Of course, we then have the basic imbecile who equates race, or genetics with ideology, nationalism, memetics, to reduce both to his confused state of all is subjective.
Memes do emerge out of memes, and presently this has become convoluted after decades of race-mixing, and the establishment of heterogeneous, nation-states. War against the virus has had casualties.
To adequately combat a memetic virus you must adopt some of its methods, exposing them for what they are. Words are the only way this memetic dis-ease remains viable, and it spreads, to reproduces. Words, symbols, metaphors is where the war is fought. Our advantage is that our words are rooted in reality, whereas theirs cannot be anything but hypothetical, feel-good, romanticism, or mystical ideology offering theoretical 'what ifs', delivered in metaphorical forms that have no reference to the real. This is their advantage...that they are unbound, by natural order, and can fabricate any delusion, any sentence structure, guided only by how pleasant it sounds, or what empowering emotions, sensations, it can trigger. Their imagination can retain a ambiguous, and preferably a conspicuous, esoteric, connection to reality, allowing it to delve, selectively, into fantasy, where anything is possible, and an idea is judged on the merits of its intentions and stated promise.
At this point we must conceded that a return to genetic purity is impossible. what it possible is a retention of the principles, values, memes, the genetic pure state produced, and passed onto us as guiding lights, beneath which a new beginning can take place - a hatching of an embryo, a cloning from the smallest of genetic materials.
Pretty sure you're barking up the wrong tree with this Indo-European and Semitic stuff as can be seen from comparing gender in language families, or the word for 'honey' and seeing that racial migrations happened on the scale of 50 thousand years ago, while language families are more of a 20 thousand years ago overlay: note for instance gender in Semitic versus Indo-European vesus Uralic, yet pretty obviously Finnish or Hungarian people look more like British than people in India or Ethiopia do. Then, a love for middle-class freedom and democracy, that comes way later, in the post-5 thousand years overlay. Victor Davis Hanson, who I'm sure you'd love, is pretty adamant that the freedom loving mind isn't a matter of race.
Pretty hard to guess what lead to this back-flow of language families, the horse and conquest, bride price versus dowry, lower class migration a la Mexicans, the spread of paganism and polytheism?
The Jews and the Greeks got along pretty well (hence the Bible, the Hellenized Jews) because they were both people not keen on subservience to imperialism ( not withstanding the degradation into empire of the Hellenic kingdoms or Byzantium in general). Little did the Jews of the Hellenic and Roman period know what we know today, that the Philistines were Greeks!
Satyr Daemon
Gender : Posts : 37123 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 58 Location : Hyperborea
Jews and Greeks got along well? Ha!!! I assume that you've mistaken national identity, the meme, with genetic identity. Many Jewish holidays celebrate the defeat of the Greeks. The story of Jesus, and of Christianity, is a story about usurping Hellenic dominance, and through Hellenism contradicting Indo-European paganism.
Despite your ignorance, shall we keep it on the level of ideologies, one rooted in nature and the other contrary to nature....producing incompatibility. Modern Greeks, yes...they get along with the Jews, because they are Jews themselves. Through Christianity. Hellenism died, or was placed on permanent life-support, with the fall of Rome and the infection of Christianity. Christianity IS Judaism mixed with select parts of Hellenism..mainly Platonism, but also monist philosophers...one of which became Socrates, after coming in contact with a philosopher, from the east, Zalmoxis. What made the Greeks cosmopolitan was they ability to assimilate alien ideals into their own, without losing themselves in them. they wre hunters....taking down prey, consuming it, defecating what was alien to them, and assimilating what invigorated their culture. Islam and Christianity are the offspring of Judaism, as is Marxism.
To be more accurate, Judaism is Nihilism reaching a memetic apex...in the west. Judaism was simply the way Nihilism expressed itself in Paganism, beginning with Zoroastrianism. Nothing original. Imagine the alien Xenomorph organism....as a metaphor. It "impregnates" its host, via the mouth...not a arbitrary choice of orifices. There it mixes with the host's DNA to produce the alien creature, according to the movie lore, and mythological canon. That's how Nihilism assimilated Egyptian paganism, and Babylonian Paganism, and alter Hellenism....to emerge first As Judaism, then as Hellenism, and then as Islam, and then as Marxism.
The migrations and blood mixing, is part of the history leading to the present state of affairs.
I've read Hanson....to love freedom does not demands anything above that of an animal brain. Some bird species die in captivity...they too love freedom, more than life itself.
Genes produce memes.....the memes do not spring out of nothingness, like Abrahamic creationism.
I've commented on racial migrations, and how tribes came out of Africa and returned, some earlier, producing the Egyptian Civilization, no coveted by sub-Saharan Negroes who want to compensate for the absence of a civilization comparable to anything we would consumer sophisticated.....and the Caucasians as conquerors, resulting in the slave trade.....but the salve trade was occurring way before the Europeans took over.
Anyway...want to see what race-mixing does.....do a cognitive leap and imagine mixing a wolf with a fox. The product, depending on what trait you are interested in measuring, would be a dilution of the two. if the trait was superior in one species, then it is reduced....and if it was inferior in the other, it would be increased...toward a middle, mediocre, ground.
As of "barking up the wrong tree"....depends what "tree" you climbed upon. I'm barking up YOUR tree....hoping you'll come down to...play.
Hungarians are a mix of European tribes and Mongols tribes. Don't know the details of Finish history to tell you how this was transmitted up to the north.
Semites, are not Jews....but Jews are Semites. Hellenism, as representative of Indo-European culture, is incompatible with Judaism, as it was expressed by the salves, the rejected tribes, we know as Semites. One embraces life and nature, the other contradicts it, and overturns it...in the symbol of the Star of David you see this overturning of Egyptian pyramid hierarchies.
Incompatible. The latter contradicts the former...it is its negation...ergo it is nihilistic.
_________________ γνῶθι σεαυτόν μηδέν άγαν
Satyr Daemon
Gender : Posts : 37123 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 58 Location : Hyperborea
Listen dude...my friend brought a woman over form Thailand and married her. Now he has a baby girl. I know bout the costs and the compromises forced upon makes in this western, Nihilistic world. Trust me, I know. But don't expect me to sugarcoat it for you, just because you have made an investment.
Even though e can never be certain how the genetic codes mix, or how they will trigger part of the DNA dormant, we cannot deny that race mixing dilutes DNA...meaning it selects half of what has been gained over centuries of natural selection, and manifests as a distinct appearance, all can recognize and only pretend to be blind to.
Let uses dogs, as an example...a species man has intervened upon and selected, according to human whims, to create the multiplicity of breeds, corresponding to naturally produced races, in humans, and breeds in other species.
Now, let's say you mix a border collie, one of the smartest, if not the smartest dog breed, with a bulldog, not the brightest dog breed...what would be the outcome?
A 'better' dog? Well, depends on your motives and needs. If you only want a pet, that makes you feel good, is loyal and fun to play with, then any mix would be good, if we also take into consideration barking, and amount of nutrition and exerciser required, upkeep and such considerations. But not if you wanted a smart dog.
Because if intelligence was your objective, then you would pick a breed that gave you the highest potential for it, and you would not rely on chance.
What if you wanted a fast dog. Would you mix a greyhound with a dutch-hound? No....you might get a nice dog, a playful dog, an obedient dog, but not a quick one.
Now consider how this works in humans breeds, called races, that have evolved naturally, due to periods of genetic isolation, and environmental conditioning, obvious in how each one looks...appears. Do you think that the genes, evolved within particular circumstances over long periods of time, and resulted in dominating India, and Europe and then the world, would not be diluted by mixing with a race that has none of that in its historical background? At what point do you accept the fact, and you do not make excuses to justify your choices and your invested interests?
Have you heard of objectivity, and the scientific method and empiricism? All of it is called philosophy.
Some call spirituality, religion, self-help manuals, self-flattery and self-pleasuring "philosophy"...but their the ones that have no place in philosophy, or in a philosophy forum, or anywhere near anything with the title 'philosophy' in it.
Jews and Greeks got along well? Ha!!! I assume that you've mistaken national identity, the meme, with genetic identity. Many Jewish holidays celebrate the defeat of the Greeks.
In deed... because Hellenism had devolved into imperialism by the time of the Maccabees and origin of Hanukkah. By comparison, back in the good old days, the Philistines (early Greeks) lived pretty much indifferently to the Jews, they didn't inspire each other's pottery or trade with each other.
Quote :
The story of Jesus, and of Christianity, is a story about usurping Hellenic dominance, and through Hellenism contradicting Indo-European paganism.
Yes. It was like political correctness for the ancient world: "hierarchy attenuating" to put it in social dominance theory terms. But by this time both the Hellenes and the Jews were at their low points: the Greeks/Romans had passed into the "Dominate" (i.e post-republic) period and the Jews were by then sore losers. They'd lost the pride of being a free and equal people -- both of them.
Quote :
Despite your ignorance, shall we keep it on the level of ideologies, one rooted in nature and the other contrary to nature....producing incompatibility. Modern Greeks, yes...they get along with the Jews, because they are Jews themselves. Through Christianity. Hellenism died, or was placed on permanent life-support, with the fall of Rome and the infection of Christianity.
I'd say the Greek spirit died several times. When Alexander conquered the city-states, that was possible because they didn't believe in freedom any more. By contrast they'd beaten back the Persians twice in the generations before that. That's also why the Muslims and the Crusaders could easily took Antioch, the people of Antioch didn't care who was making decisions, either way, it wasn't going be them. Same thing when Hannibal didn't dare to assault Rome in the Republican period despite three huge victories right in Italy and then the barbarians were able to take the city under the Dominate. Another death was at Diocletian's reforms that ended the free citizen-soldier class that freedom for Romans depended on and replaced it with serfdom and knight culture that was to last all the way until the Russian revolution. Jesus had some pretty Zen-like ideas, befitting free people, recall that Japan escaped Chinese imperialism. In fact, I see a lot of similarity between Christianity and pre-Socratic philosophy. Judeo-christian religion sucks when it's used for cry-baby purposes, which it doesn't have to be: "if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one!" Luke 22:36. This is probably true of post-modernism too, it's a method or a vehicle, it doesn't have to come to leftist conclusions, unless that's where someone purposely steers it.
Quote :
Christianity IS Judaism mixed with select parts of Hellenism..mainly Platonism, but also monist philosophers...one of which became Socrates, after coming in contact with a philosopher, from the east, Zalmoxis. What made the Greeks cosmopolitan was they ability to assimilate alien ideals into their own, without losing themselves in them.
Yes, that's an okay analogy.
Quote :
they wre hunters....taking down prey, consuming it, defecating what was alien to them, and assimilating what invigorated their culture. Islam and Christianity are the offspring of Judaism, as is Marxism.
For me, I usually think of Islam as a shadow Rome, the outcome of a Mediterranean civil war, like the Third-Century Crisis, but by the seventh century the West didn't have the spirit to win the East back as we had before. The Arabs were very much like the Macedonians. And the old Middle-East fell to them both invaders the same reason, the M.E. had been under imperialism for 3000 years and no one any longer cared who ruled them. Unfortunately, the Moslems eventually rejected reason, made official when they put down the Mu'tazila (the Mu'tazila were the continuation of Plato's academy that fled Athens to Sassanid lands fleeing Roman army persecution and eventually ending up at Baghdad). The invasion of the illiterate "Gog and Magog" Turks and the mixing of Sheba's culture with the depressed Middle-Easterners didn't help either (the Arabs encouraged the Middle-Easterners to assimilate with them via jizya and so on, by contrast the Hellenistic kingdoms kept their slavish subjects distinct).
Quote :
To be more accurate, Judaism is Nihilism reaching a memetic apex...in the west. Judaism was simply the way Nihilism expressed itself in Paganism, beginning with Zoroastrianism. Nothing original. Imagine the alien Xenomorph organism....as a metaphor. It "impregnates" its host, via the mouth...not a arbitrary choice of orifices. There it mixes with the host's DNA to produce the alien creature, according to the movie lore, and mythological canon. That's how Nihilism assimilated Egyptian paganism, and Babylonian Paganism, and alter Hellenism....to emerge first As Judaism, then as Hellenism, and then as Islam, and then as Marxism.
Speaking of paganism, it's a possible guess that the spread of paganism and the spread of Indo-European language went hand in hand.
Myself, I would distinguish between slave Jew culture and free Jew culture.
Quote :
I've commented on racial migrations, and how tribes came out of Africa and returned, some earlier, producing the Egyptian Civilization, no coveted by sub-Saharan Negroes who want to compensate for the absence of a civilization comparable to anything we would consumer sophisticated.....and the Caucasians as conquerors, resulting in the slave trade.....but the salve trade was occurring way before the Europeans took over.
Hold your horses, or chariots. There wasn't much back-channeling if we can believe modern genetic science, there were a few exceptions like the Hyksos, the Crusaders or the Moguls, but generally the flow of genes goes outwards from Ethiopia. As for sub-Saharan blacks, they never reached South Africa until about the same time humans reached China so they are not the primordial race, Caucasoid are. Ethiopians are dark skinned caucasians.
Quote :
Anyway...want to see what race-mixing does.....do a cognitive leap and imagine mixing a wolf with a fox. The product, depending on what trait you are interested in measuring, would be a dilution of the two. if the trait was superior in one species, then it is reduced....and if it was inferior in the other, it would be increased...toward a middle, mediocre, ground.
As of "barking up the wrong tree"....depends what "tree" you climbed upon. I'm barking up YOUR tree....hoping you'll come down to...play.
For me, what I see in the world is explainable by culture. Of course I'm aware some say IQ difference can only be explained racially, but, I'm still in the camp that cultural values and say, linear thinking, are learned very young, in the family, giving the impression it's racial, but it isn't.
Quote :
Hungarians are a mix of European tribes and Mongols tribes. Don't know the details of Finish history to tell you how this was transmitted up to the north.
I'm just saying, Finns are pretty similar to Swedes despite being of radically different languaculture families, meanwhile Semites and Indo-Europeans both use grammatical gender, probably suggesting they are actually a lot more closely related than many like to admit.
Quote :
Semites, are not Jews....but Jews are Semites. Hellenism, as representative of Indo-European culture, is incompatible with Judaism, as it was expressed by the salves, the rejected tribes, we know as Semites.
After the diaspora into Europe and the estabilshment of a free Israel I almost wonder if Jews can still be called Semites, not sure the percent but definitely less than half of Israelis are olive complexioned.
Quote :
One embraces life and nature, the other contradicts it, and overturns it...in the symbol of the Star of David you see this overturning of Egyptian pyramid hierarchies.
Incompatible. The latter contradicts the former...it is its negation...ergo it is nihilistic.
I get that, I'm just wondering, contra, say Donald Templer, who concluded race is the cause of low IQ among Muslims, if it can't just as well be explained by 5000 years of imperialism and unfreedom and then that culture transmitted before age 6 as the Jesuits say giving the impression it's genetic. I want to see some twin studies...
Quote :
Listen dude...my friend brought a woman over form Thailand and married her. Now he has a baby girl. I know bout the costs and the compromises forced upon makes in this western, Nihilistic world. Trust me, I know. But don't expect me to sugarcoat it for you, just because you have made an investment.
Even though e can never be certain how the genetic codes mix, or how they will trigger part of the DNA dormant, we cannot deny that race mixing dilutes DNA...meaning it selects half of what has been gained over centuries of natural selection, and manifests as a distinct appearance, all can recognize and only pretend to be blind to.
Let uses dogs, as an example...a species man has intervened upon and selected, according to human whims, to create the multiplicity of breeds, corresponding to naturally produced races, in humans, and breeds in other species.
Now, let's say you mix a border collie, one of the smartest, if not the smartest dog breed, with a bulldog, not the brightest dog breed...what would be the outcome?
A 'better' dog? Well, depends on your motives and needs. If you only want a pet, that makes you feel good, is loyal and fun to play with, then any mix would be good, if we also take into consideration barking, and amount of nutrition and exerciser required, upkeep and such considerations. But not if you wanted a smart dog.
Because if intelligence was your objective, then you would pick a breed that gave you the highest potential for it, and you would not rely on chance.
What if you wanted a fast dog. Would you mix a greyhound with a dutch-hound? No....you might get a nice dog, a playful dog, an obedient dog, but not a quick one.
So this is the thing about the dogs. Cocker spaniels are playful, and Labradors are clever, and beagles are noisy. But, meanwhile, any of these breeds in America is high-strung and neurotic. In Egypt the dogs are aggressive. And in Thailand they are of course lazy. Why are Chinese authoritarian while Koreans are getting along with Democracy? Jews are democratic but their Arab kin are authoritarian. Same race, different political culture.
Quote :
Now consider how this works in humans breeds, called races, that have evolved naturally, due to periods of genetic isolation, and environmental conditioning, obvious in how each one looks...appears. Do you think that the genes, evolved within particular circumstances over long periods of time, and resulted in dominating India, and Europe and then the world, would not be diluted by mixing with a race that has none of that in its historical background? At what point do you accept the fact, and you do not make excuses to justify your choices and your invested interests?
Have you heard of objectivity, and the scientific method and empiricism? All of it is called philosophy.
Have you? I'm wanting to see a control group study, because as I say about Muslim IQ and lazy Thai dogs, it looks to me, like the cultural overlay is sufficient to explain things. I'm not 100% certain I'm right, but I'm just not totally convinced without some more..."objective" and "scientific" data, as opposed to the mostly historical anecdotes we are drawing inferences from at the moment.
Last edited by Seleucus on Sat Jan 28, 2017 5:27 am; edited 1 time in total
Slaughtz
Gender : Posts : 2593 Join date : 2012-04-28 Age : 33 Location : A stone.
Comparing intelligence between Asians and Whites is the easiest path to attempting the fallacy of composition by saying the differences are little between the Asian and White races and therefor all races have no genetic component which affects intelligence. Comparing the smartest two breeds of dogs and concluding your position that there's very little difference in intelligence between all breeds of dogs is precisely the analogue to the fallacious reasoning you're using.
Satyr Daemon
Gender : Posts : 37123 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 58 Location : Hyperborea
Yes, and there are studies out there if you are honest about it and not driven by a political and emotional agenda. Average I.Q.s and developmental differences, in children, between races are documented. But the evidence is more direct, just as direct as differentiating a ripe tomato from a apple, without a study group, and noticing the obvious differences between Negroes and Asians, without a blood sample.
But if you are looking for mainstream studies then you must keep in mind that science is also political, and scientists are also human....you should dig below the lies, cultivating social harmony, into data which is never made public.
The most direct evidence is lack of culture in sub-Sahara, or comparing the levels there, to those developed in Asia or Europe.....before the 'evil' European went there to corrupt the 'innocent' Negro. Social convention creates the illusion parity, because the intelligence required to compensate for it using techniques and technologies, is average, and there are laws preventing the taking advantage of superiority. Social rules enforce a common behavioural norm, and education teaches how to imitate, and how to confuse knowledge for understanding, then 'corrected' by intervene, on humanitarian grounds, to enforce rules about quotas and treating all the same, under the pretext of equal opportunities.
Migration routes, before your civilizations emerged.
By the time documented human civilizations emerge, and history begins, most of human evolution had taken place. How far back can we trace civilization...a few thousand years? More? Evolution works on a hundreds of thousands of year timescale. What we now call Negro, European, and Asian, splintered off from a common ancestor in Africa thousands of years before the first human civilization. It is said that the European tribes also went extinct, due to the idea age, also explaining their later dominance, whereas those tribes that did not have to exit Africa, because they were dominant, did not face as much environmental stresses to change much, physically, and more importantly, mentally.
Evolution works on necessity, not with a goal. Nothing evolves if it is not forced to....adapt or die.
I'm just not convinced yet because the latest study I read on this matter, which was Templer's on Muslim IQ didn't convince me. For sub-Saharan Africans, add in facts like being cut off from the rest of civilization for fifty-thousand years, malnutrition, war, disease, blaring mosque loudspeakers so no one can ever get enough sleep, impoverished schools, alcohol and of course you end up with less than perfect specimens of humanity. I suspect masterliness, linear thinking, pride, courage, honesty and so on, are learned in childhood in the family. Later in life is usually too late, just like as an adult I'll never lose my accent or my fossilized grammatical errors. This is why I'm much more open to foreign adoption, and immigration of students and workers, but concerned about transplanting whole family units... but that may be for another thread. I'm not saying you're wrong, of course I can see Labradors are usually a friendly breed of dog, while Pit bulls are not known for their kindliness, and that's probably a fair analogy to race, just without scientific objective evidence I'm not totally convinced, especially since culture is clearly such a powerful factor.
Maybe it isn't a topic for another thread. Which is more dangerous to free society in North America? Immigration of Russians who are Europeans but come from an authoritarian culture, or immigration of South Koreans who come from a country with a democratic culture but are Asians?
Satyr Daemon
Gender : Posts : 37123 Join date : 2009-08-24 Age : 58 Location : Hyperborea
A human buys a cat and a dog. Two species that have evolved for hundreds of thousands of years into distinct species. Species being a reproductive, biological type, man discoverers and categorizes, gives it a name, and studies their different potential traits: size, speed, intelligence, strength colour, etc....and does not invent, just as many insist in thinking that race and sex are social fabrications.
The human places both cat and dog into his home - a controlled environment, with rules - his rules. Similar to culture, or a meme. I'm using species to accentuate what may be otherwise, lost in details which can be infinitely doubted. Now, if you begin when dog is puppy, and cat is kitten, and you deny access to the outside world, the two species will fall into a behavioural pattern, dictated by the demands of environment - nurturing. Feeding time, sleep time, rules against entering rooms or jumping on furniture etc. Social conditioning. The two species will adapt, verging towards a shared, common behaviour.
If you push a dog for behaving too much like a canine, and the cat for being too feline, then you will have two neurotic pets, and pets that are forced to converge into a common behaviour. The illusion of parity. The human can then claim that species are also a social fabrication, when it was he who cultivated parity, just like modern liberals insist that there are no races, and that sexes and gender are also social constructs, when it is they who are socially constructing their absence. You see the hypocrisy inherent in nihilism? This is the distinguishing trait, that links all variations of nihilism, in a shared bond - their lies and their dependence on duplicity and word-games. I've analyzed how and why nihilism develops multiplicity, as a product of its liberation form natural order, and the restrictions imposed upon humans by reality, but nihilism still maintains a viral code, that connects it to a psychosis. Words, symbols in general, being the primary method of replication and vitality, and the need to lie, because how can you fool existence, when you can hardly fool yourself and others? Nihilism is so ridiculous and so transparent that in order to survive in a world it denies or reinvents, it must lie. Christianity is full of such self serving lies. Moderns, as the epitome of Nihilism, in the west, the last men, are quintessentially hypocrites. They say one thing and do a second, or do a second and think a third. They use words to confuse, not to clarify, because to clarify would expose them and their pretenses. They've invented all sort of excuses to explain why they can never remain loyal to their own ideals, and they've come up with clever ways to hide their plagiarism and imitation, behind clouds of symbols and metaphors, masking their mediocre uniformity behind mirrors of hyperbolic uniqueness.
Yet, genes, being memories, or encoded experiences, and nature being the sum of all nurturing, cannot be changed with a lifetime conditioning. Training can help imitate a common behaviour, but when the rule maker is gone, the human in this case, both cat and dog, and having no previous contact with their own kind, will revert to canine and feline behaviour.
Socialization teaches behavioural norms, and law and order, and peer pressure, enforces them....but the parity they produce, is founded on self-repression. This is why, in the states, affirmative action, and this endless obsession with race, applies. Education failed to garner the results expected by naive, Marxist ideologues, and romantic fools.
They, now, have to make excuses to explain why other visible minorities, like Asians thrive, and the Negro still struggles at the bottom, resorting to violence and crime with ease, exhibiting promiscuity indicative of a sub-par intelligence.
Averages, of course...inherited potentials, is what races are, just as what species are. A species describes an average higher and lower level for all perceived traits, it does not describe where, within this average, the particular member o the species will fall. It describes statistical probability, allowing for the extreme exceptions to the rule, downward and upward.
If you are going to deny this to humans, then you must deny it to all organisms, if you want to remain true to your convictions, and loyal to your own logic. You can't have ti both ways. You can't accept that there are differences of breed and of species, on the one hand, and then claim that it's not certain when it comes to humans, because then you must justify why humans are exempt form the rule you apply across the board, and with ease, in all other cases...from animals to choosing produce. Why, for example, is appearance the essence of a element, or a tree, and you need no scientific validation, and it is superficial when it comes to humans? Why is the evolved method we use to distinguish and differentiate,conveniently fail us when we approach a socially uncomfortable, and psychologically distressful matter, concerning human beings?
We hate it when Trump lies to our faces, but we have no problem when Obama does. One tells us something we refuse to believe, because we have eyes and can see for ourselves, and the other tells us a lie we desperately want to believe, despite what we see, because we have feelings. Weird huh?
They, now, have to make excuses to explain why other visible minorities, like Asians thrive, and the Negro still struggles at the bottom, resorting to violence and crime with ease, exhibiting promiscuity indicative of a sub-par intelligence.
For me the answer is Culture of Poverty, google Oscar Lewis. Which is to say slave morality.
Look what happened with the Libero-Americans. Ex-slaves, they quickly took over the country due to the caultural assets they acrued during their captivity in America and the British colonies. Once set free in west Africa they totally dominated the indigenous sub-Saharan Africans, and began to build a modern society. (Unfortunately they grew soft and adopted Marxism and were overthrown and genocides by the indigenous they began to pity... but that is another story).
For me, the failure of the blacks in America just underscores the fact of cultural transmission in childhood and other social factors when we see how the Libero-Americans or more recent immigrants from Africa thrived.
Probably the temperament of races differ. And I'm not saying there's anything wrong with taking pride in race, white pride is great, and my favorite dog breed is probably the Irish Setter, it is more beautiful and intelligent, and noble, than any of the other breeds.
Also, as Richard Spencer pointed out, separating race and culture isn't so easy. If you love democracy, you're not going to be a sinophile, that would be silly.
Quote :
We hate it when Trump lies to our faces, but we have no problem when Obama does. One tells us something we refuse to believe, because we have eyes and can see for ourselves, and the other tells us a lie we desperately want to believe, despite what we see, because we have feelings. Weird huh?
At least for myself, I love to hear Trump's lies, they are like the sweet tunes of the lyre.
Last edited by Seleucus on Sat Jan 28, 2017 6:58 am; edited 1 time in total
Lyssa Har Har Harr
Gender : Posts : 8965 Join date : 2012-03-01 Location : The Cockpit
Myself, I would distinguish between slave Jew culture and free Jew culture.
Pls. do.
The Greeks and the Jews took to each other quite naturally. Either they ignored one another as the Philistines (Greeks) and Jews did, both self-satisfied with no desire to interfere with the other. Or as later in Hellenistic and Roman times, and as today, as two intelligent, advanced, and wise freedom loving races excited to collaborate and defend civilization from heathens.
Lyssa Har Har Harr
Gender : Posts : 8965 Join date : 2012-03-01 Location : The Cockpit
The Jews sell what they do not, themselves, buy. Their humility and nihilism is a ruse to decrease the resistance of the competitors.
Some have called this the "Jew Paradox". I compare it to the Cosa Nostra trying to become legitimate, by washing their illegal assets, and hiding behind corporate names. With the Jews, the western's starting nihilistic Meme, it takes the form of Zionism.
Strauss himself divides the Zionist method into 3 categories:
1- Orthodox, Spiritual, Zionism Here the Jews remain true to their nihilism and prepare for the coming messiah, knowing that they will be the benefactors. They oppose the other two forms because those set roadblocks to the process of Armageddon. Essentially they remain loyal to the victim persona.
2- Cultural Zionism This brand of Zionism proposes nationalism, or isolation form the rest of mankind, preserving the victim chosen people identity but refusing the religious end.
3- Political Zionism This is also in line with Liberal Democracy. Here the political branch wishes to culturally eliminate all identification rooted in any meme other than a collective, worldwide one. In this case the Jew disappears in the mix.
Here is where some conspiratorial possibilities arise. Is it honest or is it another method of reducing the competition's power? Whatever it is, it relies on conviction, because the best lie is the one believed in. Some think it preaches what it most benefits from, because the Wizard of Oz is already behind the curtain.
This is the most popular, and the one which is taking hold. Christianity and Islam, being offshoots of it are still a detriment to its cause, because they preach a discriminating attitude which preserves fragmentation. This is why this brand of Zionism attracts the cosmopolitan, atheist, liberal Jew.
This elimination of all identifications besides the modern ones, this teaching of promiscuity, permissiveness, as a desirable liberation, is all part of destroying the meme that most threatens this nihilistic memetic virus.
/
To hate the Semite who identify with their status of "outcasts" or a God chosen to suffer on his behalf, is to play into their belief system. The Semite finds identity in being hated, as he finds identity in emotion - we see this in the outcrop of Judaism Christianity, and Islam: One the self-described religion of LOVE, the other a religion of HATE. The Jewish dogma is a meme attempting to become a gene: Zionism. There are many forms of Zionism: cultural, political, spiritual.
All identify with the outcast meme: the 13 tribes are the various members of the lower social strata that were originally seduced by this cult of victimhood, and came together under the idea(l) of overturning the hierarchy by placing their King above all Kings, and outside the space/time continuum. They became the "chosen" ones. We can understand the unifying power of this ideology, because it later turned into communism and tried to seduce billions with the unifying identification with the 'wronged worker' ...the victims of Capitalism.
Political Zionism tries to destroy its own identity, as the cult of the victim, the perpetual wandering Jew, the outcast, so as to integrate and disappear within a secular culture. By eliminating all identifiers it makes its own more easily assimilated. This contradicts the identity of Jewry.
The Cultural Zionist, wishes to isolate itself from other cultures and remain the outcast. The goy are there to exploit, as the chosen ones.
The spiritual Zionist, the traditional ones, wish to go further and not even have a central cultural place of their own. They wish to remain outcasts amongst those who resent their arrogance, so as to remain true to the prophecies, and usher in the age when the true messiah will come and give the Jews their rightful reward for being such loyal followers and representatives of His power.
If we consider Judeo-Christianity as a memetic virus, infecting the body of Indo-European cultures, then to hate the virus is to hate what helps us remain strong. The noble warrior does not hate his enemy, he honors him, because the enemy identifies him and his own. No emotion enters his fight. he is pure reason. not erotic madness, but rational agape.
Myself, I would distinguish between slave Jew culture and free Jew culture.
Pls. do.
The Greeks and the Jews took to each other quite naturally.
This is not a fact, and the current splinter of so many religious schools can be attributed to this. I mean, starting from the Pauline 'heresy', etc.
Quote :
Or as later in Hellenistic and Roman times, and as today, as two intelligent, advanced, and wise freedom loving races excited to collaborate and defend civilization from heathens.
First off, jews are not a race. They are disparate elements bound together by memes, and survival laws. They are memes perpetuating themselves into a gene.
Are you familiar with Nietzsche or related historical philosophy? Its not 'intelligent' to simply invert reality with words, deny the flux of becoming with a 'being' - this is a life-hating, self-hating Nihilism.
And what wisdom are you talking of, when the foundation at bottom is a reality denying rot…?
And what is terrible about heathenism, that makes defence against them 'noble'?
The connection between Judeo-Christianity and Secular Humanism, minus the God element:
1-The idea of immaculate conception. The secular humanist still holds onto the idea of 'something from nothing'. This is why in his warped mind humanity lacks a nature, since nature implies a continuum of inherited traits.
Man is born void of any predispositions and it is man himself who conjures up greed and sex and selfishness out of thin air. It's not that these traits preexisted, were products of natural selection and are then inhibited or promoted within cultural and social contexts, but they are non-existent....man pulls them out of his arse.....like a magic trick. So gender is a total human invention. Heterosexuality, as well.
People learn to be heterosexual. It's not that people learn that social limitations of this sexual role, or acquire the cultural symbols to express it, but heterosexuality is a human invention.
2-The idea that man, and as a result nature, is evil. It is man who brings vileness and violence and greed, and rape and discrimination into the world. He is bad and must make amends for it.
This imposition of shame and guilt upon man for being man, is directly linked to Judeo-Christian servility.
3- The idea of paradise, morphing into a Utopia. This idea shows a disdain for the world, wanting to heal it, or escape it into a "better" reality. In the religion version, Paradise exists somewhere beyond and one must die to get there. When it morphs into the secular version this Utopia exists somewhere in the future.
In both versions the ideal world is characterized by the absence of suffering, strife, the seven deadly sins, but retains consciousness and vigor.
4- The idea of universal equality. All are equal under God, if the individual offers the proper respect and accepts God into his heart and in the secular form all are equal under the law if the individual shows the proper respect for the state or the institution.
Of course in the Jewish faith there is no uniform as they are the "chosen people", but this was later corrected with Christianity which opened the gates for all to be included, no mater their sex, race, creed, heritage. Their commonality was their unified submission to the common authority. In both cases the only form of distinction was in reference to servitude and loyalty to the authority. In the religion it was the pious man that was more holy than the average man, and in the system it is the good citizen who distinguishes himself from the average man.
In both cases salvation is possible if the individual makes the proper amends, submits the the one authority, works for its betterment and expansion (does the Lord's good work), and remains docile and tolerant and submissive towards it for a lifetime.
5- The idea that all deserve love and respect, just for being born. In the religious dogma love is a universal quality all deserve, and only do not get if they push it away. In the secular form it is all who have rights and deserve respect and consideration and also love.
Love becomes prostitute and it is denied to a man only if he does not display the proper thankfulness and humility. In both cases it is never applied, but remains theoretical.
The individuals purporting to be Christian or humanitarians still exhibit the natural discrimination instincts. They are blind to appearances, yet always choose the most attractive. They think all deserve love and that love and sex are wonderful, with no domination symbolism and no aggression involved, but they never screw a bum and when they are given love and sex by force they refer to it as "rape", feeling violated and hurt afterward.
6- The idea that man deserves and can attain immortality. In both the religious and the secular form this immortality is attainable via another Will, or an otherness.
In the religion this otherness is God; in the secular ideology this abstraction is the state, or the nation, or the idea of Man....the ideal Man.
7- The idea that nature is bad, and the idealized cleansed, the Platonic idea of nature is worshiped. In the religion nature is ruined by man's curiosity. He is cast out of pure nature and he ruins it for himself. In the secular form man ruins nature with his meddling, with his curiosity.
In both cases man can return to this authentic past by making the proper amends and offering the proper sacrifices.
Then man can go back to living in a world with no violence, no hunger, no greed, no selfishness, no gender, no ego.
8- The idea that ego and pride are evil. In this case the self, the ego, and anything associated with it and its self-sufficiency, is slandered so as to make it possible for the many to be as one. The many selves united into one Self (God) within which the many selves lose all relevance, are expendable and indistinguishable.
9- The idea that the world, reality, is fake, an illusion (borrowed from the east) and an intermediate stage before the more real reality or the better, perfect, world is finally reached.
Dictionary wrote:
Fetish
fet•ish noun 1.an object regarded with awe as being the embodiment or habitation of a potent spirit or as having magical potency. 2.any object, idea, etc., eliciting unquestioning reverence, respect, or devotion: to make a fetish of high grades. 3.Psychology . any object or nongenital part of the body that causes a habitual erotic response or fixation.
The fixation of modern variants of Judeo-Christian nihilism with the concept, the idea, the possibility, of humanity is not only obvious, but you can only open the television to hear it being used repeatedly as an all-encompassing, salve, a prayer, promising all sorts of magical solutions and escapes. The binding element being used is not reason, but an emotion: love. Love is what explains and justifies without having to explain and justify. One simply feels it. Through an act of verbal, conceptual, alchemy, the term is purified by eliminating all biological, natural, primal, earthly, qualities. Sex, in other words, is filtered out of the remaining, now divine, concoction, and what is left is a magical potion which can offer any mind what it needs. Humanity, the plural form of human, is reified, reduced down to its most uniform, unifying, purified form. All that was real in it is vaporized, leaving behind the ethereal essence of a magical power. Devotion, to it, is the way the sexual element is taken out of the idea, and placed on the worshiper. God, the Christian version, is this purified form of human. Human, is the secularization of the Judeo-Christian God, leaving behind only the divine, included now in the word "human." When we say “humane,” as in “treat him humanely” what we mean is in adherence to a Judeo-Christian moral standard.
Sexless, race-less, with no past, no blood, no nature, the word human becomes mystical. The worshipers are now totally associated with the term. Whereas God, in the Christian sense, was to be submitted to, hoping to sit beside Him, the devout worshiper of the divine is now included in the thing worshiped – selfishness, and egotism now lowered down to a more direct association. One is worthy simply by being born, and can only lose this worthiness, by not accepting the term with all its divine, purified, mystical connotations. The terms and conditions of remaining included are always in accordance with the nihilistic dogmas. The Christian had to prove himself before he acquired the salvation offered by the presumed Divine; the modern version, the secular humanist, is already included, no baptism necessary, making it even easier than before by eliminating the self-control and self-sacrifice of devotion; one can only face being excluded from the divine Baptismal rites have now become education. A child had to receive the appropriate rites, from the appropriate, the popularly sanctioned, priests representing the divine. In these more advanced days, the rites are called education, properly given by the sanctioned, popularly approved, priests of secular human baptismal ceremonies. Not only what is taught but how it is taught must be accepted and recited, by the inductee, after years of proper training. At the end of the process what he recites has become second-nature, literally. It is a substitute for nature. The official narrative is the pure, authentic, reliable, holy word, and the teachers, the secular humanist version of the priesthood, are the conduits of Holy Scripture, even if they themselves fail to be holy and pure.
The fact that the term “human” has now become a word, void of most natural elements – because first came the word – to be excluded, excommunicated, from the divine also takes a few words of exorcism: Nazi, fascist, hater, sexist, racist, ill etc. The mystical experience with the divine can as easily become an exorcism when all that is required to erase a concept founded on words, and nothing more than words, are more words.
The worshiper of the term humanity finds in the incomprehensibility and complexity, of the term, the holiness, of the divine, himself, in himself. He is the complex and incomprehensible, being worshiped, with narcissistic obsessiveness, in the reflection via others. He worships himself through it, this now abstracted God, dead but still not gone. He admires marvels, and loves, himself as this purified, projected, otherness. He can now be selfless, and still selfish, ego-less and still egotistical, and not feel ashamed of the baseness, the primal factor; he can be shameless in his shame, and feel civilized in his primitiveness. The sexual element in the original human has now become a defensive, slandering, accusatory word. A word used against all those who threaten to discover and uncover the ruse. It is the other who is primitive, and obsessed with sex, when he tries to uncover the primitive and sexual in the ones claiming to be worshipers of the pure and the divine and the supernatural; it is the one who threatens to uncover the hate beneath the proclamations of love, who is the hater; it is the one who threatens to uncover the illness, the sexual redirection, the dysfunction, the duplicity, who must be disarmed by accusing him first of the vary things he is threatening to disclose. The worshiper of the purified form of self is now quick to assault the other with what he feels he may be exposed as. The other is the unholy, the satanic, and the secular humanist’s conception of evil, now also given a scientific note by calling it ill. Sex is now turned into an illness, and morphs into a fetish with the concept, the word, human. It is not the reality of humanity which is obsessed over, but tis idealized, abstracted form; the secular humanist does not love humanity, no more than he loves himself, but he loves the cleansed of all reality projection of humanity he wishes were true, or which will come true in some distant, technologically advanced, Utopian future. The rejection of the sexual element in human now turns into an accusation, a sin, to defend one’s self from this overcomed evilness, and a fetish, a secret longing, an inner, sexual need being denied expression. The secular humanist becomes obsessed with the idea of humanity. Eros directs itself to the pure, virginal, idealistic part, while the animal, earthly, natural part is relieved with this obsession with the abstract. Humanity, now sexless, can only be loved platonically. The repression results in sexual dysfunction, in redirected exaggerated libidinal energies, in an inner psychic schism, in a constant, repetitive disillusionment, dissatisfaction, with the real.
Would you trust a people who don't look out for themselves first? Obviously Jews are gonna do those things you say. That's how you know a sincere and honest Jew, by his or her sense of superiority. You're not any different.
Now that isn't saying there isn't a trend of slave morality in Jewish culture, but there isn't not a strain of Christianity and political correctness in Western culture either.
Have you been to Israel? Tel Aviv is no different from any modern American city, no doubt since so many Israelis are Americans. It's the advanced outpost of Western civilization in the Middle East. If you're not a Zionist, I don't even know what to say. Are you pro-Muslim? Like... what the...
Hellenized Jews for you, Ben Shapiro, Milo Yiannopoulos, Sam Harris, Josephus.
First off, jews are not a race. They are disparate elements bound together by memes, and survival laws. They are memes perpetuating themselves into a gene.
Yes, Jews are not a family of mothers begetting generations going back to a mythical David. I'm using race in the tradition sense that Greeks or Cecil Rhodes used it, as a language and culture group.
Quote :
Are you familiar with Nietzsche or related historical philosophy?
Obviously.
Quote :
And what is terrible about heathenism, that makes defence against them 'noble'?
Spend a few years living among savages and I won't need to explain it to you. Rousseau was wrong. He could believe in the noble savage because he actually never met a savage. Have you seen how savages manage waste disposal, or traffic systems, or health care, or justice? Filth, disorder, corruption, ignorance, cruelty. Save yourself the price of plane tickets to Sumatra, read Caesar's Gallic Wars.
Lyssa Har Har Harr
Gender : Posts : 8965 Join date : 2012-03-01 Location : The Cockpit
Would you trust a people who don't look out for themselves first?
Are people who falsify reality and at the head of devolving dysgenics and overall spiritual retardation of mankind, someone to 'trust'? Really?! Are you one more hedonist sold to immediate gratification? Success sells and that smells good is good enough for you? HA
Quote :
Obviously Jews are gonna do those things you say.
Obviously, why we have philosophy to discriminate rotten apples. Not all that glitters...
Quote :
That's how you know a sincere and honest Jew, by his or her sense of superiority. You're not any different.
This is the kind of spiritual stunting a dangerous Apollonian 'rationality' can produce… Whatever works is superior, and success owns all. Its not success as much as how one succeeds that sets people and races apart...
Quote :
Have you been to Israel? Tel Aviv is no different from any modern American city, no doubt since so many Israelis are Americans. It's the advanced outpost of Western civilization in the Middle East. If you're not a Zionist, I don't even know what to say. Are you pro-Muslim? Like... what the…
So the choice is automatically J.-Xt. or Muslim? Your comfortable limitations do not define identity, thank Zeus;
Hel! How did you find this forum - intro please!!!
First off, jews are not a race. They are disparate elements bound together by memes, and survival laws. They are memes perpetuating themselves into a gene.
Yes, Jews are not a family of mothers begetting generations going back to a mythical David. I'm using race in the tradition sense that Greeks or Cecil Rhodes used it, as a language and culture group.
As if, how a nose or chin is pointed or hair color did not contribute to evolution of said language and culture!!
Its called phrenology, and involves a whole ambit of environment and genetic memory shaping everything from skull shape to leanness and meanness, which in turn shapes a language, a culture…
Dont know where you get this artificial splitting, since Spengler was even the first who said,
"One does not belong to a race; you either are it, or you are not." [will edit the exact quote later], or,
Spengler wrote:
"The blood is for us the symbol of the living. The blood of ancestors flows through the chain of generations and binds then in a great linkage of destiny, beat and time."
I believe blood is not just materialistic, but also has a spiritual component.
Blood and Soil,, rather than Language and Soil that heidegger espoused.
Quote :
Quote :
Are you familiar with Nietzsche or related historical philosophy?
Obviously.
not...
Quote :
Quote :
And what is terrible about heathenism, that makes defence against them 'noble'?
Spend a few years living among savages and I won't need to explain it to you. Rousseau was wrong. He could believe in the noble savage because he actually never met a savage. Have you seen how savages manage waste disposal, or traffic systems, or health care, or justice? Filth, disorder, corruption, ignorance, cruelty.
So heathens wrent responsible for the most advanced civilizational structures, not just in terms of infrasructure, but birth of science and philosophy and culture as we know it?!
"Each race (or variety) is characterized by a more or less distinct combination of inherited morphological, behavioral, physiological traits . . . Formation of a new race takes place when, over several generations, individuals in one group reproduce more frequently among themselves than they do with individuals in other groups. This process is most apparent when the individuals live in diverse geographic areas and therefore evolve unique, recognizable adaptations (such as skin color) that are advantageous in their specific environments." [Statement on Race as a Biological Concept] [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Evola wrote:
"Of course, the prerequisite, here, is that such doctrine is understood in a global manner, and is therefore not limited to the biological and anthropological sphere ('racism of first degree'), but is led also to consider race as a reality of the soul, of the character and of the way of life, and, finally, race as 'world-outlook' and race of the spirit ('racism of second and third degree'). Every kind of indiscriminate ethnic adulteration, on the one hand, is the consequence of a degenerated inner sensibility and of the tyranny of materialistic, individualistic and sentimental considerations, and, on the other hand, is the cause of the further degeneration of peoples and civilisations ; this must be borne in mind. Precise considerations of 'racism of first degree' should thus not be neglected in the creation of a new ruling class, ... Once, by means of the racism of first degree, a given sphere and a first selection are identified, we should proceed, through the racism of second and third degree, to further tests, in an exploration of deeper and more essential qualities than those of the outer appearance."
"...The real man, in addition to the biological and somatic part, is soul and spirit. Therefore, a comprehensive racial theory must consider all these three terms: body, soul and spirit. There will thus be a racism of the first degree, which addresses the strictly biological, anthropological and eugenic problems ; then, a racism of the second degree, which addresses the 'race of the soul', that is to say the form of the character and the affective reactions ; finally, as a crowning-piece, the consideration of the 'race of the spirit', which addresses the highest elements of the personality which, in regard to the general vision of the world and the beyond, destiny, life, action, in short, the 'highest values', differentiate and make men unequal. The classical ideal, racially interpreted, is the harmony and the unity of these three racial aspects in a higher type". ...A race must be judged, not from its physical exteriority, its somatic features, but from its psychic interiority. The body, that is to say the racial features, is the *means and ground* of expression *of a psycho-spiritual reality.* ... [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Evola wrote:
"We have exactly the contrary in Judaism. What comes first in Judaism is the law, not the blood. It is the law which has given shape and unity to the Jewish people, not a race in the strict sense of the word. It has been said, by a Jew, that, just as Adam was formed by Jehovah, the Jew was formed by the Jewish law, and this truth is not limited to the Judaism of the Old Testament, whose spiritual history has been much more eventful than is assumed, but extends also to the Judaism of the Diaspora, in which it becomes even more emphatically the case, since the Talmud appears as the real essence and the real soul of Judaism. A first important point which derives from recognising this is that 'Jewishness', before than in the blood, must be sought in the spirit : 'race', here, is essentially a behaviour, a way of being and of thinking, which, in philosophical terms, can be said to be a 'category' of spirit. It is important to establish firmly in one's mind this point in order to be able to identify a field of action of Judaism much vaster than the one that is defined by blood alone. Western civilisation has become spiritually Judaised in important sectors, and is thus affected by a forma mentis of a more or less Jewish type, even where no crossbreeding has taken place and, therefore, there is no reason whatsoever to speak of an influence by way of blood. To note this, and, therefore, to assert the necessity of identifying Judaism as a spiritual category, does not prevent us from noting also that the persistence of an idea, of an attitude, of a belief through generations ends up finding expression in an instinct, in something which penetrates into the blood, lives and acts in the blood, and, in many cases, completely irrespective of everything that the individual, as reflexive consciousness, thinks and believes he wants ; this is the second aspect of Judaism, this is Judaism, strictly speaking, as 'race' ; race, therefore, in a rather special, non naturalistic, sense." [ib.]
Evola wrote:
"One of the decisive tasks for our future will be that of connecting the myths of such movements with a blood instinct: certain ideas and expressions, which are a 'driving force' only in that they have a suggestive power on the national masses, must find a mode of expression that, at least in an elite, relates organically to race and tradition in the deepest sense, so as to differentiate the ideas of our movement from the collectivist expressions and myths that can sometimes exert the same power on masses, but are a complete denial of everything that stands for stock, tradition, fatherland. We therefore think of a selection of the second stage, to be carried out by means of a precise and repeated close examination of the political sensitivity within a group that would have already met the requirements of the physical racial selection. It would involve examining, here, to what extent the root ideas of the Fascist revolution could really speak to the blood, so as to be translated into a deeper reality than what proceeds either from common sense or from a confused enthusiasm." [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Evola wrote:
"One's idea of race depends on one's idea of man: the nature of each racial doctrine is determined by its conceptualization of the human being. All distortions in the field of racism derive from a materialist view of man, a view informed by science and naturalism. By contrast, at the very basis of my racial doctrine I placed the traditional idea of man as a being comprised of three elements: body, character and spirit. I argued that an exhaustive racial theory has to take all three elements into account by examining race in its threefold manifestation: as race of the body, race of the character, and race of the spirit. Racial 'purity' is found when these three races stand in harmonious balance with one another, each race shining through the other two. This, however,has long been only a rare occurrence. The most unwelcome consequence of the various cases of miscegenation which have occurred during the historical development of human society is notthe alteration of the physical race and psychosomatic type - what ordinary racism is chieflyconcerned with - but, rather, the divide and contrast between the three kinds of races within the same individual. As a consequence of such miscegenation, one finds men whose body no longer reflects their character, and whose emotional, moral and volitional dispositions no longer agreewith their spiritual inclinations.
'Spirit' should here be distinguished from 'character' as that component of man in touch with higher values that transcend life. In this sense, the 'race of thespirit' manifests itself in the different approaches to the sacred, to destiny and to the question of life and death, as well as in world-views, religions, etc. I here argued, therefore, that three levelsof racism ought to be distinguished in order to reflect the three kinds of races: the first level of racism pertaining to the race of the body, the second to the race of the character, and the third tothe race of the spirit. I rejected the fetish of merely physical racial purity, on thegrounds that the purity of the external race of an individual is often preserved even when hisinner race has dimmed or deteriorated (a common example of this is that of the Dutch and Scandinavians). Such an approach also put the problem of miscegenation into perspective:miscegenation certainly has negative consequences in those cases where the inner race is weak;yet if the inner race is strong, the presence of an external element, introduced - albeit not inexcess - by means of interbreeding, potentially provides a galvanizing challenge (hence, the opposite problem of certain aristocratic stocks which degenerate on account of incestuous unions). These, and other, similar considerations I made in my book.
From a political and social perspective, I acknowledged the use of racism as the expression of an anti-egalitarian and anti-rationalistic approach. Racism clearly emphasizes the idea of differentiation, with regard to both the peoples and the members of a given people. Racism opposes the democratic ideology born of the Enlightenment which proclaims the identity and equal dignity of all human beings; on the contrary, racism asserts that humanity as such is either an abstract and fictitious concept, or the final stage in a process of degeneration, dissolution and collapse - a stage only to be posited as an outmost limit never actually to be reached. Human nature, instead, is ordinarily differentiated, and this differentiation is expressed in the form of different bloodlines and races. This differentiation constitutes the primary feature of humanity:not only is it a natural condition among all beings, but also a positive element, something which ought to exist, and ought to be defended and safeguarded. The acknowledgement of diversity never led me - unlike certain other racists - to conceive humanity as a series of isolated, self-contained units; nor did it lead me to reject all higher principles. A kind of unity is certainly conceivable for humanity, but only at a higher level; and such unity accepts and preserves differentiation at a lower level. Unity 'from below', on the other hand, is a regressive phenomenon: such is the leveling unity sought by democracy, 'integrationism', humanitarianism,pseudo-universalism and collectivism. De Gobineau had already criticized similar ideas,essentially by promoting racism in aristocratic terms." [Evola, Path of Cinnabar] [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Evola wrote:
"When a race has lost contact with the only thing that has and can provide stability, namely, with the world of "Being"; and when in a race that which forms its most subtle yet most essential element has been lost, namely, the inner race and the race of the spirit—compared to which the race of the body and of the soul are only external manifestations and means of expression—then the collective organisms that a race has generated, no matter how great and powerful, are destined to descend into the world of contingency; they are at the mercy of what is irrational, becoming, and "historical," and of what is shaped "from below" and from the outside. Blood and ethnic purity are factors that are valued in traditional civilizations too; their value, however, never justifies the employment, in the case of human beings, of the same criteria employed to ascertain the presence of "pure blood" in a dog or in a horse—as is the case in some modern racist ideologies. The "blood" or "racial" factor plays a certain role not because it exists in the "psyche" (in the brain and in the opinions of an individual), but in the deepest forces of life that various traditions experience and act upon as typical formative energies. The blood registers the effects of this action, yet it provides through heredity a material that is preformed and refined so that through several generations, realizations similar to the original ones may be prepared and developed in a natural and spontaneous way. It is on this foundation—and on this foundation only—that, as we shall see, the traditional world often practiced the heredity of the castes and willed endogamous laws. If we refer, however, to the Indo-Aryan tradition in which the caste system was the most rigorously applied, simply to be born in a caste, though necessary, was not considered enough; it was necessary for the quality virtually conferred upon a person at birth to be actualized by initiation. I have already mentioned that according to the Manudharmasastra unless a man undergoes initiation or "second birth," even though he may be an Aryan, he is not superior to a Sudra. I also related how three special differentiations of the divine fire animated the three hierarchically higher Persian pishtra, and that definite membership in one of them was sealed at the moment of initiation. Even in these instances we should not lose sight of two factors being present, and never mistake the formative element for the element that is formed, nor the conditioning for the conditioned factor. Both the higher castes and traditional aristocracies, as well as superior civilizations and races (those that enjoy the same status that the consecrated castes enjoy vis-a-vis the plebeian castes of the "children of the Earth") cannot be explained by blood, but through the blood, by something that goes beyond blood and that has a metabiological character. When this "something" is truly powerful, or when it constitutes the deeper and most stable nucleus of a traditional civilization, then that civilization can preserve and reaffirm itself—even when ethnical mixtures and alterations occur (no matter how destructive they may be)—by reacting on the heterogeneous elements, and shaping them, by reducing them slowly but gradually to their own type, or by regenerating itself into a new, vibrant unity. When it comes to this point, the only forces that can be relied upon are those of the blood, which still carries atavistically within itself, Through race and instinct, the echo and the trace of the departed higher element that has been lost; it is only in this way that the "racist thesis in defense of the purity of blood can be validly upheld..." [Evola, Rveolt against the Modern World] [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Evola says, the body has to be grounded to be 'locked' to a certain soul to be locked for a certain spirit. If you define the norm, then you can permit varying exceptions. To Yockey, Race in the objective sense meant people who share and are framed by a similar destiny;
Yockey wrote:
"RACE, as has been shown, is not a unit of existence, but is an aspect of existence. Specifically it is the aspect of existence in which the relation of the human being to the great cosmic rhythms is revealed. It is thus the non-individual aspect of Life, whether it be the life of a plant, animal, or human being. ... Race in the objective sense is a creation of history. One's destiny must express itself within a certain framework — the framework of Fate. Thus a man of race born in Kirghizia belongs by Fate to the barbarian world of Asia with its historical mission of destruction of the Western Civilization. Rare exceptions are of course possible — Life submits to no generalization entirely. Some Poles, Ukrainians, or even Russians, might be impelled by their souls to share the spirit of the West. If so, they belong to the Western race, and every healthy, ascendant race accepts recruits who come in on its terms and who have the proper feeling." [Imperium]
who falsify reality and at the head of devolving dysgenics and overall spiritual retardation of mankind, someone to 'trust'? Really?! Are you one more hedonist sold to immediate gratification? Success sells and that smells good is good enough for you? HA
Let's say I'm man enough to know my Western culture is awesome, and I can still cheer for Jews and other races, because I'm secure in my own masculinity Westerness.
Quote :
Hel! How did you find this forum - intro please!!!
I made Dissident Philosophy Forum years ago. So I was aware of this forum long since. Eventually the god emperor Trump and other considerations awoke me from my leftist delusions and I thought these days I fit in, roughly speaking, here, not to mention needing some intellectual stimulation and conversation. Also I had read this really amazing post on ilovephil a few years ago about Coulanges, ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=187867 which might have been written by you? I downloaded everything from Coulanges I could find.
Let's say I'm man enough to know my Western culture is awesome, and I can still cheer for Jews and other races, because I'm secure in my own masculinity Westerness.
I distinguish mindless racists from healthy racialists. Its not about insecurity here, but fact-checking and assessing proper worth.
Like here, cheer Jews for what exactly?
Quote :
Also I had read this really amazing post on ilovephil a few years ago about Coulanges, ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=187867 which might have been written by you? I downloaded everything from Coulanges I could find.
"Musical tones and rhythm were used by our half-human ancestors, during the season of courtship, when animals of all kinds are excited not only by love, but by the strong passions of jealousy, rivalry and triumph. From the deeply-laid principle of inherited associations, musical tones in this case would be likely to call up vaguely and indefinitely the strong emotions of a long-past age. As we have every reason to suppose that articulate speech is one of the latest, as it certainly is the highest, of the arts acquired by man, and as the instinctive power of producing musical notes and rhythms is developed low down in the animal series, it would be altogether opposed to the principle of evolution, if we were to admit that man’s musical capacity has been developed from the tones used in impassioned speech. We must suppose that the rhythms and cadences of oratory are derived from previously developed musical powers. We can thus understand how it is that music, dancing, song, and poetry are such very ancient arts.... The impassioned orator, bard, or musician, when with his varied tones and cadences he excites the strongest emotions in his hearers, little suspects that he uses the same means by which his halfhuman ancestors long ago aroused each other’s ardent passions, during their courtship and rivalry." [The expression of the emotions in man and animals]
Nietzsche wrote:
"What is most difficult to render from one language into an other is the tempo of its style, which has its basis in the character of the race, or to speak more physiologically, in the average temp of its metabolism. There are honestly meant translations that, a involuntary vulgarizations, are almost falsifications of the original merely because its bold and merry tempo (which leaps over an obviates all dangers in things and words) could not be translates A German is almost incapable of presto in his language; thus also as may be reasonably inferred, of many of the most delightful and daring nuances of free, free-spirited thought. And just as the buffoon and satyr are foreign to him in body and conscience, so Aristophanes and Petronius are untranslatable for him. Everything ponderous, viscous, and solemnly clumsy, all long-winded and boring types of style are developed in profuse variety among German..." [BGE, 28]
Nietzsche wrote:
"But how could the German language, even in the prose of a Lessing, imitate the tempo of Machiavelli, who in his Principe [The Prince] lets us breathe the dry, refined air of Florence and cannot help presentingthe most serious matters in a boisterous allegrissimo, perhaps not without a malicious artistic sense of the contrast he risks - long, difficult, hard, dangerous thoughts and the tempo of the gallop and the very best, most capricious humor? Who, finally, could venture on a German translation of Petronius, who, more than any great musician so far, was a master of presto in invention, ideas, and words? What do the swamps of the sick, wicked world, even the "ancient world," matter in the end, when one has the feet of a wind as he did, the rush, the breath, the liberating scorn of a wind that makes everything healthy by making everything run!" [BGE, 28]
Spengler wrote:
"As soon as we pass from theory to practice, we see that language as currently used is no longer such a mechanism; it obeys not laws, but pulse. Thus a race-character is involved, a priori, in the way in which the matter to be communicated is set in sentences. Sentences are not the same for Tacitus and Napoleon as for Cicero and Nietzsche. The Englishman orders his material syntactically in a different way from the German.
Not the ideas and thoughts, but the thinking, the kind of life, the blood, determine in the primitive, Classical, Chinese, and Western speech-communities the type of the sentence-unit, and with it the mechanical relation of the word to the sentence.
The boundary between grammar and syntax should be placed at the point where the mechanical of speech ceases and the organic of speaking begins - usages, custom, the physiognomy of the way that a man employs to express himself. The other boundary lies where the mechanical structure of the word passes into the organic factors of sound-formation and expression. Even the children of immigrants can often be recognized by the way in which the English "th" is pronounced—a race-trait of the land. Only that which lies between these limits is the "language," properly so called, which has system, is a technical instrument, and can be invented, improved, changed, and worn out; enunciation and expression, on the contrary, adhere to the race." [Decline, p.613]
Found the perfect example of a Hellenized Jews, Robert Spencer, he's a Melkite Catholic which is what became of the Hellenized Jews. He has exactly the political views you would expect.
Impulso Oscuro
Gender : Posts : 796 Join date : 2013-12-10 Age : 33 Location : Praxis
Would you trust a people who don't look out for themselves first? Obviously Jews are gonna do those things you say. That's how you know a sincere and honest Jew, by his or her sense of superiority. You're not any different.
The fact that they can delude themselves into superiority despite their history, is something itself to be suspect of. Talking about Superiority more-so through indifference, not through other.
Seleucus wrote:
Now that isn't saying there isn't a trend of slave morality in Jewish culture
Id say its far more than a trend, it is the expression of their entire historical becoming.
Seleucus wrote:
Let's say I'm man enough to know my Western culture is awesome, and I can still cheer for Jews and other races, because I'm secure in my own masculinity Westerness.
Hubris is a sign of Hypermasculinity, and an insecure femininity. You have the luxury to cheer because you likely do not bear the immediate consequences of such...bravery...yet.
Seleucus wrote:
Have you seen how savages manage waste disposal, or traffic systems, or health care, or justice? Filth, disorder, corruption, ignorance, cruelty. Save yourself the price of plane tickets to Sumatra, read Caesar's Gallic Wars.
Ive seen how citizens have mismanaged all of the above, to a far greater extent. At least savages usually didn't make fiat claims over large spans of land they didn't inhabit and maintain.
_________________ Once more, with knowing.
The meek shall inherit the Earth, but the Noble shall take it.
Last edited by Impulso Oscuro on Sun Jan 29, 2017 12:38 pm; edited 1 time in total
Have you seen how savages manage waste disposal, or traffic systems, or health care, or justice? Filth, disorder, corruption, ignorance, cruelty. Save yourself the price of plane tickets to Sumatra, read Caesar's Gallic Wars.
Ive seen how citizens have mismanaged all of the above, to a far greater extent. At least savages usually didn't make fiat claims over large spans of land they didn't inhabit and maintain.
Can you clear up a bit what you mean here? For me this is far and away the most important issue in this whole thread. Savagery vs free civilization vs empire. I don't necessarily see this as a matter of race although obviously for historical reasons it tends to be. I can imagine some people give white savages a free pass, but I don't.
Quote :
because you likely do not bear the immediate consequences of such...bravery...yet.
Are you questioning my bravery? I must be misreading.
Obviously if a race is a threat to us we should cripple them. But if they aren't, that's cowardly to fly into a panic and not to mind our own business, live and let live. Like I say, the Philistines (Greeks) and the Jews lived a very long time quite indifferent to each other, that's well established today in archeology. Likewise in Hellenistic times, there was a synergy between these races, and at this time in history, now, we Westerners can benefit from that collaboration again. I'm definitely a Zionist.
Slaughtz
Gender : Posts : 2593 Join date : 2012-04-28 Age : 33 Location : A stone.
European barbarians, "savages", did not need to evolve more sophisticated methods of war and battle (therefor they remained tribal) until they encountered it when empires spread northward from where military organization developed with nation states (Mesopotamia 7,000-10,000 BCE). That does not mean they were any less intelligent, only necessity didn't force them to become empires until later.
Europeans adapted to harsh winters and being selected for intelligence which has a keen awareness of the seasons, requiring abstract/principled/quantifying thought. Making abstract noumena more categorized and distinct, to give them more significance by their contrast. This is the weakness of Europeans and their strength: their desire to simplify, which maximizes predictability (safety for their people). Only now they desire to simplify with nihilistic premises like equality (or that's what is sold to the common man, where others are aware it is a dumbing down).
Having the ability to absorb more natural information into these abstractions was essential to keep track of tasks that needed to be done for the very distinct seasons. To connect noumena together: imagination and creativity.
Culture plays a part, but they also atomized in identity (individualism) as a result of this process. Adaptations which maximized empathy and distinction were more valuable because of this atomization of identity - or else they would distinguish too harshly against their own kin.
It is not just whether a populace faced hardship that matters, though - also the kind matters and how frequent that change happens. In Africa there may be famine and droughts but how often were they? Were they as consistent as the changes in climate in Europe across the seasons? Enough to be predictable for the females to see consistent intellectual superiority of one man over another and select for them?
There is no free pass for any race. All gifts, burdens and distinctions are accounted for in their history.
