Tuesday, February 19, 2013 182 Comments

The greatness of Lawrence Auster

In case you haven't heard, Larry is dying.  Say a prayer for him, or something.

Greatness?  I don't know that anyone can really get away with the word in 2013.  What can greatness mean in a fourth-rate world?  In a fourth-rate world, the second-rate look great.  Worse, they feel great.  After all, they stand head and shoulders above their own age.   So why grow further?  Can we say that a Lawrence Auster saw farther, because he stood on the toes of dwarves?

Surely there's a bit of that.  I think Auster's work is best summarized by his statement, not a boast but merely the truth, that where the ordinary machine conservative takes a second look at our political narrative we live in, View from the Right took the second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth looks.  Very well.  I think our differences are best summarized by my feeling that six looks are entirely insufficient for our exquisitely sterquiline age, thirty or forty being perhaps more like it.  Six looks are certainly not enough to understand why Henry VII is worth taking seriously.  If indeed he is.

But we did not visit VFR for a history of the past - but rather, a history of the present.  Are you by some strange chance reading this in the 22nd century?  Stranger things have happened.  Do you want to read the true story of the early 21st, wie est eigentlich gewesen?  Find the VFR archive.  It must be somewhere.  Make sure you have a lot of time on your hands - or some kind of full-search FPGA in your medulla.

One of the characteristic mental disorders of our period is an easy contempt for the past.  It's not just that we are taught to hate the past, for one can respect and still detest an enemy.  It's that we despise it.  We observe it with an easy, swaggering and thoroughly unquestioned contempt.  We are presentists with all the arrogance of the cartoon plantation racist.

Which leads us into many faults of the intellect, some of them comic.  But our worst fault is the belief that history, somehow, is easy.  Of course it's easy to know what happened in the Civil War!  Every fifth-grader knows the story.  Heck, my four-year-old daughter knows the story.  She read about it in her Magic Treehouse books (which, by the way, are racist).  "Oh, I know about the Civil War," she said.  Indeed she does - she knows about it the way everyone in 2013 does.  If a little less.

Imagine the poor bastards who actually had to live in the past, being understood by a four-year-old.  Of course, it is no more possible for Sibyl to understand the Civil War than to fly to the moon.  She's a bright girl, but still.  She can only understand the period because it has been converted into a flat piece of paper with large print and a few pictures.  Imagine 2013, converted into a flat piece of paper with large print and a few pictures. 

Unfortunately, this (with slightly smaller print than Magic Treehouse) is how most of us read not only the past, but the present.  Go to Upworthy!  It's fresh, it's hip, it's socially relevant.  You will not have to think about anything for more than five seconds.  And, just like Magic Treehouse, it has pictures.

I do not mean to suggest that complex realities are impossible to simplify accurately.  If it were impossible to present a complex reality as a simple narrative, it would be impossible to write history.  Possible?  Of course it's possible.  But it's not easy.  Not at least if you want it to be true.

Perhaps some historian of a future century, reading UR for a laugh, will find this link and pop over to VFR.  I was reading Carlyle one day when I saw, in a statistical footnote, a link to George Lunt.  What sort of American would Carlyle cite on the Civil War?  All I know about George Lunt is that he published his book in 1866 in Boston.  Imagine the stones.  All I know about George Lunt is that he published his book in 1866 in Boston, and he had to have his pants cut specially.  Needless to say, his Civil War is not the Magic Treehouse Civil War.  (Nor is it the VFR Civil War, but let that pass.)

But it has become my Civil War - taken not just from Lunt, of course, but many others like him.  I trust George Lunt not because I know anything about him, aside from the pants, but because I can tell that he writes like a man whose only concern is telling the truth as he knows it.  How can I tell?  That's like asking a wine snob how he tells good wine from bad. 

And it would be a mistake to praise Auster simply for being a prophet.  "Without honor in his own country" - it's a cliche.  And true enough, like most cliches.  And it is true that in our age false prophets (so far as I can tell, the original Hebrew means no more than "pundit") abound, and honest ones are hen's teeth. 

But this is really only the beginning of the tragedy.  There is something else - something perhaps best illustrated by one of my favorite Edwardian sources:
Sometimes in our haste we may permit ourselves to speak disparagingly of debate, and if the result of debate were merely the prevalence of eloquence over silence, of good arguments over bad ones, it might justly be condemned as a means of selecting men to govern the country. But debate is something a great deal more respectable. 
The glory of the British Parliament is that men subdue it by their characters to a far greater extent than by their arguments. It is required of a leader that he must be prepared at any moment to stand up to his enemies, to give blows and to take them. This test can never be escaped. Occasional brilliant appearances will never put any man in power, or keep him in power if he has happened to arrive there by some accident. Private influence or intrigue, literary gifts of the highest order, are all in vain. The system is sound, although of necessity it excludes many aspirants of shining talents. The rule is absolute that before a man may be permitted to govern the nation, he must have proved himself capable of prevailing over his rivals in single combat and face to face.
This passage seems like a memorandum from an alternate reality that never existed.  Was it really the case that Britain, for a couple of centuries in which it was the strongest nation on earth, was governed by... the Briton most capable of argument, whoever that might be?  Yes, in fact, it was.  (I forget the source, but it was a Victorian cliche that "not everyone in Parliament deserves to be in Parliament, but everyone who deserves to be in Parliament is in Parliament."  Carlyle certainly could have been, had he cared to.)

Indeed, what's so striking in this passage is the author's casual assumption that whoever in Britain is most capable of humiliating his enemies in an argument, both is in Parliament and leads it, and in fact governs the country. 

Just as casually, we assume that the best quarterback in America today is (a) in the NFL, (b) plays quarterback in the NFL, and (c) is the first-string quarterback on his team.  Indeed this is true.  But consider the remarkable complexity of the machinery that makes it true.  Can we imagine a world without this machinery?  Or with what pretends to be this machinery, but is not, and does not actually work?  It is almost more plausible than the world that actually exists.

The world of 2013 contains no genuine parliamentary institutions.  It contains the dried, bureaucratic husks of many - just as it contains the dried, bureaucratic husks of many old monarchies.  Before nations were ruled by a man "capable of prevailing over his rivals in single combat and face to face" with the sword of his tongue, they were ruled by the actual sword.  The king was a military leader. 

Now we have no leaders of any kind.  At least, not in our political system.  Can you imagine a Barack Obama, stripped of his army of handlers, "in single combat and face to face," in the old House of Commons or something like it, against... a Lawrence Auster?  Or even a Rush Limbaugh?  You might as well imagine Rush Limbaugh in a swordfight with Henry VII.

This is what I see when I look at Auster's oeuvre - not just a prophet, but a leader.  A king, if you will.  A king out of water, in a dry and kingless age.  He was still born a king, or made himself one, and if you type in the right URL you can see it plain as day.

Does this have anything to do with Larry's faith?  Of course it does.  It is impossible to imagine a king who does not serve the King of Kings.  Or rather, if we imagine one, we find ourselves looking for other words, pejorative ones - like "dictator."  What were Hitler and Stalin, but godless kings?

Since I've already violated my daughter's privacy, I'll tell another story.  The other day we were driving down 14th Street and Sibyl was looking out the window.  Suddenly, from out of nowhere, I hear: "It says, 'Christ is the answer.'  What is Christ?"  She made it rhyme with "fist."

No Christian UR reader will ever forgive me for my answer.  After correcting her pronunciation, I said: "Christ is the same thing as God, Sibyl.  It's... it's... it's like Santa Claus for grownups."

Actually, there are few things that would please me more than seeing my daughter become a Christian.  If only because it would mean she was not a worshiper of Beyonce, or something worse.  I know all too well, however, that it is not in my power to raise her as one.

The entire question of "whether God exists" seems to me entirely superfluous and sterile.  Anyone in the age of science who believes he has a mechanism for physically confirming the "existence" of the spirit world is not religious, but rather superstitious. 

It's certainly true that historical Christianity contains many superstitious and/or miraculous conceits, but it does not depend on them either for its practical efficacy as a social institution, or even for its logical coherence.  Every scientific period is a small bubble of the known in an infinite unknown space.  It is always possible to plausibly postulate an undisprovable entity.  When mankind was young and knew little, we could postulate a God who was a giant snake that lived in the river and made it rain.  Now, we can postulate a God who is an alien system administrator who runs the servers that make quantum mechanics work.  We can easily disprove the giant snake, but not the four-headed IT jock.  Ergo, we are left with the choice of two fundamentally aesthetic arguments - Occam's razor versus Paley's watchmaker.

In the end, who cares?  Let's go with Occam's razor, which I'll always prefer because that's how I was raised.  Thus, as far as material reality goes, God, Christ and the Flying Spaghetti Monster are all the same thing.  Fine.  I'm quite comfortable with this interpretation.

If you share it, let me ask you a question.  Does Hamlet exist?

Obviously, Hamlet does not exist and nor did he ever.  Thus, when we consider only material reality, he fits perfectly in the same set with God, Christ, the FSM, and "Santa Claus for grownups."

But if we change the question to: "is Hamlet a useful concept?" we find that again everyone agrees.  Hamlet is a literary character, and perfectly real in that sense.  It is completely sensible to say, for instance, that someone is acting like Hamlet, or should be more like Hamlet, or should be less like Hamlet.  These statements are well-defined and cogent.

It is also a well-defined and cogent statement to say that Lawrence Auster is a servant of God.  One can serve without orders.  Larry doesn't need God's cell-phone number to serve God, and nor for that matter does the Pope.  When we say "God," we know what we mean - it is a shorthand for the superhuman and perfect, for infinite wisdom and intelligence, just as the character of Hamlet is a shorthand for a mercurial and hesitating character.  What, pray tell me, is the Flying Spaghetti Monster a shorthand for?

At the level of evolutionary psychology, man is both a social animal and a hierarchical one.  Not only is he extremely good at defining and relating to characters, he is born with "modules" both for ruling and for serving.  Anyone living is the descendant of many kings and many, many servants.  Those kings, too, were born knowing how to serve.  Whom did they serve?  We know the answer.

Whether a man is a king, a peasant or anything in between, to ask him to be an atheist and an egalitarian is to ask him not to use the machines in his brain that he was born with.  It is to diminish him as a human being.  The capacity to personalize the superhuman, and to use this fictional anthropomorphism as a mechanism by which we may approach the superhuman, is characteristically human.  I suppose I will never be anything but a "secular humanist," but I have learned in this way to respect, admire, and sometimes even envy my Christian friends.

For instance, characteristic of the enormous, and certainly regal, dignity of the man, is the strength and honor with which Auster approaches death.  Socrates was not a Christian, nor was Cato, nor were the 47 Ronin.  So atheists need not despair of these qualities.  On the other hand, neither Socrates nor Cato had to live in the same world as Beyonce.  It strikes me as quite implausible that when our dark age ends and the kings return, if ever, it will be under any banner but the Cross. 

Or as Maistre put it:
Frenchmen, it was to the noise of hellish songs, the blasphemy of atheism, the cries of death, and the prolonged moans of slaughtered innocence, it was by the light of flames, on the debris of throne and altar, watered by the blood of the best of kings and an innumerable host of other victims, it was by the contempt of morality and the established faith, it was in the midst of every crime that your seducers and your tyrants founded what they call your liberty.

But when man works to restore order he associates himself with the author of order; he is favored by nature, that is to say, by ensemble of secondary forces that are the agents of the Divinity.  His action partakes of the divine; it becomes both gentle and imperious, forcing nothing yet not resisted by anything.  His arrangements restore health.  As he acts, he calms disquiet and the painful agitation that is the effect and symptom of disorder.  In the same way, the hands of a skilful surgeon bring the cessation of pain that proves the dislocated joint has been put right.
When I look at VFR, especially when I look at the thanks and well wishes of Larry's readers, this is what I see - a small area of order, in the hands of a skilful surgeon.  Who will not be with us much longer.  But humanity abides, and other surgeons will come.  They will need not a scalpel, but a sword.  Let us pray they are no less skilful.

182 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Right on. Thank you. He'll be missed.

February 19, 2013 at 3:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"wie es eigentlich gewesen ist" or "wie es eigentlich gewesen war".

February 19, 2013 at 3:34 PM  
Anonymous Simon said...

"The entire question of "whether God exists" seems to me entirely superfluous and sterile."

You read old books because you are looking for God. I wonder how many more volumes it will take until you realise this? Or will it be right at the end?

If you reason from false premises, you'll reach a false conclusion...

February 19, 2013 at 3:49 PM  
Anonymous Simon said...

"Now, what harm will befall you in taking this side [Christianity]? You will be faithful, honest, humble, grateful, generous, a sincere friend, truthful. Certainly you will not have those poisonous pleasures, glory and luxury; but will you not have others? I will tell you that you will thereby gain in this life, and that, at each step you take on this road, you will see so great certainty of gain, so much nothingness in what you risk, that you will at last recognise that you have wagered for something certain and infinite, for which you have given nothing."

You have no reason not to raise little Sibyl as a Christian: she will either worship Christ or Mammon; the choice is entirely yours (if you can swallow your pride).

February 19, 2013 at 4:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Before nations were ruled by a man "capable of prevailing over his rivals in single combat and face to face" with the sword of his tongue, they were ruled by the actual sword. The king was a military leader.

Now we have no leaders of any kind. At least, not in our political system. Can you imagine a Barack Obama, stripped of his army of handlers, "in single combat and face to face," in the old House of Commons or something like it, against... a Lawrence Auster? Or even a Rush Limbaugh? You might as well imagine Rush Limbaugh in a swordfight with Henry VII.

This is what I see when I look at Auster's oeuvre - not just a prophet, but a leader. A king, if you will. A king out of water, in a dry and kingless age. He was still born a king, or made himself one, and if you type in the right URL you can see it plain as day.


Auster was a draft dodger:

https://mansizedtarget.wordpress.com/2008/01/01/dreher-vs-auster/

February 19, 2013 at 4:16 PM  
Blogger Avery said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

February 19, 2013 at 4:27 PM  
Blogger TGGP said...

"That's like asking a wine snob how he tells good wine from bad."
Funny, since blind taste tests indicate they have very little ability to discern that.

Greg Cochran sometimes jokes with people he argues with that because he has more kids, his side will ultimately prevail. It is striking to me that Auster has none, despite the general association of conservatism/religiosity with fecundity. And his church of choice, the Episcopalian one, he no longer considers even Christian. He lives in Manhattan, though he's stated that because of formative years in Colorado he (unlike the folks he went to high school with) he doesn't identify as an Easterner. While he's taking it stoically, it's sad that he's dying and sad to me as well that he seems so out of place. On the other hand, I don't know what he did for a living or if he belonged to any organizations that would disqualify him from Charles Murray's diagnosis as a rootless man (aside from the aforementioned insufficiently christian church).

I'd be lying if I said my own correspondence with him was particularly fruitful, but he'll be missed.

February 19, 2013 at 4:36 PM  
Anonymous G.K. Chesterton said...

What has happened to me has been the very reverse of what appears to be the experience of most of my friends. Instead of dwindling to a point, Santa Claus has grown larger and larger in my life until he fills almost the whole of it. It happened in this way.
As a child I was faced with a phenomenon requiring explanation. I hung up at the end of my bed an empty stocking, which in the morning became a full stocking. I had done nothing to produce the things that filled it. I had not worked for them, or made them or helped to make them. I had not even been good – far from it.
And the explanation was that a certain being whom people called Santa Claus was benevolently disposed toward me. . . . What we believed was that a certain benevolent agency did give us those toys for nothing. And, as I say, I believe it still. I have merely extended the idea.
Then I only wondered who put the toys in the stocking; now I wonder who put the stocking by the bed, and the bed in the room, and the room in the house, and the house on the planet, and the great planet in the void.
Once I only thanked Santa Claus for a few dollars and crackers. Now, I thank him for stars and street faces, and wine and the great sea. Once I thought it delightful and astonishing to find a present so big that it only went halfway into the stocking. Now I am delighted and astonished every morning to find a present so big that it takes two stockings to hold it, and then leaves a great deal outside; it is the large and preposterous present of myself, as to the origin of which I can offer no suggestion except that Santa Claus gave it to me in a fit of peculiarly fantastic goodwill.

February 19, 2013 at 4:36 PM  
Anonymous asdf said...

Why don't you just write well instead of trying to write "impressively"? We'd rather understand what your writing then have you masturbate to beating around the bush with words.

February 19, 2013 at 4:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://age-of-treason.blogspot.com/2011/06/austers-personal-announcement.html

"It's a bit premature, but here's my epitaph for him: Here lies Lawrence Auster, a full-blooded jewish convert to Christianity, a jewish fifth columnist who never forgot who "his people" were, who on a weekly if not daily basis tossed off sweeping, grandiose, negative, zero-tolerance comments about Whites, blacks, muslims, Christians, liberals, conservatives, Europeans, the French, the British, the Germans, the majority, and last but certainly not least, the "anti-semites", all self-righteously counterposed with a talmudic, hair-splitting, eggshell-walking, anally-retentively-qualified, infinitely-tolerant circumspection concerning the jews and Israel."

February 19, 2013 at 5:11 PM  
Anonymous Handle said...

Prophet or not, I feel like I should make a pilgrimage to his bedside before he departs. Can the same be said by some random stranger of us? He was charmingly pugnacious, quarrelsome, combative, arrogant and uncompromisingly intolerant. He was unflinchingly honest about what he believed, and I liked his style.

February 19, 2013 at 5:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lately I have been thinking about Auster's [Ark](http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/021044.html). It is very different from the other conservative fantasy of Galt's Gulch. The Ark isn't there to fix anything. It wins merely by surviving, in the same way that Hong Kong, Singapore, Monaco, Lichtenstein and Taiwan win by surviving.

I am increasingly of the opinion that such a project will become necessary.

February 19, 2013 at 5:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here lies Larry Auster, a typical whiny, rude New York City Jew who spent his adult life complaining about being criticized while continuously attacking, smearing, denouncing, insulting, ridiculing and otherwise running down other people, and in the process became a guru to a creepy coterie of equally judgmental and fawning hangers-on.

February 19, 2013 at 5:54 PM  
Anonymous Nostalgic Futurist said...

Why don't you just write well instead of trying to write "impressively"? We'd rather understand what your writing then have you masturbate to beating around the bush with words.

Maybe you should learn to spell before criticizing the writing of others?

in the process became a guru to a creepy coterie of equally judgmental and fawning hangers-on

And you're an anonymous idiot. There, I said it.

* *

P.S. I am a fan both of Auster (daily reader) and UR. In fact I discovered UR through VFR. I believe it was in one of the discussions between Moldbug and Auster at VFR. Something about the Civil War. Maybe coincidence. But God works in mysterious ways, even for a practical agnostic like me.

Still, very few people have the honesty and intellectual courage of Auster, not to mention his lucid prose. UR is less clear in that respect, but actually that's why I like it. To each his own.

February 19, 2013 at 6:47 PM  
Blogger DR said...

"It strikes me as quite implausible that when our dark age ends and the kings return, if ever, it will be under any banner but the Cross."

Ugghh, this is the point in the post where I physically groaned. What happened to the Moldbug I knew that deftly identified modern progressive leftism as yet another banner carrying yet another, slightly deformed, Cross?

Why the hell are you yearning for 15th century kings when you've espoused support for governments as publicly traded corporations with encryption-based security? Last time I checked very few CEOs have mission statements that contain the phrase "serving God and country."

After all wasn't it these very same Christians who brought down the Roman Empire in the 4th century? If we had managed to nail that stupid hippie to a tree at age 23 instead of 33 humanity would probably be colonizing other stars by now.

All this post seems to offering up are tired old solutions to combatting the beige oligarchy. Auster wants to return us to 1950, Ron Paul wants to put reset back to 1787 and Moldbug apparently in this post would put us back as at 1517.

For as much as the past is unfairly maligned by the present without any other defenders, one flaw of every past defunct system is undeniable: they all failed. Where did this intolerable progressive welfare state come from? From the slain corpse of those same God-fearing kings.

The genius of much of the writing at UR is that it's both reactionary, as well as presenting genuinely new and novel systems that actually have a chance of succeeding.

The Tsars weren't the group that brought down the Soviet bloc in 1989, and like it or not the ancien regime will not deliver the deathblow to modern leftism. It's not slumbering, it's dead. Nor would it even be desirable if somehow we could revive it like Frankenstein's monster.

European aristocracy may be preferable to our current decrepit state, but it had many flaws itself. Let's not forget that one major reason that the left started accelerating its gain in the early 19th century is because they were actually right in policy matters. Leftist ideology circa 1840, i.e. classical liberalism, really was far superior to anything that came before.

The Whigs were right and the Tories were wrong. Repeal of the Corn Laws and supporting industry over agriculture did super-charge the British economy. Because of this superiority countries with classical liberalism, the UK, America, and to a lesser extent France and the low countries grew much faster. This gave them increased economic, and hence military and political power.

At the end of the day the question for the reactionary is how to build political systems that avoid the sclerotic stagnation of European aristocracy without inevitably devolving into modern progressive insanity. Classical liberals got the first part right, but faulted on the second. Unfortunately the failure condition took decades to even become noticeable, and by then it was too late.

In any regards a simple wind back of the clock is insufficient. It distracts the reactionary from the real task at hand. It's like a bunch of grown men playing 16th century dress-up. Christian fetishism included. Christianity is dead as a door-nail, if not today, by 2100 certainly. Making your restoration state dependent on it is like founding a software company to write apps for PalmOS. Skate to where the puck is going, not where it's at.

Personally 'd much prefer my king to have a firm understanding of Adam Smith than Thomas Aquinas. For my money modern-day Prince Hans-Adam II is probably one of the best rulers to ever live. And the only thing he seems to rule is the almighty franc.

February 19, 2013 at 9:41 PM  
Blogger DR said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

February 19, 2013 at 9:41 PM  
Blogger DR said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

February 19, 2013 at 9:41 PM  
Anonymous Koanic said...

I have a mechanism for proving the existence of the spiritual world, O Great Moldbug, Prophet of the Shitty Age.

http://www.koanicsoul.com/blog/mathematical-proof-that-the-supernatural-exists/

And therefore I too, consider myself great.

What hidden knives lurk in your mild discourses. I think, were you a godless king, Machiavelli would dedicate books to you.

"At the level of evolutionary psychology, man is both a social animal and a hierarchical one."

Ah, but not you. You are designed for a 12 person egalitarian insular flat tribe. You, and those who share your deep-socketed gaze and bulging occipital.

February 20, 2013 at 12:25 AM  
Blogger Debra said...

This post is elegiac, and quite moving. (I do not know Lawrence Auster.)
It eloquently sums up much of my current mood : impatience with a decadent, shallow, anhistoric, Disneyland civilization.
Occasional bouts of wistful nostalgia ? for an era where democratic dollars and cents were not the measure of all things, and where we were not enjoined from morning to evening to behave as though we lived in a Disneyland theme park.
I did not raise my children in the Christian faith, but recently my 21 year old daughter told me that she knew that she had been raised in the Christian tradition, and she knows much more about her... (spiritual) history, and Christian values than most of her contemporaries, church going or not (there are few of those in my circle).
That said... I am not overly anxious to see Christianity make a comeback. Christianity, as a Jewish heresy opened the door wide to a rationalist, and rationalizing vision of an abstract, disembodied divinity, thus setting the stage for our modern democracies.
God ? HE is essential to being able to fathom what man.. IS NOT. To define certain limits that we have woefully transgressed, and continue to do so with foolish impunity.
When I want to find those limits, I know that I can open the Bible, read Ecclesiastes, Job, and throw in the Song of Songs, for the joy of it, and find.. enough meaning to get up in the morning and get through the day.
The glory of the Roman, papist Church that my mother spit on, was that it managed to offer something for everyone : vows of poverty to those who were fed up with the sound of the cash register, but beautiful, graceful pomp for those who wanted to participate in aristocratic ritual : diversity, in a word.
And corruption ?
It will always be with us.
Ideas and ideals are like people : subject to corruption, they too.. begin to die at birth, from a certain perspective...
At what point in time did "we" decide that we would get by trading off wisdom in favor of... that same knowledge which in our much maligned religious traditions was the source of so much.. evil ?

February 20, 2013 at 1:15 AM  
Anonymous josh said...

Moldbug seems to think metaphysics is easy. I don't think he's looked at it 400 times or whatever it was.

February 20, 2013 at 4:37 AM  
Anonymous josh said...

"Last time I checked very few CEOs have mission statements that contain the phrase "serving God and country.""

but back when they did, we had prosperity (and marriage) and not 75 hour work weeks.

February 20, 2013 at 4:49 AM  
Anonymous PA said...

He was a mentor to many of us.

February 20, 2013 at 6:25 AM  
OpenID nydwracu said...

All this post seems to offering up are tired old solutions to combatting the beige oligarchy. Auster wants to return us to 1950, Ron Paul wants to put reset back to 1787 and Moldbug apparently in this post would put us back as at 1517.

Do mind the first half of Moldbug's name. Tired old solutions: that's what you get when you ask a Confucian.

I kid, of course, but I still don't understand why Mencius instead of, say, Han Feizi. Such support for Christianity at this point is dangerously close to staring at stumps. Better to pass the torch to juggalos or Mormons... but the juggalos are too communist to rule and the Mormons are sci-fi Disneyland with a straight face. I wouldn't trust either to rule until they collapse the Nietzschean dialectic--unless the Mormons have killed Dionysus, which really doesn't seem improbable to me at all at this point; and if they have, they're one good theologian away from building the new Jerusalem that the Whigs never could in the land that the Whigs didn't want.

And best of all, they don't even have to be Christians!

February 20, 2013 at 7:03 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


My Lord, do Jews make the best Christians or what?

The Popish Sauromatian

February 20, 2013 at 7:26 AM  
Blogger G. M. Palmer said...

DR:

Do you still believe all the fantasies you learned in AP World History?

February 20, 2013 at 9:57 AM  
Blogger Atif Ahmed said...

The Best Porn Star Sunny leone Hot news and hot Pictures, Sunne Leone Porn Pictures and Videos
hotentertainnews.blogspot.com

February 20, 2013 at 10:06 AM  
Anonymous Federico said...

The better part of Christianity is Buddhism. That is why Wagner saw fit to include Christian imagery in Parsifal, despite the Buddhist message.

Buddhists are, more than theists, known for their strength and honour in death. You will recall Thich Quang Duc, whose immaculate demise brought shame to Christians.

Enlightenment is, in a literal and scientific sense, the bulwark of civilisation.

February 20, 2013 at 12:23 PM  
Blogger gokart-mozart said...

As one who was consumed by stubbornness and disrespect until the miracle of children (I have 7), I would encourage you to keep walking on the path set out for you by the one who made you.

Best of luck. Don't overlook ANY signs.

February 20, 2013 at 12:44 PM  
Anonymous Reactor said...

One silver-white and one of scarlet hue,
Storm-hornets humming in the wind of death,
Two aeroplanes were fighting in the blue
Above our town; and if I held my breath,
It was because my youth was in the Red
While in the White an unknown pilot flew—
And that the White had risen overhead.

From time to time the crackle of a gun
Far into flawless ether faintly railed,
And now, mosquito-thin, into the Sun,
And now like mating dragonflies they sailed:
And, when like eagles near the earth they drove,
The Red, still losing what the White had won,
The harder for each lost advantage strove.

So lovely lay the land—the towers and trees
Taking the seaward counsel of the stream:
The city seemed, above the far-off seas,
The crest and turret of a Jacob’s dream,
And those two gun-birds in their frantic spire
At death-grips for its ultimate regime—
Less to be whirled by anger than desire.

‘Till (Glory!) from his chrysalis of steel
The Red flung wide the fatal fans of fire:
I saw the long flames, ribboning, unreel,
And slow bitumen trawling from his pyre,
I knew the ecstasy, the fearful throes,
And the white phoenix from his scarlet sire,
As silver in the Solitude he rose.

The towers and trees were lifted hymns of praise,
The city was a prayer, the land a nun:
The noonday azure strumming all his rays
Sang that a famous battle had been won,
As signing his white Cross, the very Sun,
The solar Christ and captain of my days
Zoomed to the zenith; and his Will was done.


- Roy Campbell, 'The Fight'

February 20, 2013 at 2:14 PM  
Anonymous Rollory said...


Just in case people have forgotten what this guy is really like.

http://www.whatswrongwiththeworld.net/2009/06/the_trouble_with_larry.html

Anyone who's actually attempted disagreement with him directly, regardless of what evidence or reason or pure common sense they had available, knows. That he is dying does not magically make him innocent or just.

also, @DR -
"After all wasn't it these very same Christians who brought down the Roman Empire in the 4th century? If we had managed to nail that stupid hippie to a tree at age 23 instead of 33 humanity would probably be colonizing other stars by now."

No. The net population decline and increase in bureaucratic strangling of just about everything was an ongoing process that wasn't directly tied to Christianity. Rome fell under its own weight and its own inability to stay true to itself. Christianity didn't help, but it wasn't the cause either.

"For as much as the past is unfairly maligned by the present without any other defenders, one flaw of every past defunct system is undeniable: they all failed. ... genuinely new and novel systems that actually have a chance of succeeding."

Human nature, so far as we can tell, is not perfectible; there is not an ideal "correct" answer that magically makes all the problems go away. We must expect that any future system will also fail eventually; what we can hope for is that it will take longer to fail than it has in the past. If, at some point, a system that does NOT fail is found, well and good; but planning for and expecting that is foolishness.

"Let's not forget that one major reason that the left started accelerating its gain in the early 19th century is because they were actually right in policy matters. Leftist ideology circa 1840, i.e. classical liberalism, really was far superior to anything that came before."

You are totally off base, again. It was far more ATTRACTIVE than what had come before. It was not superior. Liberal and Enlightenment ideology contributed directly to the series of revolts, attempted revolutions, and other assorted social upheavals throughout the 1800s, with the events of 1848 being the standout example. You quite obviously are entirely unaware of this history. If you want to make this argument you need to refer more evidence than just one specific English case. As for supporting industry over agriculture, in France, that was one of Napoleon III's major contributions, and he was the right-wing counterrevolutionary who came very close to re-instituting hereditary monarchical dynasty. (The leftists/republicans deliberately sabotaged him, and their own country, by simultaneously weakening the military via legislative acts and helping to trigger the war with Prussia, which in turn fed right into causing the bloodbath of 1914.)

February 20, 2013 at 2:17 PM  
Blogger Aris Katsaris said...

Not counting Vatican, I'd not be surprised if the countries in the world where the Christian Church has most power are (1) Greece and (2) Serbia.

Gee, what two splendid nations. What a splendid job the Christians in the Balkans are doing compared to e.g. those mostly atheist Scandinavians.

It's very nice that someone living in a mostly secular country can fantasize about how nice it would be if people were Christians, but your comparison of Christian figures and the Spaghetti Monster would get you arrested in Greece.

It's not as if obligatory Christian catechism at schools, obligatory Christian school prayer, and Christianity as a state-endorsed religion has actually prevented or even slowed down the rise of either neonazism or socialist/anarchist terrorism in Greece. Some of the most important "17th November" leftist terrorists were the sons of a priest, including a painter of religious icons after all.

Your ramble is similar to that of non-religious Arabs or Iranians imagining that Islamists are better than the corrupt dictators they previously had. Well no, they're not.

February 20, 2013 at 4:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I believe that religion, generally speaking, has been a curse to mankind — that its modest and greatly overestimated services on the ethical side have been more than overcome by the damage it has done to clear and honest thinking.
I believe that no discovery of fact, however trivial, can be wholly useless to the race, and that no trumpeting of falsehood, however virtuous in intent, can be anything but vicious.
I believe that all government is evil, in that all government must necessarily make war upon liberty and the democratic form is as bad as any of the other forms.
I believe that the evidence for immortality is no better than the evidence of witches, and deserves no more respect.
I believe in the complete freedom of thought and speech — alike for the humblest man and the mightiest, and in the utmost freedom of conduct that is consistent with living in organized society.
I believe in the capacity of man to conquer his world, and to find out what it is made of, and how it is run.
I believe in the reality of progress.
I —But the whole thing, after all, may be put very simply. I believe that it is better to tell the truth than to lie. I believe that it is better to be free than to be a slave. And I believe that it is better to know than be ignorant.
--Henry Louis Mencken, "What I Believe" in The Forum 84 (September 1930), p. 139

The dead-Jew-on-a-stick cult is a millstone around the neck of the West. It is a preposterous, repugnant, made-up religion suitable solely for small children, the feebleminded, and slaves. For men who do not wish to emulate the example of a prisoner going meekly to the gallows, there are many alternatives, but one must start by rejecting the Jews' mind-control-tool-cum-religion.

February 20, 2013 at 7:23 PM  
Anonymous buybuydandavis said...

What were Hitler and Stalin, but godless kings?

Were they? Progressives are Christians, but these jokers have no gods? Perhaps they didn't believe their own propaganda, but anyone who believed they had a duty to obey the will of the Volk or the will of the Proletariat, certainly did have a god.

"Not only is he extremely good at defining and relating to characters, he is born with "modules" both for ruling and for serving.

Whether a man is a king, a peasant or anything in between, to ask him to be an atheist and an egalitarian is to ask him not to use the machines in his brain that he was born with. It is to diminish him as a human being."

One could just as well say that I was born with modules for aging and decrepitude, but I'll be perfectly happy to "diminish" myself by not exercising them anymore.

Further, it's unclear whether we have a module for slavishness, or if that is just the expression of a module that might be used in a different way. Not everyone yearns to be a slave.

"The capacity to personalize the superhuman, and to use this fictional anthropomorphism as a mechanism by which we may approach the superhuman, is characteristically human."

And you think these slavish religions help one "approach the superhuman"?

Superhuman, or subhuman? I'm more with Nietzsche on what the monotheisms help one approach.

Some polytheistic religions were largely chosen allegiance to a personification of a particular virtue, and even appreciation of other personifications, if not allegiance. Not quite so slavish.

In that way, really quite different than the monotheisms and Nazism and Communism, who are peas in a pod in that regard.

A while back you had a post criticizing atheists for believing in the concept of religion, rightly noting that what happens in the supernatural realms don't matter.

But you were incorrect in thinking that religion was a useless concept thereby. The zip code of the deity isn't what makes or break a religion, but the belief that slavish obedience is due.

Satan renounced religion when he willed Non Serviam; he didn't have to forget that god existed, or believe he lived in Iowa to become an atheist.

February 20, 2013 at 10:17 PM  
Blogger Debra said...

I find, when reading most of the blogs, and discussing this issue with people that many people seem to think that the God problem can be reduced to whether or not ONE believes in Him or not.
I call this dangerous reductionism.
It reduces the God problem to a simple question of individual and PRIVATE belief.
But... God is much more than that.
HE has been, in the past, a COMMON, shared, social belief invested with value. A foundation that enabled men and women to perceive the communion of shared values. Attacking God... attacks that foundation, and the sense of community that has historically come with it.
All through recorded history, there have been men and women who did not believe in God, or who had serious doubts about his existence.
But... they did not spend hours in the PUBLIC SPHERE ranting on about their private, personal disappointment in being let down by an ideal.
They kept those planes somewhat distinct, and separate.
Nuance.
It is also very reductionist to imagine that the differences between Roman Catholicism and the myriad Protestantisms are soluble in the word "Christianity".
At this time, where in France, we are submerged by the ethos of the Protestant attitudes towards work, as the means to salvation, Catholicism (if it hadn't been so perverted by the Reformation, sigh), could be a very attractive alternative..
Can you imagine, a Church where you could belong... without having to do all that earnest browbeating and autocritique about... believing ?
Hmmm... could there be some serious advantages to decadence ??
Logical...

February 20, 2013 at 11:59 PM  
OpenID reakcionar said...

Believing in religion is like believing in alcohol.

One can live without booze rather happy and succesful. Howeever, if you ever had to do some heavy-duty work (I myself was unloading trucks during my college years), you know that a couple of shots can be a great source of heat, strenght and good mood. Alcohol was an engineering tool, helping my friends and I not to sink in a deep depression of despare and painful work.

There were some who could not only work, but even happily work without booze. They were rare, but they exist.

I think that True Atheists are the similar in that respect. They need no booze, they can simply go on. But, to think that anyone could do without booze is not only stupid, but extremelly harmful. Poor guy migt switch to meth if you try to make him better off.

February 21, 2013 at 2:46 AM  
OpenID nydwracu said...

Rollory:
Human nature, so far as we can tell, is not perfectible; there is not an ideal "correct" answer that magically makes all the problems go away. We must expect that any future system will also fail eventually; what we can hope for is that it will take longer to fail than it has in the past. If, at some point, a system that does NOT fail is found, well and good; but planning for and expecting that is foolishness.

Death comes to all systems. Looking for a system that doesn't die is looking for immortality. There are biological organisms that can live seemingly indefinitely barring fatal injury, so it's not impossible, but it shouldn't be forgotten how hard the task is.

Anonymous:
The dead-Jew-on-a-stick cult is a millstone around the neck of the West. It is a preposterous, repugnant, made-up religion suitable solely for small children, the feebleminded, and slaves.

And yet it worked. Would the West have been better off without the Protestant work ethic, the command to worship God by learning the rules of His creation, or the massive, relatively stable (until recently) social structure of Catholicism?

February 21, 2013 at 5:00 AM  
Blogger G. M. Palmer said...

Debra and reak. . .

Yes precisely.

Which is the point MM is making--religion, especially of the Platonic God/Good type, is especially useful at making good societies.

February 21, 2013 at 5:51 AM  
Anonymous I Miss Afghanistan said...

DR says:

After all wasn't it these very same Christians who brought down the Roman Empire in the 4th century? If we had managed to nail that stupid hippie to a tree at age 23 instead of 33 humanity would probably be colonizing other stars by now.

All this post seems to offering up are tired old solutions to combatting the beige oligarchy. Auster wants to return us to 1950, Ron Paul wants to put reset back to 1787 and Moldbug apparently in this post would put us back as at 1517.


Yet this incongruous fool, DR "wants to return us to" 23-27 AD. Apparently the old gods of Troy were suited to save Rome and launch colonies among the constellations.

February 21, 2013 at 6:38 AM  
Anonymous Rollory said...

nydr.. nydw... nywhatever, I don't disagree. I don't say it's impossible. I DO say that orienting efforts around that goal itself and not incremental steps toward it is very, very likely to lead to disappointment. In this case, the best is the enemy of the good.

Also, what does your name mean, and how am I supposed to pronounce it?

February 21, 2013 at 7:07 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Yet this incongruous fool, DR "wants to return us to" 23-27 AD. Apparently the old gods of Troy were suited to save Rome and launch colonies among the constellations."

Considering Heron of Alexandria almost built a steam engine some 1700 years before James Watt, and the Antikythera mechanism was also built during Classical Antiquity, I would not dismiss the idea so lightly.

February 21, 2013 at 8:59 AM  
Blogger Thomas Fink said...

If someone like Auster makes someone like Moldbug write something like "... when our dark age ends and the kings return, if ever, it will be under any banner but the Cross.", it has merit. Auster seems to stay in the moment in the home of a friend who is a Catholic. That also has merit. Having said this I must remark, it is my impression that Auster exemplifies the dilemma of American conservatism. A dilemma I find expressed in many ways on many conservative and even reactionary blogs in the anglosphere (but usually not with the almost progressive zeal Auster had when arguing in favor of conservatism - thanks Foseti). As Heidegger wrote: “The Anglo-Saxon world of Americanism has resolved to annihilate Europe, that is, the homeland, and that means: [it has resolved to annihilate] the commencement of the Western world.” That means, from the perspective of the commencement America was always a revolutionary force whoever was in power there. American conservatism is an oxymoron. This is the problem. And when I started to understand this problem and articulated it Austers scalpel cut me away from his blog. This is understandable and maybe I hold still a grudge against him. I should let go. But for the things to come, may it be kings or may it be just the Church (the one and only institution that went through the three eras marked by the commencement of the West and which will arise in the next era in full glory again) Americanism has to be destroyed regardless if it calls itself conservative or progressive. You Anglos should get this. Auster did not get it and he will not get it but this is mercifully not a requirement to be accepted by our triune God. He is happy in the moment and this is fine. May God have mercy with him.

February 21, 2013 at 9:45 AM  
Anonymous I Miss Afghanistan said...

Considering Heron of Alexandria almost built a steam engine some 1700 years before James Watt, and the Antikythera mechanism was also built during Classical Antiquity, I would not dismiss the idea so lightly.

I would dismiss the idea after reading Augustine's 'City of God', personally. The gods that couldn't save Troy were supposed to save Rome? I'm eager to appreciate classical culture but reject the false conflict with Christianity.

The Pantheon on Pentecost.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LRw6xbfFPo


Auster did not get it

No he didn't. Neither did he appreciate the attempt by the Confederate States to "conserve" the Constitution. Today we talk of Jefferson versus Hamilton but the over-aching legacy of the American Revolution remains that of Thomas Paine, the man who was wrong too soon.

February 21, 2013 at 10:40 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Now, we can postulate a God who is an alien system administrator who runs the servers that make quantum mechanics work.

Does he keep regular backups and/or state snapshots? Maybe if we're worthy he'll upload are "image" to The Thirteenth Floor. Perhaps we'll be able to access the backups and re-instantiate our ancestor back into the same old universe. No need to spend $60,000 to freeze your head.

-Cloudswrest

February 21, 2013 at 12:51 PM  
Anonymous Michael said...

DR wrote: "The Tsars weren't the group that brought down the Soviet bloc in 1989"

True - but what did? Did not the demolition of the Soviet bloc begin in Poland - where resolute Catholicism was the lifeline for an ethnic nation threatened from the West first by Prussian Lutheranism, then by Nazism, and threatened from the East first by Russian Orthodoxy, then by Bolshevism?

Stalin mockingly asked "how many divisions has the Pope?" Yet Lech Walesa, a Catholic labor leader named after a Polish saint (the Poles have been described as "divi Leschi genus") and a Polish pope, John Paul II, set the fall of the Soviet bloc in motion. I doubt it could have happened had Marxism managed to destroy the Christian faith of the Poles.

Whatever you may think of Christianity, or blame on it, like all religions, it fills a basic human need. Religion is instinctive in the consciousness of man. Why that is lies beyond the scope of our discussion. What is significant is that the need will be fulfilled in some way or another. Consider the large number of people for whom Christianity has ceased to have any place in their lives, and the very small number who have not replaced it with some substitute that is no better, and in all probability, worse.

I was reminded of this the other night in light conversation with a friend, when he described his experience with vegans, saying "Never invite vegans to your party. You won't be able to offer them anything they will eat, and they will do nothing but complain." Here is an example of a substitute religion. Vegans condemn themselves to a life-long Lent, not for the sake of spiritual contemplation or historical commemoration, but simply for its own sake - and the only satisfaction they can get from it is a sense of their own moral superiority.

Christianity, taken seriously, can actually improve its believer - can make him kind and honest, or at least more so than he was. What surrogate for religion can do as much? Santayana had it right when he observed that liberalism was merely Puritanism from which the Christianity had been excised, leaving only Puritanism's fanaticism and smugness.

February 21, 2013 at 1:04 PM  
Anonymous Rollory said...

You're (somewhat) overstating your case. The Poles certainly triggered the collapse; but the collapse would not have happened had Marxism not lost its hold over everyone involved. The USSR collapsed because everybody knew its ruling ideology was nonsense; they were all hypocrites, and KNEW themselves to be hypocrites. Christianity was MUCH stronger throughout eastern Europe in the early 1900s, and yet that is precisely when the Bolsheviks took over.

This is why China is so strict with the likes of Falun Gong as well as with Christianity. It doesn't necessarily take Christianity to bring down an empire; it takes the combination of the empire's ideology being nonsense that everybody knows is nonsense, plus SOMETHING that people can believe in and motivate large numbers of people.

Which is why I expect the USA, evangelicals and all, to go the way of the USSR within my lifetime.

February 21, 2013 at 1:49 PM  
OpenID nydwracu said...

Rollory:
nydr.. nydw... nywhatever, I don't disagree. I don't say it's impossible. I DO say that orienting efforts around that goal itself and not incremental steps toward it is very, very likely to lead to disappointment. In this case, the best is the enemy of the good.
Incremental steps toward... what? Societal longevity? I'd agree, but life is orders of magnitude too short for that at this point. There just isn't enough history yet.

Also, what does your name mean, and how am I supposed to pronounce it?
I've read Beowulf a few too many times. I could be a reactionary in language also and expect people to roll back English phonology 1200 years or so to pronounce it, but I can't be bothered to myself; I say [nɪdˈrɑku].

Michael:
Christianity, taken seriously, can actually improve its believer - can make him kind and honest, or at least more so than he was. What surrogate for religion can do as much?

Surrogates can't by definition, but Westerners these days seem immune to Christianity. (I can't buy it myself, but I suspect I just don't have the brain modules for what Philip Wheelwright calls ouranian religion, and Christianity has no chthonic elements and hardly any mystical ones of note, so instead I read Buddhists and Alain de Benoist. I'll scan and upload Wheelwright's religious typology someday, but his book on the pre-Socratics (an interesting place to construct a typology of religion, but somehow it works) is one of the few I've come across that's worth the full shelf price.)

I'm still holding out hope for either a new religion or a wave of people dropping the new-age hippie bullshit and actually taking Buddhism or somesuch seriously. I'm only half joking when I hope for serious juggalo theologians... and marginally less so for Mormon ones.

February 21, 2013 at 2:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Considering Heron of Alexandria almost built a steam engine some 1700 years before James Watt, and the Antikythera mechanism was also built during Classical Antiquity, I would not dismiss the idea so lightly.

^This.

There is nothing Western about Christianity. It is, and has always been, a middle eastern ideology. 2000 years ago the same moronic right wing christian faggots that decry the influx of Islam would have been decrying Christianity. Not to mention the fact that Christianity is Marxism V1.0. Every major leftist movement of the last 500 years is an offshoot of this insane, backwards rag-head religion.

February 21, 2013 at 7:08 PM  
Anonymous I.m.a. said...

Marxism 1.0 is a divine emperor worshipped by plebes. There is absolutely nothing western about the oriental despotism that followed the fall of the republic.

February 21, 2013 at 8:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

nydwracu? What do you mean exactly by brain modules?

February 21, 2013 at 10:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

nydwracu? What do you mean exactly by brain modules?

February 21, 2013 at 10:36 PM  
Blogger Thomas Fink said...

Again and again this nonsense: `Christianity is from the middle east, Christianity is jewish´. Bla bla bla. You can do the Nietzche a thousand times, invent an artificial Thor or whatever: Christianity was, is and will be the essence of the commencement of the West. And as Heidegger observed: "The commencement is indestructible." The Church is the embodiment of the commencement. In Her you find the only authentic Aufhebung (this is a term which includes a dialectical contradiction because it means preservation and abrogation at the same time) of paganism. As Carl Schmitt observed: The Church is a complexio oppositorum. There is no antagonism She does not embrace. And only She can do it, because She rests on an indestructible rock. And She could´t care less if some of you neo-pagans or whatever you call yourself get hanged up on one of her seemingly contradictionary moves.

February 21, 2013 at 10:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It may be that Christianity is largely an extended phenotype of the Semitic/Middle Eastern peoples — one which, like Islam, transfers loyalty for family and ethny to a larger memetically controlled group which may itself be controlled by a hypocritical ethnic elite that taxes the large memetically controlled multi-ethnic population.

February 21, 2013 at 10:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Auster is determined to be an asshole to the end.

DR -- that is one of the very few sensible comments I've ever seen here.

February 21, 2013 at 11:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't buy the "Christianity is Marxism" argument, as a consequence I don't buy Moldbug's universalist argument either. I mean yeah, it's factually true, but it seems to me that it is committing the base rate fallacy. Look at the base rates for dissent throughout history. It is mostly religious dissent (usually against religious oppression). That's all people had to dissent with, so it is no surprise to me that a lot of left wing movements had their roots in religious movements.

February 21, 2013 at 11:28 PM  
Blogger Debra said...

Perhaps we might try remembering that Christianity was constructed as Jewish heresy, particularly when Paul got into the act ?
A heresy leans against what it is... opposed to.
Opposition : a religion with an invisible God localized in the Temple, whose priests alone had access to the divinity, visible through a veil in the form of a woman's breasts... (The Jewish God is intimately tied up with the feminine position..)
Contrast with a religion with a.. visible, exposed God revealed, to be worshipped not necessarily in a Temple by.. everyone, bypassing the mediation of the priests (in the Protestant heresy).
The Protestant heresy... leans against its Catholic predecessor, but also incorporates a form of antagonism and sympathy with the Jewish... faith ?
Secularization has definitely complicated the state of affairs.
What has been extracted from the Christian faith (but also from the original Jewish one, by the way..) is the abstract, disincarnated rational.. vision ? of the creator. And of the created, too. The world as abstract impersonal forces.
One can make a case for Marxism as a form of secular.. heresy, too...

I vote for "Beowulf". And... Ecclesiastes.
But there is no paradise in either.
And no singing tomorrows, as we say in French.
No.. salvation.

February 22, 2013 at 12:22 AM  
Blogger way2 college said...

NICE BLOG!! I'm happy to find numerous useful info here in the post. I would really like to come back again right here for likewise good articles or blog posts. Thanks for sharing...
bsc distance education

February 22, 2013 at 12:38 AM  
Anonymous Podsnap said...

This is why I like Larry Auster, who even on his deathbed, has the integrity to write this -

Also, Mencius Moldbug has a typically shapeless piece on me in which he pays me extravagant compliments which have precisely zero content. I defy anyone to say what Moldbug’s 2,600 word article means.

Godspeed Larry - I have no idea either.

February 22, 2013 at 3:07 AM  
Blogger G. M. Palmer said...

People want salvation and absolution.

The Romans and Greeks found it in Dionysus and the Elusinian mysteries.

Christians find it in Jesus.

Techno-progressives find it in cryogenics and cultural relativism.

February 22, 2013 at 4:50 AM  
Anonymous Rollory said...

I will summarize Mr. Verbose Verbosity Verbositarian.

1) Auster is dying.

2) Auster, in comparison to those around him, stands out for the clarity and rigor of his intellectual work.

3) Our period is lacking in such qualities.

4) There was a time when clarity and rigor of argument was prized, now it is not; the forms of the system built on that assumption remain.

5) Auster's clarity and rigor derived from his Christian faith.
[I actually will claim, and if required to I will go dig up multiple specific discussions at VFR to support the point, that his Christian faith led him directly AWAY from rigor in multiple key cases, but this is outside the scope of V^3's article]

6) Christianity results in forms that are a social good.

7) Alternatives to Christianity will not necessarily do so.

8) In the future, a return to a well-ordered society is in the opinion of V^3 likely to be founded on Christianity, in spite of the fact that V^3 doesn't consider it to be actually true.

Or, in much shorter form: Auster is dying, this is a moment to reflect on his clarity and rigor (lacking in our age), which was derived from Christianity; we see that Christianity can be useful, regardless of its underlying truth.

Or, to boil it down even further, Larry's wrong. Mr. Moldbug's piece is perfectly comprehensible and meaningful.

Auster's reference to the American Conservative piece in that same post is as dishonest and pointlessly obstreperous as anything he's ever written. Stay classy to the end, Larry!

February 22, 2013 at 5:13 AM  
Anonymous Rollory said...

I keep writing "Larry" and thinking the french word "larron"

February 22, 2013 at 5:17 AM  
Blogger Thomas Fink said...

If the Christian faith is used to vindicate Americanism it must inevitably loose clarity. This is the tragic not only of Auster. Even Moldbug must translate for his son the billboards of some fundamentalist preachers in positive light. Man’s religious instinct is so bent out of shape by Americanism that it degenerates into some form of emotionalism. It is very decadent. To call this emotionalism obstreperous in the case of Auster is a great definition. Great word for the english lessons of my wife. You are kind of obstreperous today, sweetheart.

February 22, 2013 at 6:15 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"What, pray tell me, is the Flying Spaghetti Monster a shorthand for?"

All of god that is not GOD!, I'd say.

The Popish Sauromatian

February 22, 2013 at 6:26 AM  
Blogger Debra said...

Christianity invariably leads to social catastrophe, and one size fits all thinking/behaving : "in Christ there is no east nor west in Him no north nor south, but one great fellowship of love throughout the whole wide earth".
A totalitarian society.
It CAN result in forms of INDIVIDUAL private behavior that are noble.
Nuance.
On clarity.. geez, it would be nice to have clarity, and rigorous thought with a more than 300 word vocabulary, and sentences that don't look and sound like computer printouts, or logic exercices, don't you think ?
i do.
We CAN have our cake and eat it too !

February 22, 2013 at 9:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Christianity leads to social catastrophe

Like any other "-ism". Where's the Cathedral there's fail.

BTW, (legit question)

Is the Cathedral also the Tower of Babel? Seems to me - but then I am steppe simpleton.



It CAN result in forms of INDIVIDUAL private behavior that are noble.

I don't think it's "Christianity", for one. Maybe, Christ? But in any case for something to be NOBLE it has to concern the MANY, no?



We CAN have our cake and eat it too !

In Jesus' name. Amen.

The Popish Sauromatian

February 22, 2013 at 12:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I appreciate that you like Mr. Auster, but geez, your essay is a rambling, sometimes incoherent mess!? I have to work overtime in just trying to decipher what exactly you're saying - and I'm not even sure I have! Oh, the verbal clutter! All is not lost though as I will use it to show others how NOT to write.

Your post is representative of the new 'hipster' style of writing, much too clever for your own good. Whatever happened to expressing oneself in ways that common folks like myself can actually understand?

May I recommend William Zinsser's classic, 'On Writing Well' (Fourth edition)?

February 22, 2013 at 6:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh, the verbal clutter!

LOL shut up you nerd faggot. Go back to reddit.

February 22, 2013 at 7:24 PM  
Anonymous Michael said...

Rollory wrote: "The Poles certainly triggered the collapse; but the collapse would not have happened had Marxism not lost its hold over everyone involved."

I don't dispute this. But the point should be made that Communism, which was supposed to be the inevitable conclusion of historical proceses, DID lose its hold over everyone involved, whereas Christianity, and in particular, Polish Catholicism did not - this in spite of Communism's determined efforts to destroy it.

Anonymous wrote: " Not to mention the fact that Christianity is Marxism V1.0."

Hogwash. While there have been those who wished to imply that socialism was merely the practical application of the Sermon on the Mount, this is quite clearly contradicted by Christ's own words to the effect that his kingdom was not of this world - that one should render unto Caesar what was Caesar's, and unto God what was God's. Christianity is not a blueprint for social reform or a utopian society, but rather a path to individual redemption.

For a millennium and a half after the fall of Rome, Europe was Christian, and though it had many different governments and laws, none but a few brief and aberrant episodes of its history (such as the reign of the heresiarch John of Leiden in Münster, 1534-6) attempted anything like egalitarian communism. Christian Europe was aristocratic and hierarchical, and private property was the foundation of its economy.

Nothing like socialism or communism gained any political traction until the nineteenth century, when, weakened by the scientism of the so-called Enlightenment, Christianity began to lose the allegiance of the emerging class of intelligentsia. Whatever supposed similarities there are between Christianity and some version of Marxism exist only in the propaganda designed by Marxists to woo people whose understanding of Christianity is shallow and weak. If you believe Christianity is Marxism V1.0, try reconciling Marxism with Pio Nono's Syllabus of Errors, and report back.

February 22, 2013 at 8:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

'Shut up you nerd faggot. Go back to reddit."

No, actually the person who posted it was correct. The article is a verbally cluttered and rambling mess! Obviously, your reply lacked substance and resorted to nothing more than name calling. I'm sure to you, though, it's coherent and oh 'so intellectually deep.'

Typical.

February 22, 2013 at 8:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No, actually the person who posted it was correct.

You mean yourself? It's pretty clear from your writing that you are the person above (the sentence fragments, the over use of the exclamation mark).

Why is that faggots like yourself are as verbose as the people you criticize? Also, where does my reply imply anything about Moldbug's post being "intellectually deep"? You grammar nazi types always suck at logic.

February 22, 2013 at 9:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's pretty clear from your writing that you are the person above (the sentence fragments, the over use of the exclamation mark

its multiheaded from lesswrong

he is posting as anon but it is the same writing style

February 22, 2013 at 9:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is there are a part of the right wing blogosphere that aren't a bunch of whiny beta males? The PUA / MRA blogs don't count, as they are mostly betas pretending to be alphas.

February 22, 2013 at 9:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

someone should start a tumblr blog called whiny right-wing beta males

February 22, 2013 at 9:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Is there are a part of the right wing blogosphere that aren't a bunch of whiny beta males?"

Firepower

February 23, 2013 at 5:05 AM  
Blogger Thomas Fink said...

"Is there are a part of the right wing blogosphere that aren't a bunch of whiny beta males?"

The internet social media department including the blogosphere is by definition the playground of betas and fake alphas. Right-wing, left-wing, no-wing; it does not matter. A genuine alpha usually does not refer to himself as alpha. He takes his status for granted because his physical environment is offering it to him just by the way he is. Being alpha does not translate into the internet. Because the internet produces a systematically false consciousness. That is why real alphas, if they do not have a special purpose, get very soon very tired from the social media internet. A real alpha is not looking for admirers, he has enough of them in the real world. If the alpha is political inclined, a kind of leader, he knows anyway that admirers do not count. What you need are followers. And followers you can only cultivate in the physical world.

February 23, 2013 at 7:13 AM  
Anonymous RS said...

That's ridiculous. This is not exactly 'social media'. And do you think a Nietzsche had no influence (for better and for worse)? He was almost totally ignored thru the mid-80s, then just mostly ignored. A Stirner, a Stendhal? You don't think a Thiel, say, is likely somewhat aware of the altsphere, as certain others clearly are? I miss jkr, but am pretty pleased with the altsphere. The common axioms are robust and mostly quite on the empirical side, yet we have not congealed or ever really threatened to congeal. All the good students of Mencius (and others) have been 'fighting' and resisting him/them since day one ; I know because I have read every comment ever written here, though only once.

If you want to virilize biologically, you need to just lift weights, particularly squat a lot and deadlift, with a forceful exertion going up (but don't injure yourself, see basic safety). Record your results with a minute Teutonic fussiness and lift more next week. Be fucking well-careful of supplements with a limited empirical record, or really any supplements ; I recently toxed myself pretty hard with unclear chronic implications. (And I'm a very fine biologist.)

If you want to virilize spiritually, hit them alps, hit them whitewater, skydive.

Consider that plant fats not widely extracted til the 20C (because it was not possible) may be deranging to the metabolism, though I only believe this with 60% confidence, and little to no real study. They may in particular cause the growth of a large omentum which is probably bad news for your androsity/vitality (inactivates DHT and pumps IL-6). They are found in basically all packaged and restaurant food -- like sugar. Try butter, olive and peanut oil, and all animal fats.

As a German you must of course do your weights outdoors, all-weather year-round -- three seasons in the nude. Just watch your precious schwanz.

Then at last, heave up and roar like a bear: for, not against, a la Goethe. Illuminate minds. Tell the truth for once. Show the whites of your eyes to any danger entailed in the truth, and two steady pupils to the banality of evil. Read 'Anabasis'. Mencius himself, though kinda wary of late, is a man of some courage, though notably weaker on the ethno jingo front than Auster.

February 23, 2013 at 8:55 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Christianity invariably leads to social catastrophe

Um, that's why it held the Byzantines and Western European kingdoms together for many, many centuries?

February 23, 2013 at 9:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"You grammar nazi types always suck at logic."

Let's see. You have called me a nerd, a faggot, and now a nazi. Do you ever say anything half-way intelligent that isn't ad-hominem in nature? Also, there's nothing verbose in my writing. If you consider that verbose, it must be because you are accustomed to reading kindergarten books.

February 23, 2013 at 9:32 AM  
Anonymous Rollory said...

Grammar nazi IS logic. That's the whole point. Grammar is clear rules, the following of which is logical. (The reasons for them may not be, but the rules themselves are.)

February 23, 2013 at 10:44 AM  
Blogger Thomas Fink said...

"That's ridiculous." That got you man. By the way, what I meant with physical you got a little wrong or as we say in german: in den falschen Hals bekommen. It was not meant as in "let's get physical" more like: "let's get real". So, let's get real. Let's skip the crap about lifting weight and my schwanz and jump from "ridiculous" directly to "courage" You think when Mencius is going about the "ethno jingo front" he has a little bit less courage than Auster but still he has courage. From my point of view, when Auster and Mencius write about the black man I see and smell fear based on lost cultural confidence. What you call courage I call panic. You Anglos and Anglo-Ashkenazis have by annihilating the commencement destroyed the essence of your own being and denied yourselves thus the possibility of a future. That is the source of the panic. You have imposed the guilt on us Germans and we are swallowing in it. But we have not lost the commencement. Now you impose the guilt on yourselves, and this is different. You die from the poison that was designed for us. Ahh.
"Whatever has commencement is indestructible." Heidegger
Anyway. I was an activist in times, when at least Moldbug was not yet born. I know leaders. I was myself a leader. Not a very good one. But I know a leader when I see one. Moldbug is no leader. Which is nothing terrible. His pose is not to pose as a leader. For this kind of mild narcism children are a good remedy if they do not become a stylish pose too. Auster poses as a leader. A fake leader who cannot let go of the fake internet world that confirms his posing approaching the one thing you cannot fake.

February 23, 2013 at 11:10 AM  
Anonymous Reactor said...

The Rock of Faith, the thunder-blasted—
Eternity will hear it rise
With those who (Hell itself outlasted)
Will lift it with them to the skies!
‘Till whispered through the depths of Hell
The censored Miracle be known,
And flabbergasted fiends re-tell
How fiercer tortures than their own
By living faith were overthrown;
How mortals, thinned to ghastly pallor,
Gangrened and rotting to the bone,
With winged souls of Christian valour
Beyond Olympus or Valhalla
Can heave ten million tons of stone!


- Roy Campbell, 'The Alcazar'

February 23, 2013 at 2:32 PM  
Blogger omair khan said...

Best online earning system in the world, Online Data entry jobs, Form Filling Jobs, Copy Pasting Jobs
Join the best online system from home, Best Investment Plans without any work
www.jobzcorner.com

February 23, 2013 at 3:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do you ever say anything half-way intelligent that isn't ad-hominem in nature?

Ad hominem is putting forth reasons inside arguments that attack you in some manner. Merely stating that you are a nerd, a faggot, or a grammar nazi in the explanatory and insulting sense is making no claims about an argument. I'm insulting you because I can.

Again, answer the question: where does my reply imply anything about Moldbug's post being "intellectually deep"? If you cannot point out the explicit inference that I made, you are being irrational, i.e. without reason. You are making inferences that aren't there, and resulting to "WAAAAH, HE CALLED ME A BAD NAME". Therefore, you suck at logic.

Grammar nazi IS logic. That's the whole point. Grammar is clear rules, the following of which is logical. (The reasons for them may not be, but the rules themselves are.)

False. Grammar -- in the manner the person above is using it viz. orthography -- is a social convention to do with rules of language. Logic is about valid rules of argument. The former is a contingent fact, while the latter is a necessary fact. The conflation of the two is made by typical sperglord redditors.

February 23, 2013 at 7:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Question for readers of Moldbug:

Has Moldbug explicitly rejected his neo-cameralism for monarchy?

February 23, 2013 at 10:27 PM  
Blogger Thomas Fink said...

Moldbug now finally got a thank you from Auster. They could agree that it is possible for giants to stand on the toes of dwarfs. The festival of death continues. Let us recapitulate: First the prayer vigil, then the suicide note (retracted), then happiness in Philadelphia, now back to the old pattern: who is worthy to write eulogies and who not (defiant dwarfs not allowed). I hope this will go on for many month to come. It demonstrates so eloquently what a medium of false consciousness the internet is. And what a bloody joke this all is about.
"Papa!" "What is going on my son?" "Nothing Papa, they just say they wanna shoot me if you don´t give over the Alcazar." "Then command your soul to God, shout Viva Espana and die like a patriot." "I embrace you Papa." I embrace you, my son." (Col. Moscardó on telephone with his son. Imagine the sound of guns after the last sentence. This is the way)

February 24, 2013 at 12:15 AM  
Blogger Mitchell said...

Thomas Fink said

"suicide note (retracted)"

What are you talking about?

February 24, 2013 at 12:52 AM  
Anonymous Flynn Nellis said...

Some programs can lose a HOF coach and still maintain the culture. Herron, like Dorsey, Bazemore, and Hyder are winners for the entire community, including the Arts program. They require higher standards of performance across the organization, including the proud band.

February 24, 2013 at 1:32 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is anyone following the Ted Cruz / Harvard Law communist fiasco?

February 24, 2013 at 2:12 AM  
Anonymous Rollory said...

@Mitchell

Auster posted an entry a couple weeks back where he stated that suicide seemed like a reasonable and defensible choice under certain circumstances and that Christianity's prohibition of it had never seemed reasonable to him, but especially now given the way he's been feeling. Followed by all his fans panicking that he was going to do something drastic. Followed by Auster vigorously defending his position, then suddenly realizing he shouldn't have posted it at all and removing the whole thing.

Compare to his position during the Terri Schiavo case, where a human husk with 90% of its brain having disappeared and been replaced by, essentially, water, still qualified as human enough for him that he declared the governor MUST send in the Guard and forcibly reconnect the feeding tube. One might plausibly suspect him of finding the rules to be different when they apply personally - but even SUGGESTING such a thing to him would be sufficient to be "excluded". (I've written to him under enough different names, and had enough of them "excluded", that I have some experience with precisely what lines are Not To Be Crossed with Mr. Auster.)

I thought about sending him the comment that Tolkien had his "good" Numenorean kings voluntarily give up life when they feel it's time, and that the later "bad" kings were the ones that desperately clung to life at all costs, but didn't.

February 24, 2013 at 1:21 PM  
Blogger Thomas Fink said...

In this part of the universe
Ruled by sickness and death
By rebels
Territory of the enemy
The rightful king appeared
Incognito
And died
And lived
Securing the path out of it
Reigning in the eternal easter of the heavens.

In this mirror darkly
For is against
Against is for
Dwarfs are giants
And giants are dwarfs.

What a precious time to die
Wandering with the lamb towards Stalingrad.

February 24, 2013 at 11:53 PM  
Anonymous RS said...

Josh your extrordinary laudition for Christian humility is as unbalanced as Nietzsche's contrapositive stand. (And I believe you to be earnest in it.) Did you learn nothing from Euro man's long century of bowing and scraping? A chief value of humility by your lights is that it stands athwart vice and self-indulgence -- true enough -- ...hello, so does pride? "The noble soul has reverence for itself", and rejects much of the possible and the attractive. "I wish men would begin by respecting themselves. All the rest follows from that." --At least for some people at some times.

February 25, 2013 at 5:53 AM  
Anonymous RS said...

You have also adumbrated, or really pretty much declared, that an important matter is that of demogogues who by and by convince people to take up forms of pride under cloaks of humilites. Here I am more inclined to join with your severe outlook ; this just seems like a pure disaster though I admit I am running largely on instinct. And maybe on Nietzsche and Moliere.

February 25, 2013 at 6:09 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

" You have imposed the guilt on us Germans and we are swallowing in it."

Let me spell it out for ya.

Ya'll killed them motherfucker jews and motherfucker gipsies, man. Rolled-in the shetl in ya'll pimped-out trophy Citroen trux, lined them motherfuckers against a ditch and gunned them down.

Ya'll killed them motherfucker belgians, man. Marched in mit ruhig festem Schritt and burned down that Louvain nest of popish motherfuckers.

That the AngloFrancoYankeeRuss complex did likewise is not to point, imbecile. Adolf wrote in his [i]opus magnum[/i] about the AngloFrench propaganda. The way ya'll behave he might as well be a german-vocabulary using Japanese.

As long as you assume (thus making an ASS of U and ME) the identity of "german" you assume the "German" crimes, but most importantly the imbecilic way they have been dealt with propaganda-wise.

And lastly, mein lieber beta/kleiner Mann, that "guilt" is not fed unto you by Anglos - but by your own alpha/Grosser Mann elite,

The Popish Sauromatian

February 25, 2013 at 7:01 AM  
Anonymous Rollory said...

TPS, the victors write the history books. The Germans did _nothing_ to their enemies that was worse than what the "good guys" have done - and what some of them did in that very same war and prior to it.

Thomas Goodrich's "Hellstorm" covers part of this. The fact that the Anglos took the thousands upon thousands of anti-Soviet partisans, rounded them all up, and handed them over to Stalin so's he could promptly shoot them all in the head, is well established. The context of the German political situation - that the choice was between the National Socialists and the Communists, with everyone being keenly aware of the mass starvation being implemented by Communists in Ukraine, just a few hundred miles away - is something the popular accounts NEVER discuss.

The guilt that has been imposed upon Germany is one of a barrage of psychological and cultural warfare attempts to utterly atomize and destroy that nation. It is not justified, and it is a mistake.

February 25, 2013 at 8:40 AM  
Blogger Thomas Fink said...

"You have imposed the guilt on us Germans and we are swallowing in it."
You skipped the other part.
"But we have not lost the commencement"
Do you? Have it? Lost? Or not? The anglosphere has lost it. But not every Anglo. Not when he apostates from Americanism.
Do you ever heard of re-education? Seemingly not. Look it up. This dirt was fed to us by Anglos and by traitors under close supervision of Anglos. And in the first moment when possible we will just puke it out. What you call our „elite“, what is visible for you, are just a bunch of brainwashed third graders, protected by anglo money and power. Every german politican who wants to have a future in the national area, must make his pilgrimage to the States and make his bow before the right people. The others, the real ones, das geheime Deutschland, you know nothing about. And even some of them, that made the bow, cultivate an anger about it, you also know nothing about.
BTW You do something a true alpha should never do: Call someone else a beta. A alpha needs betas. Don´t you know?

February 25, 2013 at 9:04 AM  
Blogger Thomas Fink said...

I am reading"Hellstorm"in the moment. Translating parts of it. Thanks for mentioning it. Thanks for reading it.

When we will start to weep, when Germany is weeping fiercly and freely you will know that the times are a changing.

February 25, 2013 at 9:44 AM  
Anonymous RS said...

Don't be too quick to doubt that physical virilization could be total-wichtig. For leaders and perhaps for others. Not for women, ha ha. --Though if certain of them can learn much about virile geist, I think it can be good.

It really is a serious topic for palingenecists. The physical (biological) stuff and the geistig. And not only fuer 'uns'. The possible effects for Ashkenazim could be of interest for both themselves and us.

To be clear, the bio-virilization of primary interest is that of the brain. While the muscle itself holds certain potentials, such as its use in alpinism and kayaking, the main point of weightlifting is to directly exert virilizing endocrine effects on the brain. While that's especially true for palingenecists, there is little doubt that this is actually the main reason men in general lift weights -- they just don't realize it, mostly. Actually there is no explicit collective cognizance of this fact at all, that I'm aware of, but people obviously intuit it very widely.

[...continued]

February 25, 2013 at 1:55 PM  
Anonymous RS said...


I am Mencius' age ; if you are older it may interest you to know that the age-related declines in androgens and DHEA have been claimed to pretty much not exist under certain non-modern lifestyles. (Did I say that already?) It's not natural, man! Maybe. 'Lifestyles' -- I think food is more to be suspected than most things. At least, /some/ Foerschunger someplace /claim/ this, about T and DHEA vs age that is. As I mentioned previously, biology limps and gasps in brezhnevian semi-ruin -- though certainly not the near-total ruin claimed by Charleton -- mainly because of declining P (sensu Eysenck) and the execrable p<0.05 tradition, which in practice means p<~0.25. You should always assign much higher salience to anything that achieves p<0.01 or better.

Inasmuch as it matters, I'm not particularly Anglo in any way. Nor do the notions you have about Anglo (ahem, merits and?) demerits necessarily clash sharply with my own impressions. Nor do I celebrate, on balance, the Atlantic victory of 1919 -- or the undoing of Bonaparte.

I think you should gloss your use of 'commencement'. --Inter alia, tell what German word(s) you are thinking of.

Thank you for your Ueberstzungswerk ; I will probably endeavor to read it, assuming it involves my only language.

Do you read any Ernst Nolte? I haven't really -- just am somewhat aware of him.

February 25, 2013 at 1:56 PM  
Anonymous RS said...

> You think when Mencius is going about the "ethno jingo front" he has a little bit less courage than Auster but still he has courage. From my point of view, when Auster and Mencius write about the black man I see and smell fear based on lost cultural confidence.

Yes, Mencius believeth upon spotless Angel Jews, or fucking well acts like it, which is patently absurd. In case my meaning was a little obscure to non-native speakers. That attitude should be beneath an earnest Occy palingenecist and a hardy and generous man. And it's a problem for us getting anywhere. I probably have vices of my own, but I have written the name Khemelnitskij dozens of times, like a man who can face facts. I understand what these facts were conditioned by, but I also face 'em up. Mencius (and Foseti) will not yet "write Khemelnitskij". Perhaps they plan to add a small comment at some point, but first they want to calumniate Massachusetts Massachusetts Massachusetts Cromwell Cromwell Cromwell -- exclusively -- until half of us are already in the grave and one starts to wonder what it is they really want. In case some supergenius cannot grasp my meaning, I am no opponent of further, even quite frequently-repeated posthumous hangings of the lord protector. I'm an opponent of lying.

[continued]

February 25, 2013 at 3:04 PM  
Anonymous RS said...


I myself am actually pretty tired of the same old analysis of the Black man -- none of which I actually deny, of course. Yet the Black man is also adventurous and strong ; let him remind us that we are adventurous and strong. In no way am I saying I would live near him (his average type I mean) if I had kids.

Also I am earnest in my contrition that falsifier-weaklings among /us/ have bred down his average genotype, with his average biophenotype probably also going down. Certainly his culture has not been improved.

More broadly, the logically-negative and affectively-negative are not the major force for epochal changes in social consciousness. I'm not trying to cramp Alex Kurtagic's style or beat ; it just happens to be true.

I do understand that many people are a lot less protected from Black threats than I am, hence their animosity. Let them continue with the harsh truths, nevertheless, they should turn a lot more mental energy towards the excellence of our own race, and even acknowledge the virtue of the Blacks.

How many of these blogs frequently post the cream of our art and music, folk and hoch -- frequently post on our most heroic individuals?

I would agree that the internet has certain problems. Well, I am awfully garrulous, not to mention that you've been around longer than me -- why don't you lecture about it for a bit, if warranted, and I'll listen.

February 25, 2013 at 3:04 PM  
Anonymous RS said...

> this is actually the main reason men in general lift weights -- they just don't realize it, mostly. Actually there is no explicit collective cognizance of this fact at all, that I'm aware of

Eh, on reflection that's not really true after all.

February 25, 2013 at 3:23 PM  
Anonymous IMA said...

Question for readers of Moldbug:

Has Moldbug explicitly rejected his neo-cameralism for monarchy?


What must an avowed Jacobite American-Loyalist who would "rather be ruled by the Pope than by these people" explicitly reject to be considered a monarchist? Was there ever any conflict? Honest question. I am new to MM and took the day off to commence my long journey through the archives. Having previously arrived at many of the same conclusions, but only after the nastiest of detours spent foraging for antisemitic golden apples. That roundabout way of getting 'here' pretty well flags my exurban Kshatriya upbringing opposed to MM's urban Brahmin background.

Mr. Fink, you are a "good German", sir.

February 25, 2013 at 3:38 PM  
Anonymous RS said...

> That means, from the perspective of the commencement America was always a revolutionary force whoever was in power there. American conservatism is an oxymoron. This is the problem.

Right -- or right insofar as the only American conservatism (or wholeness) is folkic. It's natural that as an auslander and intellectual you will -- likely as not, anyway -- face at least some limitations in grasping our folkic world.

There have been no whole-ish leaders since Washington, with a handful of exceptions like Mencken (substantially an epigone of Nietzsche).

The Transcendentals understood geist but obviously they understood nothing else, particularly the real-ideal dialectic.

Lincoln was a profound man about many things, but what's the point of his precious union? 'Order without purpose' -- the negative freedom and dubious or at least overmodest ideal of self-government...... for all his 'mystic cords of memory' Lincoln somehow lacked geist. He did little to bring our country into relation with Eternity, and you can see the spiritual poverty which we have now shoved into NATO Europe, making an artistic pinnacle like 'Zerkalo' impossible there.

So much for America, ...it seems to be England that brought us scidolatry about the nature and mysteries of awareness and kosmos. You may hate Nietzsche's antichristian polemic, or share my and Nolte's misgivings about his nazism -- Jene neue Partei des Lebens, welche die grösste aller Aufgaben, die Höherzüchtung der Menschheit in die Hände nimmt, eingerechnet die schonungslose Vernichtung alles Entartenden und Parasitischen -- but he was the adamant hero against the scidolatry that has arguably been as important as Jewish-Euro conflict or corrupt forms of christianity and postchristianity. Josh recognizes how unliberated Mencius is from scidolatry, and would probably be interested in the Alrenous posts on the subject.

And more importantly in making something new -- as Nietzsche would say, showing and being something new. Obviously diagnosis is no use per se.

February 25, 2013 at 4:45 PM  
Anonymous RS said...

I need not add that a crude antidarwinism like Auster's is a futile response to scidolatry, right as he may be about the scourge of materialism.

The apt response has something more to do with Spinoza, Heraklitus, Tao, Zen, or Alrenous' "direct worship of reality [inasmuch as we know it]".

Or something to do with Tarkovskij's aforementioned 'Zerkalo'.

These forms of geistigkeit can or could more-or-less readily accommodate with the philosophical-theological content of Hinduism, particularly Vedanta. I would like to see them accommodate with other geistigkeit to create a social consciousness of common geistigkeit that does not so much combat scidolatry, but shakes its head at such a confused poverty. --And which respects identitary particularism. That is, respects racial particularity and religious particularity (specific faiths in their nondegenerate forms) as natural, virtually indispensible ways of transcending individual life.

This complex of geistigkeit would be diverse, yet might take on certain shared modes and traditions among Europids, and among totally non-Europid Occidentals wishing to remain in or near Occidental civilization, participate in its life, and not act as Schmittian hostiles against it. While I will personally be forced to continue scoffing at antidarwinism, antidarwinists could still be involved in this geistigkeit. After all, they're geistig. Only scidolatrous materialism would be clearly excluded. Decadent forms such as modernist Christianity or degenerate New Ageism could be included, but kept outside the core.

This may sound like a huge mess. Maybe it is. But the point is that it's a new social way of being, not just a negative rejection and criticism of scidolatry's nihilo-hedonism. (Not that scidolatry should not be attacked as a systematic form of sophistic power and control.)

Here I use the vernacular sense of hedonism. The technical sense is that pleasure is the only intrinsic good, as opposed to Nietzsche's Pleasure and pain not opposites . . . The feeling of power, or Bentham's para-hedonistic doctrine of qualitative differences in kinds of pleasure, which is almost a hedonism (technical sense) and an antihedonism at once.

I'm undecided about how different the vernacular and technical meanings really are at bottom, but one can read about Epicurus for a moment to see that technical hedonism need not entail some sort of indiscriminate use of sex or drugs.

February 25, 2013 at 7:06 PM  
Anonymous Reactor said...

heilige deutsche Kunst

February 26, 2013 at 12:03 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thomas Goodrich's "Hellstorm" covers part of this.

Where do you guys find these books?

February 26, 2013 at 12:32 AM  
Blogger Thomas Fink said...

Commencement: „Allem Anfang wohnt ein Zauber inne.“ The uniqueness of the western World. As vindicated by the German Romantics against the enlightenment „Die Herrschaft der Vernunft“ and anglo utilitarianism. Ernst Nolte should be just a starter for diving into the fascinating world, this many faceted movement that formed in the 20th s in Germany and is now usually called the „Konservative Revolution“. A movement, which BTW had a lot of connections with the anglo world. There have been and there are still a lot of good Anglos around. Otherwise it would not make much sense commenting here. From the politically correct point of view the „Konservative Revolution“ was just opening the doors for Hitler. But who let himself not scare of by this fear mongering (haha) and opens the poison cabinet will be ready for many a surprise. On of the surprises will be how strong, how influential some of the movements inside the „Konservative Revolution“ have been. And how antagonistic towards the Hitler Rosenberg division they have been and as what a dangerous competition they have been viewed and handled by this group. Especially the so called „Jungkonservative“ are worthy to explore. Othmar Spann „Der wahre Staat“ and also Edgar Julius Jung. Their main charge against the Nationalsocialist movement was, that it belongs to the forces it claims to battle.
„Ueberstzungswerk“ Maybe a misunderstanding. „Hellstorm“ is not translated into german yet. In your language you can get it. This book published in a major company in Germany would mark a real change. When the cohorts of the 68er, all the lifestyles that claim the future but simply fail to reproduce, are marching into their graves, then will be the time.We have simply jump over one generation. Not such a long time anymore.

Food is very important. To have the ability (and hand it over to your children) to prepare simple meals (and learn to appreciate the taste of it, the difference it makes) for yourselves solves a lot of the problems. Even in Germany, where bread is almost a fetish, it becomes difficult to find a real baker.

February 26, 2013 at 12:33 AM  
Blogger G. M. Palmer said...

ß'Gott.

RS/TF: Whatcha think about art here--as RS said, who is posting that (except the MM poems which have their own sets of problems--mainly allusive ones).

February 26, 2013 at 4:59 AM  
Blogger G. M. Palmer said...

'ß Gott

apparently when/if anyone ever writes it.

February 26, 2013 at 5:02 AM  
Blogger Thomas Fink said...

"Thomas Goodrich's `Hellstorm´ covers part of this.

Where do you guys find these books?"

I got it from Amazon america. Amazon germany will not deliver it.
Actually I was introduced to it by Ceasar Torts blog. The most arian Mexican you can find on the internet. He needs some re-education about the Konservative Revolution to get over his fuerer tic and hate of the Christ. I am in good hope about that; his Weltanschauung (philosophy of life) is very much in the flux, but his Lebensgefühl (attitude of life - also an unsatisfactory translation - but there is no better I know) is alright. And his Lebensgefühl lets him spot all the time interesting subjects. Weltanschauung is important, but without a Lebensgefühl you share with your comrades, it is just empty words. You have to burn for something. Probably the virility RS is talking about. That was when I started shaking the head, reading Austers praisings of the Beatles. I am still thankful for Punk, getting me out of this hippie-doom. And then came industrial music and then techno. And now it is the heroic department of neofolk. Ever listened to "Von Thronstahl"? „Bellum Sacrum Bellum!?“ Especially: "We walked in line" Which is a cover version from someone who burned to fast and to early. And not for the Christ. Anyway, in between a little Bach does no harm. Maybe even the Beatles. But not as a Lebensgefühl.

"Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may obtain it. And everyone who competes for the prize is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a perishable crown, but we for an imperishable crown. Therefore I run thus: not with uncertainty. Thus I fight: not as one who beats the air. But I discipline my body and bring it into subjection, lest, when I have preached to others, I myself should become disqualified."

1 Corinthians 9

February 26, 2013 at 5:12 AM  
Anonymous josh said...

RS,

I assume your talking about things I've said elsewhere.

I think humility implies an understanding of the true place of man in the cosmos; he is made good, a kind of a God, but his *nature itself*, which all of us instantiate, has fallen. Pascal is good on this. We hate ourselves, but we know we are capable of perfection (though not by our own effort).

Outside of this understanding we view ourselves alternately and simultaneously as the creators of much of the Universe and all of its meaning (via nominalism)and/or mere killer apes, or else we are irredeemable and our "salvation" come from the destruction of ourselves as individual persons and our absorption into the great being. In the first instance there is no Goodness at all, in the second Goodness, if you can even call it that, entails the end to all particularism.

Christianity contains the natural law of Taoism and Dharma of Hinduism, and recognizes the existence of non-material substantial forms such as the family, community, and the nation. It also explains much more including our (fall and) redemption as *individuals*.

It is necessary to justice to humble oneself to Goodness itself and its very harmful to bow and scrape to anything else. This just points you in the right direction.

"I admit I am running largely on instinct"

You and me both, I'm sure.

"I know because I have read every comment ever written here, though only once."

I'm sorry about that.

February 26, 2013 at 7:32 AM  
Anonymous Rollory said...

re: Hellstorm - same here, learned of it via Chechar; although I knew (in a vague sense) some of what is in there, it is an excellent compilation of key facts regarding the immediate postwar period. I actually got my copy direct from the author instead of via Amazon, but Amazon is certainly the fallback position for lots of useful reference material (The Bell Curve, for example; you'll never see that in a bookstore again, but Amazon stocks it).

February 26, 2013 at 8:29 PM  
Anonymous Sarah said...

My first instinct was to help, but I suspect it would be cruel to offer anything so late in the game.

So I'll offer my labor, as full of errors as it is, for the next person. There really is nothing else that can be done.

We are inadequate to the task. Really and truly inadequate, and to say anything else is whistling in the dark. And I don't even believe in anything as comforting as the old quote, "It is not necessary to complete the task, but neither are you free to neglect it." It *is* necessary to complete the task. Our friends die. Our loved ones die. Our society is too incompetent to cure them. And, standing in this abattoir, here am I, armed with nothing but a little mathematics, a lot of hubris, and loyal friends...

Moldbug, please don't be ashamed that you cannot be a Christian. I suspect you cannot for the same reason that I cannot. It is something very like a sense of duty, though it's more fundamental and instinctive than duty; I had it before I was four. Some people cannot go that way, and that's all right; we serve a function. I have, when faced with grief, wondered bitterly why I could not have simple faith and simple feeling like everyone else, why my brain is cold and fastidious. The truth is that someday someone may need us to be cold and fastidious.

Who else can reach every star in the sky and every grain of sand?

February 27, 2013 at 12:16 PM  
Blogger A. M. said...

Just go to church--preferably a traditionalist Roman Catholic or Orthodox parish. Attend it regularly and try to pray. Gain an understanding of what is happening in the liturgy. How can you say you are incapable of faith when you do not expose yourself to the holy mysteries?

February 27, 2013 at 9:45 PM  
Blogger Thomas Fink said...

"The truth is that someday someone may need us to be cold and fastidious."

No one ever will need you to be cold. This is an imagination arising out of the dystopian fantasies ingrained in this cold and soulless culture of death that is the modern world.

From a dystopian novel that catches the heart of the matter:

"He was an easy man to figure, one of those who had grown old everywhere but in his heart, that one organ he had never worn out because he’d never dared to use it." ("Wool" by Hugh Howey)

When the heart opens naturally it often gets hurt and rejected. This hurt can turn us cold.

A.M. is right. Faith like opening the heart then is a practice. Results come by repetition. Awakening for this path comes by intervention. "I Will Send You a Helper." John 14:16
The rest is practice. This is the way of the warrior.

February 27, 2013 at 11:01 PM  
Blogger Mitchell said...

"No one ever will need you to be cold."

Sarah is talking about science. Lawrence Auster is dying because the human race does not know how to cure his cancer. This is because we do not adequately understand the microscopic cause and effect of his illness. This is because our medical science is not as advanced as it could be.

February 28, 2013 at 7:06 AM  
Anonymous RS said...

But Auster's great love is Man, who now faces so different an illness.

Still plenty of room for detached analysis there, though.

I have in recent years wished to try Edgar Jung's "Herrschaft" (in English), but I have difficulty reading, have a lot of unread books. I guess I've become addicted to rapid controversion: on the net something is asserted, and fifteen minutes later three people are machine gunning away at it from three angles. Keeps you on your toes! It's fast, it's very potent, a very harsh land for any mendacities to set up in. As for Nietzsche he handles the rapid controversion himself.

One probably understands I am not actually Nietzsche-entranced and bear some skepticism against his Blake-like (but apparently way more serious) dual worship of good and evil.

> And how antagonistic towards the Hitler Rosenberg division they have been and as what a dangerous competition they have been viewed and handled by this group.

Right, I'm sure you know Jung considered shooting Hitler.

February 28, 2013 at 1:13 PM  
Anonymous RS said...


> Commencement: „Allem Anfang wohnt ein Zauber inne.“ The uniqueness of the western World. As vindicated by the German Romantics against the enlightenment „Die Herrschaft der Vernunft“ and anglo utilitarianism.

Yes, N. convinced me of that early on, and that's how Germany/France/Italy/Slavland became home to me. Of course I did not understand him too well at all at 18 (probably less than others), but I got started early. To me what is most unique and important in German high culture (and to a lesser extent other Continental cultures) was that it did not remain a reactive (against the Enlightenment) and exaggerated 'hardline romance' (lol) ; instead we have the movement of figures like Goethe towards a partial Hellenism as well as N.'s scrupulous acceptance of much from the Enlightenment. Some English did also recognize the 'sickly' aspect of proto-romances that developed domestically. However it seems like the German romantoclassicism had the most satisfactory development, culminating in Nietzsche, though unfortunately also in Nietzsche's essential hysteria/ largely unconvincing 'halcyon' aspect.

February 28, 2013 at 1:14 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

MM is certainly toying with the validity of Christianity.

If he becomes Roman Catholic I'll be eager to see our resident conspiracy theorists revive the Black Legend to impugn our host. Even better would be Moldbug's joining a Masonic lodge.

February 28, 2013 at 9:17 PM  
Anonymous Reactor said...

"Even better would be Moldbug's joining a Masonic lodge."

The mind boggles.

March 1, 2013 at 1:59 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

RE: conversion to catholicism. I can't find the study now, but apparently it is quite hard for a person to switch back to religious belief when the person has a highly analytic style of thinking that led to the nonbelief in the first place. Not impossible of course, but much harder than simply waking up and deciding today you'll believe in God.

I'm pretty sure I read it on http://epiphenom.fieldofscience.com blog, which covers new papers in the psychology of belief.

It might have been this post: http://epiphenom.fieldofscience.com/2011/09/deep-thinkers-are-more-likely-to-lose.html

and this post:

http://epiphenom.fieldofscience.com/2012/04/instinctive-thinkers-more-likely-to.html

March 1, 2013 at 4:32 AM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

RE: conversion to catholicism. I can't find the study now, but apparently it is quite hard for a person to switch back to religious belief when the person has a highly analytic style of thinking that led to the nonbelief in the first place.

Ah, but not many highly analytical minds switch from supporting democracy to monarchy. And yet, MM has made the transition.

The mind boggles.

The goat tricycle screams demonic conspiracy. Even more reason for our host to sign up with a Lodge ASAP.

March 2, 2013 at 9:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The entire question of "whether God exists" seems to me entirely superfluous and sterile."

Well, since you don't know the meaning of 'exists' and 'God', in practice, the questions sounds something like this:

"whether bfsdkc asddfx"

Which is really quite superfluous and sterile.

March 3, 2013 at 1:36 PM  
Anonymous whatever said...

Oh yes, the South was SAVAGELY abused by the North. Oh yes. This can is very plainly seen when outgoing President James Buchanan doomed hundreds of thousands of men to death by sitting on his but for almost three months while the South organized it's revolt.

But, not to be outdone, Lincoln himself, that cold-blooded monster bent on Southern annihilation, also continued to mess around for over a month before deciding that they should actually do something. He has only had three months to think about what to do. He needed, if possible, at least ten years. And if the violent Southerners hadn't fired on Fort Sumter.... and all political and military logic said they SHOULD NOT FIRE ON IT but instead play for time.... he probably would have continued to spin his wheels.

Even then, he still simpered around for a whole year before actually issuing the Emancipation Proclamation.

The idea that the North, which didn't even hang Robert E. Lee at the end of the war, was "bent on southern destruction" is so stupid as to defy logic. If someone pulled the same stunt on the Romans as the South pulled on the North, there would be blood filling the gutters of Richmond when it fell.

I can't think of anyone who suffered less after insanely attacking an opponent vastly, vastly stronger than them and continuing the fight far past any sane hope of victory.

March 3, 2013 at 4:59 PM  
Anonymous whatever said...

Not that I think Buchanan or Lincoln was motivated by mercy or compassion. I feel they were motivated by the fact that they didn't really mind slavery, at all. Except maybe that it, practically, didn't really work.

March 3, 2013 at 5:13 PM  
Anonymous Michael said...

TUJ wrote: "MM is certainly toying with the validity of Christianity.

"If he becomes Roman Catholic I'll be eager to see our resident conspiracy theorists revive the Black Legend to impugn our host. Even better would be Moldbug's joining a Masonic lodge."

It has been suggested! Back when MM was discussing his idea of the Antiversity, and possible social venues for cultivating reactionary thought, I commented (datelined November 20, 2009 at 2:24 PM):

'... I understand the concept that the embrace of reactionary fashion may presage the embrace of reactionary sentiments. MM just has to refine his survey a bit... (two paragraphs omitted)

'Finally, one could do worse than to inquire into the lineage societies - at least some of them - and the old, white-tie lodges within the masonic fraternity. Any younger person who has joined such an organization (I speak from personal acquaintance) has already cast his lot with an institution regarded by the bien-pensant as highly politically incorrect, and is therefore swimming against the prevalent left-wing tide. Such people have already embraced not just reactionary fashion, but (at least embryonically) reactionary ideas.'

As for TUJ's later line: "The goat tricycle screams demonic conspiracy. Even more reason for our host to sign up with a Lodge ASAP."

Note that the maker identifies it as paraphernalia for "burlesque and side degrees." I have never been able to identify which ones use or used it. It certainly is not part of the Craft Lodge, the York Rite, or the Scottish Rite, nor of any of the Allied Masonic Degrees. Perhaps we shall have to create one.

I agree that MM, as a self-described Jacobite, ought to belong to the Craft. Elias Ashmole, the first man whose Masonic initiation is recorded with a definite date, was also the first man recorded to have been called a Tory. Jacobitism was a prominent aspect of the early 18th-century English Craft, though it also had its Hanoverian faction.

Freemasonry has historically served a variety of political and social causes, reaction included (e.g., the Gold- und Rosenkreuz of Wöllner and Bischoffswerder). It is amorphous enough to be adapted to many purposes, so why not this one? If it should strike a sinister note with the mobile vulgus, so much the better - and so mote it be.

March 3, 2013 at 8:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The fact that some of you are conflating freemasonry with christian traditions shows you don't know shit about the history of western esoteric traditions. Go read some of the actual academic literature on the tradition, like the SUNY series: http://www.sunypress.edu/searchadv.aspx?issubmit=true&categoryid=7006

These esoteric traditions are about as far away from Christian thought as possible, dabbling in initiation rituals that include left hand path magic and sex magic (see Bogdan's
Western Esotericism and Rituals of Initiation) to being the wellspring for Enlightenment thought (see McIntosh's The Rose Cross and the Age of Reason).

No doubt people like TUJ will dismiss it as "conspiracy theory" as he already has above. But what we do know is that there is solid academic scholarship on the issue with respect to existence of actual cultural practices. The beliefs that these esoteric groups refer to may or may not exist (personally, I don't think they do), but they still engage in sociological and cultural practices that are backed up by serious literature.

March 3, 2013 at 10:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

secret societies are for those nerd faggots that dress up in meddieval clothing and play with swords

its the equivalent of a knitting club but for men

March 3, 2013 at 11:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

@1049
&U know squat on the Christian traditions. And u said "Богдан". Huh. Huh-huh.
The Popish Sauromatian

March 4, 2013 at 6:37 AM  
Anonymous Michael said...

The point I was attempting to make, in a humorous sort of way, is that Freemasonry has always been amorphous enough for those who have wished to use it for their own purposes, to overlay them upon its basic template. The purposes have been as varied as Ashmole's royalism and Toryism, its natural successor Jacobitism in the time of the duke of Wharton, the orthodox Lutheranism of Wöllner and Bischoffswerder in the Prussia of Friedrich Wilhelm II, or on the other hand the Illuminism of Weishaupt, the anticlericalism of the late 19th century Grand Orient of France, and the similar anticlericalism of Freemasonry in many Latin American countries.

If there is any intellectual content in Freemasonry independent of what those who used it for their own purposes overlaid upon it, it is a simplified Neoplatonism and Hermeticism, deriving from the notion of a Divine Architect, as enunciated in the fifth tractate of the Corpus Hermeticum, and more remotely from Plato's Timaeus. When these texts were first translated by Marsilio Ficino in the fifteenth century, he read them in the context of Christianity and attempted to harmonize them with it. Ultimately, the support for the Christian narrative that seemed to be present in the literature of pagan antiquity was used to characterize its authors as "prisci theologi," and their writings as part of a "philosophia perennis" (Steuco's description) of which Christianity was also a part. See for fuller exposition Wouter Hanegraff's "Esotericism and the Academy" (Cambridge University Press, 2012).

If this is syncretism, then so is Christianity itself, which is the intellectual product of a Hellenicized Judaism that was in the process of developing from the worship of a primitive storm god (Yahweh = Jove) with animal sacrifices, into an ethical monotheism, under the influence of Neoplatonism and Stoicism (cf. Philo Judæus). Christianity took this one step further by rejecting the legalism of the Pharisees, with its many arbitrary taboos, replacing them with the New Covenant.

Christianity is not incompatible with the Neoplatonic/Hermetic elements of the Craft, but both Christianity and the Craft are incompatible with the faith of what MM has called "The Cathedral," viz., dumbed-down Epicureanism plus utopianism and antinomianism. As Roger Kimball has written:

"It is significant that the socialist mentality is usually also an atheistic mentality, where atheism is understood not so much as the disbelief in God as the hatred of God... There is an important sense in which religion as traditionally understood reconciles humanity to imperfection and to failure. Since the socialist sets out to abolish failure, traditional religion is worse than de trop; it is an impediment to perfection."

March 4, 2013 at 10:06 AM  
Anonymous josh said...

Secret societies are for those faggot nerds who conquered the world.

http://books.google.com/books/about/Fire_in_the_Minds_of_Men.html?id=saTynFUNPD8C

March 4, 2013 at 12:31 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

I can't think of anyone who suffered less after insanely attacking an opponent vastly, vastly stronger than them and continuing the fight far past any sane hope of victory.

The South bolted the Union because the North refused to expand slavery further West than New Mexico. And the North was right to reject the South's demands because any further transfer of slaves to the West would have brought slave owners into direct conflict with Yankee settlers who were violently opposed to competition with slave labor. California's legislature, for one, had voted unanimously to enter the Union as a free soil state.

Not that I think Buchanan or Lincoln was motivated by mercy or compassion. I feel they were motivated by the fact that they didn't really mind slavery, at all.

Lincoln was at least as racist as the average plantation owner. Abe's plan was to expel almost all of the freed slave population back to a colony in Africa. Rather than fighting a war to free the slaves, Abe's (correct and just) reason for fighting the Confederacy was to block slavery's expansion Westward.

No doubt people like TUJ will dismiss it as "conspiracy theory" as he already has above.

Anonymous, you misunderstood me. I was hoping MM's joining the Masons would generate conspiracy theories. I was not making a value judgement about the worth of the Craft or its connections with Christianity.


Michael,

I agree that MM, as a self-described Jacobite, ought to belong to the Craft. Elias Ashmole, the first man whose Masonic initiation is recorded with a definite date, was also the first man recorded to have been called a Tory.

Wasn't George Washington sworn in as president wearing full Mason regalia?

March 4, 2013 at 9:27 PM  
Blogger Debra said...

Mea culpa, I have not read all the comments...
Considering what many of us think about the mind numbing capacities of the Internet, many of you will perhaps forgive me ?...
On the virility question...
A month ago, I got a nostalgic urge to play Adam and Eve before the fall up in our local mountains, and thought I had perhaps found a willing candidate. (No shopping on my part. I am not a shopper.)
Should I say that I wanted to play Eve ? (I am a woman...)
But I don't know if I was looking for Adam, or rather... a reincarnation of Jim Corbett, born and raised in the jungle in India, to English parents at the turn of the twentieth century. (Before anybody starts ranting about colonialism, look up Corbett's books about hunting man eating tigers and leopards, but not just hunting stories, either.)
Where is... Adam ?
Where does a respectable Eve find.. a Jim Corbett ??
(Needless to say, the candidate in question did not fill the bill. He was, unfortunately, a watered down version of what the bourgeoisie has turned a MAN into... Disneyland music in the background..)
So.. I hope you realize that talking like this does not make me get all starry eyed over the prospect of getting knocked down and dragged around by my hair ?... (and raped, needless to say..)
Na. I would settle for a little.. seduction... some sophistication ? a man who is confidant in his capacities as a man ?
....
Here in France, American colonization has received dizzying new... lows.
Sickening, how the OLD WORLD manages to pull down its pants to be beaten with rods by the NEW.

By the way, Paris last week was a shock. Misery is definitely on the rise. Exponentially... In the country that gave the world the French revolution ?...
Dangerous... the French have a talent for bending under the yoke for an inordinate period of time before breaking and exploding in cataclysmic destruction. Dixit Tocqueville...

March 5, 2013 at 1:22 AM  
Anonymous Rollory said...

Debra: mon cousin à Paris allait ouvrir un petit garage / réparations autos avec un copain. Un jour, la femme du copain lui dit: J'en ai marre d'être mariée, c'est emmerdant! J'veux un divorce! Alors, hop, fini les projêts mécaniques, tout l'argent pour les avocats. Même histoire exacte pour plusieurs copains mariés (et maintenant divorcés) que j'ai ici de l'autre coté de l'Atlantique. Entre-temps, le cousin parisien travaille sans cesse, sans pour autant trouver un endroit stable. D'après notre grand-mère, il voudrait bien se marier mais ne se sent pas capable d'offrir une vie stable a qui soit ... donc il attend. Ma soeur me dit, je voudrais bien me marier, mais il ne veulent que parler de jeux d'ordinateurs! Je dis a ma soeur, je voudrais bien me marier, mais impossible d'en trouver autre que dans un nuage d'alcool!

Facon de dire, vous n'êtes pas seule.

March 5, 2013 at 7:31 AM  
Anonymous Rollory said...

"The South bolted the Union because the North refused to expand slavery further West than New Mexico"

This is an obfuscation of the underlying issues. The South bolted the Union because the restrictions on expanding slavery into new territories were seen, in light of the northern abolitionists' rhetoric, to be a preliminary step in breaking the balance of power in the Senate between the two factions, which in turn would permit further abolitionist legislation to be passed, with an eye toward eventually imposing abolition on the South.

The South was not wrong to suspect this.

The South lost confidence that the government would continue to represent the South's will. The South was not wrong about this either.

The PROXIMATE cause was slavery. The underlying cause was that the North was determined to impose its will on the South, at any cost. Which it did.

March 5, 2013 at 7:31 AM  
Anonymous Michael said...

TUJ wrote: "Wasn't George Washington sworn in as president wearing full Mason regalia?"

No, you are confusing two separate events.

Washington took the oath of office as president in 1791 using the lodge bible of St. John's Lodge No. 1 of New York. The bible was lent for the occasion. Washington was not wearing Masonic regalia at the time.

The well-known images of Washington in Masonic regalia originate either from a later event, the laying of the cornerstone of the U.S. Capitol building in 1793, or from the portrait painted of him as the charter master of Alexandria Lodge No. 22 in Virginia in 1794 .

March 5, 2013 at 11:13 AM  
Anonymous Reactor said...

Despite its elitist tendencies and hierarchical structures, Freemasonry is arguably inherently progressivist. It appears to subscribe to liberationist notions of personal and social illumination, now expressed in mystical terms, now in technocratic ones.

In countries where the Roman Catholic Church has been successfully marginalised post-Reformation, it tends to take on a conservative 'establishment' cast; in countries where the Roman Church maintains a degree of cultural hegemony, it assumes a more revolutionary character.

(Any doubts about its demonic provenance are laid to rest by the Shriner Clowns.)

March 5, 2013 at 2:32 PM  
Anonymous Michael said...

Reactor, "secret" societies are as old as human civilisation and are found all around the world. Cicero speaks of his initiation into the Eleusinan mysteries with the fondness of an old freemason on the occasion of being presented his 50-year pin by the Worshipful Master. Plus ça change... I do not think a particular ideology can be uniformly associated with any of these secret, or better, initiatic societies. Perhaps humans, and especially males, are hard-wired for them in the same way they are for religion.

To the best modern scholarly knowledge (Prof. David Stevenson's work on the origins of freemasonry), the modern "speculative" craft arose out of trade guilds of masons in Scotland, who had always had aristocratic patrons, but whose economic existence was being threatened by Calvinist iconoclasm.

Their reaction to this was to accept more members from the class of gentlemen, and they became in time refuges for crypto-Catholics and adherents of the efforts of Charles I and Archbishop Laud to introduce episcopacy and high-church, "popish" practices into the worship of the Scottish church.

It continued in the royalist-Anglican cause during the Cromwell interregnum. An important and little-realized early international branching of the Craft occurred into Sweden at this time, and was associated with the Swedish Queen Christina's efforts to aid the restoration of Charles II.

After the Restoration, Ashmole was associated with the Tories - the term originally applying to those who favored the succession of the duke of York (later James II). The substantial Jacobite faction in the Craft, represented by such as the Chevalier Ramsay in the eighteenth century, continued their loyalty to the Stuarts and in many cases to Catholicism.

The long-standing antipathy of the Church of Rome to the Craft began only in 1733 with the fulmination of the first bull against it, "In eminenti." While as in many other things, the Church always theologizes its objections to something, the real reason for the bull was to suppress a Jacobite lodge in Florence, which had been organized by British expatriates. The Church of course officially supported the Stuarts, but active Jacobitism in the Papal States posed a problem in secular politics that the Curia were eager to avoid.

There is no record of a speculative Freemasonry in Catholic Europe before the Reformation, and indeed the present-day Craft retains some aspects of a pre-reformation religious confraternity (e.g., the dedication of Craft lodges to "the Holy Saints John" - St. John the Baptist, whose feast is June 24, and St. John the Evangelist, whose feast is December 27. The dedication of a guild to a saint is very ancient, and of churches to a major and a minor patron, with feast days as nearly antipodal in the calendar, is also an ancient practice.

My point about Masonic "politics" is that the basic template of the Craft is sufficiently amorphous and flexible that people who wish to appropriate it for their own uses can do so, putting it to the purpose of their choice.

The Roman Church maintained no "cultural hegemony" throughout north Germsny, yet there were, during the late 18th century, essentially two Masonic allegiances with opposed points of view - the Gold- und Rosenkreuz and the Illuminati. How does that fit your explanation?

Similarly, the Lodge "Propaganda Due" in Italy, a country in which the Roman Church maintains a high degree of cultural hegemony, was not a left-wing "revolutionary" institution, but one to which pillars of society, members of the "democristiani," prelates, and big businessmen belonged. It was strongly opposed to Marxism and socialism. How does that fit your explanation?

March 5, 2013 at 4:21 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

This is an obfuscation of the underlying issues. The South bolted the Union because the restrictions on expanding slavery into new territories were seen, in light of the northern abolitionists' rhetoric, to be a preliminary step in breaking the balance of power in the Senate between the two factions, which in turn would permit further abolitionist legislation to be passed, with an eye toward eventually imposing abolition on the South.

Nonsense.

Lincoln and the North offered to neutralize whatever threat abolitionists posed from the Senate by enshrining Southern slavery in the US constitution provided the South gave up further claims to expand slavery Westward.

As an extra sweetener the North said it would allow the New Mexico territory to enter as a slave state and, a consequence, award the slave bloc two extra Senators.

The South had no reason to bolt the Union if the North was willing to give serious legal guarantees to preserve slavery for as long as the South wished - a deal the South stupidly rejected - unless the South wanted to break out of the Union to expand the slave trade.

March 5, 2013 at 9:14 PM  
Blogger Debra said...

Do you people ever wonder how our formulations "The North thought", "the South believed" subtely color our understanding of processes that involve a myriad of individual actors, chance, etc, that we reduce to, and resume under a single substantive (somewhat like what Adolph does in "Mein Kampf" when talking about Austria and Germany...) ?
Does anybody but me ever get the impression that the words have run away with us, and are now.. amok ?
I wish that they were sugar plums dancing in my head, but these days... they definitely have very little poetry, and even less taste.
Just how crunchy can "the North" get ??...
To be stubborn.. I still vote for "Beowulf" over even the modern neo paganism.
Think about it... in those days the heroes were buried with their treasure... talk about sending idolatry of filthy lucre spinning on its head...
I believe that in (our) revolutionary times, words get pitched against each other as though they were swords.
Think about...
hearts vs minds...
There's an abstract war for you.
As though people with hearts had no minds, and vice versa.
Somebody with a heart AND a mind (God, we definitely need more of those...) can figure out how opposing one to another turns us into ectoplasmic REACTionaries, or cold blooded calculators only interested in self advancement.
How about if we step away from the fray a little bit ?
Take a few deep breaths ?
Chew our food and really taste it ?

March 6, 2013 at 6:29 AM  
Anonymous Multiheaded said...

To the anon from 22.02: this is Multiheaded from lesswrong. I haven't commented here or anywhere on the recent several posts (finding them not very interesting), but it's cute and amusing that I have haters now. Check out my demented Jacobinist ravings in the comments elsewhere, instead

http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/03/04/a-thrivesurvive-theory-of-the-political-spectrum/#comments

March 6, 2013 at 7:02 AM  
Anonymous Multiheaded said...

Wait, oh wow - is that, like, some literal Nazis above? I'm not surprised by common fascists anymore, but actual highbrow European Nazism on the internet, shit, man.

March 6, 2013 at 7:15 AM  
Anonymous Rollory said...

"The South had no reason to bolt the Union if the North was willing to give serious legal guarantees to preserve slavery"

IF slavery was the underlying issue.

Which it was not.

It was the OCCASION of the dispute. It was not the dispute itself. That was simply the fact that one political entity contained within it two distinct peoples, one of which was coming to the decision that it did not wish to be associated with or answerable to the other, for a variety of reasons. Attempting reconciliation over this one point - last-minute reconciliation, as a tactic in the face of visible determination - would have been superficial and not addressed the underlying differences.

The war was not a "civil" war, as has been seen in any of a number of European nations; it was a conflict between two geographically identifiable areas with distinct populations. Two different nations, of different origins - Occidental Dissent has quite a number of posts on the different.

March 6, 2013 at 8:55 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re The 1861-1865 war in North America.

It was named the "War of Secession" in commie textbooks. The Popish Sauromatian.

March 6, 2013 at 9:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Moldberg, you gotta see this:
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2020491683_schooldisciplinexml.html

From the comments:

Many of my black students would repeat themselves over and over again -- just louder. It was as if they suffered from Tourette syndrome. They seemed to have no conception of waiting for an appropriate time to say something. They would get ideas in their heads and simply had to shout them out. I might be leading a discussion on government and suddenly be interrupted: "We gotta get more Democrats! Clinton, she good!" The student may seem content with that outburst but two minutes later, he would suddenly start yelling again: "Clinton good!"

Anyone who is around young blacks will probably get a constant diet of rap music. Blacks often make up their own jingles, and it was not uncommon for 15 black boys to swagger into a classroom, bouncing their shoulders and jiving back.

They were yelling back and forth, rapping 15 different sets of words in the same harsh, rasping dialect. The words were almost invariably a childish form of boasting: "Who got dem shine rim, who got dem shine shoe, who got dem shine grill (gold and silver dental caps)?" The amateur rapper usually ends with a claim--in the crudest terms imaginable -- that all womankind is sexually devoted to him. For whatever reason, my students would often groan instead of saying a particular word, as in, "She suck dat aaahhhh (think of a long grinding groan), she f**k dat aaaahhhh, she lick dat aaaahhh."

March 6, 2013 at 4:57 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

They were yelling back and forth, rapping 15 different sets of words in the same harsh, rasping dialect.

I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And in as much as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.

Abraham Lincoln ~ September 18, 1858

March 6, 2013 at 7:41 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

That was simply the fact that one political entity contained within it two distinct peoples, one of which was coming to the decision that it did not wish to be associated with or answerable to the other, for a variety of reasons.

The Confederate Party wanted to encroach on Western territory that was already occupied by free soil whites who, as demonstrated in Bleeding Kansas, were violently opposed to competing with slave labor.

I have no doubt the Jacksonians and Jeffersonian Confederates worked themselves into such an ideological frenzy about states rights that, by the start of the war, they had convinced themselves they were fighting for God-given constitutional principles. But the fact remains none of their actions make sense unless they were planning to force slavery Westward and against the wishes of the residing free soilers. And all this unnecessary conflict over an economic system the South was going to replace with mechanized industry within a matter of decades.

March 6, 2013 at 7:48 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

It was named the "War of Secession" in commie textbooks.

I prefer to call it the Unification War because it bears an eery resemblance to the Austro-Prussian war of 1866.

March 6, 2013 at 7:50 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

The well-known images of Washington in Masonic regalia originate either from a later event, the laying of the cornerstone of the U.S. Capitol building in 1793, or from the portrait painted of him as the charter master of Alexandria Lodge No. 22 in Virginia in 1794 .

If Washington laid the cornerstone of the Capitol building in full ceremonial Mason-ware then that would go a long ways towards explaining how the US has fallen ass backwards into world domination with such questionable leadership - The Stone protects idiots, drunkards, children and the United States of America.

The idea of a Masonic Moldbug is looking ever more intriguing...

March 6, 2013 at 8:00 PM  
OpenID mukatsuku said...

Masonic Moldbug? Didn't Moldbug say that winning requires winning over the most fashionable elites? Nothing better for that than a secret society.

If Peter Thiel joined the Jacobite cause, a good place to start spending money would be in founding a secret Jacobite society at Stanford.

No need to build the society slowly over the years - tap Stanford alumni of all years as speedily as is prudent.

Then repeat in the Northeast.

March 7, 2013 at 1:45 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I prefer to call it the Unification War because it bears an eery resemblance to the Austro-Prussian war of 1866.

Other than being fought in the same decade by people of mainly germanic extraction, the similarities are that what?

The popish Sauromatian

March 7, 2013 at 6:33 AM  
Anonymous Reactor said...

Michael:

"secret" societies are as old as human civilisation and are found all around the world. ... I do not think a particular ideology can be uniformly associated with any of these secret, or better, initiatic societies.

That may well be true but Freemasonry is not 'secret societies' or 'initiatic societies'. It is a specific family of such societies with a distinct family resemblance.

To the best modern scholarly knowledge (Prof. David Stevenson's work on the origins of freemasonry), the modern "speculative" craft arose out of trade guilds of masons in Scotland, who had always had aristocratic patrons, but whose economic existence was being threatened by Calvinist iconoclasm.

As with so much about the 'Craft', research into the origins of Freemasonry very quickly land one in a quicksand of claim and counter-claim. This sort of mare's nest is a standard occult m.o.: "Nothing is concealed -- from those who know!"

The long-standing antipathy of the Church of Rome to the Craft began only in 1733 with the fulmination of the first bull against it, "In eminenti." While as in many other things, the Church always theologizes its objections to something, the real reason for the bull was to suppress a Jacobite lodge in Florence, which had been organized by British expatriates. The Church of course officially supported the Stuarts, but active Jacobitism in the Papal States posed a problem in secular politics that the Curia were eager to avoid. ... My point about Masonic "politics" is that the basic template of the Craft is sufficiently amorphous and flexible that people who wish to appropriate it for their own uses can do so, putting it to the purpose of their choice.

Whatever the occasion of the original condemnation, it was repeated and amplified by numerous subsequent popes who vehemently denounced Masonry's essentially ant-Christian character.

The Roman Church maintained no "cultural hegemony" throughout north Germsny, yet there were, during the late 18th century, essentially two Masonic allegiances with opposed points of view - the Gold- und Rosenkreuz and the Illuminati. How does that fit your explanation?

Similarly, the Lodge "Propaganda Due" in Italy, a country in which the Roman Church maintains a high degree of cultural hegemony, was not a left-wing "revolutionary" institution, but one to which pillars of society, members of the "democristiani," prelates, and big businessmen belonged. It was strongly opposed to Marxism and socialism. How does that fit your explanation?


My "theory" was, I concede, a gross oversimplification. (I was thinking in part of the contrast between U.G.L.E. and the French Grand Orient.) Yes, the relations between Church, state and Lodge extend over a considerable span of time and space; one should be cautious of over-schematic generalisations.

That said, my point was that generic terms like 'left' and 'right', 'progressive' and 'reactionary', 'revolutionary' and 'conservative' are of limited applicability in this context. If by the 'right' one merely means hieratic ceremonial, the vagaries of political allegiance or even a principled belief in 'order', then one can certainly find plenty examples of 'right-wing' Masonry. The same could be said of occultism in general. But much of the discussion on this thread has been speculation about Mr Moldbug's attitude towards Christianity. Viewed through a Christian lens, the true 'right' are none other than those who owe allegiance to Christ the King against the would-be Usurper, and from that perspective Masonry stands condemned. A motto like Ordo ab chao counts for nothing against the blasphemous lèse-majesté of Igne Natura Renovatur Integra.

March 7, 2013 at 12:07 PM  
Anonymous Michael said...

Reactor -You are imputing a set of philosophical and theological beliefs to Freemasonry that a great many Freemasons would neither recognize in their experience of the Craft, nor would they personally accept. If Freemasonry "viewed through a Christian lens... stands condemned", that would come as a great surprise to Christian members of the York Rite, and to those of the Royal Order of Scotland or the S.R.I.C.F., which require that candidates for their degrees be Trinitarian Christians.

The final sentence of your post suggests that you have spent rather too much time with "Morals and Dogma" to the expense of other and better guides to the Craft. Both the mottoes you quote are specifically associated with the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, and in particular with Gen. Albert Pike's redaction of its degrees. The Scottish Rite is not all there is to Freemasonry, nor does it exercise control over the Craft. It is an appendant body to which the vast majority of Freemasons do not belong, No regular grand lodge, including U.G.L.E., is in amity with any lodge or grand lodge that recognizes the higher authority of a Supreme Council of the A.A.S.R.

Pike was fascinated with the study of what today would be called "comparative religion" and to some extent used its degrees, which he largely re-wrote, as a blank slate to propound lessons on the subject. As a consequence, "Morals and Dogma" has perhaps been more extensively studied by anti-Masons than by the newly-minted brethren of the Scottish Rite Southern Jurisdiction who used to be presented with copies of the book (a practice that ceased perhaps fifty years ago). Indeed, not content with ransacking it for quotations that can be used out of context in an unfavorable light, various mischievous persons have forged them. The Taxil hoax of the late 19th century is still taking in the ignorant and unwitting more than a century after the hoaxer's self-exposure.

"Igne natura renovatur integra" is an alchemical mnemonic and originally had nothing to do with Freemasonry. I have read a Christian exposition of it tied to the Apostles' Creed, wherein it is said of Christ that "He descended into hell; The third day he rose again from the dead: He ascended into heaven, And sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty..."

March 7, 2013 at 2:03 PM  
Anonymous Firepower said...

Current humanity needs not a surgeon - but an enema - then an executioner.

March 7, 2013 at 5:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Scottish Rite is not all there is to Freemasonry, nor does it exercise control over the Craft. It is an appendant body to which the vast majority of Freemasons do not belong, No regular grand lodge, including U.G.L.E., is in amity with any lodge or grand lodge that recognizes the higher authority of a Supreme Council of the A.A.S.R.

If the craft has hardly any hierarchy to it, then why are you even suggesting it? Above you are stating it can be used for some vague purpose for the far right (dressed up with intellectual faggotry), yet on the other hand you are stating it is culturally amorphous. So which is it? What makes you think your faggot secret dress-up LARP club from a couple of hundred years ago can compete with the likes of the military-industrial complex, the cathedral, and transnational corporations? Please answer this question without recourse to the furtive fallacy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furtive_fallacy).

March 8, 2013 at 1:43 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Secret societies are for those faggot nerds who conquered the world.

freemasons confirmed for the christian version of bronies and larp'ers

LIGHTENING BOLT

LIGHTENING BOLT

March 8, 2013 at 1:46 AM  
Anonymous Michael said...

Anonymous, the suggestion I made was only in response to another post and was rather light-hearted in intent, so why all the vituperation?

Lodges, clubs, and societies have always appealed to elites or would-be elites. It is logical for any group seeking to alter the existing order (in whatever way) to make use of such entities for its purposes, and the truth of this is shown by the many instances in which they have.

I am not saying that there is no hierarchy in Freemasonry, only that the Southern Jurisdiction of the AASR is not at the top of it, as many anti-Masons like to claim, and never has been. If you study the subject even cursorily you will find this to be the case. The amorphousness of the Craft, certainly in English-speaking countries, is precisely what makes it potentially useful as a venue for the purpose proposed. It has lodge buildings, bank accounts, and an aging membership that might welcome an influx of younger candidates - it is ripe for the application of a strategy of entrisme by traditionalists.

Arguably the Craft's politico-social amorphousness is evident even in France, where one may contrast the Grand Orient, the French Supreme Council of the A. & A. R., the Grand Loge de France, and the Grand Loge National de France - all of them, except for the G.L.N.F., "irregular" in the view of the U.G.L.E. and the American grand lodges. Each has a very distinct character unlike the others.

March 8, 2013 at 4:31 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

@michael

I'm not the douchebag above, but how would a young traditionalist like myself even get into these groups? Aren't they prima facie secretive?

March 8, 2013 at 6:24 AM  
Anonymous Michael said...

You will never be asked - you have to ask "of your own free will and accord." You might have to ask three times in some grand lodge jurisdictions. As for being "secretive," I am not sure how secretive any entity listed in the telephone book is. There are even websites like that of the Masonic Restoration Foundation.

The description of "secret society" creates certain impressions, yet the existence of many such organizations is as widely known as that of numerous businesses, associations, clubs, etc. The meetings are private. So, of course, are the meetings of corporate boards, charity boards, etc., and no one characterizes them as "secret."

March 8, 2013 at 8:31 AM  
Anonymous Michael said...

And as for Anon. No. 1, who wrote: "What makes you think your faggot secret dress-up LARP club from a couple of hundred years ago can compete with the likes of the military-industrial complex, the cathedral, and transnational corporations?"

How do you suppose the "Cathedral" got to be what it is today? It is, after all, a rather recent phenomenon. While MM has described its older intellectual roots, he identifies it as manifesting itself in a recognizable form no earlier than FDR's time.

Secular universalism, or whatever you choose to call it, made a Gramscian march through certain institutions, taking over each one as it became able. How can it be countered? By a similar effort in an opposite direction. Take the institutions it is possible to take. They won't necessarily be the same ones, nor may many of them seem very significant - but neither did some of those taken by the secular universalists at the time it was. Each one counts toward a cumulative total.

The lodges and lineage societies are institutions created by the old optimate faction. The brahmins left them alone because they did not think they could take them, nor felt that they needed them. Why not pick up what you easily can do? Better to have something than nothing.

I agree with Pareto that all politics boils down to a conflict between one elite and another. Hope lies in attracting an elite sympathetic to your cause, and hiving off dissatisfied or less-than-committed members of the rival elite who may give you help. Thus did the left come to dominate the culture, one museum or orchestra or library board at a time. They knew that the longest journey begins with the first step, and that is a lesson anyone opposing them must take to hearty.

March 8, 2013 at 8:54 AM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

Other than being fought in the same decade by people of mainly germanic extraction, the similarities are that what?

* Both wars featured contests between a Northern conservative power fighting a Southern conservative power. In Europe, the two conservative forces were Wilhelmine Prussia an Hapsburg Austria.

* In both cases, the respective Northern partisans won over the Southern ones.

* The Northern powers owed their victory in large measure to their superior level of industrialization (although cosmopolitan Austria put up a much less impressive fight than the agrarian CSA).

* Like the US Civil War, the contest revolved around what to do with Western territories.

* Both Northern powers favored a peace led by a stronger, pro-Industrial centralized government than what the Southern factions supported.

* The end of the wars resulted in the US South and Austria playing second fiddle to their Northern enemies heading into the 20th century. Likewise, the Northern powers achieved political hegemony in their realms.

March 8, 2013 at 8:48 PM  
Blogger Debra said...

I hesitate to publicize this particulalry unsavory anecdotic tidbit, but two days ago I heard over our national radio that a New York American woman university professor publicly decreed that opera was dead, and that the Zeitgeist leaned toward telereality...

I think that this particularly nasty piece of business is related to what we are discussing, and to Mencius Moldbug's.. nostalgia ?

How about a war of the worlds ? Between the Old and the New ? A war for hearts and minds, once again ?

Is opera elitist ? Reserved for the people wearing expensively crafted gowns and tuxedos ?

If opera is elitist, then how come my kids and I went often, paying less money than our less... fortunate ? motivated ? neighbors spent in the local cinemas, to sit in the upper tiers, and get an education, and some culture to boot ?

We are tired of having our elite noses rubbed in what remains of Old World culture, by a group of obnoxious people with a deep seated inferiority complex, riddled by subtle forms of... voluntary servitude, with no sense of appreciation, and no sense of shame, either.

We are also tired of watching our beautiful culture pimped by woeful "elites" intent on seducing... "the people" by watering it down, shitting on it, making it ugly to be "relevant" and to appeal to the masses.

As for the return of Christ the King...
Na.
I was fortunate enough to participate in the American Masonic institution of Job's Daughters, in Utah, one of the few states that excludes.. Mormons, not Catholics, from membership. (Utah, one of the only places in the world where a Jew can be a Gentile...). Great ritual. Great ideals for a woman. Great.. paganism, attached to Old Testament roots, and poetry.

Secret societies implicitly attack democratic transparency, just as they once were an affront to a totalitarian Church's domination...

Anything secret is an affront to modern "democratic" transparency.

That said, I believe that it is probably dangerous to make generalizations about Freemasonry, as every country's Freemasonry is probably tied to the historical circumstances in which it constituted itself in opposition to mainstream political and intellectual power.



March 9, 2013 at 1:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A short old-style battlefield-decided war, with superior battle prowess carrying the day, vs. the first modern Totalenkrieg decided through economic superiority, the Secession aspect completely absent in the Fraternal War, the junkerkaste counterpart in the Secession war fighting on the confederate side.

No, really I do not see it.
The Popish Sauromatian

March 9, 2013 at 8:36 AM  
Anonymous RS said...

'headed, I don't know why people want to hound you off here ; yours is a horrifying but rather independent mind.

I don't buy your Mark Twain/ Robespierre boo hoo, or Great Liberation by Hearing at the knee of the old hard left. It may be sincere at some level -- as a freudian or Freud student you can hardly take any more offense at that than a Nietzsche student could -- but it's probably the same ol rationale for Jewish power.

I am (A.) anti-dysgenic. --(B.) Even beyond the scope of my own volk. This I call integrity. And this I call not destroying our Europa, and Man at large.

I don't see how you can call either A. or B. deeply 'leftist' or 'rightist', nor do I see how you can fail to prioritize them above most of the stuff you talk about most, if you call yourself an honest thinker.

I believe we may have kampfed it up before. I admit I had a decent time. I like you and look forward to grappling with you on lofty philosophick zeniths far above 'left' and 'right'. OK, largely above. As always I acknowledge that the two predicates do have some meaning.

March 9, 2013 at 9:15 AM  
Anonymous RS said...

The whole shebang from Yvain looks pretty damn interesting. But, I'm off to pump iron to Das Rheingold for right now, have fun kiddos.

March 9, 2013 at 9:20 AM  
Anonymous RS said...

What are YOU doing about fruitless chauvinism, Headed? Seems like you, TUJ, and MM are doing less than I and Auster and to some extent Jim. And nor do you come off as the best of the three. In the jiiingo-jango mornin' I'll come following you. Into another fallow century, however irrigated or bloodless... in any case fallow.

I admire the comparison you and Yvain have together brewed up: the comparison between 'amygdaline' rightist states/empires and unfriendly AI... well worth thinking about. I've entertained certain distantly related thoughts. I'm sure I will come out to play on Yvain's counter-reaction post, if not sooner.

March 9, 2013 at 12:17 PM  
Anonymous Reactor said...

Anon:

"What makes you think your faggot secret dress-up LARP club from a couple of hundred years ago can compete with the likes of the military-industrial complex, the cathedral, and transnational corporations? "

According to one narrative, the Freemasons were the original architects of the Cathedral. That's the problem.

Debra:

"As for the return of Christ the King...
Na."

Yep. Clouds of glory, white horse, big fuckoff sword, the works.

"I was fortunate enough to participate in the American Masonic institution of Job's Daughters. Great ritual. Great ideals for a woman."

Lousy website though. What is it with these people? You'd think the secret masters of the world would have a less shitty online presence.

Don't get me wrong -- it's good to see the Brethren encouraging the ladies to take a part in the proceedings ... but I fear you'll always come second in their affections though.

"Great.. paganism, attached to Old Testament roots"

Was it the standard-issue Masonic solar phallic symbolism? As I recall, the God of the OT took a dim view of such goings-on.

"Secret societies implicitly attack democratic transparency, just as they once were an affront to a totalitarian Church's domination...

Anything secret is an affront to modern "democratic" transparency."

Masonic secrecy is only an "affront" to democratic transparency if you assume democratic transparency is anything other than a sham.

As for a "totalitarian Church", it might be that the best antidote to the Cathedral is a cathedral.





text or graphic image

March 9, 2013 at 3:47 PM  
Blogger Mitchell said...

My idiot self-made notion of the secret history of the modern state, extrapolated from Robert Anton Wilson, was that Freemasonry was an anti-Catholic conspiracy, and republican democracy (in America and perhaps in France too) was its political manifestation, an attempt to throw off the rule of Catholic kings. Someone help me purge this idea from my mind by telling me how wrong it is, and why.

March 9, 2013 at 7:42 PM  
Blogger Debra said...

Ah... but were the Kings truly Catholic ?
I have made it about three quarters of the way through Jacques Barzun's "From Dawn to Decadence", where it appears that, contrary to our current misperceptions, the rise of the modern.. monarchy came about through ground wrenched away from the medieval Church...
Already under Philippe le Bel, in France, (1285-1314), the monarchy attacks Church power and authority, and wrests power (and money...) from it, thus considerably weakening its legitimacy.
So... by the time the Revolution rolls around in 1789, the much hated Catholic Church has been dominated by... the monarchy for quite some time.
Interesting how "we" really don't want to know this, don't you think ?

Something else that is very interesting. Our STILL current obstination in referring to the almost 1000 years when the Church was not a figurehead of the monarchy as the "Middle Ages", and lumping together a period of great cultural and political diversity.. WHY, oh why have we not taken this period out of the.. LITTLE BOX called "the Middle Ages" ? Could this have something to do with our still current blindness due to our overburdening debt to Renaissance ideology, as a prelude to the Enlightenment experiment ?...

On Masonic ritual... you know, it's a little bit like dancing the tango. IF... you are content to read books, watch films, about tango, then you will get a very EDUCATIONAL viewpoint about the tango. But.. YOU will not be dancing it. You will be getting your rocks off watching somebody else do it.
American/current occidental culture is devoted to convincing us that watching somebody else do it, and doing it ourselves can be.. equal.
Maybe. Maybe not, though... Hard to tell.
When you are wearing those beautiful costumes, doing the intricate footwork, singing the beautiful music, it's ten million times better than typing about it with two fingers over the Internet. Right ?
Isn't that what this blog is paradoxically about ?

As for the battle of the sexes... Sorry, but I am not at war. I can afford the luxury of not being at war..
Other people could, too, if they thought about it a little bit more.

Na, democratic transparency is not a sham.
Unfortunately... if it were a sham, then I would not be shitting in my pants with fear about just how transparent we can make our "democratic" world with the new technologies...

The blind spot of most cynics is in not understanding how other people can be believers. Logical.

And yes, the antidote for the Cathedral will probably be... another Cathedral.

Go pull out Ecclesiastes for some consolation...

March 10, 2013 at 3:42 AM  
Anonymous Reactor said...

Mitchell:

My idiot self-made notion of the secret history of the modern state, extrapolated from Robert Anton Wilson, was that Freemasonry was an anti-Catholic conspiracy, and republican democracy (in America and perhaps in France too) was its political manifestation, an attempt to throw off the rule of Catholic kings. Someone help me purge this idea from my mind by telling me how wrong it is, and why

No.

March 10, 2013 at 5:06 PM  
Anonymous Reactor said...

Debra:

Ah... but were the Kings truly Catholic ?
... it appears that, contrary to our current misperceptions, the rise of the modern.. monarchy came about through ground wrenched away from the medieval Church... the monarchy attacks Church power and authority, and wrests power (and money...) from it, thus considerably weakening its legitimacy.
So... by the time the Revolution rolls around in 1789, the much hated Catholic Church has been dominated by... the monarchy for quite some time.
Interesting how "we" really don't want to know this, don't you think ?


Mais bien sûr! As the Mystical Body of Christ, the Church's life on Earth must mirror that of her divine Master in every particular, including the Passion. How could it be otherwise? One sometimes feels those traditionalist Catholics who dream of an ecclesiastical restoration come perilously close to crying "if thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross!" But even those who give credence to the prophecies of the Great Monarch who will restore Christendom acknowledge it will be a temporary respite, a brief period of grace before the final apostasy and rise of the Antichrist.

Tolkien said that, for a Catholic, history could only ever be understood and experienced as one long defeat. After all, only a progressive could be so irredeemably vulgar as to desire to be on the winning side of history. I would venture to say it's only this necessary awareness that makes it possible for even so devastating an ironist as Mr Moldbug to become a Christian.

On Masonic ritual... you know, it's a little bit like dancing the tango. IF... you are content to read books, watch films, about tango, then you will get a very EDUCATIONAL viewpoint about the tango. But.. YOU will not be dancing it. You will be getting your rocks off watching somebody else do it.
American/current occidental culture is devoted to convincing us that watching somebody else do it, and doing it ourselves can be.. equal. ...When you are wearing those beautiful costumes, doing the intricate footwork, singing the beautiful music, it's ten million times better than typing about it with two fingers over the Internet. Right ?


Right, although I can't quite shake the belief that you can always judge a book by its cover. And I confess I find Freemasonry has a really creepy cover.

Na, democratic transparency is not a sham.
Unfortunately... if it were a sham, then I would not be shitting in my pants with fear about just how transparent we can make our "democratic" world with the new technologies...


Forgive me, I misunderstood what you meant by "transparency". Yes, in that sense democracy is transparent, the corona of a solar eclipse shining around a dark centre. No need to shit yourself though.

The blind spot of most cynics is in not understanding how other people can be believers.

Reminds me of a bit of dialogue from "Videodrome":

- What you see on that show, it's for real. It's not acting. It's snuff TV.

- I don't believe it.

- So don't believe.

- Why do it for real? It's easier and safer to fake it.

- Because it has something that you don't have. It has a philosophy. And that is what makes it dangerous.

Mind you, cynicism has its advantages. In his excellent essay on Maistre, EM Cioran says the ultimate despair of the leftist is to do battle in the name of principles that forbid him cynicism.

Go pull out Ecclesiastes for some consolation...

Or perhaps:

"The wrath of the Lord shall not return till he execute it, and till he accomplish the thought of his heart: in the latter days you shall understand his counsel."

March 10, 2013 at 5:10 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

My comment about the Austro-Prussian war was tragically devoured by a rogue Google algorithm. I will recreate it tomorrow. But for now, I must say I'm heartened by the hysteria caused by the mere mention of Free Masonry. This is all the more reason for Maximum Leader to sign up at a Lodge.

March 10, 2013 at 8:58 PM  
Anonymous Rollory said...

This thread has gotten pretty far away from Auster.

Whiskey, for reasons best known to Svigor, has decided not to approve the comment I made on his pre-eulogy post. So I am putting it here.

--

"On a personal level, Larry has always been in correspondence, kind and gracious. "

You’ve clearly never had occasion to disagree with him on any matter of substance. He can be the most hypocritical, insulting, ad hominem SOB you ever saw in your life - and pointing this out is, in his eyes, an insufferable insult to his dignity.

It’s ok for HIM to fling around the most baseless and nasty accusations he can think of, but nobody is allowed to reciprocate. Most recent example when he posted the photo of Susan Rice -an ordinary-looking black woman, not so different from a middle school English teacher I had - and then wrote an entire piece on how it was obvious from her face that she had dedicated herself to evil. This is simple total nonsense. It would be just as easy to post any of the multiple photos of Auster taken over the past few years and point out how it is the face of a brutish thug given over to dissipation and cruelty - actually there would be rather more evidence to support that, in the heavy jowls, the downward-turning mouth, and so on.

Auster is one of the biggest hypocrites this planet has ever seen, and for all the truth he HAS spoken, it’s not clear it outweighs the falsehoods.

March 11, 2013 at 9:06 AM  
Anonymous Rollory said...

I should also note that I find it very indicative that Auster sees Moldbug's lack of reaction to his vicious criticism of Moldbug's writing to be some sort of positive sign. To Auster, using against others precisely the sort of viciously insulting language ("incapable of sincerity", "hopelessly confused", "drunkenly infatuated", "as a writer is unreadable and worthless") Auster would consider absolutely beyond the pale when applied to his own august self is just his natural privilege; that Moldbug doesn't react one way or another to it is, to Auster, a sign of Moldbug's inherent goodness and willingness to accept instruction. ("I ... corrected them, sir." - The Shining) To any other third party observer, it is a sign that Moldbug doesn't give a flip what Auster thinks about his writing style and will continue to write in the manner he, Moldbug, deems best. Auster is incapable of imagining this.

It also reminds me of the time when Auster went into excessive minute detail discussing every single one of John Derbyshire's personal failings. Derb, being Derb, noted it in a passing dismissive sentence, without changing any of his positions or attitudes. Auster then wrote a whole post about how Derbyshire was admitting that he, Auster, had utterly defeated him and was completely surrendering. It's like the nerd being given a put-down by the popular kid and then spouting off a long-winded answer; the nerd thinks he's won, but it's only in his head.

Auster is absolutely lacking in some sort of basic social wiring. He really doesn't understand that not everyone thinks like him.

March 11, 2013 at 9:18 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Auster goes anti-Semitic:

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/024334.html

March 11, 2013 at 9:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

@Rollory Re:906

Your intellectual dissonance is pantshitting.

And you're part of 10% of 1% if not 1% of 1%, what with visiting blog like this one, writing long, reasoned, cogent posts.

When the 1% of 1% get it this wrong, we're in for an either severe or a long mudslog - and I'm afraid both.

The Popish Sauromatian

March 11, 2013 at 2:50 PM  
Anonymous Michael said...

"Was it the standard-issue Masonic solar phallic symbolism? As I recall, the God of the OT took a dim view of such goings-on."

If you knew as much as you should, you'd realize that the emblem depicted is not "solar phallic symbolism," but rather a rebus referring to an Old Testament patriarch.

The Ancient Charges of Freemasonry assign an important role to this figure, not at all unlike that assigned him by Prof. Olaus Borrichius of Copenhagen, in his "De ortu et progressu chemiæ" (1668), p. 9:

"Chemiæ incunabula in antiqvissima prospiciunt tempora. Natam ante diluvium ex Tubalcaini [qvi aliis Nationibus Vulcanus est] historiâ sagaciores colligunt, eo inducti, qvòd ferri, ærisqve metalla, illa Tubalcaini Magisteria inveniri, fingi, formarique nequeant, in ratio priùs cognoscatur, minerarum naturas investigandi, coqvendi, purgandi, segregandi; qvæ universa reperire non nisi Divini ingeni est, reperta autem proseqvi, fabri cujusvis proletarii..."

The Ancient Charges, like Borrichius's work, contain a "genealogy of knowledge" tied to the
Bible, and also to ancient pagan legend, that was of much interest to the savants of the seventeenth century.

March 11, 2013 at 4:09 PM  
Blogger tahir sumar said...

Latest Hot Current Affairs, Entertainment News, Pictures, Videos, Latest Hot News updates, Business News, Online Marketing, Online Jobs, Mp3 Tunes, Latest Ringtones, Bollywood Girls, Entertainment Girls, Hot Girls and Most popular Affairs in the World
Daily News updates about Latest and Hot Current Affairs
HotCurrentAffairs.com

March 12, 2013 at 12:01 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

@ Anonymous 2.50

Syntax error.

March 12, 2013 at 12:42 AM  
Anonymous Reactor said...

Michael:

If you knew as much as you should, you'd realize that the emblem depicted is not "solar phallic symbolism," but rather a rebus referring to an Old Testament patriarch.

I was aware of the visual pun on the name of that particular descendant of Cain.

"A spoon full of sugar helps the medicine go down, and a couple of cartoon children are helping to show Czech kids the positive qualities of their very own North Atlantic Treaty Alliance. According to Dnes, a new cartoon film appropriates classic Czech school-children characters “Mach and Sebestova” to talk up the virtues of NATO. Mach is a clean-cut kid who does everything right, and Sebestova is his red-headed girl-friend. Together, the two talk about how NATO will protect children against the cruel Horáček and Pazout. In one typical episode, Horacek and Pazout want to throw a bomb at Mach and Sebestova’s school. At which point Sebestova’s spritely voice says: “Politicians and Soldiers from America, England, and France agreed a long time ago that if anyone threw bombs on any of their lands, then all the others would come. It’s called NATO!”

The film debuted before an audience of children whose artwork was chosen to be presented to NATO General Secretary George Robertson last month. Among the award-winning drawings were sketches of a safe and sunny world surrounded by tanks, jets, and machine guns. One highly praised drawing, by young Barborka Sulcova, was of the Madonna radiating happiness.

Secretary Robertson was pleased with the pictures, but was much happier with a gavel presented to him by Vaclav Havel. The mallet was in the shape of a golden bough with two white balls. Nobody seemed to understand the symbolism of the two-ball cane."

March 12, 2013 at 3:44 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I logged on hoping to find news Auster was already dead, but I'll take his suffering and impending death a satisfying consolation prize. Can't wait til wicked Larry is gone!!!!!! All that filth and hatred finally consumed him.

March 12, 2013 at 11:09 AM  
Anonymous Reactor said...

Didn't see that coming.

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/024321.html

March 16, 2013 at 12:51 PM  
Blogger muhammad ibraheem said...

Best Beautiful Cars, Latest Hot Vehicles, Strange Cars, Super Cars Model, Funny Cars, Car Latest Models, Cars with Girls, Cars like helicopter and Most Speed and Expensive Cars
WorldLatestVehicles.com

March 17, 2013 at 4:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home