Well, that was instructive. I wanted to mention that I have gotten into juicing lately and the MiracleJucePro is my favorite kitchen tool of late! Perhaps you will find what I have found: a strict regimen of fresh, healthy vitamine-rich vegetable juice is just what is needed today to bridge the abysses that separate us! Sounds unlikely, doesn't it? But Trumpism is actually a bowel-condition that can be treated with kelp-concentrate and 3 glasses a day of fresh, vital, 100% natural and organic juice! Email me ASAP and I will send you what you need to get started!
Thread, topic, planet, plane of existence, cosmic manifestation --- how far will you take it?David wrote:I'm making this my last post in this thread, and on this topic. The whole anti-SJW fracas, in its current form, disgusts me. It is like watching a screaming fight between a couple going through a very messy divorce. Dan mentioned the extreme anger which drives these people and how off-putting it is. Who in their right mind would want to be involved with that kind of frenzy? Not me at least.
I would suggest, David, that this is not the point to veer away from the conflict, but the point to go into it more deeply. The issues that are coming to the fore are octaves of those that came up very strongly in the interwar period in Europe (1920s-1930s). Opposition to the 'SJW' is grounded in nationalistic self-definition, that is true, but also in articulations of values. This is man's domain really. That of defining values.
What I found interesting is a comment you made some days back on this thread, that the people who are inclined to your spiritual message are those who are 'educated and liberal'. It sort of fits, doesn't it? It is the values that you define that are rather diffuse. I mean, this is the area that you work in: a sort of no-man's-land of the enlightened. Once you come into that space you sort of abandon the specific, the immediate, the tangible, even the practical. Therefor, the turn away from this 'liberalism' (hyper-liberalism is the term I prefer) is a turn back to substance, solidity, historical struggle, a fight generally, but one located in immediate concerns, selfish concerns even.
And what happens when that movement (movement within the person) is supported by a spiritual view of things, or by conservative metaphysics? Who is that person who comes onto the scene to defend what is, what is 'traditional', and also metaphysically linked to order, discipline, hard definition? What is so odd from my perspective is that I'd have imagined, at some point, that *you* (plural) would have made that turn. Such intense critical spirit, so armed against the flowey present. I certainly do understand what both you and Dan are saying (and in so much of it you are right indeed). But there is another part of the equation you seem not to be concerned with (or aware of).
I would have been curious to know your opinion of the *message* in this short video. It is sort of perfect for our age, isn't it? A 13 inute video that alludes to so much, that provokes certain sentiments, that inspires research and renewal, but is expressed in a video meme (if that is the right use of the term).
Recently, I have been devoting myself --- re-devoting myself I suppose --- to the study of the original influences, the formative structures, of occidentalism. It seems to me the crucial and ever-fruitful area because, of course, there is manifest the stuff that is the substance of our souls. In one way or another everything resolves back to this, at least for 'us'. This is what we arise out of.
Now, the 'anti-SJW' backlash, the core of its 'anger', is complex indeed. To get to the bottom of it, more so and perhaps impossible. But the value in reviewing the pdf by Bernard Lazare ('Antisemitism', written at the turn of the century approx.) is that it describes much of what has 'come around and gone around'.
What I find so interesting is that these basic issues were at one time your issues! That is, Weininger and his masculine-feminine polarity. And his Judaic-Christian conflict. And then your own 'hyper-masculine' turning against the liberalised feminine which for Weininger was the Judaic and for Nietzsche is the Judeo-Christian-as-disease. I mean this was the stuff of the basic dogma! And to become 'masculine' was to become 'decisive' and was to describe a rigorous path of internal conquest that very definitely was not liberal! But those who became interested in your spirituality were 'educated and liberal'. Yet your philosophy was, in these senses, rigid, rigorous, demanding, uncompromising and intolerant. I am sort of reminded when reading up on Corneliu Zelea Codreanu of the Iron Guard and the 'Legion of Michael' that to follow the paths recommended here was to become inducted into a radical-masculine path. How odd it is that you take the side that you do now.
In our present there is a sort of crescendo of the hyper, the vaginal-sensitive, the mutable-seductive which flows forth like an unconquerable wave, pulling along everyone and everything. It is exactly now that a man must define a position that avails him metaphysical bedrock, not a wounded bleating of a social state subject fearing the manifestation of a new spirit (to push the Hegel reference!) (Sorry, I got carried away. That happens when I mix in orange juice to the carrot-celery combo in combination with the kelp-ginger-flush).