have no chance at surviving. If he were many he would have a chance, but these others in his position seem too content with their subsistence, he would have to change their attitude , once they realize how unfair they are being treated they would join him. So one by one Lefty started planting the seeds of entitlement into their minds. It worked well the men like lefty were no longer content and the resented the one that had more even though they worked harder to get it. Now he had others on his side but Lefty wasn’t stupid there were still many more of the haves than the have not’s plus lefty and his cohorts were no match in strength and fighting skills to the others unless they killed them all while they slept which is what some of his new friends suggest they do, but ole Lefty knew if they did that there would be nobody to hunt the food for surely he had no intention of doing it himself. He would have to work out a different plan. How to get more without actually doing more? This would take some time and that’s what Lefty had plenty of. At some point Lefty started being a great deal more helpful around the camp while the men went out on hunts, this gave him a lot of time to mingle with females of the tribe. He made up stories to the younger ones about how he was once a great hunter but a deadly bear attack has made impossible to go on the hunt with the others, no matter how much he desired it he would only slow them down. Working among the women Lefty found that he was more than equal to them. He was quite adept doing the chores of women and he worked hard at it ( when anyone was looking.) Lefty soon impressed the women with stories of his past and seemingly kind and gentle manner. He was a confidante to the women and in this way he endeared himself to them, all the while thinking of the next step in his plan. Through casual talk with the women and care manipulation Lefty began to instill a sense of fairness in the women and they suddenly came to realize that they were just as important to the tribe as the hunters who risked their lives to bring fresh game to the table, and in reality they were. They were much more important than Lefty and he knew it and in some sense the great hunters knew this too even if they didn’t acknowledge it. Now with the other men like him along with the women Lefty was at last make the demands he had dared not before. The women went to their respective mates and started the revolt. No more would they be slaves to the wishes of the men. Initially this didn’t go over very well with the great hunters, as you might expect. Some of the women were killed in fits of rage by their testosterone driven men who were still pumped up on adrenaline from the mastodon hunt, but the remaining women were steadfast in their demands for equality and eventually the men agreed to hear what they had to say. Needles to say the hunters did not like the idea of equality for all, they believed that a man had to prove his worth, as for women, well, they already knew their worth. So it was begrudgingly agreed upon, everyone would share equally regardless of their contributions. Once Lefty got his deal the women found him to be scarcely around when there was work to be done. As time went by Lefty grew fat off of other peoples work, their were several new children running around that looked alot like Lefty. While sitting around the campfire during their hunting trips the hunters began to discuss this quality for everyone thing they had agreed on. When they returned from the hunt their women were never in the mood to have relations, yet they all seemed to be pregnant more often than not. It didn’t take long for the hunters to lose the enthusiasm for the hunt. If all were equal and everyone shared equally, where was the incentive to go that extra mile for the game, why risk injury to yourself for equality. It soon became apparent to the hunters that some of the clan were more equal than them even though they did less work. This was caused by Lefty who lived like a king while the hunters were out which was most of the time. Well eventually the equality agreement began to fall apart and rather than renegotiate the hunters decided to go another hunt, this one would be far from their tribe because they had hunted the local area to the extent that game was rare. So off they went the trip would take months, but they finally found a lush valley that was full of game, their were fruit trees, and plenty of fish in a nearby river, it was truly a paradise. There was one problem the place was already inhabited with another tribe. After scouting out where the tribe they deduced that they would have no problem killing the men and taking over the women for themselves, so that is exactly what they did. The hunters soon decided that this would be their new home. One of the men asked who would go back and lead the others to the new paradise, but after careful consideration it was decided that they could do without the others and their so called equality.
Well of course Lefty and his tribe of women and weaklings soon perished, nothing but a silent mark on history that nobody would remember.
This story would be played countles times throughout out history with the initial results.
Morale of the story? I drank too much coffee and couldn’t sleep.
This…
…is why I find so little to read that is interesting anymore. Our entire cultural output now is on a par with the schlock churned out by totalitarian Communist states.
In that case, the only stuff worth reading is that which was created by the dissidents.
Really, everything one reads, even if it is on a completely non-controversial topics, has the unmistakeable stench of purposefully self-hobbled minds that accept and purvey lies as facts.
2. Force themselves into that space by appeals to fairness/diversity/inclusion.
3. Bask in the attention of "breaking boundaries" to be there.
4. Begin changing that space to make themselves & those like them more dominant & comfortable by appeals to fairness/diversity/inclusion.
5. Turn that space into a space where men/whites have no control & don't want to be. The end-point is the transformation of that space into another producer of crusading women/SJWs.One of the reasons the Alt Right is so hated is because we recognize the game. When valuing fairness/diversity/inclusion is consistently turned into a weapon, it's time to stop doing that.
Not wanting to be in diverse, inclusive spaces where you’ve lost hegemonic control over historically marginalized groups — that is white male fragility, accustomed to privilege, thinking that equality is oppression.
Yeah, some Jewish folks declared themselves not white sometime ago. This seems sort of a calculated move. I mean I gotta say that most of the Jews I know look as white as any Caucasian. It would seem they want be able to distance themselves from whites if it benefits them at same time they can blend with a crowd of racist skinheads if need be.
SJW idiocy. Over at TOR, they've been running a re-watch commentary/review of TOS Star Trek. They went into total "point-and-sputter" mode over the Season 3 ep, "The Savage Curtain," which involved aliens creating simulations of "good" and "bad" people from the past. Since Genghis Khan was one of the bad'uns, the SJW commentators went to town about how racist the portrayal was, "how dare Genghis Khan be put on the evil side, when he should have been on the good side with Kirk," etc
He was just misunderstood. He was really a gentle soul. But when his sensitive side was misinterpreted he did get a little annoyed. Hence the slaughtering and raping and pillaging.
An interesting lesson from skimming Wikipeida is that, for all that and given their current legend, they appear far from invincible in Europe proper (in forest, not open horse country), even though they may have won most of the famous battles. Even Saxons (well, Transylvania Saxons, not Anglo-Saxons) sometimes beat them:
Mongol invasion of Europe:
The Mamluks (White slaves) in Egypt also stopped them cold.
Essentially she is arguing from a pre-Reformation clergy position on interpreting the Bible. The bible should be printed in Latin only and taught only by priests. It is only those men, the clergy, who can be a portal to God because they were taught by the sophisticated academics of their time.
I imagine she is incapable of this type of self-reflection.
You know, when I was in college, we still had fairly significant humanities requirements in order to get a BS – I remember at least several quarters of literature, one of drama, one of philosophy, some history, etc, basic western civilization stuff that used to be the norm in higher ed.
I loved the arts classes because basically the method was, humanities been already coopted but not yet eliminated by leftists, was read something and then make up some mindless bullsh*t about what the piece “really means”.
I’m a good writer, so I had a ball, I’d just make up whatever silly thought came into my mind and write it down in my characteristically compelling prose.
Made A’s in everything, my essays very often being held up as examples of outstanding work in just about all of these classes.
That was when I realized that all these hippie retreads were a bunch of completely substance-free jackasses on a free ride in life and haven’t changed my opinion since.
And they all gave me A’s, worshiped my stuff, tried to get me to change my major from Physics to whatever field they were in the process of bowdlerizing, I remember English, German Literature, and Philosophy professors making significant appeals to me.
Of course, I listened politely but inside I would always be thinking, “Are you out of your f*cking mind? Can’t you tell I hold you and your rabble in utter contempt?”
I do have to admit having one English professor that despite being a complete Cultural Marxist, at least a proto one, had a very incisive mind. I guess the best of the lot got sent first in to this fray, it was a long time ago, early 1980s.
I went to a state school, but even there, my Intro to Philosophy prof failed an acting major I knew who tried to mail it in.
My score? Fifty out of fifty.
He writes about it repeatedly in Open Society. All I meant is that more people have been exposed to the idea that the pre-Socratics were proto-democratic liberals by reading him than any other source, which I’m pretty sure is literally true.
For what it's worth, the wikipedia page List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death tollclaims the minimum estimate of deaths due to the Mongol conquest is 30 million and the maximum estimate 40 million. Most of the casualties were likely in China. It might be worth investigating the sources they reference. (Wikipedia is just the messenger here).
Wikipedia also has a world population estimates page. This lists a 2015 United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs estimate of the world population in 1250 as 400 million. (There are estimates by 9 other sources as well, 400 million seems reasonably within range of all.)
As I noted upthread, here’s McEvedy’s breakdown of the death-toll:
This is a good point.
Various states in history have abrogated the church’s prerogative to choose its own leaders. In the West this is done with soft power rather than hard, but it is very much what is going on. Those in the pews (and even more so those who would be in the pews were their churches not occupied by a hostile power) are increasingly skeptical of the globalist program and thus at odds with their putative leadership.
That's certainly in line with what I've seen, first hand. And for what it's worth, even though the Bishop of Cologne is free to backslap Merkel as much as he pleases, his authority doesn't extend to political logistics. Moreover, those who point out that importing refugees is an exorbitantly ineffective and stupid way to respond to the Syrian crisis (that among its many other pitfalls shuts out the ones who are most in need and who can't afford a smuggler in the first place) are not the ones who need to be guilt-tripped. If anything it's those who are busily creating 20 more Bosnias who need to be called to account.
The ones I do fault are the cowards who are willing to let yet another pillar of Western civilization -- along with the universities, the media, and the press -- fall into the hands of the leftists, and I see them time and again in forums like these. If the Sobieskis and the Zrinskis and Don Johns had been that craven, Europe would have gone crescent centuries ago.
“Seems that Zuck’s sis isn’t that well-read a classicist, unless she intended the reference to be ironic.”
Could be that a “learn enough to pass the test and then forget it” type can be an Ivy League PhD these days.
I realized that I was not going to learn anything of value. The goal seemed to be learn to sit still and be quiet and do what you're told without questioning. I always had problems doing what I was told.
When I was a child we lived in Berlin for sometime not knowing the language I became somewhat of a loner. As luck would have it my mom let an encyclopedia salesman in the door and was talked into buying a very costly set of collier’s encyclopedia. Although my mother was chastised for buying them I found it to be just what I needed to get through my early childhood. Along with the encyclopedia they gave her an extensive collection of old classic children books that included Aesop’s fables, Gulliver’s Travels, Alice In Wonderland, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, A Christmas Carol, and many other masterpieces that kept me busy reading and rereading from the early age of three untill the age of ten, when we moved back to the states. Most of the children today have no interest in children classics and know nothing of the joy they are missing.
The data doesn't agree with you. And I'm not sure why you're lumping Austria and Germany together as if their religiosity were the same. It isn't. Kulturkampf never made it to Austria. Moreover, when it comes to xenophobia there's a decided difference between those two countries, though if you're ethnically German, you might not have experienced it first-hand.>I suspect the common sense of Visegrad has more to do with basic, unreconstructed nationalism, experience of economic hardship within living memoryYou're assuming that nationalism is distinct from traditional Catholicism. Scratch a Pole, or a Croat or a Slovakian, or for that matter, a Frenchman leaning towards Marion Le Pen, and you'll see it isn't. Moreover, when it comes to the invaders from the East, be they from Istanbul or Damascus, the shared concept of "Antemurale Christianitatis" whether explicit or implicit, is a key component of national identity throughout much of that region, Poland especially, but elsewhere throughout that region. Given that Western Europe, Germany included, left it to those benighted Eastern and Southern Catholic/Orthodox Europeans to spill blood so as to keep them safe from Ottomans/Tatars/Saracens for the last couple of centuries, I'm not surprised why people in those countries, Merkel included, have a different outlook on the current immigration mess and what it's all about.> and lack of cultural marxist infiltration.Half a century within the Warsaw pact and you regard that as "lack of cultural marxist infiltration"? Seriously? Or else, to the extent that you mean the marxists were never able to get as far as they wanted into the hearts and minds of the common folk, well, again, ask yourself the reason for that.
I recommend reading “Die Wunderbaren Jahre” by Reiner Kunze for anyone who denies East German society was atomized and destroyed under Communism.
And on the west side of the barbed wire, “Biedermann und die Brandstifter” by Max Frisch for some insight on how totalitarians/cultural marxist foist their evil upon unsuspecting, trusting, hardworking and decent peoples.
The price of liberty is eternal vigilance, that never changes.
I loved the arts classes because basically the method was, humanities been already coopted but not yet eliminated by leftists, was read something and then make up some mindless bullsh*t about what the piece "really means".
I'm a good writer, so I had a ball, I'd just make up whatever silly thought came into my mind and write it down in my characteristically compelling prose.
Made A's in everything, my essays very often being held up as examples of outstanding work in just about all of these classes.
That was when I realized that all these hippie retreads were a bunch of completely substance-free jackasses on a free ride in life and haven't changed my opinion since.
And they all gave me A's, worshiped my stuff, tried to get me to change my major from Physics to whatever field they were in the process of bowdlerizing, I remember English, German Literature, and Philosophy professors making significant appeals to me.
Of course, I listened politely but inside I would always be thinking, "Are you out of your f*cking mind? Can't you tell I hold you and your rabble in utter contempt?"
I do have to admit having one English professor that despite being a complete Cultural Marxist, at least a proto one, had a very incisive mind. I guess the best of the lot got sent first in to this fray, it was a long time ago, early 1980s.
A philosophy professor begged you to pick his major because of a b.s. paper you wrote? Must have been a crap school.
I went to a state school, but even there, my Intro to Philosophy prof failed an acting major I knew who tried to mail it in.
...is why I find so little to read that is interesting anymore. Our entire cultural output now is on a par with the schlock churned out by totalitarian Communist states.
In that case, the only stuff worth reading is that which was created by the dissidents.
Really, everything one reads, even if it is on a completely non-controversial topics, has the unmistakeable stench of purposefully self-hobbled minds that accept and purvey lies as facts.
http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2013/09/technology-communism-and-brown-scare.html
I went to a state school, but even there, my Intro to Philosophy prof failed an acting major I knew who tried to mail it in.
University of Georgia. Yes, I thought it was a crap school. I was in a dual degree program with Georgia Tech, getting BS’s in both Physics and Mech Engrg. But I when I entered a commissioning program for the US Navy nuclear program, I cut the Ga Tech part as I would graduate a year sooner and frankly, I was never big on sitting around in classrooms.
Another possibility is that maybe I do write terrific essays from time to time even if I did go to a crap school. Have you ever considered that before mindlessly insulting a complete stranger about whom you know little or nothing other than what you can maliciously misinterpret from his idle commentary on a random blog?
Somebody has to be able to create good material, it doesn’t just drop out of the sky.
I don’t make up stuff about myself or my experiences, I don’t need to.
Pegida is based in East Germany and AFD his its biggest support there. East Germany is almost completely atheist.
Demographics of atheism
Religion in Europe
Here is the official statement of the polish catholic church on immigration: The Church in Poland: welcoming refugeesThe assumption here is that the future of Poland should be multi-racial, multicultural and even multi-religious. Hillary Clinton would approve.Please show me some evidence of the great catholic bullwark against immigration and the alleged catholic support for nationalism and the preservation of ethnostates. I wish it would exist. All I am aware of is a few fringe figures and obscure bloggers. The bulk of the catholic church, from top to bottom, is more extreme than Angela Merkel and more destructive than all of George Soros' NGOs combined.
Normie conservatives identify with their country and its traditional religion and they assume that both must be inherently linked. They are also skeptical of mass-immigration. But these sentiments can be attributed to common sense and instinctual tribal loyalty.
At the present time Poland has a lot of “diversity.” The
situation has changed drastically in the last 3-4 years,
partly due to the severe recession that has gripped Russia,
Belarus, and even more so Ukraine. One of the factors is the
low price of oil, currently at about $55 per barrel, while Russia
needs oil to be at at least $70 per barrel to balance its budget.
Currently Poland is hosting over a million Ukrainians, most on short-
term work permits and university students, an unknown but growing
number of Belarusians, and 8,000 Chechens. There also legal immigrants,
incl. 10,000 Russians (some are escapees from Putin’s Russia), 70,000
Vietnamese, and 5,000 or so Tatars who have lived in Poland for centuries.
Unlike the predominantly male migrants in W. Europe, the sex ratio among
the Ukrainians is normal. Poland has successfully avoided the unhealthy migrant
sex ratios that are plaguing W. Europe, esp. in the 15-35 demographic. Ukrainian
women work in housekeeping, child and elder care, and some Ukrainian girls even
work in retail. Since Ukrainian is a heavily polonized eastern Slavic language (due to
to the fact that western Ukraine was for many centuries ruled by Poland), most
Ukrainians find Polish fairly easy to learn.
As I pointed out many times on this forum, “geography is destiny” seems like a good zeroth
order approximation in the power series expansion of history, and Poland, due to its
location in Europe, appears to be returning to its former incarnation as a Polish- Lithuanian Commonwealth (where Lithuania actually included today’s Belarus, and parts of western
Ukraine). That vast entity that existed for 300 years was multiethnic, multiconfessional,
and even multiracial (Tatars, etc)
In fact this fallacious thinking occurs in the welcome refugee statement of the polish church that I linked before:This assumes that there is some fixed "migratory route". But the very proposals of the polish catholic church expressed in this document would turn Poland into a destination real quick.That is what some enthusiastically believed would occur after Austria joined the EU in 1995. The central location of Austria would somehow through the magic of geography re-establish the Austro-Hungarian Empire within the context of the EU. Instead we got the third world and Muslims.
Alexander Hamilton is an honorary non white at least in part because some people believe he was a real one, because he was born out of wedlock in the West Indies to a poor woman who worked for a rich man who was (or at least may have been) Alexander’s father. Some people don’t realize or can’t accept that such a society has poor white people, the example of our own South notwithstanding.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Saint_Kitts_and_NevisGeography where you were born can definitely play a role in someone's racial perception of you. If you were born in a heavily Negro nation you must have some Black blood somewhere in your family tree even if it's not evident in your phenotype, I mean how do you maintain White racial purity in a country where 9 out of every 10 person is Black.
Now we have to listen to Jews lecture us about our own history of Western Civilization? And that as whites we’re not even allowed to claim it? Interesting career choice for her given the history between Jews and Greeks.
Maybe she went into the classics to destroy them, similarly to the way Constitution hating leftists go to Harvard Law to destroy the Constitution. They’re successful because they have high IQs and a sense of mission. If they don’t get on SCOTUS and/or reach the highest ranks in the professoriate, they still have great financial rewards, which is not generally the case with a classicist. Maybe some day Ms. Zuckerberg will wish she’d become a lawyer. Of course she’s got a rich brother.
P.S. It always amuses me when people, especially rude people, don’t think to use google.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/4544602?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
Whereas the Zionists revived Hebrew as a language for their nation, we could revive Latin as the language for Our Fair Republic.
Dominus vobiscum.
Et cum spiritu tuo.
Ave atque vale.
Maybe she likes Classics?
Norbert Hofer rage-quit the catholic church in 2009 because of the catholic “witch-hunt” (his words) against the FPÖ and its politicians. Meanwhile Van der Bellen said he considers joining the church. He was overwhelmed by the work and sacrifice of catholic volunteers on behalf of the refugees. He celebrated his victory with a pilgrimage to Mariazell last week.
Hofer’s stance on immigration was often brought up to cast doubt on his christian faith. He never managed to explain himself on this issue and tried to change the subject. He campaigned against immigration in the first round. He emphasized his christian faith in the second round and the re-run. But he never connected the two to argue that his christian faith compels him to repel the muslim hordes or something like that. In fact, he mentioned immigration less and less as the election progressed.
There was only one support group of 1500 Christians who endorsed him. But they did not mention immigration, but rather family values and faith.
Btw, the FPÖ actually ran a pagan woman named Barbara Rosenkranz in 2010. She has ten kids and is among the most right-wing in the party. Hofer is pretty lukewarm.
The existence and success of political parties depends on many historical contingencies. Germany and Austria differ. So do the lutheran north, the catholic south and the atheist east of Germany. But the relative success of the FPÖ and the AFD in the current year doesn’t tell you much about that.
The catholic volunteers and charity workers love their refugees and demand more of them.
Catholicism was vehemently opposed to Marxism in the east. But it embraced the western Cultural Marxist paradigm immediately and wholeheartedly, except on some matters of sex and reproduction.
The eastern marxist-leninist regimes flat out banned and suppressed western influences, including all heretical off-shoots of marxism, like the Frankfurt school, critical theory, cultural marxism, trotskyism, etc. That is why nationalism and common sense are still present in Visegrad.
That's a major exception.
No prizes for guessing whether Mr, Colavito or Ms. Zuckerberg gets more traction among today’s leftists.
Various states in history have abrogated the church's prerogative to choose its own leaders. In the West this is done with soft power rather than hard, but it is very much what is going on. Those in the pews (and even more so those who would be in the pews were their churches not occupied by a hostile power) are increasingly skeptical of the globalist program and thus at odds with their putative leadership.
That’s a very good point indeed.
Could be. Or at least it’s quite possible that she liked them at one time.
In an episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm, Larry David makes the mistake of giving up a cabinet in a kitchen next to to his office. His friends and employees receive the news with alarm, telling him he should never, ever give up a cabinet. In the end, the person he gives the cabinet to takes over two cabinets and eventually the whole kitchen, locking him out.
Similarly, the US should never give up a state. Perhaps someday we will have enough conservatives to reoccupy California, given our higher than average birthrates.
The counties that went for Trump were in the interior, away from the coast. He did well in the Sierras.
That is where the water for LA and the Bay area comes from.
LA may have legal title to Owens Valley water but those would not hold up in an openly hostile confrontation.
Hofer's stance on immigration was often brought up to cast doubt on his christian faith. He never managed to explain himself on this issue and tried to change the subject. He campaigned against immigration in the first round. He emphasized his christian faith in the second round and the re-run. But he never connected the two to argue that his christian faith compels him to repel the muslim hordes or something like that. In fact, he mentioned immigration less and less as the election progressed.
There was only one support group of 1500 Christians who endorsed him. But they did not mention immigration, but rather family values and faith.
Btw, the FPÖ actually ran a pagan woman named Barbara Rosenkranz in 2010. She has ten kids and is among the most right-wing in the party. Hofer is pretty lukewarm.
The existence and success of political parties depends on many historical contingencies. Germany and Austria differ. So do the lutheran north, the catholic south and the atheist east of Germany. But the relative success of the FPÖ and the AFD in the current year doesn't tell you much about that.The catholic volunteers and charity workers love their refugees and demand more of them.
Catholicism was vehemently opposed to Marxism in the east. But it embraced the western Cultural Marxist paradigm immediately and wholeheartedly, except on some matters of sex and reproduction.
The eastern marxist-leninist regimes flat out banned and suppressed western influences, including all heretical off-shoots of marxism, like the Frankfurt school, critical theory, cultural marxism, trotskyism, etc. That is why nationalism and common sense are still present in Visegrad.
“…except on some matters of sex and reproduction.”
That’s a major exception.
Classics is perhaps the only field in humanities that gets the same respect as Physics and Math. I suspect looking smart is important to the sister of Mr Facebook.
I think “Zuckerman” or “Zukerman” is fairly common, but I never heard of a “Zuckerberg” until Facebook Mark became famous.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_Zuckerman
*http://www.ancestry.com/name-origin?surname=zuckerberg
What's she going to do? Make Amazon stop selling us books? Get our names on a National Shitlist so the county library branch won't let us check out classical authors? Cut off our subscriptions to Eidolon?
“What’s she going to do?… …Cut off our subscriptions to Eidolon?”
Please don’t give her any ideas!
situation has changed drastically in the last 3-4 years,
partly due to the severe recession that has gripped Russia,
Belarus, and even more so Ukraine. One of the factors is the
low price of oil, currently at about $55 per barrel, while Russia
needs oil to be at at least $70 per barrel to balance its budget.
Currently Poland is hosting over a million Ukrainians, most on short-
term work permits and university students, an unknown but growing
number of Belarusians, and 8,000 Chechens. There also legal immigrants,
incl. 10,000 Russians (some are escapees from Putin's Russia), 70,000
Vietnamese, and 5,000 or so Tatars who have lived in Poland for centuries.
Unlike the predominantly male migrants in W. Europe, the sex ratio among
the Ukrainians is normal. Poland has successfully avoided the unhealthy migrant
sex ratios that are plaguing W. Europe, esp. in the 15-35 demographic. Ukrainian
women work in housekeeping, child and elder care, and some Ukrainian girls even
work in retail. Since Ukrainian is a heavily polonized eastern Slavic language (due to
to the fact that western Ukraine was for many centuries ruled by Poland), most
Ukrainians find Polish fairly easy to learn.
As I pointed out many times on this forum, "geography is destiny" seems like a good zeroth
order approximation in the power series expansion of history, and Poland, due to its
location in Europe, appears to be returning to its former incarnation as a Polish- Lithuanian Commonwealth (where Lithuania actually included today's Belarus, and parts of western
Ukraine). That vast entity that existed for 300 years was multiethnic, multiconfessional,
and even multiracial (Tatars, etc)
No, demography is destiny! Geography does not matter in the era of cheap travel, mass-communication and global supply chains. Somalis did not end up in Sweden because of geography.
In fact this fallacious thinking occurs in the welcome refugee statement of the polish church that I linked before:
This assumes that there is some fixed “migratory route”. But the very proposals of the polish catholic church expressed in this document would turn Poland into a destination real quick.
That is what some enthusiastically believed would occur after Austria joined the EU in 1995. The central location of Austria would somehow through the magic of geography re-establish the Austro-Hungarian Empire within the context of the EU. Instead we got the third world and Muslims.
I typically add demography(or population dynamics)
as the next term in this power series expansion, and if
you're mathematically trained, then you know what I
mean. Of course, population dynamics is important.
I said so many times before on this forum.
I'm not saying that the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth
is likely to be resurrected. What the history of the Common-
wealth (or that of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire)
demonstrates in my view is that multiculturalism doesn't
work, and the U.S. is now beginning to learn this lesson.
In the spring of 2015 a large group of Ukrainian jornalists
wrote to Polish politicians suggesting that Poland might
consider incorporating a big chunk of western Ukraine into
its territory - based on opinion polls 90% of western
Ukrainians would rather be ruled by Poland than by the Kiev
oligarchs. There is little interest in Poland in this idea at this
time since this type of annexation would mean taking over
a big chunk of the Ukrainian debt. The Polish feel a little
closer to Belarus, again part of the Commonwealth, settled
by the Polish centuries ago who converted to Orthodoxy and
effectively became Ruthenians.
By the way, after 1989 few people in Poland pay attention to
what the bishops are saying if it disagrees with common sense
IMO, masses of Europeans having”the realization that there might well be no God…” would be more descriptive of the Enlightenment Era of the 16th/17th centuries, when Rationalism, Cartesianism, Skepticism were sweeping aside a millenium of medieval religiosity.
When Darwinism finally rolled around in the 19th century, it was much more an effect, rather than a cause, of the the already centuries-long waning influence of religion in Western thought and life.
Various states in history have abrogated the church's prerogative to choose its own leaders. In the West this is done with soft power rather than hard, but it is very much what is going on. Those in the pews (and even more so those who would be in the pews were their churches not occupied by a hostile power) are increasingly skeptical of the globalist program and thus at odds with their putative leadership.
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6293
Here they’re trying to effect a change in the leadership through dissent in the pews — but the pews are already on their side against clerical authority so why bother?
Anyway I suppose it changed from JP II’s Polish nationalist bulwark against communism to Francis’ Marxist liberation theology somehow.
Isn’t Christianity inherently missionizing, globalist, and, well, cucky, and prone to falling into these virtue-chasing spirals?
We all fall short of the glory of God, even Christianity. Then again, when rightly practiced, Christianity contains within itself the means to transcend those failings.
At minimum that requires a robust distinction between the spiritual sphere and the temporal.
A major failing of the Hillary claque was having no earthly idea who their friends were.
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/14/evangelicals-back-donald-trump-atheists-support-hi/Two thirds of Atheists StandWithHer# hashtag. I don't know why Atheists get so much love among White Nationalists/The Alt-Right and Christians get so much hate. If it was up to most Atheists we would be hearing that creepy Hillary laugh for the next 8 years.
Matthew Arnold FTW.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hedgehog_and_the_Fox
Pegida is based in East Germany and AFD his its biggest support there. East Germany is almost completely atheist.
Demographics of atheism
Religion in Europe
Here is the official statement of the polish catholic church on immigration: The Church in Poland: welcoming refugeesThe assumption here is that the future of Poland should be multi-racial, multicultural and even multi-religious. Hillary Clinton would approve.Please show me some evidence of the great catholic bullwark against immigration and the alleged catholic support for nationalism and the preservation of ethnostates. I wish it would exist. All I am aware of is a few fringe figures and obscure bloggers. The bulk of the catholic church, from top to bottom, is more extreme than Angela Merkel and more destructive than all of George Soros' NGOs combined.
Normie conservatives identify with their country and its traditional religion and they assume that both must be inherently linked. They are also skeptical of mass-immigration. But these sentiments can be attributed to common sense and instinctual tribal loyalty.
Within living memory, Poland wasn’t so ‘ethnically homogenous’.
In fact, it was Europe’s outlier in that respect.
– and how did that end up?
I can swear that I read somewhere, many many moons ago that Richard Nixon was part Albanian on the maternal side and distantly related to Enver Hoxha.
For the life of me I cannot recall the source.
For the life of me I cannot recall the source.
I vaguely remember hearing that too. No idea if it’s true or not.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/goldibex
He looks very very beta; maybe dissatisfaction is drawing D.Z. to the alt-right in spite of herself.
Et cum spiritu tuo.
Et ad te.
Ave atque vale.
Alright, so you boys aren’t too keen on the notion, very well. I’m just spit-ballin’. My take-away from all this is that you scoffed at the idea of Latin being the official language of Our Fair Republic.
You didn’t scoff at the given existence of Our Fair Republic.
I’m for a conditional CalExit.
First, the US would keep most of the territory. Much of California (geographically speaking) is sparsely populated and/or conservative. The state has significant natural resources. Perhaps more importantly, certain locations such as Yosemite are integral parts of the country’s natural heritage and must not be surrendered. IOW, they get the Third World megalopoles on the coast; we keep John Muir’s California.
Second, while I’d allow full internal autonomy for the CalExiters, including with respect to immigration policies, ultimate sovereignty must remain with the US. If Californians had an independent foreign policy, it would create the possibility of a foreign power (most likely China) gaining a strategic foothold on our continent.
Overall, the model for CalExit (or, more precisely, SF/Sacramento/LA/San Diego Exit) should be Hong Kong. One country, two systems.
http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-pol-ca-california-neighborhood-election-results/The most frustrating thing to me about the CalExit idea is that this is the kind of tension that was designed to be dealt with by federalism and states' rights. But since the left requires a strong central government to enforce the petty diktat of the week (transgenders in bathrooms for the whole country? if it really is a problem let the states figure it out) now their knickers are in a twist because they lost control of their Frankenstein's monster.
That atlas is full of crap. It doesn't pass the math test. It's par for the course for anyone authoring anything about massacres to wildly inflate the numbers (which we have no way of verifying via a census) to set off that 'Gosh!' factor in gullible readers.
No way the population of Egypt was 2 when they built the Pyramids. Start with 2 living people, namely 1 man and 1 woman. This pair had 4 children that survived to adulthood to marry. This gives a next generation total of 4. Repeat the 4 kids in the next generation and you’re up to 8. Next generation, etc, and by 0 BC you’re already at 2,251,799,813,685,248 people. Thats 2.251 quadrillion–with a ‘q’–by the 1st century. The population was a heck of a lot smaller back then, otherwise the world would have become wildly overpopulated centuries ago, and it wasn’t.
“Alexander Hamilton is an honorary non white at least in part because some people believe he was a real one, because he was born out of wedlock in the West Indies to a poor woman who worked for a rich man who was (or at least may have been) Alexander’s father. Some people don’t realize or can’t accept that such a society has poor white people, the example of our own South notwithstanding.”
The reason so many people believe Alexander Hamilton was Black is because he was born in Saint Kitts And Nevis where a whopping 92 percent of the population is Black.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Saint_Kitts_and_Nevis
Geography where you were born can definitely play a role in someone’s racial perception of you. If you were born in a heavily Negro nation you must have some Black blood somewhere in your family tree even if it’s not evident in your phenotype, I mean how do you maintain White racial purity in a country where 9 out of every 10 person is Black.
“Maybe Zuck just can’t get a White woman?”
Yeah there is not a single White female gold digger on the planet who is open to marrying the wealthiest man in the world who is under the age of 40.
https://www.google.com/search?q=cary+grant+to+catch+a+thief+beach&biw=1366&bih=638&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiHvp_uo__QAhUrr1QKHUjmCf4Q_AUIBigB&dpr=1#tbm=isch&q=cary+grant+to+catch+a+thief+
“Some were, some weren’t. Go to Italy today, dear boy. It has a wide range of phenotypes, from the swarthy to the fair.”
If by fair you mean fair haired, the vast majority of fair people in Italy are either women (mostly dye jobs) or children. There are not a lot of adult men in Italy who are as blond as actor Philip Seymour Hoffman for example.
There were no Haven Monahans among any of the Italian men on The Sopranos or The Godfather.
http://curiosando708090.altervista.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/maurizio_merli_.jpg
“P.S. Here’s Dr. Zuckerberg’s Facebook page, Sugar Mountain Treats, of delicious-looking desserts she bakes.”
Might I ask what the point of including this is? I mean, does anyone here actually believe that it’s wrong for a woman to be interested in how to bake desserts? Does anyone here think it’s wrong for a woman who bakes desserts to also have opinions about the larger world, even if you disagree with them? I would think this should make people of an “alt-right” bent have a bit more empathy with Donna Zuckerberg, seeing as she does do some things that the alt-right regards as feminine. Sheesh. If she wrote a post denigrating baking, that would “feminist.” If she writes about baking, there’s some unspoken contempt for any attempt at intellectualism on her part. Can you see why this sort of, “Heads you’re a feminazi, tails you’re a girly-girl,” implication might be a bit frustrating and might disincline people to sympathy with the alt-right?
Ms. Zuckerberg (especially given her tangent about how she lets her students use her as a doormat) seems like much more of a follower than a leader. The place she's coming from is less Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and more Nice White Lady.
If the cultural winds were blowing another way (or even if her brother with the famously aggressive personality thought differently), she could bake her pastries and read Ovid without troubling herself too much with thoughts of scary alt-righters.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/4544602?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
It always amuses me when idiots don’t understand what they read, or rather what they link to.
*Namely that Karl Popper never had the "slightest connection" to the study of pre-Socratic philosophy.
Could be that a "learn enough to pass the test and then forget it" type can be an Ivy League PhD these days.
Bingo!
In fact this fallacious thinking occurs in the welcome refugee statement of the polish church that I linked before:This assumes that there is some fixed "migratory route". But the very proposals of the polish catholic church expressed in this document would turn Poland into a destination real quick.That is what some enthusiastically believed would occur after Austria joined the EU in 1995. The central location of Austria would somehow through the magic of geography re-establish the Austro-Hungarian Empire within the context of the EU. Instead we got the third world and Muslims.
I said “geography is the zeroth order approximation.”
I typically add demography(or population dynamics)
as the next term in this power series expansion, and if
you’re mathematically trained, then you know what I
mean. Of course, population dynamics is important.
I said so many times before on this forum.
I’m not saying that the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth
is likely to be resurrected. What the history of the Common-
wealth (or that of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire)
demonstrates in my view is that multiculturalism doesn’t
work, and the U.S. is now beginning to learn this lesson.
In the spring of 2015 a large group of Ukrainian jornalists
wrote to Polish politicians suggesting that Poland might
consider incorporating a big chunk of western Ukraine into
its territory – based on opinion polls 90% of western
Ukrainians would rather be ruled by Poland than by the Kiev
oligarchs. There is little interest in Poland in this idea at this
time since this type of annexation would mean taking over
a big chunk of the Ukrainian debt. The Polish feel a little
closer to Belarus, again part of the Commonwealth, settled
by the Polish centuries ago who converted to Orthodoxy and
effectively became Ruthenians.
By the way, after 1989 few people in Poland pay attention to
what the bishops are saying if it disagrees with common sense
Yes.
We all fall short of the glory of God, even Christianity. Then again, when rightly practiced, Christianity contains within itself the means to transcend those failings.
At minimum that requires a robust distinction between the spiritual sphere and the temporal.
Podesta’s not the sharpest tool in the shed.
A major failing of the Hillary claque was having no earthly idea who their friends were.
see also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hedgehog_and_the_Fox
According to various articles floating around out there, as of 2012 D.Z. was married to this guy:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/goldibex
He looks very very beta; maybe dissatisfaction is drawing D.Z. to the alt-right in spite of herself.
The smartest fellow-student of mine was Dorothea Wender, nee Schmidt. Get this: her parents were Plymouth Brethern handing out tracts on the street (unless she made that up), and she earned a living winning commerical jingle contests. She said she won a new Cadillac once that way and got $5000 out of selling it to a Cadillac dealership. I don't remember what her diss. was on. She didn't do much publishing-wise but I do remember something she got published where she was able to work in something about Susie Creamcheese. She had a tragic life, divorced with 2 daughters, teaching at Wheaton College in Norton, MA, she had a major stroke at a young age, but by dint of much effort, was able to re-assemble most of your mind.
Back to Donna Zuckerberg's piece in Jezebel. I can only feel sorry for her that she took up Classics. In the ancient world, women were subservient, and there is precious little to write about from a feminist viewpoint. Much less to justify reading Classics to female students with a background in Diversity Studies (c). So she twists herself up in pretzels to establish a standing point. Highly politicized and polarized, she wants to prevent Alt-Right from classicizing the ancient texts. Unless she can transcend her existential reality she will never do useful work in her chosen field. This is an unhappy-making pickle to find oneself in. Randi and Arielle her sisters are doubtless doing something with their lives.
Anonymouse, that was an informed, erudite, and compassionate comment. Thanks.
He’s one of the richest people in the world. He can get any woman.
General rule: White man with Asian woman= Beta male
Amy (Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother) Chua makes a point of telling people that she was the first Asian that her White husband dated. She wants people to know that he's not some loser with Yellow Fever....
When Darwinism finally rolled around in the 19th century, it was much more an effect, rather than a cause, of the the already centuries-long waning influence of religion in Western thought and life.
What you say is true. However, the enlightenment view of a rational, deistic universe crafted by a clock-maker God is still rather anodyne. Darwin replaced that with the idea of a violent contest for survival – a far less comforting notion.
Certainly the coup de grace on a centuries long trend that began in earnest with the Renaissance.
Newton's Calculus didn't help matters much either, IMO.
The problem with Darwinism (and atheism) is that it leads inevitably to nihilism. Christianity on the other hand leads to woolly-minded feelgood wallowing in misguided compassion and that leads to national and cultural suicide. So we're between a rock and a hard place.
Bring back the old gods! Bow down to Wotan!
The smartest fellow-student of mine was Dorothea Wender, nee Schmidt. Get this: her parents were Plymouth Brethern handing out tracts on the street (unless she made that up), and she earned a living winning commerical jingle contests. She said she won a new Cadillac once that way and got $5000 out of selling it to a Cadillac dealership. I don't remember what her diss. was on. She didn't do much publishing-wise but I do remember something she got published where she was able to work in something about Susie Creamcheese. She had a tragic life, divorced with 2 daughters, teaching at Wheaton College in Norton, MA, she had a major stroke at a young age, but by dint of much effort, was able to re-assemble most of your mind.
Back to Donna Zuckerberg's piece in Jezebel. I can only feel sorry for her that she took up Classics. In the ancient world, women were subservient, and there is precious little to write about from a feminist viewpoint. Much less to justify reading Classics to female students with a background in Diversity Studies (c). So she twists herself up in pretzels to establish a standing point. Highly politicized and polarized, she wants to prevent Alt-Right from classicizing the ancient texts. Unless she can transcend her existential reality she will never do useful work in her chosen field. This is an unhappy-making pickle to find oneself in. Randi and Arielle her sisters are doubtless doing something with their lives.
There are two women’s names in this sentence and a half.
The subservient one isn’t the ancient one.
I know this would eliminate Dr. Zuckerberg’s job, but the reality is that the Classics developed out of a world of patriarchy, sexism, and hierarchy where slavery went unquestioned as a practice, and mass slaughter and rape was reflexive for the victors of a battle.
One can try to “re-interpret” the Classics out of existence, or “contextualize” the authors, but the reality is that the Classics are fundamentally reactionary.
It is easier to simply burn books and suppress their dissemination than it is to attempt to “re-interpret” them in a manner that inverts the plain meaning of the text. I think we need to start with burning and suppressing the ancient texts, and move our way up to the U.S. Constitution. I imagine a carefully redacted version of the Federalist Papers can be permitted to exist, as the talk about the Electoral College sounds useful.
In addition, once you train people to destroy the works of their political opponents, they are much easier to cajole into torturing their opponents to extract confessions and then sentencing their opponents to death in show trials. Social Justice will never be realized unless we are willing to break a few eggs. We really need to heighten the terror at this historical juncture, before the Alt-Right has an opportunity to metastasize.
Interesting interpretation. I haven’t read much by Conrad, but Nostromo lends some weight to your interpretation, iirc it has a major character who through his atheism loses the will to life and spotaneously commits suicide when the chance arises.
situation has changed drastically in the last 3-4 years,
partly due to the severe recession that has gripped Russia,
Belarus, and even more so Ukraine. One of the factors is the
low price of oil, currently at about $55 per barrel, while Russia
needs oil to be at at least $70 per barrel to balance its budget.
Currently Poland is hosting over a million Ukrainians, most on short-
term work permits and university students, an unknown but growing
number of Belarusians, and 8,000 Chechens. There also legal immigrants,
incl. 10,000 Russians (some are escapees from Putin's Russia), 70,000
Vietnamese, and 5,000 or so Tatars who have lived in Poland for centuries.
Unlike the predominantly male migrants in W. Europe, the sex ratio among
the Ukrainians is normal. Poland has successfully avoided the unhealthy migrant
sex ratios that are plaguing W. Europe, esp. in the 15-35 demographic. Ukrainian
women work in housekeeping, child and elder care, and some Ukrainian girls even
work in retail. Since Ukrainian is a heavily polonized eastern Slavic language (due to
to the fact that western Ukraine was for many centuries ruled by Poland), most
Ukrainians find Polish fairly easy to learn.
As I pointed out many times on this forum, "geography is destiny" seems like a good zeroth
order approximation in the power series expansion of history, and Poland, due to its
location in Europe, appears to be returning to its former incarnation as a Polish- Lithuanian Commonwealth (where Lithuania actually included today's Belarus, and parts of western
Ukraine). That vast entity that existed for 300 years was multiethnic, multiconfessional,
and even multiracial (Tatars, etc)
Ukrainians and Belarussians won’t turn out to be much of a problem, neither will Vietnamese or the Tatars (who in any case are a long-established minority). I’d be glad if Western Europe had only your kind of “diversity”.
That’s fair enough. Social Darwinism, about the most reductive perspective on the human condition possible, followed hard on the heels of biologic Darwinism.
Certainly the coup de grace on a centuries long trend that began in earnest with the Renaissance.
Newton’s Calculus didn’t help matters much either, IMO.
Now I can't read Homer or Plato or Plutarch without being a racist. Always, everywhere, whatever I do, I'm somehow scheming to put blacks back in chains and women in the kitchen. No pleasure I can have escapes the stain of my distant ancestors.
All accounts must be settled, all crooked roads must be made straight, all mountains and valleys must be leveled to achieve perfect justice. Apparently there is just something in human nature that turns some people into theocratic bullies. It's an urge so strong it manifests itself even in people who don't believe in God.
I'm beginning to understand why wise gurus supposedly went to live on mountaintops, away from all human contact.
That’s right. There will always be an established church. The only choice is which one.
He can *buy* any woman who is for sale.
So was the 20th century all polka dots and moonbeams?
They weren’t doing slavery to be evil back then, they were doing it because it was necessary to survive/compete. When societies had advanced enough that slavery became less necessary, strange new respect for freedom as an inalienable right of all people, etc.
We are usually blind to the evils of things we feel we really need, the whole thing about it is impossible to convince someone of something when his livelihood depends upon him not understanding that something.
Like today, we kill about about 30k people a year in traffic deaths, a lot, but still well below 50k/annum of 70s, with a smaller population and less cars. That is about how many US lives were lost in Vietnam War. The 30k/annum total is roughly a Korean War every year.
Thats quite a human toll that this institution takes and while we work to minimize this, everyone more or less accepts the morality of it. It is never presented as a moral wrong, just as an efficiency/safety issue.
As soon as driverless cars become pervasive, everyone will be shaking their heads at how we all merrily went our way with this, entertaining ourselves with reports on holiday traffic death tolls, etc. It will look sort of crazy to future generations.
But we need our cars to survive now and back then, slavery was a critical component of many societies.
EUROPEANS PRACTICED SLAVERY!
EUROPEANS WERE BAD!I do think a controlled-study of the Classics, for carefully selected students in elite universities, could be allowed to exist provided it was clear that the telos was to demonstrate the consistent arc of moral evil displayed in European cultures from Ancient Greece to the Holocaust, and the brave hope that ultimately the European perishes in the cannibal's pot, where he or she can, at least, provide for the protein deficits of the Sun People, having exploited them over so many centuries.
Might I ask what the point of including this is? I mean, does anyone here actually believe that it's wrong for a woman to be interested in how to bake desserts? Does anyone here think it's wrong for a woman who bakes desserts to also have opinions about the larger world, even if you disagree with them? I would think this should make people of an "alt-right" bent have a bit more empathy with Donna Zuckerberg, seeing as she does do some things that the alt-right regards as feminine. Sheesh. If she wrote a post denigrating baking, that would "feminist." If she writes about baking, there's some unspoken contempt for any attempt at intellectualism on her part. Can you see why this sort of, "Heads you're a feminazi, tails you're a girly-girl," implication might be a bit frustrating and might disincline people to sympathy with the alt-right?
It is a little known fact that many on the right have an outlandish sweet tooth. H., for example, would eat… oh, never mind.
Please see my comment no. 87. Yes, it’s from the Daily Stormer – deal with it. It just proves my point.
http://www.dailystormer.com/yes-ms-zuckerberg-please-give-birth-to-an-army-of-mixed-race-babies-to-fight-us-nazis/
I’d put it as he can have sex with any woman as opposed to get any woman.
By getting I mean gaining her true affections rather than a simulation that she may even sincerely believe is a true attraction on her part.
Look at Sumner Redstone. Looks like he forked out the better portion of 150 million to Sydney Holland and she still cheated on him. And at that kind of dough, you know the guy was trying to buy that thrilling psychological spark of true love in addition to raw sex, which can be had for many orders of magnitude more cheaply with the most beautiful, sexy women imaginable.
And he still couldn’t authentically “get” a woman even in the eight to nine figure range. That has got to be frustrating, and he was in the habit of throwing only slightly smaller amounts of money at other woman, at least according to Sydney Holland’s lawsuit.
You know a dude isn’t happy with outcomes when he is doing something like that.
A woman’s love and respect for a man can’t ever be bought, but if you are willing to settle for less, there are plenty of women who will earnestly attempt to simulate it for the right price. Ol’ Sumner apparently wasn’t and there is a bit of a Greek tragedy aspect to him in this.
IMO, the whole story ennobles women, demonstrates that despite the view of many men that at some price point you can just buy women, but there is a core that woman (and men) can’t ever sell, not even for tens of millions of dollars.
Richard S. will scatter the Zuck, drive him before him, reduce his fortune to ashes, shroud those who love him in tears, and will gather Donna, Arielle and Randi into his bosom. Finally he’ll move in on Priscilla and Fakebook’s foundering founder will be rightfully yclept Cuckerberg.
Couldn’t help remembering Saul Bellow’s famous remark, “Who is the Tolstoy of the Zulus? The Proust of the Papuans? I’d be glad to read him.”
Gregory Cochran gets to call people pinheads without explaining why because he’s an accomplished scholar who people know and respect. You are an anonymous pincode, so you just come off as having a personality disorder. The closest thing you have made to an actual statement of what you believe to be true* is obviously not true. Being generous, perhaps you simply misunderstood what I was saying, which is an occupational hazard of being an abusive braggart.
*Namely that Karl Popper never had the “slightest connection” to the study of pre-Socratic philosophy.
* corrected a typo
Smartest man ever to become an American president. Too bad his life was cut short. Even more remarkably he came up with a new & ingenious proof of the Pythagorean theorem (‘cuz he was bored in Congress).
To stake out a career in the academic humanities today, you need to drain all the beauty and wonder out of studying them, and instead problematize them in terms of the social justice and progressive issues du jour. I’m not cynical enough to believe Zuckerberg, whose area of expertise is Euripides and Aristophanes, doesn’t like, even love, her chosen field of study. But she is one of the few who has both the connections and financial means to promote and defend the classics without politicizing them in such a dreary and sanctimonious way, that has made so bright minds turn away from the classics and humanities in general. It speaks terribly of her that she’s taken the academically expedient road of reviewing the classics from a maddeningly myopic presentist and feminist view, and that she seeks to squash opposing identitarian views as inferior to her own.
If the Zuckerberg Connection wasn’t enough trigger-warning for ya, well…..you really owe it to your readers to post the promimently-displayed artwork illustrating this don’t-think piece.
(Later, she scolds some alt-rightist for “a Photoshopped image (of) Hitler” on his Facebook page. Of course, he’s simply “a troll”, not a Zuckerberg.)
Me, I saw where this was headed when the good “Doctor” made sure to shoehorn you think you’re smart, but you’re not, ok? – cuz you’re stupid. I’m smart right there in the very first graf.
As I’ve come to relish reminding these folks: but you’re not so smart that you saw President Trump coming, were you? And you’re dumb enough to not quite grasp that your continuing, deeply-neurotic and shamelessly-selfish public meltdowns have all but RE-elected him four years from now ……..when he hasn’t even been inaugurated the first time!
As for “Dr” Zuckerberg’s heavy-handed warning/reminder to every student or subordinate dependent upon ahistorical harpies like herself for the kind of bureaucratic reacharound now as vital as oxygen for a career in tenured radicalism…..look here: if someone is advising you to “forefully challenge” traditional viewpoints by “engag(ing) them on their assumed definitions of “foundation,” “Western,” “civilization,” and “culture.” Point out that such ideas are a slippery slope to white supremacy”, recognize the swindler at work – remember, “it all depends on your definition of is is”, and take up the challenge of debunking, discrediting and driving out such Ponzi-schemers from academia, which in the long run is far more important a task than electing a worthwhile politician.
It won’t be that hard. Just imagine how she’d be attacked for, say, making pro-white statements – how her family connections would be used to relentlessly mock and malign her – and copy the methodology! Here, surely, is a Goliath any determined David – armed with truth, logic and the historical record -can slingshot into submission. After all, one Zuckerberg besieging Western civilization is entirely sufficient.
BTW, I very much enjoyed your take on Conrad and Heart of Darkness, that it is a treatise written by a man conflicted by the implications of Darwinism. I had never considered that angle, but it is very intriguing.
That made me reconsider a couple of other works with the perspective that the authors lived in an era where the implications of Darwinism were sinking into the collective consciousness.
One such is A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court, which was very prescient about the soon to be real life horrors of trench warfare. I’ve always thought that while it starts off quite critical of European aristocratic institutions and other medievalisms, it is optimistic about humanity until it gets to the denouement with all the mass slaughter.
I still consider it one of the bleakest things I’ve ever read, a commentary on the hopelessly dehumanizing aspects of technology. But I can see that without at least exposure to God is Dead, life is just amoral struggle to survive by whatever means necessary type notions easily inferred from Darwinism, Clemens probably couldn’t have written such a work.
Another work considering in this light might be Jack London’s To Build A Fire, an account of a grim and utterly meaningless struggle for survival that failed because of random, minor happenstances.
Anyhow, thanks for posting those very interesting ideas.
The prevailing views of science are part of the zeitgeist of an age; that was certainly true of the 19th century. It seems to me that interesting writers are interested in lots of things. Conrad, Wells, Twain, London, and others, wrote books based on their experiences and often wide-ranging interests, so it isn't surprising that the broader currents of intellectual life inform their works.
Modern literary critics seem to just think in terms of textual analysis. Actually I think that is a central tenet of post-modern critical theory; that texts have meanings that even the writers didn't know, and which only the critics can tease out. Funny then, how those hidden meanings just happen to reflect the obsessions of modern academics: racism, sexism, colonialism, queer-theory, etc.
First, the US would keep most of the territory. Much of California (geographically speaking) is sparsely populated and/or conservative. The state has significant natural resources. Perhaps more importantly, certain locations such as Yosemite are integral parts of the country's natural heritage and must not be surrendered. IOW, they get the Third World megalopoles on the coast; we keep John Muir's California.
Second, while I'd allow full internal autonomy for the CalExiters, including with respect to immigration policies, ultimate sovereignty must remain with the US. If Californians had an independent foreign policy, it would create the possibility of a foreign power (most likely China) gaining a strategic foothold on our continent.
Overall, the model for CalExit (or, more precisely, SF/Sacramento/LA/San Diego Exit) should be Hong Kong. One country, two systems.
Not that I take CalExit seriously, but this map zoomed all the way out suggests some obvious boundaries:
http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-pol-ca-california-neighborhood-election-results/
The most frustrating thing to me about the CalExit idea is that this is the kind of tension that was designed to be dealt with by federalism and states’ rights. But since the left requires a strong central government to enforce the petty diktat of the week (transgenders in bathrooms for the whole country? if it really is a problem let the states figure it out) now their knickers are in a twist because they lost control of their Frankenstein’s monster.
Yeah, that’s been my experience as well. I’ve met a “Zuckerman” or two, but no “Zuckerbergs.”And, of course, there are Philip Roth’s “Nathan Zuckerman” novels:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_Zuckerman
*
http://www.ancestry.com/name-origin?surname=zuckerberg
That atlas is full of crap. It doesn't pass the math test. It's par for the course for anyone authoring anything about massacres to wildly inflate the numbers (which we have no way of verifying via a census) to set off that 'Gosh!' factor in gullible readers.
Even given your highly questionable assumptions, only 80 million, not 160 million.
Context-dependent unless they assimilate. Non-assimilated Ukrainians massacred Poles in Galicia en masse in the 1940s.
Dunno. I know quite a few White women who find him very unappealing…..
General rule: White man with Asian woman= Beta male
Amy (Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother) Chua makes a point of telling people that she was the first Asian that her White husband dated. She wants people to know that he’s not some loser with Yellow Fever….
When even extremely obese guys like Michael Moore and stand up comedian Ralphie May can get White wives, healthy weight Mark Zuckerberg sure as hell would not have a problem getting a White wife.
You act like most White women have extremely high standards when it comes to men's physical appearances. You act like most White women only date men who look like the male models you see in a Abercrombie & Fitch catalog. Stop acting like White women are such special snowflakes on a pedestal.
Your average White woman is not going to end up marrying a man as handsome as Ryan Gosling or Cristiano Ronaldo for example.
If by fair you mean fair haired, the vast majority of fair people in Italy are either women (mostly dye jobs) or children. There are not a lot of adult men in Italy who are as blond as actor Philip Seymour Hoffman for example.
There were no Haven Monahans among any of the Italian men on The Sopranos or The Godfather.
Since I paired fair with swarthy, I’m referring to skin tone
Yeah there is not a single White female gold digger on the planet who is open to marrying the wealthiest man in the world who is under the age of 40.
I’m assuming that Zuck isn’t interested in marrying blatant gold diggers
You didn't scoff at the given existence of Our Fair Republic.
I’m all for doing everything that it takes to preserve the White Anglo Republic
For the life of me I cannot recall the source.
http://ethnicelebs.com/richard-nixon
I’m assuming, and quite reasonably so, dear boy, that your thought would be far better expressed as identifiable or detectable rather than blatant.
Otherwise it is a nonsensical thought.
Non-blatant gold-diggers of any race are a dime a dozen, they can be quite crafty and males can be quite blind. And even at that, many a digger, blatant or otherwise, and a mine form happy, fulfilling, and enduring unions.
The biggest difference between the parts of Europe that the Mongols couldn’t conquer, and the parts of the world that they did, was the density and quality of fortifications. China was immensely wealthy, but their fortifications were nowhere near the same class as those of western Europe. Night and day, really (I suspect this has something to do with the differing histories of warfare, but that’s just a guess). Chinese didn’t get much beyond walled cities (and the Great Maginot Wall), generally built on lowlands, which do not stack up against proper castles (also, European stone fortifications were better-made). Western Europe was (is) positively littered with castles and impressive fortifications. The Danube was about as far into Europe as the Mongols got, and the Danube happened to be where poorly-fortified Europe (mostly wooden fortifications) ended, and well-fortified Europe began.
Long supply lines probably played a role in Europe, but the Mongols established empires (Golden Horde, etc.) much closer to Western Europe, and still never got any further than Hungary or Poland.
The Mongols were stopped by: The Vietnamese (IIRC; one of those SE Asian cultures), the Indians (Delhi Sultanate), the Hungarians, the Poles, Levantines, Mamelukes, at least.
Siege warfare was not kind to the Mongols. They were absolute masters of open steppe warfare (no small thing, given how vast the steppe is), but they bogged down in siege warfare. They lost very few princes warring against foreigners on the steppe and open terrain, but lost quite a few in siege warfare.
The Mongols taking something like Constantinople (never mind the citadel) doesn’t pass the smell test. They had far easier pickings closer to home, in China. They were never more than jumped-up bandits, so they went where the loot was easiest.
Deep Ditches and Well-built Walls: A Reappraisal of the Mongol Withdrawal from Europe in 1242
Roman busts are”more realistic and expressed more about the person” than comparable Greek sculptures. This may well be true, but it does not follow that Roman busts are better than Greek ones, but only that the two cultures had different ends in view when they produced portrait busts. The Greeks wanted heroism and ideal beauty, the Romans a faithful reflection of the real, including the psychologically real.
As pure artists, the Greeks were hugely superior, as the Romans themselves recognised.
General rule: White man with Asian woman= Beta male
Amy (Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother) Chua makes a point of telling people that she was the first Asian that her White husband dated. She wants people to know that he's not some loser with Yellow Fever....
This perception is very real and increasingly common over the past 15 years or so. I’m married to a Japanese lady, a real, authentic Japanese passport bearing one, and we both feel that sort of social opinionating going on from time to time, although it wasn’t much of a thing when we were dating/getting married.
I do find that when people find that my wife is a Japanese Asian, a lot of that evaporates, somehow Japanese women get a few more pokemon points than other ethnicities. Not enough to let everyone off the hook completely, but palpable.
I could give a f*ck myself what other people think, but my wife notices that my first wife was non-Asian (white, if you must) and the only reason I moved on from her was that she died, that I only ever dated one other asian lady, a Japanese-American, who was just another face in a multiracial crowd way back when, and that she had never even considered the possibility of dating a foreigner of any race/ethnicity until we met.
But you are very right, this is a very real stereotype with much basis in reality. It is something that has largely developed since we married. I don’t think I had ever heard the term “Yellow Fever” until after we married. I find it a minor annoyance as it is out there and has become quite pervasive in the U.S.
The white people who care about these things also are often the ones who call the Japanese “the other white meat” in other situations.
Dumb, inbred racists, you guys know who you are.
The offset for me is trolling libs with stories about my interracial marriage, mixed race progeny, with specific race left unsaid while collecting all sorts of virtue points, then doing the big reveal that my wife is Japanese and seeing how crestfallen, even cheated these guys feel, because they subconsciously share the same racial views as even many stormfronters, that Japanese aren’t inferior to white people while all other non-whites are.
It really puts it in their faces and via body language, etc, you can indicate you know that is what is formulating unsaid in their heads. It is riotously fun and about the easiest, most effective lib-trolling possible.
TLDR: if you care about other’s perceptions in these sorts of relationships, start with a Japanese woman and a native born, passport bearing one who resides in Japan and who could give a f*ck about America, it mitigates it a lot.
I remember Bork saying this in a TV interview after he was “borked” in his nomination to the Supreme Court in 1987. Although written later, he might reference this in his book, “Slouching Towards Gomorrah: Modern Liberalism and American Decline.”
Oh, how I wish I had been there.
Lloyd Jones was a visiting professor at Berkeley in 1969 and I attended some at least of his lectures. He was very fierce, very opinionated, very amusing. PC hadn’t been invented yet; he would have been against it and “rubbish!” would have been the least of his put-downs.
Might I ask what the point of including this is? I mean, does anyone here actually believe that it's wrong for a woman to be interested in how to bake desserts? Does anyone here think it's wrong for a woman who bakes desserts to also have opinions about the larger world, even if you disagree with them? I would think this should make people of an "alt-right" bent have a bit more empathy with Donna Zuckerberg, seeing as she does do some things that the alt-right regards as feminine. Sheesh. If she wrote a post denigrating baking, that would "feminist." If she writes about baking, there's some unspoken contempt for any attempt at intellectualism on her part. Can you see why this sort of, "Heads you're a feminazi, tails you're a girly-girl," implication might be a bit frustrating and might disincline people to sympathy with the alt-right?
AFAICT Steve’s point was the same as yours (humanizing the opposition).
Ms. Zuckerberg (especially given her tangent about how she lets her students use her as a doormat) seems like much more of a follower than a leader. The place she’s coming from is less Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and more Nice White Lady.
If the cultural winds were blowing another way (or even if her brother with the famously aggressive personality thought differently), she could bake her pastries and read Ovid without troubling herself too much with thoughts of scary alt-righters.
Lest we forget that Facebook started out as an app for guys to hook up with girls. How sophisticated! That’s evidently still the case for a lot of guys; that is, those that claim they are “friends” with 1,300 girls. Closer to home, my familial experience with Facebook is that it is a “gossip rag” for women … post a picture of your toddler or mention your latest operation and you get 34 “likes” from people you don’t know. That can raise your spirits, right?
I’ll stick to the older generation’s perception of Facebook: Those that think they have “300″ friends don’t have any friends.
That is, unfortunately, supported by two tragic incidents in our greater extended family when two young people in the millennial generation committed suicide. Both isolate themselves as “social network jockeys” on the Internet. I’m guessing that one day they woke up and realized they had no real relationships and they had no real friends … and they didn’t know what to do about it.
"A middle-aged woman who told her 1,048 Facebook "friends" that she had taken an overdose was found dead the next day after none came to her aid."
As pure artists, the Greeks were hugely superior, as the Romans themselves recognised.
Aeneid, Dryden’s translation
Aeneid, Taylor’s translation
I prefer Dryden's rendering by the way.
I loved the arts classes because basically the method was, humanities been already coopted but not yet eliminated by leftists, was read something and then make up some mindless bullsh*t about what the piece "really means".
I'm a good writer, so I had a ball, I'd just make up whatever silly thought came into my mind and write it down in my characteristically compelling prose.
Made A's in everything, my essays very often being held up as examples of outstanding work in just about all of these classes.
That was when I realized that all these hippie retreads were a bunch of completely substance-free jackasses on a free ride in life and haven't changed my opinion since.
And they all gave me A's, worshiped my stuff, tried to get me to change my major from Physics to whatever field they were in the process of bowdlerizing, I remember English, German Literature, and Philosophy professors making significant appeals to me.
Of course, I listened politely but inside I would always be thinking, "Are you out of your f*cking mind? Can't you tell I hold you and your rabble in utter contempt?"
I do have to admit having one English professor that despite being a complete Cultural Marxist, at least a proto one, had a very incisive mind. I guess the best of the lot got sent first in to this fray, it was a long time ago, early 1980s.
Around 1972 I was prepping for the GRE. I bought one of those books which gave sample questions for the various subjects offered. The education chapter attracted my attention in an idle moment and, although I had taken no education courses as an undergrad and had absolutely no desire to become a graduate in the subject, I answered the fifty questions offered. With nothing to lose, I answered each of them as I suspected a good little progressive would.
My score? Fifty out of fifty.
Various states in history have abrogated the church's prerogative to choose its own leaders. In the West this is done with soft power rather than hard, but it is very much what is going on. Those in the pews (and even more so those who would be in the pews were their churches not occupied by a hostile power) are increasingly skeptical of the globalist program and thus at odds with their putative leadership.
“Hard” still has its uses. What do think forced poor little Benedict out?
You’re right about that of course, maybe I shouldn’t have quite dismissed the possibility of trouble like I did. From my perspective these intra-European divisions don’t matter that much anymore, but in some parts of eastern Europe they certainly still do.
I could not agree more. Greek genius married to Roman force: the divine coupling which made our civilisation.
I prefer Dryden’s rendering by the way.
“Isn’t Christianity inherently missionizing, globalist, and, well, cucky, and prone to falling into these virtue-chasing spirals?”
A whopping 81 percent of White Evangelicals voted for Donald J. Trump, there is nothing Cuck about that. Atheists however are a very solid Democratic Party voting vase and that’s very Cuck.
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/14/evangelicals-back-donald-trump-atheists-support-hi/
Two thirds of Atheists StandWithHer# hashtag. I don’t know why Atheists get so much love among White Nationalists/The Alt-Right and Christians get so much hate. If it was up to most Atheists we would be hearing that creepy Hillary laugh for the next 8 years.
My favourite Christian institution is the Teutonic knights, which swept ever Eastwards in a Catholic Christian war, first against pagan Lithuanians, which was basically successful, and then against schismatic Russians, which came a cropper in 1242 (see Eisenstein's Alexander Nevsky).
The point is that twentieth century weakling Christianity, from the false pope Francis on down, is an historic anomaly and a contemptible failure of nerve.
General rule: White man with Asian woman= Beta male
Amy (Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother) Chua makes a point of telling people that she was the first Asian that her White husband dated. She wants people to know that he's not some loser with Yellow Fever....
Totally agree about that general rule. But we’re not dealing with a typical case here.
General rule: White man with Asian woman= Beta male
Amy (Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother) Chua makes a point of telling people that she was the first Asian that her White husband dated. She wants people to know that he's not some loser with Yellow Fever....
“Dunno. I know quite a few White women who find him very unappealing…..”
When even extremely obese guys like Michael Moore and stand up comedian Ralphie May can get White wives, healthy weight Mark Zuckerberg sure as hell would not have a problem getting a White wife.
You act like most White women have extremely high standards when it comes to men’s physical appearances. You act like most White women only date men who look like the male models you see in a Abercrombie & Fitch catalog. Stop acting like White women are such special snowflakes on a pedestal.
Your average White woman is not going to end up marrying a man as handsome as Ryan Gosling or Cristiano Ronaldo for example.
Here's an anecdote: I know a guy, reasonably good-looking, intelligent (went to UCLA), makes good money as a professional photographer. Yet he never had any real success with White women. Too introverted, too shy. He finally ended up marrying a Filipina whom he met on line. Guy's quite happy now and has three daughters.
What would Aristotle have said about this argument?
And who is the last “man” referred to as having been rejected? Presumably not Trump (though with this author anything is possible) but the syntax leaves this issue wide open.
Does la Sra. Zuckerberg say here that the “manosphere” is not part of the “alt-right”? Unfortunately, due to her poor command of English, I cannot tell. Perhaps she ought to have written in Latin, or in Attic Greek.
Ms. Zuckerberg (especially given her tangent about how she lets her students use her as a doormat) seems like much more of a follower than a leader. The place she's coming from is less Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and more Nice White Lady.
If the cultural winds were blowing another way (or even if her brother with the famously aggressive personality thought differently), she could bake her pastries and read Ovid without troubling herself too much with thoughts of scary alt-righters.
That’s a much more thoughtful response than I anticipated. Thank you.
Jack London’s To Build A Fire
Oh, man, that was in our 8th grade reader … Cold chills down my spine 45 years later …
Are you allowed to buy yourself a tenured chair?
I wasn’t insulting you, but your school, and, in particular, your philosophy professor. That’s one humanities subject where rigor is usually required. If you can b.s. your way through a philosophy class, it’s not a good one.
So maybe a better way of putting it was I conformed to their academic echo chamber, played the deconstruction/analysis/interpretation game just as they would have it, nailed it, but all the while thought the whole enterprise nothing but a masturbatory activity by useless people wasting their time and mine. I liked reading the material and discussing it in the frame of the author's obvious intent, but the notion that any random work has all this hidden meaning in, say Der Schimmelreiter, that was definable by anyone who cared to do so, was utterly preposterous.
I mean, my goal was A's, Dean's List, etc., so I wasn't going to risk achieving that. But from my first experience doing this sort of cultural vandalism, I thought it utter nonsense. OTOH, my immediate previous experience had been pretty harsh as a mortarman, marksmanship coach, and scout/sniper and didn't leave me especially sympathetic to soft-handed effete liberal pastimes.
As for UGa, I started there because I had quit/expelled from HS, not sure how the paper reads, I just walked out of school for the last time in 10th grade, never looked back, did construction work until 17th birthday when I joined the USMC. Served a tour there in the infantry, not a place for academic prep, so UGa was my remedial step to transferring to a top flight school.
But I short circuited that by entering Navy nuke program. Another iron in the fire I abandoned at that time was transferring to Cal Tech after I had established a consistent nearly 4.0 record at UGa my first/second year. I had been accepted into Cal Tech around the time the Navy accepted me into a commissioning program (NUPOC) that expected me to complete my degree at UGa, so I abandoned Cal Tech, although I had been accepted as a transfer student there as well as a dual degree program with Ga Tech, which was my safety option.
I can say there were countless times while in the sub force, like every waking moment often for months at a stretch, and for some years thereafter, that I thought choosing the submarine force/UGa over Cal Tech was the dumbest thing I ever did in my life.
It still isn't a great school, but UGa's reputation has risen considerably since I attended, occasionally getting included in less discriminating public ivy compilations by whoever does these things, not that anyone, including me, cares about my undergrad, or grad, degree source
OT: It is amazing what the HOPE program did for public higher ed in Georgia as well as simply the passage of time putting a few more decades between UGa and its segregation policies of the past.
I remember shortly after entering as an undergrad in 1980 seeing some piece about Charlayne Hunter, one of the first two black students admitted to UGa in 1961. I was absolutely shocked at how young she was (37) as my mind's eye view of segregation was dusty, sepia toned black and white fire hose/dog images from my grandfather's generation or something. But no, here was one of the first two UGa black undergrads and still on the youngish side of adulthood.
It was a moment of cognitive dissonance for me about UGa, how close it was still to this past that seemed to me long ago/far away as a 21 year old in 1980.
Something more recent along the literary deconstruction topic is that I published a brief memoir a few years back that got quite a bit of circulation and discussion about its meaning, etc. I can say I've seen hundreds, if not thousands of remarks on the piece, this stuff still trickles in, occasionally has been used in undergrad lit courses, things like that, and not a single person has ever gotten anywhere near the question that drove me when I writing it and I thought I had completely spelled this out in plain sight, I wasn't trying to hide it at all.
These quotes make the article seem like satire (as I’m sure others among the 548[!!!] commentors have pointed out). This passage fits right in:
Alas, she is serious.
You attribute Facebook’s success to factors that were available to its competitors as well; ergo, they don’t explain Facebook’s enormous success.
A lot of this wasn’t obvious at all. A long time angel investor wrote a book called The Social Media Business Plan several years ago in which he predicted the future for social media would be niche communities, and Facebook would fail because it wasn’t one.
In 2010, Ruby on Rails inventor (and O-1 immigrant) David Hennemeier Hansson argued Facebook wasn’t worth its then $33 billion market cap. It’s worth more than 10x that now.
https://eidolon.pub/after-the-manifesto-a2d772f54868#.u2ha3g4nb
Harry Potter. Every single time. Even when they’re engaging “high culture” liberals look to the apotheosis of prole-lit.
The memes, they’re real!
I'll stick to the older generation's perception of Facebook: Those that think they have "300" friends don't have any friends.
That is, unfortunately, supported by two tragic incidents in our greater extended family when two young people in the millennial generation committed suicide. Both isolate themselves as "social network jockeys" on the Internet. I'm guessing that one day they woke up and realized they had no real relationships and they had no real friends ... and they didn't know what to do about it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/facebook/8241015/Facebook-friends-mock-suicide-of-woman-who-posted-goodbye-message.html
“A middle-aged woman who told her 1,048 Facebook “friends” that she had taken an overdose was found dead the next day after none came to her aid.”
In fact this fallacious thinking occurs in the welcome refugee statement of the polish church that I linked before:This assumes that there is some fixed "migratory route". But the very proposals of the polish catholic church expressed in this document would turn Poland into a destination real quick.That is what some enthusiastically believed would occur after Austria joined the EU in 1995. The central location of Austria would somehow through the magic of geography re-establish the Austro-Hungarian Empire within the context of the EU. Instead we got the third world and Muslims.
Correct me if I’m wrong but wasn’t the Polish- Lithuanian Commonwealth ultimately a failed state? There’s a reason why the Polish- Lithuanian Commonwealth no longer exists.
Might I ask what the point of including this is? I mean, does anyone here actually believe that it's wrong for a woman to be interested in how to bake desserts? Does anyone here think it's wrong for a woman who bakes desserts to also have opinions about the larger world, even if you disagree with them? I would think this should make people of an "alt-right" bent have a bit more empathy with Donna Zuckerberg, seeing as she does do some things that the alt-right regards as feminine. Sheesh. If she wrote a post denigrating baking, that would "feminist." If she writes about baking, there's some unspoken contempt for any attempt at intellectualism on her part. Can you see why this sort of, "Heads you're a feminazi, tails you're a girly-girl," implication might be a bit frustrating and might disincline people to sympathy with the alt-right?
I agree. It’s taking an unnecessary cheap shot at her. It’s her views on the classics that deserve contempt. Her views on baking seem to be uncontroversial.
Agreed.
The problem with Darwinism (and atheism) is that it leads inevitably to nihilism. Christianity on the other hand leads to woolly-minded feelgood wallowing in misguided compassion and that leads to national and cultural suicide. So we’re between a rock and a hard place.
Bring back the old gods! Bow down to Wotan!
The classical tradition in philosophy can be characterized by Man's acknowledgement of the limits imposed by Nature. In classical philosophy, Man himself is a product of this nature, which imposes limitations upon him that he can understand but not fully overcome. His task is to educate himself to understand nature, and work within the limits imposed by it. The task of human society, and political society, is to be able to delineate between the different natural abilities of individual humans, and use those differences for the benefit of the entire society.
For instance, in Book I of Aristotle's Politics, Aristotle argued that all of Nature is hierarchical -- and this is true of individual humans, too. Aristotle lists a series of social relationships from highest to lowest, and each "level" by nature rules over its inferiors. At the top of the list is the human Male; next are females, then children, then slaves, and finally animals. Each of these "levels" of human society is based upon the ability to partake in reason and suppress emotion. Thus, Aristotle sees the male as most rational, the female less so, the child less than the female, the slave less than the child, and the animal less than the slave. Each layer of society is symbiotic, and society functions most harmoniously when the superior parts rule over the inferior parts. For Aristotle, "justice" is "equality among equals, and inequality among unequals."
(Similarly, Plato describes a hierarchical list of types of political societies. First is his Ideal Republic ruled by the Guardian Class; then a military rule; then a business oligarchy; then a democracy; and finally, a dictatorship, which inevitably arises from too much democratic equality. Democracy, for Plato, is a perversion of nature).
The culmination of classical philosophy is Christianity, which places true justice not in the hands of the political system, but in the hands of an Almighty God, who is the author of Nature itself and the Creator of these levels of distinction. The task of the Christian is to understand the defects of his nature, and to submit to the grace of the Almighty to remedy it in the hereafter.
Now, Modern philosophy attacks the notion that man must accept the limits of his nature. Modern philosophy seeks to use science and technology to change and modify man's Natural environment so as to remove Nature's impediments. (In other words, Modernity seeks to create an artificial, not a natural, society).
Democracy is a Modern artifact because men are not inherently equal. Feminism is a Modern artifact because males and females are inherently unequal. And racial egalitarianism is a Modern artifact because the races are inherently unequal. Democracy, feminism, and racial egalitarianism are all artificial. The Alt-right recognizes this; consequently, it looks to the classical tradition for guidance.
Karl Marx is the ultimate Modern philosopher, because he believed that science, technology, and economic prosperity would ultimately lead to the abolition of all natural differences and distinctions, resulting in a global communist Utopia of complete equality. For Marx, Man's nature itself will evolve, and the Post-modern communist man will be a different species entirely from the Classical Man.
Prof. Zuckerberg, the so-called "classicist," is really a Marxist who enjoys reading ancient literature, but obviously, she does not believe any of it.
As a product of nature, how would it not, unless impeded from doing so artificially?
Better it evolve like a biome, rather than a parking lot.
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/14/evangelicals-back-donald-trump-atheists-support-hi/Two thirds of Atheists StandWithHer# hashtag. I don't know why Atheists get so much love among White Nationalists/The Alt-Right and Christians get so much hate. If it was up to most Atheists we would be hearing that creepy Hillary laugh for the next 8 years.
I haven’t seen much love for atheism. There are the usual people, like Derbyshire, who sheepishly admit to not having much in the way of faith and a few here and there trying to revive various paganisms, along with a great deal of well-earned frustration with the current incarnation of Christian practice.
When even extremely obese guys like Michael Moore and stand up comedian Ralphie May can get White wives, healthy weight Mark Zuckerberg sure as hell would not have a problem getting a White wife.
You act like most White women have extremely high standards when it comes to men's physical appearances. You act like most White women only date men who look like the male models you see in a Abercrombie & Fitch catalog. Stop acting like White women are such special snowflakes on a pedestal.
Your average White woman is not going to end up marrying a man as handsome as Ryan Gosling or Cristiano Ronaldo for example.
My wife managed it, but she’s far from average.
I don’t know. Enlighten us.
The St Gallen conspiracy is well-reported.
As for the NWO thugs: note that the banks informed the Vatican that it would no longer honour credit card transactions within the city-state, nor accept normal dealings with the Vatican Bank, on 1 January 2013. On 11 February Benedict announced his intention to resign, and the very next day these restrictions were lifted. Coincidence? Few people in the Vatican think so - unless, intriguingly, they are Francis supporters.
His now-wife was probably the first woman who ever paid any attention to him. In true beta form, he then pedestalized her for life.
When even extremely obese guys like Michael Moore and stand up comedian Ralphie May can get White wives, healthy weight Mark Zuckerberg sure as hell would not have a problem getting a White wife.
You act like most White women have extremely high standards when it comes to men's physical appearances. You act like most White women only date men who look like the male models you see in a Abercrombie & Fitch catalog. Stop acting like White women are such special snowflakes on a pedestal.
Your average White woman is not going to end up marrying a man as handsome as Ryan Gosling or Cristiano Ronaldo for example.
Dunno. Moore and May have more presence than Zuck…..
I”m actually not really talking about his looks. There’s just something about his demeanor that turns women off….
Here’s an anecdote: I know a guy, reasonably good-looking, intelligent (went to UCLA), makes good money as a professional photographer. Yet he never had any real success with White women. Too introverted, too shy. He finally ended up marrying a Filipina whom he met on line. Guy’s quite happy now and has three daughters.
Notion was that the blatant ones are more readily identifiable/detectable.
If by fair you mean fair haired, the vast majority of fair people in Italy are either women (mostly dye jobs) or children. There are not a lot of adult men in Italy who are as blond as actor Philip Seymour Hoffman for example.
There were no Haven Monahans among any of the Italian men on The Sopranos or The Godfather.
Actor Maurizio Merli, portrayed an Italian version of “Dirty Harry” Callahan
Maybe I should have made it clear that I was reading the material and writing stuff that I thought they would want to hear but I considered more or less mindless, pointless drivel rather than just unsupportable (by their definition of unsupportable, I thought it all was unsupportable) random writings.
So maybe a better way of putting it was I conformed to their academic echo chamber, played the deconstruction/analysis/interpretation game just as they would have it, nailed it, but all the while thought the whole enterprise nothing but a masturbatory activity by useless people wasting their time and mine. I liked reading the material and discussing it in the frame of the author’s obvious intent, but the notion that any random work has all this hidden meaning in, say Der Schimmelreiter, that was definable by anyone who cared to do so, was utterly preposterous.
I mean, my goal was A’s, Dean’s List, etc., so I wasn’t going to risk achieving that. But from my first experience doing this sort of cultural vandalism, I thought it utter nonsense. OTOH, my immediate previous experience had been pretty harsh as a mortarman, marksmanship coach, and scout/sniper and didn’t leave me especially sympathetic to soft-handed effete liberal pastimes.
As for UGa, I started there because I had quit/expelled from HS, not sure how the paper reads, I just walked out of school for the last time in 10th grade, never looked back, did construction work until 17th birthday when I joined the USMC. Served a tour there in the infantry, not a place for academic prep, so UGa was my remedial step to transferring to a top flight school.
But I short circuited that by entering Navy nuke program. Another iron in the fire I abandoned at that time was transferring to Cal Tech after I had established a consistent nearly 4.0 record at UGa my first/second year. I had been accepted into Cal Tech around the time the Navy accepted me into a commissioning program (NUPOC) that expected me to complete my degree at UGa, so I abandoned Cal Tech, although I had been accepted as a transfer student there as well as a dual degree program with Ga Tech, which was my safety option.
I can say there were countless times while in the sub force, like every waking moment often for months at a stretch, and for some years thereafter, that I thought choosing the submarine force/UGa over Cal Tech was the dumbest thing I ever did in my life.
It still isn’t a great school, but UGa’s reputation has risen considerably since I attended, occasionally getting included in less discriminating public ivy compilations by whoever does these things, not that anyone, including me, cares about my undergrad, or grad, degree source
OT: It is amazing what the HOPE program did for public higher ed in Georgia as well as simply the passage of time putting a few more decades between UGa and its segregation policies of the past.
I remember shortly after entering as an undergrad in 1980 seeing some piece about Charlayne Hunter, one of the first two black students admitted to UGa in 1961. I was absolutely shocked at how young she was (37) as my mind’s eye view of segregation was dusty, sepia toned black and white fire hose/dog images from my grandfather’s generation or something. But no, here was one of the first two UGa black undergrads and still on the youngish side of adulthood.
It was a moment of cognitive dissonance for me about UGa, how close it was still to this past that seemed to me long ago/far away as a 21 year old in 1980.
Something more recent along the literary deconstruction topic is that I published a brief memoir a few years back that got quite a bit of circulation and discussion about its meaning, etc. I can say I’ve seen hundreds, if not thousands of remarks on the piece, this stuff still trickles in, occasionally has been used in undergrad lit courses, things like that, and not a single person has ever gotten anywhere near the question that drove me when I writing it and I thought I had completely spelled this out in plain sight, I wasn’t trying to hide it at all.
Various states in history have abrogated the church's prerogative to choose its own leaders. In the West this is done with soft power rather than hard, but it is very much what is going on. Those in the pews (and even more so those who would be in the pews were their churches not occupied by a hostile power) are increasingly skeptical of the globalist program and thus at odds with their putative leadership.
“>Those in the pews (and even more so those who would be in the pews were their churches not occupied by a hostile power) are increasingly skeptical of the globalist program and thus at odds with their putative leadership.”
That’s certainly in line with what I’ve seen, first hand. And for what it’s worth, even though the Bishop of Cologne is free to backslap Merkel as much as he pleases, his authority doesn’t extend to political logistics. Moreover, those who point out that importing refugees is an exorbitantly ineffective and stupid way to respond to the Syrian crisis (that among its many other pitfalls shuts out the ones who are most in need and who can’t afford a smuggler in the first place) are not the ones who need to be guilt-tripped. If anything it’s those who are busily creating 20 more Bosnias who need to be called to account.
The ones I do fault are the cowards who are willing to let yet another pillar of Western civilization — along with the universities, the media, and the press — fall into the hands of the leftists, and I see them time and again in forums like these. If the Sobieskis and the Zrinskis and Don Johns had been that craven, Europe would have gone crescent centuries ago.
Might you like to explain that?
Hofer's stance on immigration was often brought up to cast doubt on his christian faith. He never managed to explain himself on this issue and tried to change the subject. He campaigned against immigration in the first round. He emphasized his christian faith in the second round and the re-run. But he never connected the two to argue that his christian faith compels him to repel the muslim hordes or something like that. In fact, he mentioned immigration less and less as the election progressed.
There was only one support group of 1500 Christians who endorsed him. But they did not mention immigration, but rather family values and faith.
Btw, the FPÖ actually ran a pagan woman named Barbara Rosenkranz in 2010. She has ten kids and is among the most right-wing in the party. Hofer is pretty lukewarm.
The existence and success of political parties depends on many historical contingencies. Germany and Austria differ. So do the lutheran north, the catholic south and the atheist east of Germany. But the relative success of the FPÖ and the AFD in the current year doesn't tell you much about that.The catholic volunteers and charity workers love their refugees and demand more of them.
Catholicism was vehemently opposed to Marxism in the east. But it embraced the western Cultural Marxist paradigm immediately and wholeheartedly, except on some matters of sex and reproduction.
The eastern marxist-leninist regimes flat out banned and suppressed western influences, including all heretical off-shoots of marxism, like the Frankfurt school, critical theory, cultural marxism, trotskyism, etc. That is why nationalism and common sense are still present in Visegrad.
>He never managed to explain himself on this issue and tried to change the subject.
Well, then he has only himself to blame for that. Even so, good luck trying to pretend that he didn’t get to where he was without a lot of Catholics behind him. Yeah, right. Same goes for what’s happening in Poland now. Trying to claim that it’s nationalism as opposed to Catholicism (as if the two can be separated when discussing Poland in the first place) is just another lame effort to write out religion from Europe. It happens as much in the alt-right these days as it does on the left, and its equally pathetic.
The first time I realized Trump might pull it off was in talking to a devout Catholic who was telling me–since CNN was his primary news source– that Trump was a moron and a clown. The church he goes to, which I’ve actually seen is a typical mish mash of lovely German architecture set off against screaming Nigerian babies in the cry-room, and Vietnamese, Latinos and who knows what else in the pews, all while the Vietnamese priests issues homilies in English so broken that apparently no one understands him. I’m fairly confident the priest toes the line when it comes to “official” policy. And yet, upon asking around who everyone was going to vote for, the Catholic in question (who is an avuncular figure so that people open up to him who wouldn’t for a poll taker) found out everyone he knew was voting for Trump, and that’s what ultimately sold him. For what it’s worth, he’s an immigrant, too. My hunch is that Hofer, for all his inability to stand up for himself theologically got a fair amount of his support in the same way. If you don’t see that, well, maybe you need to actually go to some of these churches, or like me, get to know someone who can get people to open up.
>But it embraced the western Cultural Marxist paradigm immediately
Hogwash. Caving in to Marxists was a gradual slippage that took decades, and certainly didn’t happen “immediately”. Who are you kidding? And besides, it’s Marxism that ripped off and bastardized Christianity in the first place. But that’s not the issue. Lefebvre — not that I’m endorsing him — was in his younger days, a missionary to Gabon. That certainly could have turned him into a woolly-headed liberation theologian type. It didn’t. Being concerned about Africans and Syrians on the one hand, and having a backbone when it comes to what you believe are two different things.
The one thing I do agree with you on is that this is Marxism coming to the fore, not Christianity in general, so if you or Hofer choose to abandon the latter, you’re part of the problem.
The fates of thine are fix'd, and stand entire.
Thou shalt behold thy wish'd Lavinian walls;
And, ripe for heav'n, when fate Aeneas calls,
Then shalt thou bear him up, sublime, to me:
No councils have revers'd my firm decree.
And, lest new fears disturb thy happy state,
Know, I have search'd the mystic rolls of Fate:
Thy son (nor is th' appointed season far)
In Italy shall wage successful war,
Shall tame fierce nations in the bloody field,
And sov'reign laws impose, and cities build,
Till, after ev'ry foe subdued, the sun
Thrice thro' the signs his annual race shall run:
This is his time prefix'd. Ascanius then,
Now call'd Iulus, shall begin his reign.
He thirty rolling years the crown shall wear,
Then from Lavinium shall the seat transfer,
And, with hard labor, Alba Longa build.
The throne with his succession shall be fill'd
Three hundred circuits more: then shall be seen
Ilia the fair, a priestess and a queen,
Who, full of Mars, in time, with kindly throes,
Shall at a birth two goodly boys disclose.
The royal babes a tawny wolf shall drain:
Then Romulus his grandsire's throne shall gain,
Of martial tow'rs the founder shall become,
The people Romans call, the city Rome.
To them no bounds of empire I assign,
Nor term of years to their immortal line.
Ev'n haughty Juno, who, with endless broils,
Earth, seas, and heav'n, and Jove himself turmoils;
At length aton'd, her friendly pow'r shall join,
To cherish and advance the Trojan line.
The subject world shall Rome's dominion own,
And, prostrate, shall adore the nation of the gown.
An age is ripening in revolving fate
When Troy shall overturn the Grecian state,
And sweet revenge her conqu'ring sons shall call,
To crush the people that conspir'd her fall.
Then Caesar from the Julian stock shall rise,
Whose empire ocean, and whose fame the skies
Alone shall bound; whom, fraught with eastern spoils,
Our heav'n, the just reward of human toils,
Securely shall repay with rites divine;
And incense shall ascend before his sacred shrine.
Then dire debate and impious war shall cease,
And the stern age be soften'd into peace:
Then banish'd Faith shall once again return,
And Vestal fires in hallow'd temples burn;
And Remus with Quirinus shall sustain
The righteous laws, and fraud and force restrain.
Janus himself before his fane shall wait,
And keep the dreadful issues of his gate,
With bolts and iron bars: within remains
Imprison'd Fury, bound in brazen chains;
High on a trophy rais'd, of useless arms,
He sits, and threats the world with vain alarms."
Aeneid, Dryden's translation
Evening activities may have been somewhat non-standard chez Zuckerberg. Perhaps Mark and sis donned togas or similar attire when acting out their favorite scenes from mythology or classic literature. Now my head hurts from the visual.
Thanks for your comments, and recommendations of books with similar themes. Another book which (rather obviously) dealt with the implications of evolution was H.G. Well’s The Time Machine.
The prevailing views of science are part of the zeitgeist of an age; that was certainly true of the 19th century. It seems to me that interesting writers are interested in lots of things. Conrad, Wells, Twain, London, and others, wrote books based on their experiences and often wide-ranging interests, so it isn’t surprising that the broader currents of intellectual life inform their works.
Modern literary critics seem to just think in terms of textual analysis. Actually I think that is a central tenet of post-modern critical theory; that texts have meanings that even the writers didn’t know, and which only the critics can tease out. Funny then, how those hidden meanings just happen to reflect the obsessions of modern academics: racism, sexism, colonialism, queer-theory, etc.
Zuckerberg in German, Sugar Mountain in English
Neil Young had a song about that.
Oh, to live on Sugar Mountain
With the barkers and the colored balloons,
You can’t be twenty on Sugar Mountain
Though you’re thinking that
you’re leaving there too soon,
You’re leaving there too soon.
It’s so noisy at the fair
But all your friends are there
And the candy floss you had
And your mother and your dad.
Oh, to live on Sugar Mountain
With the barkers and the colored balloons,
You can’t be twenty on Sugar Mountain
Though you’re thinking that
you’re leaving there too soon,
You’re leaving there too soon.
There’s a girl just down the aisle,
Oh, to turn and see her smile.
You can hear the words she wrote
As you read the hidden note.
Oh, to live on Sugar Mountain
With the barkers and the colored balloons,
You can’t be twenty on Sugar Mountain
Though you’re thinking that
you’re leaving there too soon,
You’re leaving there too soon.
Now you’re underneath the stairs
And you’re givin’ back some glares
To the people who you met
And it’s your first cigarette.
Oh, to live on Sugar Mountain
With the barkers and the colored balloons,
You can’t be twenty on Sugar Mountain
Though you’re thinking that
you’re leaving there too soon,
You’re leaving there too soon.
Now you say you’re leavin’ home
‘Cause you want to be alone.
Ain’t it funny how you feel
When you’re findin’ out it’s real?
Oh, to live on Sugar Mountain
With the barkers and the colored balloons,
You can’t be twenty on Sugar Mountain
Though you’re thinking that
you’re leaving there too soon,
You’re leaving there too soon.
Oh, to live on Sugar Mountain
with the barkers and the colored balloons,
You can’t be twenty on Sugar Mountain
Though you’re thinking that
you’re leaving there too soon,
You’re leaving there too soon.
The problem with Darwinism (and atheism) is that it leads inevitably to nihilism. Christianity on the other hand leads to woolly-minded feelgood wallowing in misguided compassion and that leads to national and cultural suicide. So we're between a rock and a hard place.
Bring back the old gods! Bow down to Wotan!
“> So we’re between a rock and a hard place.Bring back the old gods! Bow down to Wotan!
I realize this is partially or totally tongue-in-cheek, but the sad fact is that there are actually neckbeards out there who believe this tripe: the notion that the religion of the berserkers will somehow be successfully resurrected by a bunch of little snowflakes who need a safe-space ideology now that a bunch of blue-haired old ladies and sissy bishops took their muscular Christianity from them and won’t stop triggering them. Yeah, right.
Christianity has *always* been situated between a rock and hard place. Globalizers and syncretists on one side (be they freemasons, Jacobins Communists — some of them, in fact, far more erudite and civilized than the typical Christian), and on the other, smelly knuckle-dragging barbarians sporting either Viking swords or suicide vests. If these delicate little flowers weren’t total cowards, they’d choose to stand their ground just like those before them. And if they are total cowards, well, Wotan can have them.
What passes for paganism these days is basically a modern invention. And things like Wicca are just flaky gynocentric indulgences. Those who think Wotan is going to make a comeback are indulging in the kinds of fantasies that worry me about the alt-right. There's that disturbing disconnectedness from reality about certain sections of the alt-right which probably comes from spending too much time in alt-right online echo chambers and mistaking that for reality. They're the same people who think Trump couldn't have won without Pepe the frog.
It's also worth remembering that the actual paganism of the past crumbled pretty quickly when it encountered the monotheistic religions like Christianity and Islam.
I think atheism is a dead end unless you think nihilism is really cool and edgy. That leaves a choice between a revived Christianity and Islam. It saddens me to say this but if I were a betting man my money would be on Islam. I hope I'm wrong.
Reviving Christianity would require a grass-roots revolution against the existing church leaderships. I guess it's possible. Unfortunately it will require things to get a lot worse. It's depressing to think that Lenin was right when he said the worse, the better.
“For what it’s worth, the wikipedia page List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll claims the minimum estimate of deaths due to the Mongol conquest is 30 million and the maximum estimate 40 million.”
Here’s a thought. The heyday of the Mongols was from about 1230 to 1290, but the Mongols were still laying waste to places and battling on in the mid-1300s. It’s possible that the Black Death would not have occurred if not for the Mongols. Among other things, the Mongols practiced primitive forms of biological warfare, catapulting carcasses into cities. If Black Death deaths are attributed to the Mongols, that would be another 75 to 200 million people dead at their doing.
The Black Death:
Re:
“Deep Ditches and Well-built Walls: A Reappraisal of the Mongol Withdrawal from Europe in 1242″
Buried in the wikipedia page on the Mongol invasion of Hungary:
That doesn’t seem like just one or two fortified cities that they could lay siege to and ignore…
Apart from anything else has there ever been an example of a dead religion (I mean a totally dead religion) being successfully revived?
What passes for paganism these days is basically a modern invention. And things like Wicca are just flaky gynocentric indulgences. Those who think Wotan is going to make a comeback are indulging in the kinds of fantasies that worry me about the alt-right. There’s that disturbing disconnectedness from reality about certain sections of the alt-right which probably comes from spending too much time in alt-right online echo chambers and mistaking that for reality. They’re the same people who think Trump couldn’t have won without Pepe the frog.
It’s also worth remembering that the actual paganism of the past crumbled pretty quickly when it encountered the monotheistic religions like Christianity and Islam.
I think atheism is a dead end unless you think nihilism is really cool and edgy. That leaves a choice between a revived Christianity and Islam. It saddens me to say this but if I were a betting man my money would be on Islam. I hope I’m wrong.
Reviving Christianity would require a grass-roots revolution against the existing church leaderships. I guess it’s possible. Unfortunately it will require things to get a lot worse. It’s depressing to think that Lenin was right when he said the worse, the better.
Of course each of these could be described as a grass-roots revolution in a sense.
Sorry Steve, bad news for Spencer and other cute fashboys: Z is married to a fellow Princeton classics scholar. In their quest for diversity the couple moved from Princeton (6% black) to midtown Palo Alto (1.5% black).
(They were misinformed.)
As consolation I offer this news item from 2012:
It’s kind of what the whole religion’s based on, so I wouldn’t put it past us.
Forsan et haec olim meminisse juvabit.
:
Here is a breakdown of regular churchgoers among voters from a catholic news source.
ÖVP (peoples party): 62% regular churchgoers
SPÖ (socialists): 33%
GRÜNE (greens): 33%
FPÖ / BZÖ (nationalists): 15%
This data is from 2006. The greens have stagnated. The nationalists doubled their support since then, so the breakdown may have changed, but the hard core of freedom party supporters are clearly the least likely to attend mass.
This should not be surprising. Green party voters tend to be the children of urban and bourgeois conservatives. Freedom party voters tended to be the children of more secular working class socialists. Both groups are less religious than their parents. Also, the freedom party base is male, but men are less religious and less active in the church.
The head of Caritas Austria, Stephan Wallner, was also the Bundesgeschäftsführer (executive director) of the Green Party from 2009 until he stepped down two weeks ago, after VdB won. The conservatives campaigned for VdB.
I am not aware of any religiosity related exit polls from this election. Both candidates tried to convince undecided, centrist median voters during the re-run based on personal likeability, not ideological issues. The pro-christian signaling was part of this strategy.
*Namely that Karl Popper never had the "slightest connection" to the study of pre-Socratic philosophy.
Knowing nothing about the pre-Socratics, but having heard of Karl Popper, you decided that five minutes with Google was enough for you to call him a leading figure in their study, a laughable assertion to anyone actually familiar with either. For that, and for leaving your hasbara comfort zone, you were deservedly held to account. Take your medicine in silence.
Milo Yiannopoulos (who, incidentally, was using the Twitter handle “@nero”…)
Yes, there’s no greater alt-right hero than Nero. Damning stuff, Dr. Z.
I assume Yiannopoulous used that handle because he was “fiddling while Rome burned”?
Yes, and the only thing worse than a thousand year Dark Age is a permanent Dark Age.
So I should address myself to my great-great-grandchildren?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Fitzgerald
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Fagles
Reading Caroline Alexander’s very fine translation of the Iliad. She seems to be the real deal. According to the author of this review, Fagles didn’t really know Greek.
https://www.newcriterion.com/articles.cfm/A-classic-restored-8428
Yes, there's no greater alt-right hero than Nero. Damning stuff, Dr. Z.
I assume Yiannopoulous used that handle because he was "fiddling while Rome burned"?
I’d imagine it’s akin to Roissy looking on poolside, a common alt-masculine, non-Christian division pose prior to the emergence of Trump when all seemed lost (to them). The rest of us had a fool’s hope.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism#History
From that Wikipedia page:
I never heard of this guy, but now I can say “I can’t think of any examples of atheists before the late 17th century.” So, thanks.
did not emerge as a distinct world-view until the late Enlightenment."
To that I say, don't believe everything you read in Wikipedia. There is that famous line in the 14th Psalm, "The fool says in his heart, 'There is no God.'" If you're telling us the Bible is so magically prescient that it was able to correctly predict and denounce a competing ideology that was a thousand-plus years away from coming into existence, that's your prerogative, I guess.
As for me, I think there's a more obvious conclusion to be drawn, and that being the case, I'm sticking to my guns.
[…] of some note, I guess, sallies forth to meet them. The barbarians are, of course, the alt-right. Steve Sailer and EvolutionistX have already made reply to Zuckerberg’s learned diatribe, but she enumerates […]
Ha, you’re welcome. I usually get some flak for being one of Steve’s more moderate commenters, probably in the 95th+ percentile for being nice to Jews and a few other groups (mainly LGBTs).
Living in ultraliberal MA there’s to me a very clear distinction between high-functioning people who tend to have bad political views, and people who aren’t able to integrate in a civilized society. It’s hard to hate your friends, even if they would stop speaking to me if they knew I posted here.
Nice + feckless and disingenuous doesn't, and that's what the non-alt-right has been trying to sell and failing, pre-Trump.
Let’s get to 600 comments!
“Don’t let white people own classical white literature — it belongs to People of Color . . . and us Jews!”
I don't see that the classics have much to do with race or skin color, the infamous Persian luxury notwithstanding. Latins are, obviously, quite as much heirs to the classical tradition as Germans and Slavs anyway. Signorina Z. would have missed the point if she had had one, but as posters upthread have mentioned, the "battle for the classics", if there is such a thing, is absurd, the classics being common property.
Arguing for the irrelevance of the classics, now, that's just dumb.
Nice + courageous and straightforward works, indeed it’s necessary to help the medicine go down and exhibit good faith.
Nice + feckless and disingenuous doesn’t, and that’s what the non-alt-right has been trying to sell and failing, pre-Trump.
A lot of high-functioning people have more or less tuned out of politics altogether or equate politics with the sort of factionalism and regionalism condemned by Washington.
Are Berbers white? Does it matter? Is exporting the classics to POCs cultural imperialism? Does that matter? (Moderately cryptic answer key: mnyn)
I don’t see that the classics have much to do with race or skin color, the infamous Persian luxury notwithstanding. Latins are, obviously, quite as much heirs to the classical tradition as Germans and Slavs anyway. Signorina Z. would have missed the point if she had had one, but as posters upthread have mentioned, the “battle for the classics”, if there is such a thing, is absurd, the classics being common property.
Arguing for the irrelevance of the classics, now, that’s just dumb.
Here is a breakdown of regular churchgoers among voters from a catholic news source.
ÖVP (peoples party): 62% regular churchgoers
SPÖ (socialists): 33%
GRÜNE (greens): 33%
FPÖ / BZÖ (nationalists): 15%
This data is from 2006. The greens have stagnated. The nationalists doubled their support since then, so the breakdown may have changed, but the hard core of freedom party supporters are clearly the least likely to attend mass.
This should not be surprising. Green party voters tend to be the children of urban and bourgeois conservatives. Freedom party voters tended to be the children of more secular working class socialists. Both groups are less religious than their parents. Also, the freedom party base is male, but men are less religious and less active in the church.
The head of Caritas Austria, Stephan Wallner, was also the Bundesgeschäftsführer (executive director) of the Green Party from 2009 until he stepped down two weeks ago, after VdB won. The conservatives campaigned for VdB.
I am not aware of any religiosity related exit polls from this election. Both candidates tried to convince undecided, centrist median voters during the re-run based on personal likeability, not ideological issues. The pro-christian signaling was part of this strategy.
Thanks, that was interesting. I wouldn’t have guessed it for sure.
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/14/evangelicals-back-donald-trump-atheists-support-hi/Two thirds of Atheists StandWithHer# hashtag. I don't know why Atheists get so much love among White Nationalists/The Alt-Right and Christians get so much hate. If it was up to most Atheists we would be hearing that creepy Hillary laugh for the next 8 years.
Not in the least. Historic Christianity is absolutely blood-drenched, from the Crusades to the Thirty Years War.
My favourite Christian institution is the Teutonic knights, which swept ever Eastwards in a Catholic Christian war, first against pagan Lithuanians, which was basically successful, and then against schismatic Russians, which came a cropper in 1242 (see Eisenstein’s Alexander Nevsky).
The point is that twentieth century weakling Christianity, from the false pope Francis on down, is an historic anomaly and a contemptible failure of nerve.
https://www.newcriterion.com/articles.cfm/A-classic-restored-8428
Haven’t read Caroline Alexander’s translation yet, but this fellow claims that it’s better than even Lattimore’s (long the gold-standard in terms of fidelity to the text):
High praise indeed.
That seems a tad excessive. Fagles’ translations are definitely less faithful than Lattimore’s, but he’s quite upfront about that.
That's certainly in line with what I've seen, first hand. And for what it's worth, even though the Bishop of Cologne is free to backslap Merkel as much as he pleases, his authority doesn't extend to political logistics. Moreover, those who point out that importing refugees is an exorbitantly ineffective and stupid way to respond to the Syrian crisis (that among its many other pitfalls shuts out the ones who are most in need and who can't afford a smuggler in the first place) are not the ones who need to be guilt-tripped. If anything it's those who are busily creating 20 more Bosnias who need to be called to account.
The ones I do fault are the cowards who are willing to let yet another pillar of Western civilization -- along with the universities, the media, and the press -- fall into the hands of the leftists, and I see them time and again in forums like these. If the Sobieskis and the Zrinskis and Don Johns had been that craven, Europe would have gone crescent centuries ago.
Your last paragraph is absolutely spot on, and so very much in line with the thinking of Archbishop Lefebvre and his followers that I cannot understand why you state in your next comment that you do not endorse him.
Might you like to explain that?
I am firmly of the opinion if we all don't hang together, we will hang separately. (Yeah, I know the guy who came up with that wasn't much for piety.) Historically, if you look at the fights between the Donatists and the Augustinians, or the Iconoclasts and the Iconodules, Nestorians and Arians and Pelagians yada yada, what strikes me most about all that is the fact that as noble and well-intentioned all those factions were, in hindsight, the mutual antagonism they engendered is what allowed Islam to basically plow them all over. So was it all worth it? The answer is important because there's a real threat of that happening again.
In Western Europe, it's fine if they want to have a hundred or more fractally dividing Western Branches of American Reform Presbylutheranism, or whatever. Those in the East, and the South, both Catholic and Orthodox, who for centuries did the dirty work of keeping the rest of Europe safe from Ottomans/Tatars/Saracens etc. didn't have the same luxury of allowing that kind of factionalism (except of course when it comes to mutual gang-fights in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and stunts like that). For those people -- Visegrad group included -- the Protestant Reformation was just a draft-dodging exercise that allowed Western Europeans to shirk their duty in fighting Islam (a duty they bravely took on during the Crusades, I might add) and pretend that the real enemy was some Black Legend bogeyman while leaving it to others to keep the real enemy out. But those benighted and swarthy Southern and Eastern Europeans had to do a better job of sticking together, and that's what they did, and that's why they tolerated autocracy and bad rulers and whoremonging Medici popes more so than was the case in the rarified realms of the North and West.
So while it's true that I probably sympathize more with Marcel than with what I will crudely refer to as Koran-kissers and those who lecture others on how many refugees to take in even as they themselves (I'm guessing) rely own personal contingent of Swiss bodyguards to vet anyone who comes into their midst. But if endorsing the former is going to help the Salafists or the followers of Dawkins plow over the main institution that made Europe great (I'm talking the one that built the universities, the hospitals, the social welfare system, the Michaelangeloes, etc.) then it's not worth it. Some people here think it was "whiteness" that is solely responsible for all that, but Europe was white long before it was great, so clearly, that's not enough.
Morever, if the regular schmucks in the pew (who when it comes to immigration are currently far wiser than those in the pulpits, given that they see what it's really about) had heeded the warnings of the priests and bishops earlier and not decided to stop producing babies, Europe would not be in this mess right now. That being the case, those who now come and whine and moan about how it's Christianity that is destroying Europe are way off the mark when it comes to casting blame. Yes, it's true that the popes are primarily listening to do-gooder little old ladies when it comes to immigration, but is that really so surprising? Who else but do-gooder little old ladies even goes to church these days?)
Not all that ingenious. If you fiddle around with triangles for about half an hour trying to prove the Pythagorean theorem you are likely to come up with the 2x version of Garfield’s proof (a square formed of two of Garfield’s trapezoids); not that Garfield wasn’t pretty clever in paring his proof down to the minimum, geometrically speaking. But he was indeed brilliant and his death should be greatly deplored.
I prefer Dryden's rendering by the way.
I agree, with the caveat that “To spare the vanquished and the proud to tame” is a better line than “To tame the proud, the fetter’d slave to free”.
What passes for paganism these days is basically a modern invention. And things like Wicca are just flaky gynocentric indulgences. Those who think Wotan is going to make a comeback are indulging in the kinds of fantasies that worry me about the alt-right. There's that disturbing disconnectedness from reality about certain sections of the alt-right which probably comes from spending too much time in alt-right online echo chambers and mistaking that for reality. They're the same people who think Trump couldn't have won without Pepe the frog.
It's also worth remembering that the actual paganism of the past crumbled pretty quickly when it encountered the monotheistic religions like Christianity and Islam.
I think atheism is a dead end unless you think nihilism is really cool and edgy. That leaves a choice between a revived Christianity and Islam. It saddens me to say this but if I were a betting man my money would be on Islam. I hope I'm wrong.
Reviving Christianity would require a grass-roots revolution against the existing church leaderships. I guess it's possible. Unfortunately it will require things to get a lot worse. It's depressing to think that Lenin was right when he said the worse, the better.
You’d think so, but historically this hasn’t always been the case. It was, once before, when the rise of the Protestants jolted the Church out of the lethargy into which it had been sinking; but the Church seems to possess a bizarre facility of self-renewal unknown to other institutions. The great revival of the nineteenth century, for instance, came primarily from within the hierarchy. In their time the rise of the Benedictines, the Dominicans, the Franciscans, the Jesuits, the Oratorians, the Passionists, etc etc. have all done great things for the revival of Christianity. Probably within the next century this will happen again.
Of course each of these could be described as a grass-roots revolution in a sense.
Hit Disagree by accident.
This is exactly the kind of thing Dr. Zuckerberg is trying to stop.
Here you are trying to justify slavery (fortunately, you don’t cite Aristotle). Haven’t you heard:
SLAVERY WAS BAD!
EUROPEANS PRACTICED SLAVERY!
EUROPEANS WERE BAD!
I do think a controlled-study of the Classics, for carefully selected students in elite universities, could be allowed to exist provided it was clear that the telos was to demonstrate the consistent arc of moral evil displayed in European cultures from Ancient Greece to the Holocaust, and the brave hope that ultimately the European perishes in the cannibal’s pot, where he or she can, at least, provide for the protein deficits of the Sun People, having exploited them over so many centuries.
If I want a totalitarian ideology with limited connection to reality, I can do better than that.
The real founders of the so-called alt-right are more "obscure" types like Sam Francis and F. Roger Devlin, both of whom were raised Catholic IIRC. I encourage discriminating readers to ignore the background noise and seek out the gems, which are there to be found, and will outlast even Donna's brother's little digital empire.
Devlin was certainly raised Catholic. But, Sam Francis? I’d be surprised.
What passes for paganism these days is basically a modern invention. And things like Wicca are just flaky gynocentric indulgences. Those who think Wotan is going to make a comeback are indulging in the kinds of fantasies that worry me about the alt-right. There's that disturbing disconnectedness from reality about certain sections of the alt-right which probably comes from spending too much time in alt-right online echo chambers and mistaking that for reality. They're the same people who think Trump couldn't have won without Pepe the frog.
It's also worth remembering that the actual paganism of the past crumbled pretty quickly when it encountered the monotheistic religions like Christianity and Islam.
I think atheism is a dead end unless you think nihilism is really cool and edgy. That leaves a choice between a revived Christianity and Islam. It saddens me to say this but if I were a betting man my money would be on Islam. I hope I'm wrong.
Reviving Christianity would require a grass-roots revolution against the existing church leaderships. I guess it's possible. Unfortunately it will require things to get a lot worse. It's depressing to think that Lenin was right when he said the worse, the better.
“Apart from anything else has there ever been an example of a dead religion (I mean a totally dead religion) being successfully revived?”
That’s a very good question. To the extent there was any ire in my post, it was not directed at you, but rather, it was a reaction against “Grandfather Frost”, that cheap Trabant-quality knockoff of Saint Nicholas. (But Grandfather Frost has no Krampus sidekick, either, so he’s *doubly* lame.) Nevertheless, the Russians I know have very fond memories of New Year’s, far more so than Christmas, and I suspect that tradition will outlive many other vestiges of Communism.
Anyway, that’s as close as anything I can think of when it comes to a successful revival of what I guess is some pagan deity of some sort. I take your point that neo-paganism or Crowleyism or whatever is no more authentic, though I guess the ‘shrooms can fool some people into thinking otherwise. In general, it mystifies me that so many on the alt-right long for a time when white people or Europeans or Anglo-Saxons or whatever you want to call them stood tall even while contorting themselves into all kinds of mental loops in order to pretend that religion was just some cultural artifact that played no key role in that development, and that going forward can simply be brushed aside. (Kind of like those who get all jesuitical, so to speak, in dissecting away the notion that Christianity is only animating Merkel’s side of the immigration divide, as opposed to Visgrad et al. who are playing the role of the heavies, but clearly, that’s a popular line of thought in these comments.)
To resuscitate Christianity we need to de-feminise it. We also need to make Christianity attractive to heterosexuals. Clearing out the homosexual priests would be an essential first step but I don't see any likelihood of that happening.
A revival in terms of numbers would be of no use unless it was accompanied by a radical change in the nature of Christianity. At the moment Christianity in the West is not merely useless, it is a deadly enemy of civilisation. But how can we transform it back into something positive?
He has a fine statue in downtown Cincinnati.
http://www.downtowncincinnati.com/exploring-downtown/establishment/james-a-garfield-monument
It’s within sight of my favorite restaurant:
http://cincinnatirefined.com/eat-drink/scottis-italian-restaurant-downtown-cincinnati
Might you like to explain that?
Might you like to explain that?
I am firmly of the opinion if we all don’t hang together, we will hang separately. (Yeah, I know the guy who came up with that wasn’t much for piety.) Historically, if you look at the fights between the Donatists and the Augustinians, or the Iconoclasts and the Iconodules, Nestorians and Arians and Pelagians yada yada, what strikes me most about all that is the fact that as noble and well-intentioned all those factions were, in hindsight, the mutual antagonism they engendered is what allowed Islam to basically plow them all over. So was it all worth it? The answer is important because there’s a real threat of that happening again.
In Western Europe, it’s fine if they want to have a hundred or more fractally dividing Western Branches of American Reform Presbylutheranism, or whatever. Those in the East, and the South, both Catholic and Orthodox, who for centuries did the dirty work of keeping the rest of Europe safe from Ottomans/Tatars/Saracens etc. didn’t have the same luxury of allowing that kind of factionalism (except of course when it comes to mutual gang-fights in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and stunts like that). For those people — Visegrad group included — the Protestant Reformation was just a draft-dodging exercise that allowed Western Europeans to shirk their duty in fighting Islam (a duty they bravely took on during the Crusades, I might add) and pretend that the real enemy was some Black Legend bogeyman while leaving it to others to keep the real enemy out. But those benighted and swarthy Southern and Eastern Europeans had to do a better job of sticking together, and that’s what they did, and that’s why they tolerated autocracy and bad rulers and whoremonging Medici popes more so than was the case in the rarified realms of the North and West.
So while it’s true that I probably sympathize more with Marcel than with what I will crudely refer to as Koran-kissers and those who lecture others on how many refugees to take in even as they themselves (I’m guessing) rely own personal contingent of Swiss bodyguards to vet anyone who comes into their midst. But if endorsing the former is going to help the Salafists or the followers of Dawkins plow over the main institution that made Europe great (I’m talking the one that built the universities, the hospitals, the social welfare system, the Michaelangeloes, etc.) then it’s not worth it. Some people here think it was “whiteness” that is solely responsible for all that, but Europe was white long before it was great, so clearly, that’s not enough.
Morever, if the regular schmucks in the pew (who when it comes to immigration are currently far wiser than those in the pulpits, given that they see what it’s really about) had heeded the warnings of the priests and bishops earlier and not decided to stop producing babies, Europe would not be in this mess right now. That being the case, those who now come and whine and moan about how it’s Christianity that is destroying Europe are way off the mark when it comes to casting blame. Yes, it’s true that the popes are primarily listening to do-gooder little old ladies when it comes to immigration, but is that really so surprising? Who else but do-gooder little old ladies even goes to church these days?)
The real villain here, and by no means only here, was the officially "Blessed" but by no means saintly Pope Paul VI.
Of course each of these could be described as a grass-roots revolution in a sense.
Based on what little I know about it, our best hope and happily what is most likely is something analogous to the Jansenists.
I think your instincts are sound on this.
He looks a good deal like Yogi Berra, just not with any of the light behind the eyes.
“the earliest-found usage of the term atheism is in 16th-century France…
did not emerge as a distinct world-view until the late Enlightenment.”
To that I say, don’t believe everything you read in Wikipedia. There is that famous line in the 14th Psalm, “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’” If you’re telling us the Bible is so magically prescient that it was able to correctly predict and denounce a competing ideology that was a thousand-plus years away from coming into existence, that’s your prerogative, I guess.
As for me, I think there’s a more obvious conclusion to be drawn, and that being the case, I’m sticking to my guns.
Re the 14th Psalm, I would argue that this Psalm is inveighing not against atheism, which is not really acknowledged in the Bible, but is inveighing against Hebrews forsaking their one true God (Yahweh) for other, false idols, as happens occasionally elsewhere in the Old Testament. That Psalm condemns the "impure" and laments the fate of "My people", suggesting that the object is to keep the Jews on the right God, not to stamp out some kind of nihilism.
Hebrew has many words for "God" or "god", allowing fine distinctions to be made between "our true God" and others' random gods, with relatively few words. Maybe a Hebrew scholar could be more specific.
I am firmly of the opinion if we all don't hang together, we will hang separately. (Yeah, I know the guy who came up with that wasn't much for piety.) Historically, if you look at the fights between the Donatists and the Augustinians, or the Iconoclasts and the Iconodules, Nestorians and Arians and Pelagians yada yada, what strikes me most about all that is the fact that as noble and well-intentioned all those factions were, in hindsight, the mutual antagonism they engendered is what allowed Islam to basically plow them all over. So was it all worth it? The answer is important because there's a real threat of that happening again.
In Western Europe, it's fine if they want to have a hundred or more fractally dividing Western Branches of American Reform Presbylutheranism, or whatever. Those in the East, and the South, both Catholic and Orthodox, who for centuries did the dirty work of keeping the rest of Europe safe from Ottomans/Tatars/Saracens etc. didn't have the same luxury of allowing that kind of factionalism (except of course when it comes to mutual gang-fights in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and stunts like that). For those people -- Visegrad group included -- the Protestant Reformation was just a draft-dodging exercise that allowed Western Europeans to shirk their duty in fighting Islam (a duty they bravely took on during the Crusades, I might add) and pretend that the real enemy was some Black Legend bogeyman while leaving it to others to keep the real enemy out. But those benighted and swarthy Southern and Eastern Europeans had to do a better job of sticking together, and that's what they did, and that's why they tolerated autocracy and bad rulers and whoremonging Medici popes more so than was the case in the rarified realms of the North and West.
So while it's true that I probably sympathize more with Marcel than with what I will crudely refer to as Koran-kissers and those who lecture others on how many refugees to take in even as they themselves (I'm guessing) rely own personal contingent of Swiss bodyguards to vet anyone who comes into their midst. But if endorsing the former is going to help the Salafists or the followers of Dawkins plow over the main institution that made Europe great (I'm talking the one that built the universities, the hospitals, the social welfare system, the Michaelangeloes, etc.) then it's not worth it. Some people here think it was "whiteness" that is solely responsible for all that, but Europe was white long before it was great, so clearly, that's not enough.
Morever, if the regular schmucks in the pew (who when it comes to immigration are currently far wiser than those in the pulpits, given that they see what it's really about) had heeded the warnings of the priests and bishops earlier and not decided to stop producing babies, Europe would not be in this mess right now. That being the case, those who now come and whine and moan about how it's Christianity that is destroying Europe are way off the mark when it comes to casting blame. Yes, it's true that the popes are primarily listening to do-gooder little old ladies when it comes to immigration, but is that really so surprising? Who else but do-gooder little old ladies even goes to church these days?)
His parents were.
I suspect the common sense of Visegrad has more to do with basic, unreconstructed nationalism, experience of economic hardship within living memory and lack of cultural marxist infiltration. Marxist-Leninism was certainly a strong bullwark against the Frankfurt school.
Merkel is an outspoken Christian. She insists that her political decisions are guided by her christian faith and she keeps reprimanding Germans for their lack of faith and christian practice. The current president of Germany, Joachim Gauck, is a lutheran pastor who keeps preaching open borders and constantly scolds Germans for not being welcoming and generous enough.The western catholic flock loves and adores Pope Francis. The catholic church ladies fall over themselves, trying to welcome, help and pamper muslim immigrants.
Both the christian elites and most church-goers of Western Europe would react in utter disbelief if anybody argued that Christianity demands anything but unlimited love and charity for complete strangers. The minority of christian immigration restrictionists don't disagree. They just argue that it is more affordable and efficient to help muslims in their homelands.
Even the evangelicals in Germany are fully behind and enthusiastic about Merkels invitation. They believe that this is a great opportunity to convert Muslims. A foolish idea. They failed to convert hardly any of the millions of Muslims who were already present in Gemany. (German evangelicalism is basically a US import and closely tied to the american mother ship)
Painful to acknowledge but, yes, you are correct.
I am firmly of the opinion if we all don't hang together, we will hang separately. (Yeah, I know the guy who came up with that wasn't much for piety.) Historically, if you look at the fights between the Donatists and the Augustinians, or the Iconoclasts and the Iconodules, Nestorians and Arians and Pelagians yada yada, what strikes me most about all that is the fact that as noble and well-intentioned all those factions were, in hindsight, the mutual antagonism they engendered is what allowed Islam to basically plow them all over. So was it all worth it? The answer is important because there's a real threat of that happening again.
In Western Europe, it's fine if they want to have a hundred or more fractally dividing Western Branches of American Reform Presbylutheranism, or whatever. Those in the East, and the South, both Catholic and Orthodox, who for centuries did the dirty work of keeping the rest of Europe safe from Ottomans/Tatars/Saracens etc. didn't have the same luxury of allowing that kind of factionalism (except of course when it comes to mutual gang-fights in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and stunts like that). For those people -- Visegrad group included -- the Protestant Reformation was just a draft-dodging exercise that allowed Western Europeans to shirk their duty in fighting Islam (a duty they bravely took on during the Crusades, I might add) and pretend that the real enemy was some Black Legend bogeyman while leaving it to others to keep the real enemy out. But those benighted and swarthy Southern and Eastern Europeans had to do a better job of sticking together, and that's what they did, and that's why they tolerated autocracy and bad rulers and whoremonging Medici popes more so than was the case in the rarified realms of the North and West.
So while it's true that I probably sympathize more with Marcel than with what I will crudely refer to as Koran-kissers and those who lecture others on how many refugees to take in even as they themselves (I'm guessing) rely own personal contingent of Swiss bodyguards to vet anyone who comes into their midst. But if endorsing the former is going to help the Salafists or the followers of Dawkins plow over the main institution that made Europe great (I'm talking the one that built the universities, the hospitals, the social welfare system, the Michaelangeloes, etc.) then it's not worth it. Some people here think it was "whiteness" that is solely responsible for all that, but Europe was white long before it was great, so clearly, that's not enough.
Morever, if the regular schmucks in the pew (who when it comes to immigration are currently far wiser than those in the pulpits, given that they see what it's really about) had heeded the warnings of the priests and bishops earlier and not decided to stop producing babies, Europe would not be in this mess right now. That being the case, those who now come and whine and moan about how it's Christianity that is destroying Europe are way off the mark when it comes to casting blame. Yes, it's true that the popes are primarily listening to do-gooder little old ladies when it comes to immigration, but is that really so surprising? Who else but do-gooder little old ladies even goes to church these days?)
Africans.
On that we can agree, but who wants such a thing?
Here is a breakdown of regular churchgoers among voters from a catholic news source.
ÖVP (peoples party): 62% regular churchgoers
SPÖ (socialists): 33%
GRÜNE (greens): 33%
FPÖ / BZÖ (nationalists): 15%
This data is from 2006. The greens have stagnated. The nationalists doubled their support since then, so the breakdown may have changed, but the hard core of freedom party supporters are clearly the least likely to attend mass.
This should not be surprising. Green party voters tend to be the children of urban and bourgeois conservatives. Freedom party voters tended to be the children of more secular working class socialists. Both groups are less religious than their parents. Also, the freedom party base is male, but men are less religious and less active in the church.
The head of Caritas Austria, Stephan Wallner, was also the Bundesgeschäftsführer (executive director) of the Green Party from 2009 until he stepped down two weeks ago, after VdB won. The conservatives campaigned for VdB.
I am not aware of any religiosity related exit polls from this election. Both candidates tried to convince undecided, centrist median voters during the re-run based on personal likeability, not ideological issues. The pro-christian signaling was part of this strategy.
“I am not aware of any religiosity related exit polls from this election. Both candidates tried to convince undecided, centrist median voters during the re-run based on personal likability, not ideological issues. The pro-christian signaling was part of this strategy.”
My guess is that religiously based exit polls won’t help much. In the case of Eastern Bloc, you’re talking about people who for generations knew in their bones that you don’t reveal what you really believe when someone with a clipboard comes by. Some of them learned things like that the hard way. Even in the case of (formerly) Western Germany or Austria, most people are probably going to try and avoid that single little supercilious glance from a polltaker that is enough to say “Really — you pretend to follow Jesus and you’re actually voting for those people?”
Again, Trump offers a useful lesson. To the extent that evangelicals in the US have to explain to anyone why they wound up voting for a guy who basically allowed his entire family (first one, anyway) to apostasize away to Judaism a single whiff of remorse, it’s not going to happen without some prying, given that they themselves probably have mixed feelings about the guy they wound up voting for. Lefty websites contain a plethora gobsmacked comments about how evangelicals are so vile as to to so easily sell out their religion in order to vote for Trump. That being the case, an evangelical is not going to eagerly reveal his or her religious motivations, but that doesn’t mean they didn’t play a key role.
In the end, maybe it was Clinton pushing the evangelicals away as much as Trump enticing them, but that’s a useful lesson as well, and goes to your point about Hofer basically squirming his way out the religious angle (as well as Petry’s philandering in the case of Germany, which may make her equally squirmy). If that’s how it played out, then it was a missed opportunity on his part.
I don’t want to sound naively optimistic but the geographical distribution of Trump votes in California might offer a bit of hope from a military and strategic perspective.
The counties that went for Trump were in the interior, away from the coast. He did well in the Sierras.
That is where the water for LA and the Bay area comes from.
LA may have legal title to Owens Valley water but those would not hold up in an openly hostile confrontation.
“Africans.”
That being the case, people need not wonder why the voices of the brave cultural warriors who choose to sleep in on Sunday don’t get more traction.
I remember some cleric complaining a while ago that once upon a time he would frequently receive a helpful suggestion in the donation basket in lieu of actual money, whenever he got the notion to turn the topic of the homily to the death penalty, or nuclear disarmament, or Nicaragua, or Dorothy Day, etc. Comments along the line of “how about you keep your Commie trap shut next time?”. To the extent that counter-push is no longer there, I don’t just blame the church for that. The little guy in the pews may be far smarter about immigration, but to the extent he no longer bothers to show up, then he shares some of the blame.
This is how the SJWs took over all the other institutions - so gradually and surreptitiously that the takeover was complete before anybody noticed.
In all cases of course the warning signs were there but nobody anticipated just how overwhelming the victory of the cultural marxists was going to be.
Maybe if more members of the hierarchies had been prepared to speak out the rank and file might have put a stop to all this nonsense. Of course Pope Pius IX did point out the dangers of compromise as early as 1864.
When this post first appeared, I thought maybe we’d find a silver lining such that Donna would turn out to be just naive, but at least well meaning.
Not so. The merciless post at rooshv.com really tears the veneer off, and all that can be concluded is:
-Mark’s sister is a lightweight, and is in way over her head…laughably so
-A Princeton PhD in the liberal arts may have as much real world value as a community college diploma
-Donna is lucky to have a fabulously wealthy brother, and presumably a solid set of parents who at least encouraged her to avoid drugs, and obey the law.
-Donna is essentially an analog to Anita Sarkesian or Lacie Green….a garden variety SJW, but with tons more $$.
-Donna is more attractive in grainy, out of focus photos which show only her face, taken @ age 21
Agreed. The problem is that 21st century Christianity in the West bears little resemblance to the Christianity that animated the army of John Sobieski. Christianity has become horrifyingly anti-masculine. This obviously turns off men but I suspect it also turns off quite a few women. You look at the men in leadership positions in modern Christian churches and they can hardly be called men at all. They’re not just weasels but wimps. Most men and I think it’s fair to say most women are revolted by such specimens. It’s almost as if the churches are deliberately excluding any men who have even the slightest trace of testosterone. And in fact it’s quite possible that they are – it’s difficult to imagine any even mildly masculine man being able to have a successful career in the Anglican Church.
To resuscitate Christianity we need to de-feminise it. We also need to make Christianity attractive to heterosexuals. Clearing out the homosexual priests would be an essential first step but I don’t see any likelihood of that happening.
A revival in terms of numbers would be of no use unless it was accompanied by a radical change in the nature of Christianity. At the moment Christianity in the West is not merely useless, it is a deadly enemy of civilisation. But how can we transform it back into something positive?
To resuscitate Christianity we need to de-feminise it. We also need to make Christianity attractive to heterosexuals. Clearing out the homosexual priests would be an essential first step but I don't see any likelihood of that happening.
A revival in terms of numbers would be of no use unless it was accompanied by a radical change in the nature of Christianity. At the moment Christianity in the West is not merely useless, it is a deadly enemy of civilisation. But how can we transform it back into something positive?
Bruce Charlton (http://charltonteaching.blogspot.com) has on ongoing push for a redevelopment of Christianity along the lines of Goethe, Blake, Coleridge and Wordsworth (as he says in one recent post) and Lewis and Tolkein (considered as sainthood candidates in another recent post).
A valid point. But could the rank and file really have prevented the takeover of the churches by SJWs? The problem is that this sort of thing is always done gradually. You start off with sermons about loving thy neighbour and nobody realises that over the course of several decades this eventually leads to sermons in favour of open borders. You start off with sermons about compassion and understanding and no-one realises that very gradually over the course of a few decades this will eventually lead to sermons in favour of homosexual marriage.
This is how the SJWs took over all the other institutions – so gradually and surreptitiously that the takeover was complete before anybody noticed.
In all cases of course the warning signs were there but nobody anticipated just how overwhelming the victory of the cultural marxists was going to be.
Maybe if more members of the hierarchies had been prepared to speak out the rank and file might have put a stop to all this nonsense. Of course Pope Pius IX did point out the dangers of compromise as early as 1864.
Yes, I’ve been following Bruce Charlton’s blog for a while. He has some worthwhile ideas.
And if you could magically reset the West to the way it was a century or two ago we'd destroy ourselves all over again.
We need to take a long hard look at our civilisation, identify its weaknesses and ruthlessly eradicate those weaknesses. There's a lot of good within western civilisation but there's a lot of sickness as well.
We can't blame a bunch of Africans living in mud huts, or Islam, or China, or any other culture, for destroying us. They don't have the capacity to do so, they never have had and never will have. Western civilisation wasn't murdered, it committed suicide.
Well, there was some Jewish angle to all this, but of course you’re right. We need to identify the weaknesses, because even if we could get rid of Jews completely, we could recreate the problem in a few centuries at most, the way Mormons or the Amish were created. Like the British and Irish didn’t have proper Gypsies, so they bred an indigenous Traveller group to do the exact same harm.
That’s why I think that even if there weren’t some moral problems with “getting rid of the Jews”, it wouldn’t accomplish much.
It's interesting that in Australia, with very few Jews, Lebanese are generally very successful in business, quite wealthy and quite powerful. My sister-in-law married into a very very wealthy and politically well-connected Lebanese family. So to some extent the Lebanese are Australia's Jews. Their success also certainly is based to a high degree on nepotism. And when they out-marry they like to marry blondes, like my sister-in-law!
did not emerge as a distinct world-view until the late Enlightenment."
To that I say, don't believe everything you read in Wikipedia. There is that famous line in the 14th Psalm, "The fool says in his heart, 'There is no God.'" If you're telling us the Bible is so magically prescient that it was able to correctly predict and denounce a competing ideology that was a thousand-plus years away from coming into existence, that's your prerogative, I guess.
As for me, I think there's a more obvious conclusion to be drawn, and that being the case, I'm sticking to my guns.
If you don’t believe your own citation, you could have spared the rest of us from it.
Re the 14th Psalm, I would argue that this Psalm is inveighing not against atheism, which is not really acknowledged in the Bible, but is inveighing against Hebrews forsaking their one true God (Yahweh) for other, false idols, as happens occasionally elsewhere in the Old Testament. That Psalm condemns the “impure” and laments the fate of “My people”, suggesting that the object is to keep the Jews on the right God, not to stamp out some kind of nihilism.
Hebrew has many words for “God” or “god”, allowing fine distinctions to be made between “our true God” and others’ random gods, with relatively few words. Maybe a Hebrew scholar could be more specific.
The counties that went for Trump were in the interior, away from the coast. He did well in the Sierras.
That is where the water for LA and the Bay area comes from.
LA may have legal title to Owens Valley water but those would not hold up in an openly hostile confrontation.
I think it is fair to say that in a straight up Red-Blue civil war the geographic disposition of the various counties is such that the Red counties would shut off the water, power, heat, ammunition, food and fuel to the Blue counties (i.e., cities) and the Blues would be suing for peace in a matter of days, before they are figuratively and perhaps literally cannibalized by their own underclass.
Blues are aware of this on some level, which is why they prefer to advance by more subtle, gradual and piecemeal means. But the new generation of SJWs is obtuse and impatient, which is a dangerous combination, so maybe they really will try to go more overt.
I am firmly of the opinion if we all don't hang together, we will hang separately. (Yeah, I know the guy who came up with that wasn't much for piety.) Historically, if you look at the fights between the Donatists and the Augustinians, or the Iconoclasts and the Iconodules, Nestorians and Arians and Pelagians yada yada, what strikes me most about all that is the fact that as noble and well-intentioned all those factions were, in hindsight, the mutual antagonism they engendered is what allowed Islam to basically plow them all over. So was it all worth it? The answer is important because there's a real threat of that happening again.
In Western Europe, it's fine if they want to have a hundred or more fractally dividing Western Branches of American Reform Presbylutheranism, or whatever. Those in the East, and the South, both Catholic and Orthodox, who for centuries did the dirty work of keeping the rest of Europe safe from Ottomans/Tatars/Saracens etc. didn't have the same luxury of allowing that kind of factionalism (except of course when it comes to mutual gang-fights in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and stunts like that). For those people -- Visegrad group included -- the Protestant Reformation was just a draft-dodging exercise that allowed Western Europeans to shirk their duty in fighting Islam (a duty they bravely took on during the Crusades, I might add) and pretend that the real enemy was some Black Legend bogeyman while leaving it to others to keep the real enemy out. But those benighted and swarthy Southern and Eastern Europeans had to do a better job of sticking together, and that's what they did, and that's why they tolerated autocracy and bad rulers and whoremonging Medici popes more so than was the case in the rarified realms of the North and West.
So while it's true that I probably sympathize more with Marcel than with what I will crudely refer to as Koran-kissers and those who lecture others on how many refugees to take in even as they themselves (I'm guessing) rely own personal contingent of Swiss bodyguards to vet anyone who comes into their midst. But if endorsing the former is going to help the Salafists or the followers of Dawkins plow over the main institution that made Europe great (I'm talking the one that built the universities, the hospitals, the social welfare system, the Michaelangeloes, etc.) then it's not worth it. Some people here think it was "whiteness" that is solely responsible for all that, but Europe was white long before it was great, so clearly, that's not enough.
Morever, if the regular schmucks in the pew (who when it comes to immigration are currently far wiser than those in the pulpits, given that they see what it's really about) had heeded the warnings of the priests and bishops earlier and not decided to stop producing babies, Europe would not be in this mess right now. That being the case, those who now come and whine and moan about how it's Christianity that is destroying Europe are way off the mark when it comes to casting blame. Yes, it's true that the popes are primarily listening to do-gooder little old ladies when it comes to immigration, but is that really so surprising? Who else but do-gooder little old ladies even goes to church these days?)
But the sainted archbishop did not leave of his own accord; he was pushed.
The real villain here, and by no means only here, was the officially “Blessed” but by no means saintly Pope Paul VI.
Benedict was overthrown by a combination of Leftist clerics (the St Gallen mafia) and New World Order secularists.
The St Gallen conspiracy is well-reported.
As for the NWO thugs: note that the banks informed the Vatican that it would no longer honour credit card transactions within the city-state, nor accept normal dealings with the Vatican Bank, on 1 January 2013. On 11 February Benedict announced his intention to resign, and the very next day these restrictions were lifted. Coincidence? Few people in the Vatican think so – unless, intriguingly, they are Francis supporters.
What is their agenda?
The St Gallen conspiracy is well-reported.
As for the NWO thugs: note that the banks informed the Vatican that it would no longer honour credit card transactions within the city-state, nor accept normal dealings with the Vatican Bank, on 1 January 2013. On 11 February Benedict announced his intention to resign, and the very next day these restrictions were lifted. Coincidence? Few people in the Vatican think so - unless, intriguingly, they are Francis supporters.
Are there sources for these? I have heard neither of the bank restrictions nor of the St. Gallen mafia. Which is probably more a function of my ignorance than anything else. But I’d be interested.
The St Gallen conspiracy is well-reported.
As for the NWO thugs: note that the banks informed the Vatican that it would no longer honour credit card transactions within the city-state, nor accept normal dealings with the Vatican Bank, on 1 January 2013. On 11 February Benedict announced his intention to resign, and the very next day these restrictions were lifted. Coincidence? Few people in the Vatican think so - unless, intriguingly, they are Francis supporters.
Like Reiner Tor, I would very much like to learn about the Cardinals (and whoever else) are in the group known by their meetings in St. Gallen.
What is their agenda?
Re the 14th Psalm, I would argue that this Psalm is inveighing not against atheism, which is not really acknowledged in the Bible, but is inveighing against Hebrews forsaking their one true God (Yahweh) for other, false idols, as happens occasionally elsewhere in the Old Testament. That Psalm condemns the "impure" and laments the fate of "My people", suggesting that the object is to keep the Jews on the right God, not to stamp out some kind of nihilism.
Hebrew has many words for "God" or "god", allowing fine distinctions to be made between "our true God" and others' random gods, with relatively few words. Maybe a Hebrew scholar could be more specific.
Which is at heart what is involved in most Atheism as actually practiced.
What is their agenda?
Apparently there really are a lot of sources on the St. Gallen mafia, like this. I vaguely recall having heard of it before.
I didn’t yet find anything on the bank restrictions, but I’m sure I’ll find something. Still neon2 could assist us with some links, I hope he’s still around this old thread.
But, I still can't figure out what their agenda is.
Is it a specifically gay mafia? Or, do they want to transform the RC Church into something like the Church of England or the Swedish national church?
So I'll only say that the St Gallen mafia is not a "gay" one, but its members are no doubt as unimpressed by the Church's traditional teaching on this as on every other topic.
One of the cardinals in this group told an ambassador to his country who had asked if there was any danger of another conservative being elected that he needn't worry. "It's all worked out beforehand" he smiled.
He is now one of the infamous Nine who are advising Francis in his work of destroying the Church.
As for the banking crisis: I don't know how to embed links, so simply google "Benedict steps down - inside the vatican" for a strict account of the facts. This will give you a few more names to google, and a clearer picture should emerge. But in short: the NWO does care about Christianity: how to destroy or a least subvert it. Soros knows how to use his ill-gotten gains, and his disciples will not have failed to learn from him.
As pure artists, the Greeks were hugely superior, as the Romans themselves recognised.
I thought about it, but I still think Roman busts were superior. And the Pantheon is not worse than the Parthenon (though perhaps not better either). Greek art could’ve been better in all other respects, but Roman architecture was at least the equal of Greek architecture, and the busts were better. It was snobbery on the part of the Romans to say the Greeks were superior without qualifications.
Although I prefer the Roman busts as well.
And as Thomas Sowell has pointed out, where you don’t have Jews you have other “middleman” ethnic groups like Indians (dot not feather), overseas Chinese or Lebanese fulfilling the same social functions.
It’s interesting that in Australia, with very few Jews, Lebanese are generally very successful in business, quite wealthy and quite powerful. My sister-in-law married into a very very wealthy and politically well-connected Lebanese family. So to some extent the Lebanese are Australia’s Jews. Their success also certainly is based to a high degree on nepotism. And when they out-marry they like to marry blondes, like my sister-in-law!
Remember that we’ve had a lot of subtle cultural indoctrination that “realism” (the Roman approach) is superior to “idealism” (the Greek approach).
Although I prefer the Roman busts as well.
It's interesting that in Australia, with very few Jews, Lebanese are generally very successful in business, quite wealthy and quite powerful. My sister-in-law married into a very very wealthy and politically well-connected Lebanese family. So to some extent the Lebanese are Australia's Jews. Their success also certainly is based to a high degree on nepotism. And when they out-marry they like to marry blondes, like my sister-in-law!
Christian or Muslim Lebanese?
Thanks. I’ve found a few other online references to it as well.
But, I still can’t figure out what their agenda is.
Is it a specifically gay mafia? Or, do they want to transform the RC Church into something like the Church of England or the Swedish national church?
The long-established Lebanese community in Australia is Maronite Catholic. And they’re very long-established.
They are the best of the Lebanese and the reason why that country was, fifty years ago, so well-educated and prosperous in comparison with other Arab countries, all their oil wealth not withstanding.
You realize the classics were originally written, or carved, in Flintstony block capitals, and ran in both directions?
Greek looks really stylish and intellectual in lower case minuscules, but those long postdated most of the Greeks who count for anything.
I congratulate you on that!
They are the best of the Lebanese and the reason why that country was, fifty years ago, so well-educated and prosperous in comparison with other Arab countries, all their oil wealth not withstanding.
It's interesting that in Australia, with very few Jews, Lebanese are generally very successful in business, quite wealthy and quite powerful. My sister-in-law married into a very very wealthy and politically well-connected Lebanese family. So to some extent the Lebanese are Australia's Jews. Their success also certainly is based to a high degree on nepotism. And when they out-marry they like to marry blondes, like my sister-in-law!
Most middleman minorities never dominated the culture and politics of their host countries the way Jews do. They are usually not so destructive either.
My family has been in Australia since the mid-19th century but I still think of myself as being culturally Anglo-Celtic-Australian.
I'm bitterly opposed to immigration because it's a numbers thing. I think Australia had quite enough diversity, and quite enough people, a generation ago and it's past time to call a halt.
Although I prefer the Roman busts as well.
I think both have a place, but it’s more difficult to create realistic busts than idealistic ones, because the former is more individualized. It’s also not so difficult in this age of abstract art to find realistic art inferior, so the indoctrination might actually work the other way.
The Lebanese in Australia are reasonably well liked. They’re sort of assimilated but they still cling to much of their own culture even after quite a few generations. Personally I don’t have a problem with that. I don’t like the idea of assimilation very much – I don’t fancy the idea of melting pots turning everyone into one huge soggy mass of undifferentiated blandness. I like cultural differences, as long as the cultural minorities are small in number and don’t actively work against the host country. The Catholic Lebanese in Australia have probably been a net benefit, mostly because there aren’t too many of them.
My family has been in Australia since the mid-19th century but I still think of myself as being culturally Anglo-Celtic-Australian.
I’m bitterly opposed to immigration because it’s a numbers thing. I think Australia had quite enough diversity, and quite enough people, a generation ago and it’s past time to call a halt.
Drat it! I wrote a long reply just now, and managed to lose it by leaving the page inadvertently.
So I’ll only say that the St Gallen mafia is not a “gay” one, but its members are no doubt as unimpressed by the Church’s traditional teaching on this as on every other topic.
One of the cardinals in this group told an ambassador to his country who had asked if there was any danger of another conservative being elected that he needn’t worry. “It’s all worked out beforehand” he smiled.
He is now one of the infamous Nine who are advising Francis in his work of destroying the Church.
As for the banking crisis: I don’t know how to embed links, so simply google “Benedict steps down – inside the vatican” for a strict account of the facts. This will give you a few more names to google, and a clearer picture should emerge. But in short: the NWO does care about Christianity: how to destroy or a least subvert it. Soros knows how to use his ill-gotten gains, and his disciples will not have failed to learn from him.
I can understand the process in, for example, a Communist country, where one is born into it, so the choice is only rule or ruin or both, but no one forced these Bergoglians to become clerics. They chose this, in spite of it being the opposite of everything they desired. (Now that I think of it, no Communist government was deliberately demolished from within that I know of, though it would be an understandable deed if it were the case. While among churches, liberal democratic governments, charitable foundations, civic groups and other organizations where participation is not mandatory, there are loads of infiltrators who seem happy to spend their careers undermining the organization they work for.) What's up with these people?
Maybe it is not so different from Ms. Donna Zuckerberg who started this thread. She seems to have nothing but contempt for the Classics, yet she's going all out to become a Classics scholar, powered by her hatred of her subject. What's wrong with her?
Driverless vehicles won’t save lives unless they are universal and passengerless.
Re the 14th Psalm, I would argue that this Psalm is inveighing not against atheism, which is not really acknowledged in the Bible, but is inveighing against Hebrews forsaking their one true God (Yahweh) for other, false idols, as happens occasionally elsewhere in the Old Testament. That Psalm condemns the "impure" and laments the fate of "My people", suggesting that the object is to keep the Jews on the right God, not to stamp out some kind of nihilism.
Hebrew has many words for "God" or "god", allowing fine distinctions to be made between "our true God" and others' random gods, with relatively few words. Maybe a Hebrew scholar could be more specific.
I had similar thoughts, and so checked the Hebrew. The word for God in “There is no God” is Elohim.
Yes, it is one of the paradoxes of atheism that atheists are so much more dogmatic and intolerant than the religious over whom they profess superiority.
So I'll only say that the St Gallen mafia is not a "gay" one, but its members are no doubt as unimpressed by the Church's traditional teaching on this as on every other topic.
One of the cardinals in this group told an ambassador to his country who had asked if there was any danger of another conservative being elected that he needn't worry. "It's all worked out beforehand" he smiled.
He is now one of the infamous Nine who are advising Francis in his work of destroying the Church.
As for the banking crisis: I don't know how to embed links, so simply google "Benedict steps down - inside the vatican" for a strict account of the facts. This will give you a few more names to google, and a clearer picture should emerge. But in short: the NWO does care about Christianity: how to destroy or a least subvert it. Soros knows how to use his ill-gotten gains, and his disciples will not have failed to learn from him.
I’ve been watching your discussion with reiner and PV out of the corner of my eye, and I have a question, though perhaps it assumes too much familiarity. The question is, why would someone like these Bergoglians, St. Gallensists, etc. dedicate their lives to something they despise? I mean, it is hard to understand how a young man would sign up to be a clergyman in a church he doesn’t believe in. It is that much harder to understand how the same man would laboriously climb the hierarchy of an organization he continues to disbelieve in and evidently despises, until he is finally, late in life, in a position to demolish that which he spent his life ostensibly serving. The concentrated, indissoluble hatred that a man must harbor to be able to spend his life thus is staggering to contemplate. Are the fringe benefits of clergydom so good to compensate for a life spent in covert, schemeing hatred? Or do such men join in sincerity and later somehow become disillusioned and bitter, and rather than depart, hatch plans in their own bile to become spiritual suicide bombers?
I can understand the process in, for example, a Communist country, where one is born into it, so the choice is only rule or ruin or both, but no one forced these Bergoglians to become clerics. They chose this, in spite of it being the opposite of everything they desired. (Now that I think of it, no Communist government was deliberately demolished from within that I know of, though it would be an understandable deed if it were the case. While among churches, liberal democratic governments, charitable foundations, civic groups and other organizations where participation is not mandatory, there are loads of infiltrators who seem happy to spend their careers undermining the organization they work for.) What’s up with these people?
Maybe it is not so different from Ms. Donna Zuckerberg who started this thread. She seems to have nothing but contempt for the Classics, yet she’s going all out to become a Classics scholar, powered by her hatred of her subject. What’s wrong with her?
I believe that’s a plural usage, right?
I believe it to be the second of your two alternatives. Many young men entered the clerical state filled with an enthusiasm and a spirit of self-sacrifice based upon a real although often (if only because they were young) superficial Faith.
Before Vatican II most of these held firm: the Church was a rock, and their training was generally good enough for them to be proud of its history and system of belief, both dogmatic and moral. The life was a good one, indeed a very satisfying one, so long as the faith remained truly alive, and the goal of eternal life for oneself and one’s flock remained central to one’s daily round of work and prayer.
Then along came the frivolous disaster of Vatican II. Since that time, now over fifty years ago, the life of a priest has become more and more a burden without relief: a “reformed” liturgy which tears the prayer life of the priest from its two thousand years of organic growth, the collapse of a Church universally admired (or at least respected and feared) to a state of near universal derision and loathing, a clergy treated with bemused contempt by society, even or perhaps most in once Catholic countries like Spain, and you end up with a situation ripe for both despair and revolution.
Those who despaired have either left or simply go through the daily routine and wait for retirement. The adepts of revolution are mostly either bishops or professors – in other words men who have a lot to lose if they walk away. They are well into late middle age at best, and the world outside the church will offer them no work which will allow them to live in the style to which they have become accustomed: lives of light duties, large rectories, and long and bibulous lunches (if you don’t believe me, then walk into the restaurants around the Vatican any time from one to four, and then again from seven to midnight).
A Church which holds firm to its hard teachings on divorce, abortion, and mercy killing, and on same-sex marriage in particular, is a church which is headed for the catacombs. This is the last destiny which these comfortable mediocrities want.
So they were scared witless by the thought of a Ratzinger papacy. Thus the St Gallen mafia. Had their favoured candidate, Martini of Milan, been in good health, he would probably have been elected, and would have carried out with infinitely more grace and intelligence the very policies which Bergoglio is now so crassly attempting to force down people’s throats.
Once Benedict was in, and showed that he would not only hold the line but even turn back the clock (particular with the liturgy), the opposition crystalised and managed to bring him down.
Whether the Church too is now down for the count is something which only time will tell.
I can understand the process in, for example, a Communist country, where one is born into it, so the choice is only rule or ruin or both, but no one forced these Bergoglians to become clerics. They chose this, in spite of it being the opposite of everything they desired. (Now that I think of it, no Communist government was deliberately demolished from within that I know of, though it would be an understandable deed if it were the case. While among churches, liberal democratic governments, charitable foundations, civic groups and other organizations where participation is not mandatory, there are loads of infiltrators who seem happy to spend their careers undermining the organization they work for.) What's up with these people?
Maybe it is not so different from Ms. Donna Zuckerberg who started this thread. She seems to have nothing but contempt for the Classics, yet she's going all out to become a Classics scholar, powered by her hatred of her subject. What's wrong with her?
Presumably because they’re true believers. Fanatics. The problem is that it’s not Catholicism they believe in. So they’re essentially heretics.
I like the fact that you added HASBARA!!!!! to your content free abuse. Smart move, if playing to the gallery a bit.
Once again: the most famous advocate of the view that the pre-Socratics were proto-liberal-democrats was Karl Popper. That is what I said and it is true. I never said he was a “leading figure” in pre-Socratic scholarship. The one assertion you have made with any content in it is obviously false. This undermines your implicit claim to be some sort of expert, the only evidence for which you can adduce is your free use of abuse.
Sad.
While we're at it, we own the space program, too, you haters. Haven't you seen "Hidden Figures?" All Your Base Are Belong To Us.
I assume they'll eventually get around to telling Sailer he's not allowed to use statistics, because Racism.
This sure seems like a terrific recipe for social harmony.
Turning everything real into (((real))) estate is the old Babylonian/Sumerian formula, and Abraham came out of that set of political and economic innovations ya know. Goat herders are not the seedbed of sanhedrin.
Similarly if you want to be part of the real estate terrain of identity politics/PC, you have to pay rent, and your landlords will determine what it is. (“Apologize for your superiority!” “OK, OK, I apologize.” “Now apologize and grovel!” “Erm, OK, for now, to keep things simple.” “Now apologize, grovel, and let us beat you up!” Eventually the demand is: cease to exist. But that was the intention all along.)
Since white men produce most of the valuable stuff of the real world, they make the best renters. Eminently milkable for higher and higher rent in fact. As has been demonstrated repeatedly in the past 2,000 years.
The point isn’t harmony or progress or evolution or anything of the sort. The point is rent-taking pure and simple. My utopia is, with enough power behind it, a real estate scam to which you must pay rent. Like heaven, in fact. Pie in the sky by and by when you die. (“That’s a lie!”)
When the (((Zuckerbergs))) of the world start screeching in the above genre, it is solely because their landlordism has faced a challenge. YOU may think that the earth upon which your ancestors stood, lived, fought, and died is sacred. But the (((Zucks))) are here to wave deeds in your face and claim your own title is bogus. Now pony up, white man!
This is why Trump is such a slap in the face. He beat the Manhattan landlords at their own game. When Aristotle pointed out the innate hierarchalism of all nature, he referred to something natural and spectacular that cannot be faked. The (((Donna Zuckerbergs))) of the world use their access and power to impose a fake hierarchy, for their own benefit, and that of those they choose to apportion it to, because they are not inhabited by the genuine form, which is bestowed by the gods.
This is a heinous act that violates the first three Commandments, which deal with stealing god’s honor…but I’m a nonbeliever, so what do I know about such things?
They know that “god” and god alone apportions superiority, which accounts for their perpetual subterranean magma of resentment and aggression.