a ''return'' to traditionalism, a rejection of ''communism''... - Page 10 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

The non-democratic state: Platonism, Fascism, Theocracy, Monarchy etc.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14950112
@Political Interest



Thank you my friend, it is much appreciated.


In regards to the reflective life being the only life worth living to me, to have other minds out there who feel somewhat likewise and share their own reflections, it is a treasure. I can only compare it to moments like Socrates and his friends having the same sort of discussions albeit on a more refined plane for them.


I try to be balanced but I am a naturally anxious person.


As I was, but more than that, fearful and unadventurous. But about the time I first left PoFo, I started journeying, and found myself not only outside my comfort zone in my region of the United States, but even to Europe and Russia, Siberia even. The fear went about that time, same time as my conversion to Orthodox Christianity formally. I'm in my late 40's, but better late than never.


It would appear that the masses are growing tired of these types of politicians. The days when establishment politics was absolute and undisputed seem a very long time ago.


This goes a long way towards explaining the Trump phenomena in America, but also Duterte in the Philippines, etc...


There must be some cultural and spiritual factors which produce higher levels of religious interest in certain parts of the world, especially when we compare them to the West. Having said that it is important not to discount the fact that a lot of people in the former communist countries remain secular or only nominally religious.


I noticed that in Russia, although the momentum is going the other way, conversion rather than dropping out. Part of the situation there is a mistrust of the ''official'' Orthodox church in Russia, going back not just to Sergius and the present gang, but also further back to Patriarch Nikon in 1666 and the split which led to the Raskol, which led to the ''Old Believers''. I will say that I am more than just sympathetic to that grouping, btw.

I think it has to do also with an over eager reflex on the part of some clergy to identify with the modernist Capitalist order, which makes the 2/3rds of Russians and other East Europeans who want some kind of USSR 2.0 back, a bit suspicious.


From what I can see of America the gap between conservatives and liberals is quite narrow now. The differences seem very superficial. In Britain there is almost no gap at all, both the conservatives and the "liberals' if such a comparison is possible, agree on almost all common points, free markets and social liberalism.


And the lesser the gap between the two factions, the more it seems they attack each other on superficial or personal details of the individual politicians.

I remember that years ago I asked a question on this forum about why conservatives like free markets when they lead to all of the awful excesses we see in modern societies today. Of course I was much younger and didn't understand it in such terms but that question reflected how unimpressed I was with centre-right convervatives.


In 1988, I voted for the first time, George H.W. Bush versus Governor Dukakis of Massachusetts. The sole reason then that I voted against Dukakis and for Bush is seeing Dukakis in that US Army tank, looking like such a dork. It's that superficial in American politics with most American ''conservatives''. I of course have changed, lol.


For me it is not a fear that what I believe may be incorrect but an inability to accept reality in some circumstances.


Reality is what it is, but we can be fooled by our limited reason, or by despair in an existential sense. But i've made the conscious effort to trust better than I have in the past.


Do you believe the demographic shift will be so dramatic as to produce such drastic changes in population composition? And what role do you think the far left will play in all this?


I don't think the demographics will change all that much, as native Europeans will convert to Islam unless they are devout Christians.

The Far Left in Europe? I think in Western Europe, identified as they are with bringing down everything, they will join the Muslims and convert. The Left in Eastern Europe will be one of the components of national-patriotic forces that will protect that region from being swamped.

I agree with you about conversion. A lot of the mercantile liberal Westerners will easily convert because they will think the alternative is not worth the effort. Afterall if they stand for nothing then it is easy to embrace the alternative.


I hate to say it, and I hope I'm wrong actually, but as Balthasar Gracian said; ''Hope is a great falsifier''.


Well even the old paganism was based on much more substantial ground. A lot of Neo-Pagans today just seem to make up their own religions. It is almost like hipsterism.


It was more substantial than modern neo-paganism, in that it was embedded in a larger way of life, whereas the later phenomena is more counter-cultural as you indicate.

But I was speaking about a larger ''Paganism'' which is the default setting of natural mankind, in any religion or none. They want a kind of business relationship with God or the gods, Buddha, Allah, and so forth, to ask for earthly blessings or avert earthly disasters, else otherwise the Deity or deities are ignored, and if belief is damaged, scornfully mocked and ''disbelieved'' in. ''Faith'' never truly enters the equation to begin with. Most people are this way in this world, i'm sad to say I think.



I have some ideas about Islamism and the right which might interest you. I will wait to hear your ideas first, though.


I first noticed something of a curious intersection between the West, Islam, and Capitalism, when I heard President Ronald Reagan quote Ibn Khaldun. Later, I saw Reagan and other Rightists praise and support the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan fighting the Soviet Union, and the Iran/contra affair which saw them supply Iran in it's war with Iraq.

Later, I looked at Hitler and Fascism's favorable thinking about Islam, and researched the thoughts of Islamic Scholars on free enterprise and Capitalism, including Grover Norquist and his ideas on Islam/Capitalism.

I've come to the conclusion therefore that at some point, Capitalism and Islam will merge, specifically the Right Wing/Libertarian factions that are increasingly Anarcho-Capitalistic. I see nothing on the part of either party that would prevent it, and every reason why Islam and Capitalism help mutually reinforce each other perfectly.

I could and will go into more details later, but for now I hope it's a good starting point.
#14950151
I've come to the conclusion therefore that at some point, Capitalism and Islam will merge, specifically the Right Wing/Libertarian factions that are increasingly Anarcho-Capitalistic. I see nothing on the part of either party that would prevent it, and every reason why Islam and Capitalism help mutually reinforce each other perfectly.


I sincerely wish Far Right Sage were here to take on this notion. You really need to hear from him. In his absence let me ask this:

Why do you think that anarcho-capitalism and Islam have an affinity for one another. I would think that fascism and Islam would be a far better fit.

I see no libertarian faction of Islam. Where are you seeing it? Islam is at its nature doctrinaire and dogmatic. In that regard very similar to Roman Catholicism though writ large. In all of its modern expressions with which I am aware it seems to be a perfect fit for dictatorial rather than permissive society. It does not rely on consensus and alliance building which is at the heart of anarcho-capitalism. It seriously seems like you are trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

Before you reply let me say that I am not making a value judgment here for the moment. Islam and ultra-nationalism an obvious fit. Military power in a religious state that faces an essential threat is a fit.

Tell me how you imagine the rule-driven belief system that is Islam can reconcile itself with an economic system that imagines itself the very antithesis of formula and dogma.

I don't mean to jump on a small point but this one struck me as a tad wacky.
#14950165
@Drlee

First of all, welcome to this thread, I have always appreciated your intellect, if I have not always agreed with you politically. But anyway, allow me to reply to your questions concerning my recent line of thought regarding Islam and Anarcho-Capitalism;


I sincerely wish Far Right Sage were here to take on this notion. You really need to hear from him.


I have long respected FRS and his opinions, and consider him a online friend. He is missed by me for sure. He would be an asset to this and any conversation.

In his absence let me ask this:

Why do you think that anarcho-capitalism and Islam have an affinity for one another. I would think that fascism and Islam would be a far better fit.


Firstly, the economics of Islam itself are a major consideration in my thinking as far as the affinity I see there between Islam and Capitalism, but by no means the only consideration. Indeed, Islam is so inclined to the principles of free trade and capitalism that it's hard for me to think of any other system being as successful in the Islamic world.

I see no libertarian faction of Islam. Where are you seeing it? Islam is at its nature doctrinaire and dogmatic.


While some linger on the fact that there is no ''separation of mosque and state'' in the Islamic world aside from secular dictatorships, few go on to contemplate that many of these lands of Islam are all privately held by extended families and tribal kinship groups...

In the Koran and Hadiths and other commentaries, Islam is truly revealed as ''doctrinaire and dogmatic'', but these things are written, there is no clerical hierarchy in Sunni Islam or if there were there is none to enforce it from the top down. It's rules are infused within the fabric of society itself.


In that regard very similar to Roman Catholicism though writ large.


No, not really, sorry. There is no ''Pope'' or clerical hierarchy in majority Sunni Islam

In all of its modern expressions with which I am aware it seems to be a perfect fit for dictatorial rather than permissive society.


Direct a question @Victoribus Spolia and ask him if Anarcho-Capitalism has to be ''permissive'' in order to operate. My own thinking is that it does not. Again, private and personal rule over Islamic lands is normative in Islam, if not modernity.



It does not rely on consensus and alliance building which is at the heart of anarcho-capitalism.


I have not read Islamic scholars in a while, but from what I seem to remember and from personal observation of Middle Easterners, I think consensus and alliance building is at the very heart of dealings in the Islamic world too.


It seriously seems like you are trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.


When I first examined the situation as I saw it, I might have agreed, but I disagree now.

Before you reply let me say that I am not making a value judgment here for the moment.


Duly noted ;)


Islam and ultra-nationalism an obvious fit.


Not sure about that, Islam seems pretty international in feeling.

Military power in a religious state that faces an essential threat is a fit.


How about warlike tribes and clans and families? Do they fit even better with Islam than your example?

Tell me how you imagine the rule-driven belief system that is Islam can reconcile itself with an economic system that imagines itself the very antithesis of formula and dogma.


Because Islam from the start-Muhammad being a Trader/Merchant himself-has given free reign to Capitalistic principles throughout it's entire history to this day. One exception being on the charging of interest, but that's another matter almost.
I don't mean to jump on a small point but this one struck me as a tad wacky.


It isn't. Think about it some more with an open mind and the idea might grow on you.
#14950167
While some linger on the fact that there is no ''separation of mosque and state'' in the Islamic world aside from secular dictatorships, few go on to contemplate that many of these lands of Islam are all privately held by extended families and tribal kinship groups...


This is a fair point. I will have to think about this.

In the Koran and Hadiths and other commentaries, Islam is truly revealed as ''doctrinaire and dogmatic'', but these things are written, there is no clerical hierarchy in Sunni Islam or if there were there is none to enforce it from the top down. It's rules are infused within the fabric of society itself.


This is true but Islam has always existed within societies that do not separate mosque from state as you said. Islam has been able to rely on government to enforce its orthodoxy within this symbiotic relationship.

I have to grant that anarcho-capitalism does not absolutely require much diversity of thought within its groups. It does not even absolutely require a significant number of groups. But absent these groups and diversity of thought then what is anarcho about the capitalism?

VS frequently speaks convincingly about feudalism. Is that not closer to the kinship and tribal alliances of which you speak? I ask because I do not really know what form these (mostly rural) institutions take.

Anyway. To ask it another way, what differences might these anarcho-capitalist groups imagine that would cause them to wish for a separate identity.

By the way, I have enjoyed lurking in this thread. You have obviously given this a great deal of thought.
#14950174
@Drlee

Drlee, you said;

This is a fair point. I will have to think about this.


Thank you, and by all means feel welcome to add to the conversation, your input is welcome! I want to remind you and all that this thread represents a kind of flux, brought on by nagging and vexing questions I have politically and philosophically, and what is here is the working out of this problem i'm having.



This is true but Islam has always existed within societies that do not separate mosque from state as you said. Islam has been able to rely on government to enforce its orthodoxy within this symbiotic relationship.


But again, it has been personal government, not saying informal but certainly at the hands of persons with a non-Westphalian State idea of government doing the enforcement.

I have to grant that anarcho-capitalism does not absolutely require much diversity of thought within its groups. It does not even absolutely require a significant number of groups. But absent these groups and diversity of thought then what is anarcho about the capitalism?


Good question to be sure. But I go back to earlier American thinkers like Orestes Brownson among others, who posited that true civilizations as opposed to political barbarism, base their polities upon public trust and the common good, over some privately derived ''right'' based on birth or wealth or even religious selection, too... Point of my digression is that Anarcho-Capitalism would be entirely private and personal, rule by virtue of ownership of a territory of private property. Note that in Islam, Islamic territory is claimed forever, and so you have Islamist groups claiming the lands of Spain and Portugal and the Balkans, for Islam. Same principle applied but given a theological justification.

VS frequently speaks convincingly about feudalism. Is that not closer to the kinship and tribal alliances of which you speak? I ask because I do not really know what form these (mostly rural) institutions take.


Some may disagree, (and likely will about Islam, given the circumstances) but yes, these institutions are personal, and bound by ties of mutual but informal and unspoken private debt, honor, obligation, and duty, patrons and the receivers of a patron's help. So the closeness to European feudality is there.

Anyway. To ask it another way, what differences might these anarcho-capitalist groups imagine that would cause them to wish for a separate identity.


Well, I think that you have probably noticed the breakdown of the modern secular state in the Middle East, propped up by force alone. This isn't going to get any better for such secular statists there. And filling the vacuum are these Islamist groups applying the traditional Sharia law and Islamic customs and at no point behaving as a modern state. This will only grow in my opinion, like a flood.

By the way, I have enjoyed lurking in this thread. You have obviously given this a great deal of thought.


Thank you very much! I do not take myself too seriously, but I do take the problems of my fellow human beings very much in a serious vein, and if by a bit of thoughtful chatter I can help work out an issue that has vexed myself and others... Then I feel justified to continue.
#14950335
I have been a material monist, although a theistic one, for most of my adult life, and while I'm open to other possibilities, I remain one now. As a Orthodox Christian, some might be scandalized that I take ''material'' more than ''spiritual'' values as guiding principles. What do I mean exactly by this? I don't divide the two at all. My Christianity that was taught me is intended as a way of life, from birth into eternity... With earthly consequences.

All religion is based on trust in what is received as the metaphysical truth, misplaced as that trust may be in certain specific instances or not. That does not mean absolute trust in the persons given charge over the structure which imparts these truths (or lies, depending on where one stands), but in what is thought and felt to be right. What this comes down to is contact between ideas which may be conditioned by human feelings and historically conditioned circumstances, and the real material world and it's facts which we all deal with every day. As a Orthodox Christian, I am very much involved in the world, and the world because of the Incarnation is in fact good for that reason. As a member of Christ's Church, I am called to service for the sake of my fellow men and for the glory of God.

So it is not crass, and a lessening of the spirit of the Good News of Salvation, to suggest concrete ways of life that are more in keeping with the dignity of all human beings as human beings, made in the Image and Likeness of God, in spite of their sins and faults and whether or not they are even apparently headed on the road to eternal life.

How can I say ''Mine!'' if I love my Brother as myself? Is Private Property at most a concession to human weakness and sin, like divorce, say? What then is it to keep this higher life that Christians are called (at least ideally) to operate in accordance with, to expand it somewhat to all members of society? Not just Monks and Nuns?

If someone were to say to me now that ''atheistic and secularistic'' Socialism is wrong, I might agree, but on the other hand, what is ''Antichristian'' about free health care? Free utilities? Free education? Free medical care? Ownership of the means of production by the laborers who actually produce?

I'm not offering answers to these questions at this point, just giving food for thought either way. I have worked and labored my entire adult life-and even in childhood-and struggled along with many others, wondering if a more just society was possible or whether I had to just ''suck it up'' and endure this life and it's socio-economic system. Either way it seems that my Christian thinking leads me to do whatever the Holy Spirit wills me to do as a person, but it appears to be important to at least ask these questions in all humility.

Now I balance this set of questions which may be capable of optimistic and rational answers, with an equally rational assessment that could be seen as pessimistic. That modern life itself is unsustainable anyway, that a collapse is looming the world over, and that since especially in those conditions ''man is a wolf to man'' it might be wise to be more realistic... To again make accommodation to human weakness and the barbarousness of his conditions in a particular time and place.

So there are some very ''materialistic'' questions. Sure, my earthly life will someday draw to a close, but Heaven and Hell are genuine Places; they occupy Space and are capable of extension and sub-division. I'll be in one place or another. But seems to me that the Foyer or Antechamber of both Places is right here in this world, and the decisions we make in relation to other Persons, including the God in Three Persons of Christian belief, is very material and very relational... As opposed to being so detached from everyday life and reality that a ''spiritualization'' and ''dematerialization'' of the Last Things is created, on the part of Christians who unwittingly contribute to the decline in Christianity itself...
#14950450
annatar1914 wrote:In regards to the reflective life being the only life worth living to me, to have other minds out there who feel somewhat likewise and share their own reflections, it is a treasure. I can only compare it to moments like Socrates and his friends having the same sort of discussions albeit on a more refined plane for them.


There is definitely a Socratic character to our discussions here. It is not a tiring debate but a friendly exchange of ideas. You’re absolutely right that these types of conversations are something of a treasure. I enjoy them because it is reaching a final consensus as opposed to a series of contradictory arguments. Here I feel that we can come to some conclusions.

annatar1914 wrote:As I was, but more than that, fearful and unadventurous. But about the time I first left PoFo, I started journeying, and found myself not only outside my comfort zone in my region of the United States, but even to Europe and Russia, Siberia even. The fear went about that time, same time as my conversion to Orthodox Christianity formally. I'm in my late 40's, but better late than never.


There are many places I want to travel to. Europe and Russia are my dream destinations. I think it would be a wasted life if I had the chance to step foot in Great Russia and chose not to. Although travel unsettles me I think that if I want to go somewhere enough I will ignore my worries. Afterall being scared and uncomfortable are experiences that we have to face all through our lives whether we like it or not. Therefore we might as well just embrace it as part of life.

annatar1914 wrote:This goes a long way towards explaining the Trump phenomena in America, but also Duterte in the Philippines, etc...


I think Corbyn’s rise in Britain is also part of this. And this is why I believe the left could still play a role in the future. There is definitely a resurgence of a type of Neo-Marxism.

I believe that we will eventually see the collapse of centrism as we know it. As the century becomes more radical so will the politics. I hate to make such a Leninist type statement but it is perhaps suitable given the climate we are in today.

annatar1914 wrote:I noticed that in Russia, although the momentum is going the other way, conversion rather than dropping out. Part of the situation there is a mistrust of the ''official'' Orthodox church in Russia, going back not just to Sergius and the present gang, but also further back to Patriarch Nikon in 1666 and the split which led to the Raskol, which led to the ''Old Believers''. I will say that I am more than just sympathetic to that grouping, btw.


Perhaps it is a process? The Russians only just exited from communism. Maybe as time progresses they will continue to become more religious and explore Orthodoxy both as a cultural heritage and as their religion? I always take a long term view of historical processes.

Regardless of the religiosity of Russians, I think there are far more of them who are actively religious than we will find in the West. Of course you will know better than me having stepped foot on Russian soil and being Orthodox yourself.

annatar1914 wrote:I think it has to do also with an over eager reflex on the part of some clergy to identify with the modernist Capitalist order, which makes the 2/3rds of Russians and other East Europeans who want some kind of USSR 2.0 back, a bit suspicious.


This is fascinating, would you care to explain more?

annatar1914 wrote:And the lesser the gap between the two factions, the more it seems they attack each other on superficial or personal details of the individual politicians.


This is certainly true. When it becomes a contest between two candidates who have exactly the same world view, the same politics and most importantly lack any interest in real change then politics will lose all substance.

annatar1914 wrote:In 1988, I voted for the first time, George H.W. Bush versus Governor Dukakis of Massachusetts. The sole reason then that I voted against Dukakis and for Bush is seeing Dukakis in that US Army tank, looking like such a dork. It's that superficial in American politics with most American ''conservatives''. I of course have changed, lol.


I don’t know much about Dukakis but I doubt there would have been much difference between him and Bush. The awkwardness of him sitting in a tank was probably the only real difference between the two in terms of real deep politics, in other words none!

annatar1914 wrote:Reality is what it is, but we can be fooled by our limited reason, or by despair in an existential sense. But i've made the conscious effort to trust better than I have in the past.


I have been in a type of existential despair my entire adult life. I’ve never been able to accept the hard realities of the world and the way it operates. Now I am starting to realise that there is no control over the world but I can control my personal conduct. All I can do is live as honourably as I can and fulfil my duties in whatever capacity.

annatar1914 wrote:I don't think the demographics will change all that much, as native Europeans will convert to Islam unless they are devout Christians.


What factors do you think will result in Europeans being drawn to Islam en masse? Will it be living in close proximity to Muslims and being drawn to their religion, in other words a type of religious and cultural diffusion? Or could it even be that liberalism and post-modernity will reach their end which will result in this mass conversion?

annatar1914 wrote:The Far Left in Europe? I think in Western Europe, identified as they are with bringing down everything, they will join the Muslims and convert. The Left in Eastern Europe will be one of the components of national-patriotic forces that will protect that region from being swamped.


It is a difficult question because the left as they exist today are very much opposed to Islamists on several points, namely gender issues and sexual morality. It could be hard to convert the typical leftist when they have their own social agenda which is also opposed to Muslim concepts of traditional society.
But then as I said in my previous post the mercantile middle class liberal type of Westerner will easily convert, although these types of people do not necessarily represent the most committed leftist in Europe today.

As you said, I agree with you about the left in places such as the former Soviet Union. They still retain their patriotic features. However I think the left in several Warsaw Pact states is going in the direction of most of the Western left. I am thinking of Poland as an example.

annatar1914 wrote:I hate to say it, and I hope I'm wrong actually, but as Balthasar Gracian said; ''Hope is a great falsifier''.


I can definitely see it. Living in England I can definitely see the potential for this to happen.

annatar1914 wrote:It was more substantial than modern neo-paganism, in that it was embedded in a larger way of life, whereas the later phenomena is more counter-cultural as you indicate.

But I was speaking about a larger ''Paganism'' which is the default setting of natural mankind, in any religion or none. They want a kind of business relationship with God or the gods, Buddha, Allah, and so forth, to ask for earthly blessings or avert earthly disasters, else otherwise the Deity or deities are ignored, and if belief is damaged, scornfully mocked and ''disbelieved'' in. ''Faith'' never truly enters the equation to begin with. Most people are this way in this world, i'm sad to say I think.


Yes true faith is never a business like contract.

annatar1914 wrote:I first noticed something of a curious intersection between the West, Islam, and Capitalism, when I heard President Ronald Reagan quote Ibn Khaldun. Later, I saw Reagan and other Rightists praise and support the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan fighting the Soviet Union, and the Iran/contra affair which saw them supply Iran in it's war with Iraq.

Later, I looked at Hitler and Fascism's favorable thinking about Islam, and researched the thoughts of Islamic Scholars on free enterprise and Capitalism, including Grover Norquist and his ideas on Islam/Capitalism.


This was exactly what I had in mind and I was hoping you did too. The part about how the fascists viewed Islam is especially interesting to me. I have done some deep research into this subject and the conclusion I reached was that the Nazis were well disposed towards Muslims. Contrary to the idea that Germany courted Muslims during the war for strategic reasons there was actually a very real feeling of camaraderie and admiration for Islam and Muslims. Hitler is quoted as saying that the peoples of Islam are closer to the Germans than the French and he even lamented the fact that there was not an Islamic conquest of Europe which would have produced Islamised Germans.

It is well known that several Nazis fled the to the Arab world after WWII and became Muslims. I think that it was the vast majority of them who went there. Johann von Leers is perhaps the most famous example.

I even saw an interview with Otto Ernst Remer in which he spoke glowingly of Khomeini and said that the future belongs to Islam.

annatar1914 wrote:I've come to the conclusion therefore that at some point, Capitalism and Islam will merge, specifically the Right Wing/Libertarian factions that are increasingly Anarcho-Capitalistic. I see nothing on the part of either party that would prevent it, and every reason why Islam and Capitalism help mutually reinforce each other perfectly.

I could and will go into more details later, but for now I hope it's a good starting point.


Yes I very much think this is a possibility. The Anglo-Saxon world could embrace Islam. In fact I have long thought that Islam is suited to Anglo-Saxons. And I mean this as nothing but a statement of fact, I am not intending to be rude by saying this. I have even had an Anglo-Saxon convert to Islam agree with me on this. And I have read online very high praise from Muslims for Western converts who it is said are very devout.
#14950457
Political Interest wrote:Yes I very much think this is a possibility. The Anglo-Saxon world could embrace Islam. In fact I have long thought that Islam is suited to Anglo-Saxons. And I mean this as nothing but a statement of fact, I am not intending to be rude by saying this. I have even had an Anglo-Saxon convert to Islam agree with me on this. And I have read online very high praise from Muslims for Western converts who it is said are very devout.

This is just wishful thinking on your part.
#14950461
Political Interest wrote:Hardly wishful thinking. I do not want Anglo-Saxons to become Muslims.

Islam is basically the opposite of what being an anglo is all about:
1. Booze
2. Bacon
3. Sexy women
4. Banging tunes
5. Science
6. Freedom of speech, thought and association
7. Not getting blown up by suicide bombers

Islam has nothing to offer us that we want and we don't give in to terrorism, we fight fire with fire. :flamer:

#14950465
SolarCross wrote:Islam is basically the opposite of what being an anglo is all about:
1. Booze
2. Bacon
3. Sexy women
4. Banging tunes
5. Science
6. Freedom of speech, thought and association
7. Not getting blown up by suicide bombers


:lol:

EDIT:

@Political Interest @annatar1914

I will responding to some of your arguments/responses to me (God willing) sometime this week.

@Drlee, I plan on starting a thread on Anarcho-Capitalism and Feudalism sometime this week, possibly as a response to things said on this thread and in the Crusades poll. I hope to see you there. ;)

In Him,
-VS.
#14950560
@Political Interest

Greetings again, my friend! Let us continue our discussion, you replied about the nature of our conversations on this thread that;


There is definitely a Socratic character to our discussions here. It is not a tiring debate but a friendly exchange of ideas. You’re absolutely right that these types of conversations are something of a treasure. I enjoy them because it is reaching a final consensus as opposed to a series of contradictory arguments. Here I feel that we can come to some conclusions.


Thank you, and yes, such is my intention on two levels; one, simply to commune with other minds that might have better insights consciously or not into the points of reference we have had in this thread, about modernity, Socialism, the traditional way of life, Christianity, etc..

The second intention is to indeed come to some conclusions. I might be alright with unknowing, but if I can avoid it that would be good for my peace of mind, and be intellectually stimulating.


There are many places I want to travel to. Europe and Russia are my dream destinations. I think it would be a wasted life if I had the chance to step foot in Great Russia and chose not to. Although travel unsettles me I think that if I want to go somewhere enough I will ignore my worries. Afterall being scared and uncomfortable are experiences that we have to face all through our lives whether we like it or not. Therefore we might as well just embrace it as part of life.


I don't know if you can identify with this, but a great deal of my vague anxiety I've had my entire life disappeared after my trip back from overseas, spending time in Russia. I faced my fears known and unknown, and overcame them, partly because I absolutely had to trust, every single moment, I was not in control, but it gave me a peace of mind that i'd rarely had before that point in my life.



I think Corbyn’s rise in Britain is also part of this. And this is why I believe the left could still play a role in the future. There is definitely a resurgence of a type of Neo-Marxism.


I believe Jeremy Corbyn has a political future, and seeing him as British PM would definitely be a break with the past there.

I believe that we will eventually see the collapse of centrism as we know it. As the century becomes more radical so will the politics. I hate to make such a Leninist type statement but it is perhaps suitable given the climate we are in today.


I don't think it's too extreme to say. I happen to believe that ''centrism'' as you call it almost could be called not so much a political ideology as a decision not to have a political ideology, and using the legislative process to delay decisions indefinitely, stalling and compromise.

I do not think that is what is called for.


Perhaps it is a process? The Russians only just exited from communism. Maybe as time progresses they will continue to become more religious and explore Orthodoxy both as a cultural heritage and as their religion? I always take a long term view of historical processes.

Regardless of the religiosity of Russians, I think there are far more of them who are actively religious than we will find in the West. Of course you will know better than me having stepped foot on Russian soil and being Orthodox yourself.


I can pretty much agree with what you've said here, I believe in a rebirth of Orthodoxy, and I know that if it does, it will come from Russia.


This is fascinating, would you care to explain more?


Polling over the past 25+ years and other data, including my own personal and anecdotal observations, tells me that the majority of Russians had it better under the Soviet Union. Many I know still keep their Soviet passports and look with nostalgia on that period, want the USSR to be brought back in some form, and look at the present period as one of collapse and decline.


This is certainly true. When it becomes a contest between two candidates who have exactly the same world view, the same politics and most importantly lack any interest in real change then politics will lose all substance.


It's what I've seen, for sure.



I don’t know much about Dukakis but I doubt there would have been much difference between him and Bush. The awkwardness of him sitting in a tank was probably the only real difference between the two in terms of real deep politics, in other words none!


Little did I know now, but you're absolutely right, not a damn bit of difference.



I have been in a type of existential despair my entire adult life. I’ve never been able to accept the hard realities of the world and the way it operates. Now I am starting to realise that there is no control over the world but I can control my personal conduct. All I can do is live as honourably as I can and fulfil my duties in whatever capacity.


It's truly the better way, doing all you can personally with grace and honor, within your own means.


What factors do you think will result in Europeans being drawn to Islam en masse? Will it be living in close proximity to Muslims and being drawn to their religion, in other words a type of religious and cultural diffusion? Or could it even be that liberalism and post-modernity will reach their end which will result in this mass conversion?


I think it'll be primarily the last part, with modernity reaching it's logical conclusions, and forcing people to make a choice.



It is a difficult question because the left as they exist today are very much opposed to Islamists on several points, namely gender issues and sexual morality. It could be hard to convert the typical leftist when they have their own social agenda which is also opposed to Muslim concepts of traditional society.
But then as I said in my previous post the mercantile middle class liberal type of Westerner will easily convert, although these types of people do not necessarily represent the most committed leftist in Europe today.


At the core of the faux left in the West, there is nothing, except at bottom a desire to tear down all the old symbols and narratives. I believe that many will choose then other symbols, other narratives, such as the Islamic one.

As you said, I agree with you about the left in places such as the former Soviet Union. They still retain their patriotic features. However I think the left in several Warsaw Pact states is going in the direction of most of the Western left. I am thinking of Poland as an example.


Yes, the more latinate and western in culture, have probably made their choice.



I can definitely see it. Living in England I can definitely see the potential for this to happen.


Not that I would want that of course, perhaps there is time to change things.



Yes true faith is never a business like contract.


No, it doesn't seem so, but it's what people are inclined to think



This was exactly what I had in mind and I was hoping you did too. The part about how the fascists viewed Islam is especially interesting to me. I have done some deep research into this subject and the conclusion I reached was that the Nazis were well disposed towards Muslims. Contrary to the idea that Germany courted Muslims during the war for strategic reasons there was actually a very real feeling of camaraderie and admiration for Islam and Muslims. Hitler is quoted as saying that the peoples of Islam are closer to the Germans than the French and he even lamented the fact that there was not an Islamic conquest of Europe which would have produced Islamised Germans.


He may eventually be ironically be proven correct on this count, for the future if not the past.

It is well known that several Nazis fled the to the Arab world after WWII and became Muslims. I think that it was the vast majority of them who went there. Johann von Leers is perhaps the most famous example.

I even saw an interview with Otto Ernst Remer in which he spoke glowingly of Khomeini and said that the future belongs to Islam.


Fascism is a close fit in some respects, but I think that there are closer ones.


Yes I very much think this is a possibility. The Anglo-Saxon world could embrace Islam. In fact I have long thought that Islam is suited to Anglo-Saxons. And I mean this as nothing but a statement of fact, I am not intending to be rude by saying this. I have even had an Anglo-Saxon convert to Islam agree with me on this. And I have read online very high praise from Muslims for Western converts who it is said are very devout.


Islam is a total way of life, as Christianity used to be and should be still, and is in fact a sort of Christian Heresy. So it is easy for the unchurched and uncommitted but cultural christians to follow, and even exhibit zeal within the bounds they've set for themselves.




EDIT;

@Victoribus Spolia

VS, you said;

@Political Interest @annatar1914

I will responding to some of your arguments/responses to me (God willing) sometime this week.

@Drlee, I plan on starting a thread on Anarcho-Capitalism and Feudalism sometime this week, possibly as a response to things said on this thread and in the Crusades poll. I hope to see you there. ;)

In Him,
-VS.


Sounds like a plan, I'm looking forwards to it, and I suspect Political Interest and Drlee is as well.

In Him,

annatar1914
#14950799
@SolarCross @Victoribus Spolia @annatar1914

I would like to let you all know that my opinion on Anglo-Saxons being inclined to Islam is one I would like to recant. The way my statement read sounds disrespectful both to Muslims and Anglo-Saxons. It was a poorly thought out idea. I apologise if I have offended anyone.

However I still do not discount the possibility of the Anglosphere converting to Islam in future. If this were to happen it would be due to structural realities and historic processes currently underway, circumstances unique to the Occident and its contemporary historic conditions.

annatar1914 wrote:Greetings again, my friend! Let us continue our discussion, you replied about the nature of our conversations on this thread that;

Thank you, and yes, such is my intention on two levels; one, simply to commune with other minds that might have better insights consciously or not into the points of reference we have had in this thread, about modernity, Socialism, the traditional way of life, Christianity, etc..

The second intention is to indeed come to some conclusions. I might be alright with unknowing, but if I can avoid it that would be good for my peace of mind, and be intellectually stimulating.


It is a privilege for me to be part of such discussions with all of you.

annatar1914 wrote:I don't know if you can identify with this, but a great deal of my vague anxiety I've had my entire life disappeared after my trip back from overseas, spending time in Russia. I faced my fears known and unknown, and overcame them, partly because I absolutely had to trust, every single moment, I was not in control, but it gave me a peace of mind that i'd rarely had before that point in my life.


I can definitely understand what you mean. In fact I have heard someone else once say that travel made them less anxious because they had to just go with the flow and not worry.

But I am anxious not only about travel but even just daily life, how I looked at someone at work or if I came off as rude to them, whether someone is annoyed at me and other concerns. The experience of living with people is incredibly intense.

annatar1914 wrote:I believe Jeremy Corbyn has a political future, and seeing him as British PM would definitely be a break with the past there.


And unlike Trump it appears that Corbyn is a man of convinced ideological positions.

However I don’t think he will succeed even if he does get elected. Structurally it just will not be possible.

annatar1914 wrote:I don't think it's too extreme to say. I happen to believe that ''centrism'' as you call it almost could be called not so much a political ideology as a decision not to have a political ideology, and using the legislative process to delay decisions indefinitely, stalling and compromise.

I do not think that is what is called for.


I do think that centrism whether centre-left or centre-right can work if it is pursued on correct lines. For example I think that what existed in the West up until the 1990s was a type of working centrism. And in many ways Vladimir Putin is himself a centrist. My objection to liberal centrism is essentially that it has become as you say the politics of nothing as opposed to its own type of politics. It became the default rather than a position based on conviction.

I have some respect for centrists like those in post-war West Germany like Konrad Adenauer. Lee Kuan Yew appears to have been a centrist as well.

The systemic collapse that will remove centrism from mainstream politics and push people towards the extremes of the political system will be the result of establishment failure. Liberal democracy could work but the elites are not doing their job and this is producing a gradual systemic failure. The West has long ago entered its stagnation period, much like that which existed in the Soviet Union.

annatar1914 wrote:I can pretty much agree with what you've said here, I believe in a rebirth of Orthodoxy, and I know that if it does, it will come from Russia.


And what this rebirth in Russia shows us is that if it is possible there it is possible here. The Russians had a choice after 1991 and they still have the choice, to become secular and culturally liberal.

I think that the West also has this choice, it can choose to become conservative again. It can explore its religion once again. Russia could serve as inspiration for such a development.

annatar1914 wrote:Polling over the past 25+ years and other data, including my own personal and anecdotal observations, tells me that the majority of Russians had it better under the Soviet Union. Many I know still keep their Soviet passports and look with nostalgia on that period, want the USSR to be brought back in some form, and look at the present period as one of collapse and decline.


Indeed. I try to tell this to Westerners, I try to let them know that contrary to their reading of Soviet history the experience of the USSR is far more complicated in the historic memory of Russians. That it was a period of relative stability where the average person could live well and where Russia was strong cannot be denied.

It is not well known in the West but there was an entire Soviet popular culture with music, films and experiences that people in that country grew up with and experienced throughout their idyllic youth. It cannot just all be dismissed in the way that Western liberals want it to be. People will always remember fondly the times when they were young and in love.

annatar1914 wrote:It's truly the better way, doing all you can personally with grace and honor, within your own means.


In many ways it is the only certainty in life. We cannot control anything around us but we have full control over what we do in response. It is in a sense the most convincing answer to existential crisis.

annatar1914 wrote:I think it'll be primarily the last part, with modernity reaching it's logical conclusions, and forcing people to make a choice.


Therefore Westerners will research Islam and find in it an alternative to the utter desolation post-modernity has left them?

annatar1914 wrote:At the core of the faux left in the West, there is nothing, except at bottom a desire to tear down all the old symbols and narratives. I believe that many will choose then other symbols, other narratives, such as the Islamic one.


Quite possibly. It would be a rejection of Western narratives and structures but instead of replacing them with the nothingness of contemporary faux cultural leftism they replace will them with Islamic narratives, symbols and structures. When it is a choice between faux cultural leftism and Islam it is clear which of the two is more noble and which would appeal to a person’s inner sense of what is right and just. Islam is a noble and honourable religion in its own right.

annatar1914 wrote:Yes, the more latinate and western in culture, have probably made their choice.


It is striking how civilisations all follow the same trajectory. Even though Swedes, Danes, Scots, Poles and Lithuanians all speak different languages there is a common civilizational trajectory.

annatar1914 wrote:Not that I would want that of course, perhaps there is time to change things.


I think there is definitely time to revive Christianity. It might be possible that once post-modernity reaches the end of its course the choice may be made to look at a return to Europe’s traditional religion. There is still a current within England, for example, which respects traditionalist Catholicism and you can still see a nascent revival of Christianity that could gain momentum at any time if the English people became interested in making such a decision.

annatar1914 wrote:No, it doesn't seem so, but it's what people are inclined to think


I believe that all of the great religious traditions are valuable and honourable. Although we may have our own religion I think all of them are worthy of respect. There is a big difference between a traditional Muslim and a Western neo-pagan. I have a very deep respect for Islam.

Russia is an excellent example of how all religions are respected while still maintaining loyalty to and sincere belief in one’s own religion.

annatar1914 wrote:He may eventually be ironically be proven correct on this count, for the future if not the past.


It is very interesting that the far right, even in the US are now starting to talk about “White Shari’Ah.”
annatar1914 wrote:Fascism is a close fit in some respects, but I think that there are closer ones.


I think that fascism still had many differences with Islam even if the former projected itself onto the latter. A lot of it was probably romanticism on the part of the German fascists.

annatar1914 wrote:Islam is a total way of life, as Christianity used to be and should be still, and is in fact a sort of Christian Heresy. So it is easy for the unchurched and uncommitted but cultural christians to follow, and even exhibit zeal within the bounds they've set for themselves.


As I mentioned at the very top of this post my position on Anglo-Saxons and their relationship to Islam has changed, I have recanted my old opinion. But I do agree with you that someone from an Abrahamic religious background could very easily be converted, especially if they are not interested in Christianity but still want to be religious. In the final analysis I suppose it is a question of whether lukewarm cultural Christians will choose Christianity or Islam once post-modernity is over.

Victoribus Spolia wrote:I will responding to some of your arguments/responses to me (God willing) sometime this week.


I look forward to it, VS.

In Him,

Political Interest
#14950907
@Political Interest , @Victoribus Spolia , @Potemkin @Decky @Drlee and others; I plan on a reply to you Political Interest my friend, and to you also my good friend Victoribus Spolia, but tonight I am thinking about the anniversary of the October 4th constitutional crisis in Russia that happened in 1993. It will be 25 years since those bloody days when the last remnants of the political order of the Soviet Union perished, with in actuality thousands dead, and Yeltsin in full power.

Here's a Communist's view of what happened;



And video of the fighting and protests of those days;



And the Wiki article on it;

''1993 Russian Constitution Crisis''

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_Russ ... nal_crisis

My personal views at the time were such that I was so influenced by the mainstream media, that I had little sympathy for these people, but I could not look away, and was mesmerized by the images. Later, seeing the collapse of society, the lawlessness and corruption and the brazen theft of the Oligarchs, the suffering and misery of people I knew, I just had to wonder... The effects of a real ''Cognitive Dissonance'' at work.

Today, I am left with a horrible burden, a terrible sadness, all sorts of emotions that are related to the themes of what I've been talking about and hearing from others on this thread.
#14950948
Political Interest wrote:I would like to let you all know that my opinion on Anglo-Saxons being inclined to Islam is one I would like to recant. The way my statement read sounds disrespectful both to Muslims and Anglo-Saxons. It was a poorly thought out idea. I apologise if I have offended anyone.

However I still do not discount the possibility of the Anglosphere converting to Islam in future. If this were to happen it would be due to structural realities and historic processes currently underway, circumstances unique to the Occident and its contemporary historic conditions.

It's alright I am not offended just baffled how anyone could out of all the people in the world think anglo-saxons have some special affinity for Islam. Surely the French will convert first? Islam doesn't spread though theology (because Islamic theology is garbage) it spreads through terrorism. Islamic sub-populations don't turn up the terrorism until they number enough for that to have serious effect. France has more muslims than even the UK (which has the most of the anglo countries). Moreover the french are prone to surrendering and running away unlike anglos. I gaurantee France will convert before any anglo country.

Come to think of it, most of your posts are about casting aspersions on anglo-saxons aren't they? What's the reason for that? Just curious.
#14951064
@SolarCross , @Drlee @annatar1914 @Political Interest

I have decided to start a new thread under the Libertarian subforum entitled:

Ancaps, Neo-Feudalism, and The Natural Order.

This will be my address to several of your objections to my position as well as clarification on my own views. I will not be posting on this thread further.

If you wish for me to address or answer something specifically, please let me know as I am writing the draft right now. If I do not post it tomorrow, I will post it monday or tuesday.

Here is the outline:

I. Introductory Thoughts and Questions By Fellow-Posters.

II. The Collapse of The State and Its Immediate Consequences.

III. Libertine Lifestyles in A State of Nature: A Praxeological Analysis.

IV. Statism and Decadence: An Analysis.

V. Statism and The Inevitability of Tyranny and Insolvency.

VI. Freedom Without A State.

VII. Order Without A State.

VIII. Historical Precedent.

IX. Christianity and Anarcho-Capitalism in Three Points.

X. Common Objections Addressed By My Variation of The System.

#14951353
annatar1914 wrote:My personal views at the time were such that I was so influenced by the mainstream media, that I had little sympathy for these people, but I could not look away, and was mesmerized by the images. Later, seeing the collapse of society, the lawlessness and corruption and the brazen theft of the Oligarchs, the suffering and misery of people I knew, I just had to wonder... The effects of a real ''Cognitive Dissonance'' at work.

Today, I am left with a horrible burden, a terrible sadness, all sorts of emotions that are related to the themes of what I've been talking about and hearing from others on this thread.


I think this will be the future of the West. This is a perfect example of what I mean when I speak about the collapse of centrism. In Russia during the 1990s liberal centrism nearly collapsed but Putin saved it in a sense. Putin was able to create liberal national conservatism which is a patriotic force.

SolarCross wrote:It's alright I am not offended just baffled how anyone could out of all the people in the world think anglo-saxons have some special affinity for Islam. Surely the French will convert first? Islam doesn't spread though theology (because Islamic theology is garbage) it spreads through terrorism. Islamic sub-populations don't turn up the terrorism until they number enough for that have serious effect. France has more muslims than even the UK (which has the most of the anglo countries). The french are prone to surrendering and running away unlike anglos. I gaurantee France will convert before any anglo country.

I am in fact probably the best friend Anglos could have.

Come to think of it, most of your posts are about casting aspersions on anglo-saxons aren't they? What's the reason for that? Just curious.


As I mentioned, I do not hold this position anymore. It was a poorly thought out idea. Of course it might be possible for English speakers to convert to Islam but that would be based on many different factors and influences. Yes I agree with you, it could be the Germans, French or Scandinavians as well.

Regarding my posts about Anglo-Saxons, they are not made with the intention of casting aspersion, although I can understand how you could read them that way. What they are intended to do is criticise the excesses taking place in countries like England and America. It’s a type of tough love and is not meant as anything but constructive criticism. If I really hated Anglos I would not be warning about the English becoming a demographic minority in England would I? I wouldn’t make posts talking about racism against white British people either.

Victoribus Spolia wrote:I have decided to start a new thread under the Libertarian subforum entitled:

Ancaps, Neo-Feudalism, and The Natural Order.


I will definitely take a look at it. It should be interesting.
#14951355
@Political Interest, @Victoribus Spolia , @Potemkin

Hello Political Interest,

Was on a quick business trip and just got back home... But I am looking to answer your comments best I can;

I would like to let you all know that my opinion on Anglo-Saxons being inclined to Islam is one I would like to recant. The way my statement read sounds disrespectful both to Muslims and Anglo-Saxons. It was a poorly thought out idea. I apologise if I have offended anyone.


I'm not going to put a value judgement on it, other than to say that I think there is a special sort of infidelity at work in the Anglosphere and that may incline some to the Unitarian and ''Jesus was a great spiritual teacher'' sort of belief that in turn could lead to Islam. As for apologizing for any ''poorly thought out idea'', If I did that I'd be apologizing a great deal i'm afraid. You've got a good head on your shoulders.

However I still do not discount the possibility of the Anglosphere converting to Islam in future. If this were to happen it would be due to structural realities and historic processes currently underway, circumstances unique to the Occident and its contemporary historic conditions.


Agreed.


It is a privilege for me to be part of such discussions with all of you.


Believe me, the privilege is all mine, I started this thread with certain aims in mind, but I have also been rewarded in others.



I can definitely understand what you mean. In fact I have heard someone else once say that travel made them less anxious because they had to just go with the flow and not worry.

But I am anxious not only about travel but even just daily life, how I looked at someone at work or if I came off as rude to them, whether someone is annoyed at me and other concerns. The experience of living with people is incredibly intense.


Perhaps we're more alike than I realized, lol.


And unlike Trump it appears that Corbyn is a man of convinced ideological positions.


Trump is an Ideologue, but of the sort that probably hasn't been seen in centuries... Of that, more later...

However I don’t think he will succeed even if he does get elected. Structurally it just will not be possible.


I agree. Now as to the ramifications of that structural impossibility, I cannot say quite yet at this point.


I do think that centrism whether centre-left or centre-right can work if it is pursued on correct lines.


Pragmatism and 'Realpolitik', while appealing to as broad a voter base as possible while as bland as possible, seems to me to be how it works as long as it does. With Carl Schmidtt, I have to agree that these politicians merely ''delay the decision''.

For example I think that what existed in the West up until the 1990s was a type of working centrism. And in many ways Vladimir Putin is himself a centrist. My objection to liberal centrism is essentially that it has become as you say the politics of nothing as opposed to its own type of politics. It became the default rather than a position based on conviction.


Not sure it really starts with conviction either, because these sorts of people are born in every age, but if it starts with any convictions it is that of ''Peace'', which is a genuine good to be sure.


The systemic collapse that will remove centrism from mainstream politics and push people towards the extremes of the political system will be the result of establishment failure. Liberal democracy could work but the elites are not doing their job and this is producing a gradual systemic failure. The West has long ago entered its stagnation period, much like that which existed in the Soviet Union.


In the Soviet Union, it appears that the collective leadership after Stalin had already decided on a gradual liberalization and even a gradual reintroduction of Capitalism, and had to make the bellicose rhetorical remarks they did to conceal their motives from the generation that fought the Great Patriotic War. If it was a ''stagnation'' in either case, it is almost a planned one, with heavy involvement of what even our friend Victoribus Spolia would decry as ''Crony Capitalism''.



And what this rebirth in Russia shows us is that if it is possible there it is possible here. The Russians had a choice after 1991 and they still have the choice, to become secular and culturally liberal.


Everyone has a choice in every time and place, for spiritual rebirth both personal and collectively. I have my biases in this regard, but so I feel it is.

I think that the West also has this choice, it can choose to become conservative again. It can explore its religion once again. Russia could serve as inspiration for such a development.


I'm sure i've used this illustration before, but I recall with your comment the paradoxical and prophetic Roman Catholic writer and thinker Leon Bloy, who shortly before he died in 1917 said that he was still saying as the Great War raged; ''I await the coming of the Cossacks and the Holy Ghost''. And in my mind, so will it be, Light from the East.



Indeed. I try to tell this to Westerners, I try to let them know that contrary to their reading of Soviet history the experience of the USSR is far more complicated in the historic memory of Russians. That it was a period of relative stability where the average person could live well and where Russia was strong cannot be denied.

It is not well known in the West but there was an entire Soviet popular culture with music, films and experiences that people in that country grew up with and experienced throughout their idyllic youth. It cannot just all be dismissed in the way that Western liberals want it to be. People will always remember fondly the times when they were young and in love.


People in the West, home in my region of the world, they wouldn't understand why I cursed and wept inside as I saw, the ruins of recent and former greatness, that appeared as far away from the present day realities of modern life as ancient Assyria or Egypt.


In many ways it is the only certainty in life. We cannot control anything around us but we have full control over what we do in response. It is in a sense the most convincing answer to existential crisis.


Yes, the response. I may have asked this before, but do you read Soren Kirkegaard? He says there are actually three, and probably more, thoughtful responses to life; ethical, aesthetic, and spiritual.



Therefore Westerners will research Islam and find in it an alternative to the utter desolation post-modernity has left them?


Quite possibly, in my opinion. I see nothing preventing it, yet, anyway.



Quite possibly. It would be a rejection of Western narratives and structures but instead of replacing them with the nothingness of contemporary faux cultural leftism they replace will them with Islamic narratives, symbols and structures. When it is a choice between faux cultural leftism and Islam it is clear which of the two is more noble and which would appeal to a person’s inner sense of what is right and just. Islam is a noble and honourable religion in its own right.


I'll say that there are plenty of noble and honorable people in Islam.



It is striking how civilisations all follow the same trajectory. Even though Swedes, Danes, Scots, Poles and Lithuanians all speak different languages there is a common civilizational trajectory.


Yes, we don't hear much of the ''Northern Crusades'', the ''Wendish Crusade'' which is especially meaningful to me as part Sorbian, and the incessant wars between Russia and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, that would illuminate the civilizational chasm along the Bug and Nieman rivers...


I think there is definitely time to revive Christianity. It might be possible that once post-modernity reaches the end of its course the choice may be made to look at a return to Europe’s traditional religion. There is still a current within England, for example, which respects traditionalist Catholicism and you can still see a nascent revival of Christianity that could gain momentum at any time if the English people became interested in making such a decision.


As we have said, it can really happen, and perhaps in God's mercy, the grace for it to happen will be provided.


I believe that all of the great religious traditions are valuable and honourable. Although we may have our own religion I think all of them are worthy of respect. There is a big difference between a traditional Muslim and a Western neo-pagan. I have a very deep respect for Islam.


Islam is one of those religions that despite what some may think of it, has the means of inspiring people to adopt it, quite logically so, as a total way of life. Christians used to be the same if not better at that embrace of the Faith we used to know.

Russia is an excellent example of how all religions are respected while still maintaining loyalty to and sincere belief in one’s own religion.


Yes, because true Orthodoxy is generally not inclined to forcing others to be Orthodox, as Faith and being caught up into the Divine Triune Life cannot be forced at any point anyway.


It is very interesting that the far right, even in the US are now starting to talk about “White Shari’Ah.”


Yes, because the culture lacks that all-encompassing sense of belonging and having all the answers that American modernity lacks in spades.

I think that fascism still had many differences with Islam even if the former projected itself onto the latter. A lot of it was probably romanticism on the part of the German fascists.


And the romanticism was mutual. Baathism for instance owes a great deal to Mussolini and other Fascistic thinkers. Another example btw of a non-western society adopting a political heresy of ultimately Western origin, the same as Russia and China regarding Marxist-Leninism.

Thank you, Political Interest.

______________________________________________________________________________

@Victoribus Spolia

VS, you said;

I have decided to start a new thread under the Libertarian subforum entitled:

Ancaps, Neo-Feudalism, and The Natural Order.

This will be my address to several of your objections to my position as well as clarification on my own views. I will not be posting on this thread further.


Sounds cool, and i'd be happy to participate as I may. I regret your not posting on this thread further, I hope that it's been of some small benefit to you.

I'll be wrapping up this thread as it is pretty soon once I've come to some conclusions, and I'm eager to see what you've posted in your new thread. VS, you are a remarkable man with insight and intellect, and it's always a pleasure interacting with you.
  • 1
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
Russia-Ukraine War 2022

@JohnRawls General Election Summary 2022 Date[…]

Claims that mainstream economics is changing rad[…]

Isn't oil and electricity bought and sold like ev[…]

@Potemkin I heard this song in the Plaza Grande […]