[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 13 KB, 173x256, download.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5936609 No.5936609 [Reply] [Original]

Isn't traditionalism basically "le wrong generation" as an ideology and philosophy?

>> No.5936612

>>5936609
good post

>> No.5936614

yea lol

>> No.5936615

good thread

>> No.5936616

more like 'muh daddy issues'

>> No.5936617

No, it's mature and enlightened, the French revolution was a bad thing

>> No.5936618

traditionalism feels like a revolution on revolution

the fact that they use such dialectics makes it look like reverting to status quo

>> No.5936625

>not realising 'traditionally' you'd have gotten the fuck on with your life instead of sitting on a chinese cartoon telegraph network whining at other aspies about 'traditionalism'

>> No.5936805
File: 192 KB, 1024x896, 1394047742586.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5936805

>>5936609
Tradionalism is basically: every generation after the Judeo Masonic Revolt of 1789 otherwise known as the French Revolution and the Revolutions of 1848 are the wrong generation and that society has be degenerating since then.

>> No.5936814

not really considering it wants to go back hundreds if not thousands of years

>> No.5936833

>>5936609
It's one of the more well-read ideologies. Even if you disagree with them they make for better conversation than pseudointellectual college Marxist hipsters and the mainstream 'left/right' paradigm fags.

>> No.5936838

>>5936805
You could have just said "yeah"

>> No.5936850

Traditionalism is basically babbys first philosophy for 20 year olds

>> No.5936859

>>5936833
You must really miss /pol/, huh? I know it's hard, and you probably won't believe me, but I do believe that one day you will realize that Moot did you a favor by freeing you from yourself.

>> No.5936861

>>5936805
Frederick the Great was a Freemason, and the Rothchilds were made nobility after the French Revolution was put down.

>> No.5936863

>>5936850
no thats Nietzsche

>> No.5936872

>>5936833
Which is why marxism and "left/right" theorists remain relevant in academic and intellectual discourse and traditionalism has only found home between a few misguided white dudes with social anxiety.

>> No.5936879

>>5936863
Nietzsche IS a traditionalist, you dumb fucking pleb.

>The noble and brave who think thus are the furthest removed from the morality which sees precisely in sympathy, or in acting for the good of others, or in DESINTERESSEMENT, the characteristic of the moral; faith in oneself, pride in oneself, a radical enmity and irony towards "selflessness," belong as definitely to noble morality, as do a careless scorn and precaution in presence of sympathy and the "warm heart."—It is the powerful who KNOW how to honour, it is their art, their domain for invention. The profound reverence for age and for tradition—all law rests on this double reverence,—the belief and prejudice in favour of ancestors and unfavourable to newcomers, is typical in the morality of the powerful; and if, reversely, men of "modern ideas" believe almost instinctively in "progress" and the "future," and are more and more lacking in respect for old age, the ignoble origin of these "ideas" has complacently betrayed itself thereby.

>> No.5936883

>>5936861
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/2110/2110-h/2110-h.htm#2H_4_0010

>> No.5936887

>>5936883
Yeah, that's about as reliable as Engels' history of Indians.

>> No.5936888

>>5936879
no he's a self described degenerate

>> No.5936898

What tradition? Of sustaining hokey baby boomer values? Or perhaps of trying to go back to what we project a time before might have been like? Please.

>> No.5936899

>>5936872
>ideological popularity with in academia decides legitimacy
Embarrassing.

>> No.5936902

>>5936888
Nietzsche was one of the most ascetic philosophers, right up there with Kant.

His philosophy is almost entirely derived from the ideals of ancient Greek aristocracy. If he hates most traditionalists, it's only because he thinks it's degenerate to let money lenders and merchants buy titles, as opposed to Nietzsche's preference for warrior aristocracies.

>> No.5936916

>yfw EvolaKid starts all these threads so he can spout his bile

>> No.5936917
File: 85 KB, 295x453, confederacy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5936917

>> No.5936922

>>5936872
The point is traditionalist provide more interesting conversation because they bother to think outside the mainstream and back their shit up. Whereas the typical left/right fags and Marxist just repeat whatever academia or their parents told them.

>> No.5936929

>>5936922
>traditionalists
>think

Good one :^)

>> No.5936933

>>5936929
Woah dude, you sure showed me! :P

>> No.5936947

>>5936922
>the point is that Raelism provides more interesting conversation because they bother to think outside the mainstream and back their shit up
>the point is that people who dress like gentlemen provide more interesting conversation because they dress outside the mainstream and back their fashion up

>> No.5936948

>>5936916
Spare a thought for EvolaMom and EvolaDad who have to live with the guy, try to motivate him, and find ways to trick him into leaving his room so they can empty the piss bottles and lay new rat traps.

>> No.5936958

>>5936922
lol

>> No.5936968

>>5936947
>strawmanning

>> No.5936984

>>5936833
>>5936899
>>5936922
>>5936933
Note to self; traditionalist posts always yield true doubles

>> No.5936992

Daily reminder that if you aren't a traditionalist you are not a REAL man

REAL men are traditionalists.

>> No.5936998

>Mfw I entered university (faculty of arts) a moderate leftist and finished my first semester a reactionary traditionalist

Fuck

>> No.5937020

>>5936609
>implying historicist marxism and whatever STEMshits want from transhumanism isn't le wrong generation too
Atleast the things traditionalists want empirically happened.

>> No.5937030

>>5936902
Nietzsche is a relavtivist that hates even small slave morality.

>> No.5937052

>>5937020
It's "le wrong generation", but for the future rather than the past.

>> No.5937056

So what's /lit/s opinion on the spiritual non-political traditionalism (which presumably doesn't have little argentinian autists that sperg out all over the internet)? Stuff like Guenon?

>> No.5937061
File: 591 KB, 905x917, 1416259124022.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5937061

>>5937052
So what's the right ideology? Memeticism?

>> No.5937064

>>5936859
I guess I don't browse enough, what exactly happened to /pol/? I've been seeing these posts talking about it's downfall but I've no clue what actually happened.

>> No.5937071

>>5937061
Voluntary egoism.

>> No.5937073

>>5937071
Is that stirnerism?

>> No.5937075

>>5937064
Moot got cucked and exposed so he went off the wall and removed captcha.

>> No.5937079

>>5937073
Yes.

>> No.5937081

>>5936609

No, it's just Neoplatonism applied to a social/political standpoint. Metaphysical principles secure a point in which contingent political and social structures are to be based around. Anyone who's read Evola knows that he in some ways felt that the stage western society was at when he died (1970s) was actually preferable to the early 20th century when he was young, because he was glad to see Bourgeoisie morality and the liberal social order break down- even if it was into a nihilism( which in some ways would allow certain individuals to be more willing to embrace Tradition). He explicitly stated in his first major full length that mere dates and specific political and historical moments have nothing to do with Traditionalism, other than as imperfect examples of the principles he espouses.

"Tradition" as Guenon originally envisioned it didn't even have a spiritual/political dimension outside of a very well considered critique.

>> No.5937088

>>5937064
>>5937075
Also made mandatory ID's, word filters, and a bunch of sticky's.

>> No.5937090

>>5937079
Cool, I can dig it.

>> No.5937097

>>5936805
Admit it, the French revolution isn't the problem, it's the industrial revolution that is at the center of your ire.

Materialism isn't a product of liberal capitalism or of Marxism, it's a product of advanced industrialization. Industrial society is what puts technology on the pedestal, not "muh Jews and freemasons".

>> No.5937100

>>5937056
That's little t tradition, the perennialists. It's a different thing, it focuses on esoteric issues, whereas big T tradition focuses on the exoteric. There is significant overlap in values but they are not the same thing, you should start a different thread to get a better focus on that school of thought (if anyone else here has read them).

>> No.5937112

>>5936850
>>5936863
Don't know about the US but here it's Marxism (or rather Marxism-lite for college kids).

>> No.5937120
File: 226 KB, 575x582, RonPaulsCrazyPresidentialAdventure.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5937120

>>5937112
In the USA it's libertarianism.

Marxism is relegated to literature classes, and only the PoMo ones.

>> No.5937127

>>5937100
Whoops, that's backwards. Little t tradition is exoteric, not big T.

>> No.5937128

>>5937112
In the US: Nietzsche if you're studying on your own. Marxism if you're studying in a university.

>> No.5937135

>>5937120
>PoMo
>marxism
hmmhmm

>> No.5937142

>>5936947
Both statements are true though.

>> No.5937146

>>5937120
They go hand-inhand. Evola kid is basically a libertarian, he just wants business owners to have official titles.

>> No.5937155

>>5937128
>Marxism if you're studying at the university

The only people who believe this are /pol/acks. In high school I became a socialist, and was totally thrilled to meet other leftists on campus. How disappointed I was when it turned out all the 3spooky5me right-wing stories of Marxist professors was a lie.

Only professor I met who even mentioned Marx was a literature professor, and this was barely in passing.

>> No.5937171

>>5937155
What university did you go to?

>> No.5937179

>>5937155
I'm a liberal arts major as well, everyone are just neoliberal capitalist swine.

>> No.5937186

>>5937171
University of Arizona

I'd love to know what university you've experienced that is filled with Marxists.

>> No.5937188

>>5937155
Scholars in the humanities and social sciences may mention Marx and Marxist scholars - Adorno, etc. - because some have been influential in their field. Find a professor actively involved with Marxist politics is a quite different matter.

>> No.5937192

>>5937155
Where did you go to college? My experience was completely different.

>> No.5937199

>>5937186
UCLA

>> No.5937202

>>5937120
I often see posts about US colleges having gender studies/ African American studies/etc... those don't seem especially linked with Libertarianism. Are there specifically Libertarian studies with unique subjects like those above?

>> No.5937205

>>5937186

my experience is aligned with yours, but if you go to grad school the Marxist boogie man is slightly more real.

>> No.5937215

>>5937186
I've posted in relation to this question before. In NYC public high schools I read Marx (for multiple classes). When I went to college in upstate NY many of my professors were far left leaning or outright Marxists. Whether or not they were deeply involved in marxist politics, is a different matter as >>5937188 points out. Though I don't think it is exactly relevant.

>> No.5937231

>>5937202
Nope. He might be right about what people believe but libertarianism is not what colleges are teaching. It's seen as somewhat anti-intellectual in those settings.

>> No.5937234

>>5937186
>>5937199
Politics are so heavily shaped by geography in the America that the experience in college depends alot on the state. I guess the overall impression of US-colleges being filled with leftists is simply the consequence of most left-wing states being also the most populous and with the highest rate of college enrollment.

>> No.5937240

>>5937202
How are those things directly linked with Marxism? If anything those classes are doctrinaire liberalism, and that's just the establishment ideology, hardly surprising the establishment ideology would be reinforced in public classes.

Libertarianism is *not* something you find taught as doctrine, but that is not what was being asked. Libertarianism is the ideology that teenage angst and rebellion is channeled through, an ideology which is basically masturbatory and knee-jerk anti-establishment ("I would be a Nietzschean ubermensch if it weren't for the gubmint holding me back!" :'( )

>> No.5937257

>>5937240
>tries to make Marxism seem more nuanced so as to distinguish it from other facets of 'doctrinaire liberalism' thereby making his views still seem 'cutting edge' and anti-establishment
>writes in the voice of an invented libertarian.

Tell me more...sike!

>> No.5937260

>>5937240
I never said they were linked with Marxism, just not linked with Libertarianism.

>> No.5937267

>>5937234
Hold on, there's a difference between the culture of a "blue state" like California or Illinois and having universities packed with Marxist professors who will dislike Democrats as well as Republicans.

It's also worth remembering that because of the way American universities hire, compared to other countries, there's the opportunities for departments to develop ideological leanings. There are a handful (but only a handful) of Marxist-friendly economics departments like UMass Amherst. And there are literature departments like Duke. A few people get tenure and start empire building. This happens on the right as well, most places in economics, but in humanities and social sciences it tends to be in conservative Christian colleges.

>> No.5937274

>>5937257
Marxism is anti-establishment, you dolt

>> No.5937278

>>5937257
>implying I'm wrong

Or are you just getting anal-pains over my accurate satirizing of idiot libertarians? Libertarianism is only satisfying to the egos of teenagers.

>> No.5937288

>>5937097

The French Revolution is the beginning of Totalitarianism and mass communitarian degeneration. Homogenizing all classes and religions ( and we have now extended it to both sex's, all races, all nationalities, etc) into " the people" or "humanity", and ignoring more particular, majestic or sublime elements of individual groups for the sake of a bovine mass man and generating a "will of the people" is the problem, technology is neutral on it's own- it can be used for any kind of government, it's that devolution into an existence defined by quantity which goes hand in hand with The French Revolution, Capitalist consumer culture, egalitarianism, and mass industrialization.

>> No.5937291

>>5937257
>Marxism is an establishment ideology in Liberal capitalism

You're too stupid to breathe.

>> No.5937299

>>5937274
Depends what the 'establishment'. Certainly, in my university, marxists were part of the establishment.
>>5937278
Nah, more so just laffin at that infantile desire to be seen as a 'rebel' despite 'the establishment' in many universities being more or less exactly what you are.

>> No.5937302

>>5936998
all it took me was a course on postcolonial theory.
If anything makes you reactionary traditionalist it is the ramblings of leftist/marxist teachers

>race is a social construct
>we only differ 0.02% genetically

dat doublespeak cuz muh feelings

>> No.5937316

>>5937288
>The French Revolution is the beginning of Totalitarianism

I disagree. Totalitarianism, in the modern sense, started with the enforcement Chinese Legalism by the Qin empire. However it did have the consequences you describe for the French revolution and in fact was even more thorough, destroying a large part of the writing, traditions and culture that preceded it.

>> No.5937318

>>5937291
Blessed are the poor.

>> No.5937322

>>5937288
It's not like after years of agricultural society ideals simply flipped for no reason: the mass urbanization and pauperization of peasant farmers is to blame for "communitarian degeneration". Any "sublime element" of human organization was undermined already by the urban poor, which prior to liberalism was already being forced into wage slavery or prostitution. This shift existed alongside an extant aristocracy and old ideology, so its hard to blame the degenerating conditions on anything other than a technological shift.

>> No.5937323

>>5937302
Well, yes, 18:th century racial theories have generally fallen out of favour. Perhaps you could prove the academic consensus wrong? Start working on those papers!

>> No.5937336

>>5936609
Yes, but more cancerous.

>> No.5937340

>>5937302
fuck off posthuman trash.

>> No.5937341

>>5937323
>what is forensic anthropology

>> No.5937345

>>5937341
>he thinks Bones is real

>> No.5937346

>>5937302
Both statements are true. Even if you believe that genetic differences between human populations are significant, you can't deny that the concept of race is an ill-defined social construct that has changed significantly over time and is useless for scientific classification. How is the term "black" useful when it covers people from Eastern to Western Africa that are physiologically quite different or even negrito people from Asia who are more distantly related to Africans than even Europeans?

>> No.5937364
File: 148 KB, 1000x843, and so on.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5937364

>enter Uni an anarcho syndicalist
>leave Uni a statist socialist

>> No.5937373

>>5937364
>enter uni an idiot
>leave uni a stupid frog poster

>> No.5937376

>>5937316

I don't know Chinese History so I can't comment on that, I was speaking as far as the western perspective goes, that is very interesting.

>>5937322
The 18th century in general helped allot on that front ideologically, but the communitarian degeneration I speak of comes from when classes are dissolved into one homogenous group of "citizens" and the deification of abstract concepts like "humanity" and it's recreation and "progression" becomes the ideal. It's true that the ideas already existed, but the French Revolution was the political moment when much of that was realized in the west for the first time- and while initially the horror and brutality of plebean totalitarianism caused people to shift back into Monarchy ( one which did not handle the situation quite as they should of, benevolently, as de Maistre suggested they should,) within a generation or two those ideals concretized by the French Revolution worked especially hard with Industrialization to cause this degenerate state.

One thing I will say, as far as these threads go. Can Marxists and Traditionalists just stop being petty when debating each other?, just be benevolent and honest about the points being brought up and reply with some intellectual sincerity ( like the two who I am responding two).

I identify as a Reactionary Right Winger, but I also love reading Althusser, even though I think that he is mostly wrong. People with opposing views to you can still be intelligent and worth discussing things with. When political action comes it is time to crush skulls- if you are just going to debate intellectual concepts you might as well just act decently to those who you are debating and hope you learn something from the discussion.

>> No.5937379

>>5937346
the point remains the same, there are differences between different 'races', people hailing from different regions on planet earth. It is not my business to suggest that some races are superior to others, I am merely trying to convey the point that facts are often dismissed due to political correctness. Something which shouldn't occur in a academic setting. It's the same with Watson who has been ostracized due to his remarks on racial differences and such. I can understand he is an asshole and whatnot but truth or ideas shouldn't be censored because they make you uncomfortable.

Obviously, the truth is a very dangerous subject to talk about when you delve into the social sciences considering there is no true objectivity. But alas, we can hope

>> No.5937386

>>5937341
Forensic anthropology uses the word race and traditional racial classification as a matter of convenience (for reports that have to be vulgarized for use by non-specialists). It's not actually used for the technical work proper where they use much more detailed categorizing.

For example there is no "black" skull shape. There are instead several very different skull shapes that are typical of specific African populations.

>> No.5937394

>>5937071
>>5937073
I don't think Voluntary egoism is tecnically an ideology.
>>5937073
Also, I would try to avoid using the term stirnerism. It comes too close to calling yourself a stirnerist. Same thing with voluntary egoism.

>> No.5937404

I don't think race is really an interesting point to dwell on, and I don't think it is at all inherent to traditionalism, or reactionary politics. Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn was a significant reactionary, a Catholic monarchist, but he believed in multiculturalism and racial pluralism and despised nationalism and any other collectivist ideology. He thought the racial tensions of modernity are for the most part exacerbated by democracy and all of the collectivist ideologies that stem from it.

>> No.5937407

>>5936609
No. Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire.

>> No.5937408

>>5937364

You aren't actually ever "anarcho syndicalist" if you go to uni, and you certainly are not a socialist getting out.

You are just a closet liberal with a clown nose.

>> No.5937413

>>5937379
But as you pointed it yourself, your Marxist professors never denied there were differences, even if they emphasized that the percentage was low.

>> No.5937415

>>5937408
>conflating liberalism with leftism
Are you American?

>> No.5937425

i like this website

>> No.5937433

Friendly reminder that de Maistre was right

>> No.5937471

>>5937433
He was so right that he allowed the most insane part of French free-masonry to survive and prosper to this day.

>> No.5937527

What's the name of the 19th century Catholic monarchist who had an influence on the Syllabus of Errors? I think he was Spanish.

>> No.5937530

No, traditionalism is basically the highest form of Gorean agricultural perversion.
They pine for the days when enforced monogamy meant that anyone could have a women as a sexual servant as long as they were merely adequate. The feudal agricultural pervert is so debased he gets a thrill which cannot be simulated by any means of fantasy from inflicting the condition of pregnancy upon women, from the curse of Eve. The poor and the stupid were allowed to breed.
They believe mankind is naturally evil and you can't do anything to change or punish them.
Traditionalists are there to remind us that there are things worse than bourgeois capitalism.

>> No.5937545

>>5937527
Donoso Cortes?

>> No.5937547

>>5936948
EvolaBro, EvolaSis, EvolaUncle....they've all got it tough, having to interact with that spaz

>> No.5937550

>>5937530
simply epic

>> No.5937555

>>5937530
>>>/tumblr/

>> No.5937556

>>5937545
bingo. thanks.

>> No.5937574

>>5937547
EvolaDog, EvolaGoldfish, EvolaNeighbour...

>> No.5937587

>>5936609
Traditionalism is literally the Tumblr of the Right.

>> No.5937590

>>5937530
>The feudal agricultural pervert is so debased he gets a thrill which cannot be simulated by any means of fantasy from inflicting the condition of pregnancy upon women, from the curse of Eve.

Well i admit to having an impregnation fetish but...

>> No.5938320
File: 87 KB, 250x233, 1418421924581.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5938320

>>5936922
>point is traditionalist provide more interesting conversation because they bother to think outside the mainstream
"Edgelord" is not an ideology, it's a symptom of being fifteen.

>> No.5938350
File: 497 KB, 660x2194, treadonme.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5938350

>>5937231
Not at schools where libertarian think-tanks underwrite the board of directors.
George Mason University has an institute pretty much dedicated to libertarian thought and policies called the Mercatus Center.

>> No.5938521

>>5938350
Leftist control in the universities isn't total, even in their geographical regions and subject fields of dominance. Every university I have attended has treated libertarian the way your image does though.

>> No.5938553

>>5938521
Good, libertarianism is an ideology for high schoolers who have read online summaries of Ayn Rand novels. Nobody with a functioning and developed brain should actually subscribe to a philosophy that intellectually bankrupt.

>> No.5938575

>>5938553
I don't consider myself a libertarian. Though it's a pretty consistent philosophy. The only objections I usually hear are fears about monopoly formation and 'the rich getting richer'; both are unfounded and don't even necessarily contradict libertarian goals as understood by the lowest common denominator.

tldr; most high schoolers are probably smarter than you, little bro.

>> No.5938602

>>5938575
>I'm not a libertarian
>But there are no valid objections to libertarianism

Then why the fuck aren't you a Libertarian, mate?

>> No.5938615

>>5938575
>>5938602
There are a million valid objections to libertarianism.

>> No.5938625

>>5937590
See, the think about your fetish is that it is precisely that, a fetish. For the fetishist, reality is already impossible, as the fetish is developed in a temporal context which can never be relived.
For the traditionalist it is not a fetish, it cannot be a fetish as a fetish is sublimated, something recalled by pornography. Pornography is not enough for the traditionalist, it cucks him too much.
His hatred for mankind is so deep, he has no trust in anything anyone will ever do or say including himself. His succor is in the raw facts of blood and cum and the powers he creates to affirm these laws.

Also, natural childbirth isn't really a thing anymore, only for really masochistic hippies. The task of grooming, childrearing and the condemnation of the female sex to drudgery and the idiotworld of childhood is the Traditionalist's main kick. Nay, the idea of warping the entire sex for that purpose, of stifling their development -evolutionary footbinding- if you will, is, absurd as it may be.

>> No.5938631

>>5938625
this seems like projecting to an extreme level

>> No.5938646 [DELETED] 

>>5938602
>>5938615
It's more along the lines of, given what libertarians value, there system makes sense. With their caveat that 'values' are subjective, it is difficult to come up with a strong counter unless you can show some kind of contradiction there. I guess the most solid objection has to do with their stance against the initiation of force or threat thereof, which many of them use as the starting point. Even that has its nuances, so as to help it make some sense. But if you reject that then nothing they say will mean anything.

The starting points are still merely assumptions but unlike most political philosophies [especially more mainstream political philosophies] it actually would achieve what it is hoping to achieve, which is more than I can say for most fascists, liberals, or socialists.

>> No.5938657

>>5938602
>>5938615
It's more along the lines of, given what libertarians value, their* system makes sense. With their caveat that 'values' are subjective, it is difficult to come up with a strong counter unless you can show some kind of contradiction there. I guess the most solid objection has to do with their stance against the initiation of force or threat thereof, which many of them use as the starting point. Even that has its nuances, so as to help it make some sense. But if you reject that then nothing they say will mean anything.

The starting points are still merely assumptions but unlike most political philosophies [especially more mainstream political philosophies] it actually would achieve what it is hoping to achieve, which is more than I can say for most fascists, liberals, or socialists.

>> No.5938678
File: 25 KB, 560x348, weirdshit.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5938678

>>5938575
For some reason my response can't get posted because it's supposedly spam, but see pic related.

>> No.5938712

>>5938678
How is that spam?

>> No.5938719

>>5938631
Even if I am projecting 100% that's a complete ad hom and thus you're full of shit.

It's probably better if I am projecting because I am capable to recognize this urge, which may be implicit in all men, something known all the better from personal conflict to be weeded out.

Shoo shoo gains goblin.

>> No.5938722

>>5938678
I don't understand what you mean by profit motive; every political philosophy has a 'value' motive, depending on what adherents to the philosophy value. Libert.ism doesn't necessarily have a 'profit motive' through and through. It is a system that would allow for the unhindered (legislatively, excluding the use of force) pursuit of it.
>charters, c-change, dereg
I'll look into the specific orgs you mentioned but none of those initiative really contradict what libert.s profess to pursue; so it isn't exactly whistle blowing to point something like that out. If those initiatives are being pursued in certain ways then yes, they may be contradictory to what political libert.s profess, but in and of themselves there's not really incorrect about that.

>> No.5938729

>>5938678
>>5938722
And it seems as though my post was being marked as spam too. You can see the changes I made to correct it; I'm not sure which did it.

>> No.5938738

>>5938575
Mine are
>The social place of capital is a licence for cruel individual caprice as it was in previous modes of production.
>historical contingencies.

>> No.5938758

>>5938350
>only black people are poor
Why do urban white people believe this again? I feel like turning class issues into race issues is the dumbest shit.

>> No.5938771

>>5938738
Explain what you mean a little bit. That way I can evaluate it without having to make too many assumptions.

>> No.5938782

>>5937323
Yeah, and Boasian anthropology is still fucking around. Hell, half of his students made up bullshit and considered it completely okay.

They are as bad as Freud and his bullshit field.

>> No.5938794
File: 132 KB, 562x276, seindad.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5938794

>>5938722
Apparently you have to call it global warming here, because c-change is spam.

>> No.5938803
File: 77 KB, 600x450, lizstanza.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5938803

>>5938722
>I'll look into the specific orgs you mentioned but none of those initiative really contradict what libert.s profess to pursue; so it isn't exactly whistle blowing to point something like that out. If those initiatives are being pursued in certain ways then yes, they may be contradictory to what political libert.s profess, but in and of themselves there's not really incorrect about that.
No, of course it wouldn't be whistleblowing, but the hypocrisy is inherent in an anti-statist philosophy using state powers to enforce their will.

>> No.5938818
File: 216 KB, 180x180, 1415572391252.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5938818

>>5938771
Not that anon, but there's the inherent belief in libertarianism that contract law is sacrosanct, which allows for human rights to be trampled.

>> No.5938819

>>5938803
Like I said, it all depends how it is being done within the context of what laws already exist. If a particular area has provisions that prohibit or limit charter schools then trying to pass laws that undo these limits, in a round about way, isn't hypocrisy. Considering one of the charges was deregulating, I hardly see how that applies to using state powers to 'enforce their will'.

>> No.5938845

>>5938794
Thank you for that info; this is key.
>>5938818
>sacrosanct
True, depending on how you view human rights. I'm not arguing that libertarianism is perfect, simply that it doesn't contradict itself; it achieves that which it says it will achieve (which, as I mentioned, is superior to most other mainstream political philosophies). Libertarianism allows for the possibility of 'human rights', as might be defined by non-libertarians, to be trampled on. However, it doesn't necessitate it. I think the standard libertarian response would be 'if enough people agreed with your concept of human rights and valued those rights then we would have ever incentive not to trample on them'. Whether that works for you or not is something altogether different but it's not a contradiction by any means.

>> No.5938901
File: 168 KB, 414x433, 1413447256361.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5938901

>>5938819
> If a particular area has provisions that prohibit or limit charter schools then trying to pass laws that undo these limits, in a round about way, isn't hypocrisy.
Alright, maybe it would help to outline the process:
>district has good public schools, not a lot of parochial schools
>peddle influence to make public schools shittier (pull funding, fuck with teachers unions, back school board members to create texas-tier textbooks)
>public schools start performing worse
>lobbyist for charter school financiers use data to argue that charter schools perform better
>now, the data might show that they perform only slightly better than the shittified public schools, but whatever, because if the public schools are well-funded, then there's no money for charter schools to be getting from the government and parents

As you said, it's effective, but it "works" in the same way Stalinism worked for people who toed the party line.

>> No.5938973

>>5938901
I see. I have some first hand experience with public schools and some professional experience with teachers unions. Nothing was approaching what I would call 'good'. Without harping on that though, I think the kind of scenario you've describing is a weakness of the public schools. The idea that they can be so thoroughly tampered with, without consumers (taxpayers) having very much input, except through their representatives, supports the libertarian position. In this example, its being done to objective worsen an education but in other cases it can simply be used to push or pull material in one direction or another. The whole idea of using public money for private schools, I think, is hypocritical. I would be very skeptical of any libertarian organization that was pushing for that. I think that kind of corruption and opportunism is acknowledged by the philosophy, which is why libertarians seek to reduce the total possible output of the public sector.

>> No.5938984

>>5938771
In order for the free market to truly be free from all previous conditions and for the Social Darwinistic project of libertarianism to take place, wherein everyone who isn't Mark Zuckerberg is weeded out by starvation or forced to be a dancing bear by "private charity" it would first have to redistribute all wealth equitably among all citizens AND THEN say fuck it and deregulate everything, otherwise the obvious advantage would be to those who accumulated the tainted wealth from the tyranny of state moochers.

>> No.5939082

>>5938984
>Social Darwinistic project
It doesn't have to be that way.
>redistribute all wealth equitably
I agree for all public wealth. For private,any advantages would quickly be lost, if an incompetent individual wanted to increase his wealth, or slowly be lost, if he was too scared to even try.

>> No.5939130

>>5936609
>>5936805

Tradition as an ideology is, when you boil it down, "I want to live in the past according to rules/structures that made sense under entirely different conditions than those pertaining today." You know those radical Islamist types who keep trying to turn the clock back to the time of Muhammad? That's Traditionalism, son.

>> No.5939154

>>5939130
>"I want to live in the past according to rules/structures that made sense under entirely different conditions than those pertaining today."

While you're absolutely right, I think that's a horrible simplification. I think a lot of the traditionalism you see manifesting today is not even a yearning for a specific system -- unlike extremist Islamic groups -- but for ideals/system at all. Or, better stated, it's not simply that they're complaining about how the ideals and metaphysical concepts of the day have changed, but that, under a modern atheist materialism, they don't exist at all. It's very unfair to classify such a void and yearning for fulfillment as outdated ideology.

>> No.5939194

>>5939082
The point is that the advantages are lost, but voluntarily and all private wealth that was won under any statist intervention is unjustly won because of the services the state were won at the expense of those who the state had to coerce, the private wealth accumulated by the eons of tyranny is an unfair advantage. And that contradicted the first point about Libertarianism not being a Social Darwinist project, those without the ability or desire to sell their labour are either left to starve, to be used by public charity, or assume the animal condition. If it's not Social Darwinist, what's the point?

>> No.5939246

>>5939194
Agreed, it is most likely unjustly won (to varying degrees, with certain exceptions of those who did not use the state in any direct way but still benefited from certain restrictions like certifications or something). The logistics of that, however, is too ridiculous because just saying 'you all deserve even wealth as a starting point' isn't necessarily the solution. There are cases of hard work at wealth creation and those individuals don't deserve for that to be taken from them (because it is too difficult to determine cases of hardwork from not, in many cases at least, it is simply more probable that the job of reorganizing would be up to the market)
>what's the point
The point is simply that those things which individuals most value is what is [attempted to be] maximized. Meaning, if a community is not comprised of cutthroat social darwinists but by people who value other things, then it is reasonable to assume that those options you mentioned would not be the case. A libertarian wouldn't really assume to know exactly what people would come to value in an entirely free society, though they do try to use history to arrive at some reasonable suggestions).

>> No.5939325

>>5939246
If all wealth including the means of production is not liquefied and seized then the public assets would be almost instantly used to recreate the state in the interests of those who had most benefitted it before, for what advantage would there be for those with the material power of the mode of production to give up the advantages they had under the welfare state. The means of production represents a concrete investment over all those who do not possess it, and it is the permanent result of unjustly accumulated wealth under the state, resulting in conditions identical to the one before.

How is that which individuals as individuals most value to be maximized if the reasonable outcome of what the people value is as you said based on the community?

>> No.5939342

>>5939130
Most traditionalists are privately rooting for groups like ISIS, including me. I only wish there was a European version to purge our homelands of the invading third-world scum and the self-hating leftist traitors who have taken control and are bent on miscegenating the European peoples out of existence.

>> No.5939344

>>5936609
"Today's generation is dumb. They only care about Justin Gayber and twerking. Truly euphoric and enlightened people enjoy sophisticated topics such as minecraft, /B/, and being a hacker. I was born in the wrong generation." - Anon 2014, certified 280 IQ, euphoric being of enlightenment

>> No.5939374

>>5939342
But if brown people live in Europe long enough, they'll become white.

>> No.5939376

>>5937379
I agree 100% friend

>> No.5939391

>>5937379
>facts are often dismissed due to political correctness.
Nah, bruh, you just aren't articulate enough to present your facts in a politically correct way.

>> No.5939392

>>5939374
No, everyone will just become brown.

>> No.5939403

>>5939392
Then how come the people in Europe evolved to be white?

>> No.5939406

>>5939392
Everyone already is. In the ancient world, white was like marble white, it took hella tanning to get to what's pasty for us. But the white race is gone now because he mixed with swarthy barbarians who were basically Nigger Lite.

>> No.5939416

>>5939406
The Ancient Greek and Roman races certainly are gone. The Latins and Teutonics aren't but are currently on the brink of extinction. The Anglo-Saxon gene pool for example is so contaminated that probably 40-50% of the island would have to be exterminated to bring the race back to its pre-1950 level.

>> No.5939459
File: 77 KB, 700x454, 1973_Oct28_Dayan_Sharon.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5939459

>mfw /pol/ got rekt

Did you guys post any spam?

>> No.5939523

>>5939130
>>5939154

[traditionalism] has been associated with an idea which inevitably devalues its meaning, namely the idea of "nostalgia for the past" (…) If to recognize what is true and just is "nostalgia for the past," it is quite clearly a crime or a disgrace not to feel this nostalgia.

--Frithjof Schuon

>> No.5939589

>>5939325
We're not necessarily talking about anarcho-capitalism.
>How is that which individuals as individuals most value to be maximized if the...
In two ways. Firstly, enough individuals making the same decision or similar decisions can be seen as a 'community', even if they aren't living in close proximity. If you care enough about the poor to donate your extra clothing to them and other individuals do so as well, we might call this a 'community' of people who donate clothes; they value helping the poor in this way. The choice is made individually but enough people have made that choice so as to make an impact on w/e society they are living in (even if the whole society does not necessarily share this value and therefore does not contribute). The other way is an individual literally making the choice to let others choose for them. Meaning, an individual can literally establish a relationship that is similar to his current relationship to a state if he doesn't wish to engage in the stress of making his own decisions with regard to certain things (allocating a certain amount of money each paycheck to a foundation that will spend it on clothing for the homeless, as an example). This isn't community rule, as you seem to be suggesting. It's merely stating that whenever a large number of people (even if its only 1% of a total population), make the same choice or similar choices, their values manifest in society. So your idea of a social darwinism perspective would really only apply if that mindset was total, which it isn't.

>> No.5939619

>muh humanism vs. muh progress

Love watching educated idiots fight.

>> No.5939633

>>5937097
Well Industrialism is the fault of the Protestant work Ethic.

>> No.5939634

>>5939633
>muh weber

>> No.5939671

>>5939619
>>5939634
take you 'muh' meme back to /pol/

>> No.5939678

>>5939671
this is a spinoza thread after all

>> No.5939691
File: 75 KB, 407x600, 1414356742189.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5939691

>>5936609
Traditionalism and NRx became popular on the internet around the same time Game of Thrones came out, think about it.

GRRM is the root of all bullshit.

>> No.5939710

>>5939691
It's ironic that Martin is a liberal-minded person.

>> No.5939758

>>5936616
i kekked

>> No.5939768

Problem with traditionalism is that it's inherently essentialist, romanticist and cherishes a nostalgia for an invented past.

>> No.5939782

>>5939691

>traditionalism is popular

Get off the internet.

>> No.5939796

>>5936609

No because tradition isn't created by one generation, but rather it's refined by many.

>> No.5941668

>>5939782
>became popular on the internet

please try to finish sentences before reacting friend. Thank God all people outside are le dumb bluepill gee I wonder why

>> No.5941876

>>5941668
It's not popular on the internet. It's popular on a tawainese chat board.

>> No.5941880

>>5941876
Bengladeshi conversation wall*

>> No.5941922

catholic liturgical traditionalism isn't(like who wouldn't prefer the latin mass over the novus odo lmao)

but if ur a catholic traditionalist and pro-monarchy u r p much a fedora :)

>> No.5941927

>>5941876
>tfw no Taiwanese qt gf

>> No.5942236

>>5941922
basically you are saying: if you are the opposite of fedora you are fedora

fucking retard

>> No.5942266

>>5942236

Is that trip ironical?

>> No.5942282

>>5942236
Still dribbling I see

>> No.5942385

>>5942266
don't bully kids

>> No.5942474

>>5939589
Anarcho-Capitalism is only the logical conclusion of Libertarianism and the end-goal of it's strategy, which is the reign of capital as a social force which holds the same sovereignty as religion or divine natural right did in days of old, only to varying degrees. The dominant capitalist mode of production means the choice is only to submit to the pursuit of capital and all modes of production are subservient to capital in this current era. The market conditions have no use for that which is unable to create capital, so it is removed, living or un-living. The example of the community which decides which of the impoverished to give the clothing to decides inevitably on the basis of the impoverished individual's capability as a means to generate capital either as a force of consumption or as a surplus labour force. Under the illusion of human nature (which is a politicized animal nature of survival) as capitalist under the capitalist mode of production, not to generate capital is a suicidal impulse and with the market used as it is in the form of a form of peaceful exchange, the privation of the generation of capital by the capitalist is a murderous impulse, and detrimental to the ability of those to have freedom as the dead possess no freedom and those who do not wish to die are but pawns of those who have the capability to let them live.

>> No.5942489

>>5942474
So it's just honest classical liberalism.

>> No.5942508
File: 18 KB, 300x300, 3494069.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5942508

>>5942236
Only the most Supreme of Gentlemen are fit to rule.

>> No.5942587

>>5942474
You ought to write crit. theory, you have the much coveted ability of making simple ideas seem complicated and making tame suggestions seem polemic. Personally, I think you're right on one thing: there's no logical reason for libertarians to stop at minarchism. It is perhaps the one glaring inconsistency, given their premises. But all your platitudes,
>divine natural right
>suicidal impulse
>muderous impulse
don't mean much. The capitalist modes are not sentient; they are malleable and change according to the ability of the providers and the will of the consumers. So all your talk of 'inevitability' is truly missing the point. The only thing I will say is that a worker's threat of suicide, quite literally, is a kind of implicit proviso, a weapon of the working class, in any free system.

>> No.5942620

>>5942236
I do not sense any nobility in your blood. I cannot tell for certain though, they are quiet on that subject. But i sense a lot of quiet dignity and laborious nature in them. It would seem they the majority were working class, and quite proud of it.

There is a lot of shadow on your line. I take that as proof that your ancestors actually practiced some form of magic in life. They seem to think you have a predisposition to it. If you really buckled down and put your nose to the grindstone, you could do some great things.

They say to be careful with jealousy though. Your family frequently feel victim to coveting. It caused great tragedy among them. They unanimously state to never use magic as a means of attaining love. It always ended badly for them. But if you stay away from that aspect of it, they think you would benefit greatly from it.

>> No.5942695

>>5942587
It's not crit. theory to explore the implications and possibilities of all things and to merely not to take things for granted. Simple ideas are only simple because forces immeasurably complicated have molded minds to give the words which constitute those their accepted meaning.
Those platitudes are all emphasized comparisons in the role which capital plays in the minds, the divine right of kings in the feudal agricultural era was long seen as an unquestioned necessity which brought order to society, which parallels the way in which the capitalists and the economy is seen, almost in the manner of a hungry god which demands sacrifice and renunciation, one cannot offend capital without wrecking death and devastation for oneself and the race. The capitalist modes are not sentient, this is true, they could be more aptly considered memetic, but that's a different kettle of fish. They obtain sentience as far as sentient beings perpetuate the concept of the necessity of their conditions, through the threat. As far as the workers suicide is a weapon, the capitalist is more then adequately prepared for defense by the very nature to which they have molded the working class.

>> No.5942703

>>5942620
you're just plain cruel.

>> No.5943152

>>5942236
yes
im a catholic
radical traditionalists are the fedoras of the Roman Catholic Church
sedevacantists are post-fedora

"vatican II was heretical"
*tips biretta*
:)

>> No.5943351

>>5939403
white is the next step in evolution

>> No.5943366

>>5943152

this is random but your comment just caught my eye, do you have any recommendations for religious themed fiction? East of Eden while obviously a little heavy handed was a huge influence in my faith, nothing else has really kept my attention in the same way.

>> No.5943389

>>5943366

The Last Days: The Apocryphon Of Joe Panther - Andrew Masterson

>> No.5943423

>>5943366
canticle of leibowitz

catholic post-apocalyptic speculative fiction

>> No.5943489

>>5941922
catholics are pretty much obliged to be monarchists. the syllabus of errors speaks against democracy and secular rule.

>> No.5943507

>>5943423
>>5943389

eh, not really interested in anything to do with the apocalypse.

>> No.5943513

>>5936609

traditionalism is the self-centered belief that everything was perfect up until just the moment that you arrived.

yet somehow many of these same people will simultaneously believe that they are living in the perfect culmination of all civilization.

>> No.5943515

>>5936609
American libertarians ruined traditionalism forever.

>> No.5943540

>>5943513
Nah. Traditionalism according to the Guenon and Evola is the belief that there is an universal set of ideas, known for every human culture that was progressively lost when materialism started to rule the world.

For example its impossible to be evolian traditionalist and support monarchy, because monarchy is already degenerated form of the base system.

Idea is to try to find these basic values that should rule our society and try to apply them to the modern life.

>> No.5943561

>>5943540
>Guenon and Evola

fascist right-wing pap.

>> No.5943580

>>5943561
nice shitpost.
I wonder what kind of mental gimnastics would you need to perform to connect Guenon with fascism or "right-wing".
And Evola, as an elitist fag certainly couldnt associate with primitive and plebeian fascist movement. He saw fascist and nazi regimes as a possiblity to spread his ideas but he quickly realised its impossibru

>> No.5943587

>>5943580

you think it's just a coincidence that traditionalism with a capital T and traditionalism with a lower case t are always, always, aligned with conservative, right-wing movements? be they radical or not? surely just accidents of history.

>> No.5943593

hah, traditionalism. i find the whole "patrician" meme to also be pretty rightwing and regressive. but no one likes to hear that.

>> No.5943647

>>5943587
>>5943587
Conservatives misunderstand the tradition. They take for granted the revolutionaries ideas of yesterday and call them theirs.

Conservatism is incompatible with Tradition

>> No.5944085

>>5943152
>>5943152
lol

"Catholics" like you are actually Episcopalians.

"Radical traditionalists" are what would have been considered regular Catholics 100 years ago.

Sedevecantists are the ones who recognize that the Catholic Church was overthrown by the Synagogue of Satan ~50 years ago and that the Throne of Peter is broken.

>> No.5944296

Traditionalism is flawed as a concept because it tries to reinstate practices that have failed in the past. Things don't just fail for no reason, the fact that they're not around today proves that they were flawed, and so it is necessary to learn from them and produce new alternative practices.

>> No.5944335

>>5944085
>2015
>Still worshipping the Demiurge

I lel'd

>> No.5944815

>>5943647
Tradition is incompatible with tradition, every tradition eclipses and older one. If you are a Trve Traditionalist, you will oppose private property as degeneracy, it was clearly invented by Jews.

>> No.5944847

>>5944335
How do you know you aren't?

>> No.5944940

>>5937097
National-Socialist Germany was a Post-Industrial Revolution nation and it managed to resist materialism. The problem is Liberal-Democracy and Capitalism.

>> No.5944963

>>5944940
Lel did it? You may have a point about liberal-democracy but it needed capitalism to become as powerful as it eventually did.

>> No.5944971

>>5937064
If you had visited /pol/ for more than 5 seconds you would have an answer to your own question.

>> No.5944981

>>5936850
Hardly. Traditionalism isn't exactly a popular or accessible ideology, unlike Communism which is fairly simply in theory.

>> No.5945008

>>5936898
Traditionalism ≠ Tradition.

>> No.5945010

>>5944981
It's basically to political ideology as neo-paganims is to religion.

>> No.5945019

>>5944981
>Traditionalism isn't exactly a popular or accessible ideology

If you're not talking about Guénon or Nasr, then you're just a maymay /pol/eech spouting bullshit.

>> No.5945029

>>5944981
>unlike Communism which is fairly simply in theory
Uh, communism might be, Marxism certainly isn't, especially since Marxism is a growing field with lots of competing theories within it, including those against some things of Marx, like Gramsci for instance.

>> No.5945051

>>5945019
Communism is in reality little different from capitalism--atheistic, amoral, completely materialist.

Traditionalism asks people to accept concepts like the divine right of kings, mystical principles, kali yuga, etc.

Also it's completely anti-masses, whereas both communism and capitalism glorify the masses.

I mean there is no way you can claim that traditionalism is a more accessible ideology for a modern than communism, and it's certainly not more popular.

>> No.5945070

>>5945051
>atheistic, amoral, completely materialist.
capitalism is none of those.

>> No.5945075

>>5936609
To me traditionalism is just wanting to honour the culture that your ancestors practiced before you. To me traditionalism is about forming an intimate connection with the past.

>> No.5945082

>>5945070
It is all three, to claim otherwise is ludicrous.

>> No.5945096

>>5945051
Is Capitalism really Atheistic? Marx and the Bolsheviks advocated Atheism. Surely Capitalism isn't Atheistic due to all the money which can be made from religion.

>> No.5945098

>>5945051
Actually you realize there is no political application to Tradition, right? Saying the opposite is fascist nonsense. There is nothing to do during the Kali Yuga except standing aside (which is not riding le tiger or taking le epic iron pill).
Hence it's not an ideology and can't even be compared to reactionism or communism or anything else

>>5945070
Capitalism is amoral.

>> No.5945100

>>5945082
Those three things are entirely outside the bounds of what capitalism can be. Maybe you mean modern capitalists are atheistic, amoral, and materialist?

>> No.5945115

>>5937274
How is Marxism anti-establishment. It's Egalitarian, materialistic and Populist just like Liberal-Democracy and Capitalism.

>> No.5945136

>>5937364
Statist Socialism as an Oxymoron. Wealth cannot be redistributed without a central governing authority. Anarcho-Socialism /Communism is impossible.

>> No.5945147

>>5945096
It is atheistic in the sense that all higher principles are subjugated to economic growth and profit. Religions are corrupted by Capitalism and become subject to its impulses and logic. Hence the horror show of US Protestantism and the travesty of Vatican II.

>> No.5945159

>>5938575
Libertarianism is logically and morally consistent, but totally idealistic. The Non-Aggression Principle is unrealistic, and there's nothing to stop the state from growing large and inefficient in a Libertarian system.

>> No.5945160

>>5945147
Sounds like you have more of an issue with what you perceive as the nature of human beings.

>> No.5945177

>>5945096
You mean hypocrisy. All faiths banned profit for profit and ostentatious charity, the two pillars of modern religion.

>> No.5945178

>>5936609
Tradtionalism is basically trying to keep the things that worked in the past.

Progressivism is basically trying to fix what wasn't broken.

>> No.5945203

>>5945159
The only thing that could stop the state from growing long term is unwilling citizens. It would be there job, if they could manage it.

>> No.5945205

I don't see how Traditionalism is even possible anymore. Most of Traditionalism is founded on spiritual and metaphysical ideas which seem impossible to uphold in our Materialistic, Atheistic, Secular mass oriented society. How can you expect to control an entire society with concepts like the Divine Right of Kings in a Post-Enlightenment era.

>> No.5945211

>>5945203
their*

>> No.5945217

>>5945205
We will go back to those ideals anon, fear not. Our current materialistic society will crumble and cry for Christ.

>> No.5945219

>>5945159
Libertarianism also makes the mistake of placing its faith in the masses as opposed to any form of state authority. The masses, a group of inherent short sighted, impulsive, ignorant and easily manipulable people should never be given such value in a political system or ideology.

>> No.5945243

>>5945219
>The masses, a group of inherent short sighted, impulsive, ignorant and easily manipulable people should never be given such value in a political system or ideology.

The masses are shaped by their elites and any "flaws" with them is a reflection of the elites efforts in the same way that poorly trained soldiers would reflect on their general.

>> No.5945246

>>5945217
After hundreds of years of Secular, Atheist, Scientific thought I don't see how our civilization could slip back into a metaphysical and spiritual mode. Especially in the age of the internet and mass media. Just look at how easily the internet trivialises and ridicules all higher values. Can you imagine a true Traditionalist-Monarchist society in which Christianity was a dominant power and kings were imbued with supernatural qualities with websites like 4chan around?

>> No.5945250

>>5945205
Real traditional people don't force others, they just help whoever wants to be. Evolian kiddies (traditionalists) will spam maymays until they get old and die.

Guénon already denounced those ultramodern fakes.

>> No.5945251

"Traditionalism" that I've encountered is little more than an excuse to control groups of people you disagree with. I can guess several things "traditionalists" would prefer me locked up for, so why would anyone sane support them? This is the kind of shit that promotes people keeping up appearances in fear of being outed as non-conforming. It's fucked up.

>> No.5945257

>>5945217
>Christ
>not the wellspring of modernism
gr8 b8 m8

>> No.5945264

>>5945246
I see it. People will be empty, shallow and in need of religion. It's just a matter of time. Also scientific understanding has nothing to do with this.

>> No.5945280

>>5945251
>Why would anyone sane support them?
They wouldn't. All contemporary revolutionary movements are essentially Populist. They are based on promising the masses additional power, control and liberty in their society. This is true for both Communist and Fascist revolutionary movements in the 20th century. Traditionalism is inherently Anti-Populist and based on taking power away from the masses and removing their Democratic rights. The only way you'll get a Traditionalist revolution is through persuading the elites, which will also never happen.

>> No.5945289

>>5945264
When I said Science I meant the rejection of all supernatural phenomena which cannot be reproduced with the Scientific method, the emphasis on evidence which is so often evoked by New-Atheists.

>> No.5945342

>>5945289
Thanks for clarification anon.
I just think that people won't be able to go on like this for long.
Nice talking to you.

>> No.5945363

>>5945289
People have their breaking points, especially masses of them.
Assuming anon is right, the people will simply not care and look to some hope or some ideal that doesn't make them feel vapid and automated.

>> No.5945418

>>5945243
>The masses are shaped by their elites

In a democracy it's the other way around. Of course, there aren't really any elites in mainstream politics or culture at all anyway, that would be very undemocratic.

>> No.5945437

>>5945418
You can't actually be this retarded

>> No.5945442

>>5945418
>In a democracy it's the other way around
Had you bothered looking into work about political science/sociology in the last 50 years you would have known that this is not the case. They have even have a section called Elite Theory to make looking for information on the topic easier. Do you take concepts like "rule of law" and "equality under the law" at face value to?

>> No.5945451

>>5945418
>In a democracy it's the other way around.
edwardbernayschuckling.mp3

>> No.5945476

>>5945418
>In a democracy it's the other way around.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Even in the direct democracy of Athens, orators made putty out of the people, and in representative democracy with mass digital entertainment, the elites totally shape the lower classes.

>> No.5945517

>>5945418
>In a democracy it's the other way around

What is demagogy.

>> No.5946170

Traditionalists are not individuals, they want to be enslaved by wives and careers.

>> No.5947835

>>5943489
lol i know and it sucks

monarchism a shit

>> No.5947846

>>5947835
Epic post there bro. Can you also teach me how to write properly like that, or will I have to go to reddit to see the true masters.

>>5946170
But that's wrong
>As far as a revolutionary-conservative movement is concerned, there is a need for men who are free from these bourgeois feelings. These men, by adopting an attitude of militant and absolute commitment, should be ready for anything and almost feel that creating a family is a “betrayal”; these men should live sine impedimentis, without any ties or limits to their freedom. In the past there were secular Orders where celibacy was the rule . . . the ideal of a “warrior society” obviously cannot be the petit-bourgeois and parochial ideal of “home and children”; on the contrary, I believe that in the personal domain the right to an ample degree of sexual freedom for these men should be acknowledged, against moralism, social conformism, and “heroism in slippers.”

>> No.5947891

>>5947846
monarchism is literally a fedora-ideology

it assumes that there is "one great individual" who can rule ppl well.

>> No.5947978

>>5947891
>it assumes that there is "one great individual" who can rule ppl well.
He's not an individual, but a person. And a person who is a king doesn't rule, he helps other people rules themselfs by ruling the politics.
>The “absolute person” is obviously the opposite of the individual. The atomic, unqualified, socialized, or standardized unity to which the individual corresponds is opposed in the absolute person by the actual synthesis of the fundamental possibilities and by the full control of the powers inherent in the idea of man (in the limiting case), or of a man of a given race (in a more relative, specialized, and historical domain): that is, by an extreme individuation that corresponds to a de-individualization and to a certain universalization of the types corresponding to it. Thus, this is the disposition required to embody pure authority, to assume the symbol and the power of sovereignty, or the form from above, namely the imperium

>> No.5948138

This thread sucks, I can't learn anything from this 250-post shit-flinging contest

Can someone please clarify a few things for me? I've been called a traditionalist because I disagree with modern PC leftist thought labeling everything an evil, obsolete 'social construct' and seeking to tear it all down in the name of progress. However, I have no interest in a return to Christian values either. I'm so confused, am I merely some bitter, delusional racist, ancient in my thinking, standing in the way of society's natural evolution?

>> No.5948147

>>5944085
"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it"
Basically if the CC was overthrown by Satan for good Christ was never the son of god to begein with since he lied about something this big.

>> No.5948152

>>5948138
You're a Nietzschean.

>> No.5948281

>>5947891
Even worse, it assumes that whatever brought that individual to power will still be there in the offspring. Unfortunately, all genetically inherited features tend to the statistical mean value over time. Meaning smart people will have slightly dumper offspring and vice versa. Wait 200 years and the education can no longer compensate for the genetic insufficiencies.

>> No.5948299

>>5948138
you're a normal person who has spent too much time reading stupid leftist bullshit

>> No.5948312

>>5948152
Either that or an Evolafag

>> No.5948346

>>5948312
While Evola was nominally against Christianity, his aristocratic model was the Christian one, not the pagan one.

>> No.5948504

>>5948346
NRx at work. Evola claimed to be a kshatriya and was naming only hindu or classical models of life.

>> No.5948532

>>5948138
you're a retard who doesn't understand what "social constructs" are and what they actually mean, and you're an American who doesn't understand what the "left" is

>> No.5948554

>>5937379
>It's the same with Watson who has been ostracized due to his remarks on racial differences and such.
Watson has been ostracized because he made controversial statements about a field he obviously wasn't an expert on. He didn't say "the truth", he rambled about shit he didn't know, and there were precedents. I know it can be hard to grasp to politically minded people who try to fit the facts into their ideology but in science we have this policy of avoiding bold statements if we don't have the background and peer-reviewed papers to back them up, especially when they're likely to stir up a lot of shit among profane minds.

>> No.5948659

>>5936947
>raelism
Lamb lies down on broadway?

>> No.5948866

>>5936609
yeah but calling it "le wrong generation" doesn't discredit it.

>> No.5948899

>>5948866
That's right, why bother calling it anything when it does a pretty good job at discrediting itself.

>> No.5948980

>>5948138
Most people don't call you a traditionalist as a philosophical one(like in this thread), it's the simple way of saying a conservative.

>> No.5948986

>>5948504
It was the christian one though. He preffered if his warriors were celibrate.

>the example of those centuries-old religious orders that embraced celibacy suggests that a continuity may be ensured with means other than physical procreation. Besides those who should be available as shock troops, it would certainly be auspicious to form a second group that would ensure the hereditary continuity of a chosen and protected elite, as the counterpart of the transmission of a political-spiritual tradition and worldview: ancient nobility was an example of this.