I Reject, I Affirm. ''Raising the Black Flag'' in an Age of Devilry. - Page 11 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

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

An atheist-free area for those of religious belief to discuss religious topics.

Moderator: PoFo Agora Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. Religious topics may be discussed here or in The Agora. However, this forum is intended specifically as an area for those with religious belief to discuss religion without threads being derailed by atheist arguments. Please respect that. Political topics regarding religion belong in the Religion forum in the Political Issues section.
#15033450
@quetzalcoatl , thanks for your replies! you said;


Marxists may acknowledge that the state, in theory, may wither away. In 20th century practice, it appears that once a vanguard is installed as protector of the revolution, the state becomes an ossified, permanent entity.


Are you sure ''ossified'' is a good descriptor of the State in such a situation? I of course see several reasons why that might be so, and a few go directly to my opinions on Marxist-Leninism and the bulk of the Socialists today. I see here that your address the problem further;


Hierarchies become destructive as they become removed and distant, unresponsive to the needs of their members. Smaller more local hierarchies preserve the individuals sense of belonging. The state is the mechanism by which these smaller hierarchies express their collective will. (Bolsheviks understood this at some level. Workers Soviets were originally intended to govern the newly created state.)


One could make that argument, yes.


The state will never wither away as long as humans aspire to collective action. Not sure if this makes me a statist. I don't worship power, as the libertarian critique might suggest. But I do see it as a necessity for humans to live together. Perhaps this will be proven wrong in the future, but I don't think it will.


I agree, although as my political spectrum suggests, there are those who really do worship power via the mechanisms of the State, and those I placed on the RIGHT of the Spectrum (Fascists, Monarchists, Reactionaries of all sorts, etc...). Those who worship themselves and their own individual might as a means of keeping and extending power, I placed on what I called the REAL LEFT (Libertarians, Objectivists, Anarcho-Capitalists, etc...) :D ;)



I've formulated a few modest alternatives to the common liberal tropes of limited government:

1) Government is not the solution. Government is not the problem. Government is the tool of collective public purpose.

2) That government which governs least governs least. That government which governs best governs best. There is no causal connection between these two statements.

3) There is no ideal size of government. The size of government is determined by the collective public purpose.


Can't say that I can disagree with any of that. :)
#15033674
@Potemkin , @Victoribus Spolia, and others;

So, in practical modern terms, how is one who condemns revolution and counter-revolution as such, yet believes in the Popular Will, in true Democracy, in Socialism within the context of the Nation in which it arises, how am I to speak to and about modern events and the things that are to come?

Can't have ''Soviet Democracy'' without ''Democratic Centralism'', as i've shown before. Arising from the Popular Will, including the Popular will of the Dead, of previous generations, there is the leadership of the people, best expressed in the Mladorossi slogan; ''Tsar and the Soviets''.

The Geopolitical position that results is a kind of Eurasianism or rather Anti-Atlanticism, similar to Alexander Dugin but perhaps without some of the language and philosophical baggage some see with him. Back with Oswald Spengler too, but against him and his ''Faustian Civilization'' of the West and with his ''Magian'' one.

The opposite of Karl Popper's ''Open Society'', let's put it that way.... I'm for the ''Closed Society'', to be sure. History really does unfold in accordance with inexorable, deterministic laws. We may not understand them, may never understand them fully, but they exist. Plato, Hegel, Marx, each with something to say worthwhile as far as I'm concerned.

But more of them later. Point to take away from this post is that democracy is not democracy if it is not also illiberal in my opinion.
#15033812
@Potemkin , @Victoribus Spolia, and others, my friends;

Now I shall speak as promised of the rise of US President Donald Trump. Having a certain background and having determined that Trump would be President as soon as he entered the 2016 electoral race, I can speak with some standing as to what will happen in the future and why. Liberals may not like it. ''Conservatives'' may not either, and both be confounded.

1. President Trump will win for sure in 2020 his bid for re-election, and he is already beginning to bring his enemies to heel. There is no stopping it, no stopping what is coming.

2. President Trump is thinking long term, and is establishing a Dynasty that will be the masters of America for decades if not centuries to come. There is no stopping it, it absolutely will be happening. His children and grandchildren will be Presidents, and they will transform the United States of America.

3. President Trump is dedicated to the proposition that America will never be Socialist, and that ''America First'' means ''America First over all the World'', and thus that Socialism (or anything that smacks of favor towards the workers beyond Welfarism) of any kind will not be allowed to take root and thrive anywhere in the World and pose even a mere intellectual and ideological threat to America and Capitalism, much less a physical and existential threat to America and Capitalism. To him, America and Capitalism are identical.

4. For all their bitter kvetching, the Western Elites are beginning to realize all this and make their peace with it, give Trump a place at the table, maybe even the head place. They are just going through the motions of pretending to be against him at this point. Some foot soldiers have not received the memo to stand down, but really this was all planned out many years ago, as Trump was being groomed for the Presidency in the Nixon and Reagan years by elements of circles within those Administrations.

5. President Trump is a war President, and an Economic Collapse President. These events are necessary to make America great again, and there will be a lot of pain. Some of it necessary in some people's eyes, some not so much. But people will still regard President Trump highly, in fact his popularity will even grow and grow higher.

Some of you will not like what I have to say. I don't even like some of what i've said. But nobody with real as opposed to hollow figurehead power gives a damn about what you think. Most of you who think you hate him now will learn to love him and his family and the political team around them, and love them sincerely. Some of you will pretend to be incredulous at what I'm saying. But in your heart you know that I am right.
#15033907
Now, what I'm planning for future reflections and discussion is tying some of this all together from a spiritual angle, the eschatological and apocalyptic dimensions of the times we're living in. Picking up some of these points I've made earlier in this thread about Orthodox Christianity, Mormonism, Islam, Israel, and President Trump/America/Capitalism, Russia, and the fate of Western Civilization as a whole.

Some of it will sound crazy, some of it definitely controversial and bizarre.
#15033957
annatar1914 wrote:Now, what I'm planning for future reflections and discussion is tying some of this all together from a spiritual angle, the eschatological and apocalyptic dimensions of the times we're living in. Picking up some of these points I've made earlier in this thread about Orthodox Christianity, Mormonism, Islam, Israel, and President Trump/America/Capitalism, Russia, and the fate of Western Civilization as a whole.

Some of it will sound crazy, some of it definitely controversial and bizarre.


One of the reflections I had was an insistence that Mormonism would be the new religion of the Western Civilization because of some of my ideas concerning America and America's role in the future. I was wrong about Mormonism, but my thoughts were stimulated by the reflection on the uses to which religion is used by the Elites and how religion conversely acts upon the Elites in turn.

In order to illustrate this, I will engage in my next post upon what I consider to be the meaning of the Fatima apparitions that began in 1917, and how because of the 3rd Fatima Secret, the Papacy will fully guide the destiny of the Western World through it's final phase. This will only seem to be a digression; I assure my readers that it will not be.

Edit; I have decided that if I cover the ''Fatima'' Phenomena and how I believe the Roman Catholic Church will profit from it in the future, I will do so in a separate thread from this one.
#15034643
annatar1914 wrote:One of the reflections I had was an insistence that Mormonism would be the new religion of the Western Civilization because of some of my ideas concerning America and America's role in the future. I was wrong about Mormonism, but my thoughts were stimulated by the reflection on the uses to which religion is used by the Elites and how religion conversely acts upon the Elites in turn.

In order to illustrate this, I will engage in my next post upon what I consider to be the meaning of the Fatima apparitions that began in 1917, and how because of the 3rd Fatima Secret, the Papacy will fully guide the destiny of the Western World through it's final phase. This will only seem to be a digression; I assure my readers that it will not be.

Edit; I have decided that if I cover the ''Fatima'' Phenomena and how I believe the Roman Catholic Church will profit from it in the future, I will do so in a separate thread from this one.


I'm going to ease gently into this one-maybe. Call it a post inspired by the insights of Fyodor Dostyoevsky in his ''Legend of the Grand Inquisitor'' section of ''the Brothers Karamazov''.

People in general, whatever their position on my revised political spectrum, crave unity with other human beings. Even individualists assiduously cultivate bringing others into individualist systems of thought. People especially crave in their fallen condition, a unity of the spiritual and the temporal authority, so that one man or group of men can wield magic, mystery, and authority as the bonds of this ''unity''. This is because this craving for unity is closely linked to their craving for certainty. Which is easier for people to do; search for certainty or have others provide that ''certainty'' for them?

While elsewhere I have said recently that the greater part of mankind, at least the plurality, are some form of Socialist/Communist/National Bolshevik, I also maintain that many people are precisely of this camp as long as they don't have to work for it, to fight for freedom. Many, but not all;



Anyway, the default setting in the absence of freedom is Absolutist Statism, and in modern times this political philosophy was not expressed in the alleged secular political realm, but in 1870 by the Vatican Council I, by the Papacy after a culmination of the thinking of Ultramontane traditionalist reactionary Monarchists Joseph de Maistre, Louis de Bonald, and Juan Donoso y Cortes. No greater authority can be claimed than that coming from and holding the power of God Himself, and absolutely (despite any theological hedging) Infallible, absolutely laying claim to the potential obedience of every human being on this Earth.

There is thus a direct line between Papal Infallibility and Supremacy, and the secularized concept which in Fascist Germany was called the ''Fuhrerprincip'', or ''Leadership Principle''.( It's interesting that all the research indicates that Roman Catholic southern Germany was utter devoted to Hitler the Leader, rather than the NSDAP Ideology itself, whereas in Northern Protestant Germany, it was the opposite situation).

So after laying out those thoughts, I can be said to be making two claims. One, is that modern absolutism Statism comes from the Roman Catholic Church and the Authoritarian spiritual principle. The second claim,(and this will be the most offensive, or considered bizarre or improbable) is that in about another 100 years, the Roman Catholic Church's Papacy will be more powerful (and more traditionalist and reactionary) than it has ever been in it's 1000 year history, and will come close to being the World Government over the greater part of Mankind. In the next few posts I will explore more as to why this will be so in my opinion.
#15034645
Awesome, you're like an Orthodox Christian collectivist like myself? I knew they existed.

My ideology is one in which everyone can be as they wish, one of the cornerstones of our religion is coming to God of your own free will.

My ideology:

Economic Stance "A worldwide confederation, where new societies can be started up in remote, unused locations and people can basically have what system they like; provided it follows basic universal rules of non-oppression, fairness, freedom and (roughly) collective governance.

Of course, you need a central authority with supreme power that keeps the peace and has real clout.

But that's the only way you can give everyone what they want; it's the only way the fascists can go and have their white paradise (hopefully far away from me..), the communists can have their communist paradise, the neoliberals can have their singaporean city state, the traditionalist conservatives can have gloucestershire, the islamist theocrats can have a chunk of Iran etc...

It's a mistaken idea that capitalism should be FORCED on everyone, or islamism, or OTT libertarianism, or communism, or even my own personal ideas wrt the community I'd live in myself."


My (/our?) ideal personal society would be a Orthodox Christian collectivist society, similar to those reported in Antioch in 4AD.

Monasticism, hesychasts and 'yurodivy' (Holy fools) have fascinated me for a long time now.

Your thread is full of fascinating posts. Thanks for your truly inspired stuff.

(Just to say, I'm a hypocrite and a sinner too, never will I allow my arrogance and pride to control my life - just saying in case my post sounds arrogant or boastful).
#15034651
Presvias wrote:Awesome, you're like an Orthodox Christian collectivist like myself? I knew they existed.

My ideology is one in which everyone can be as they wish, one of the cornerstones of our religion is coming to God of your own free will.

My ideology:



My (/our?) ideal personal society would be a Orthodox Christian collectivist society, similar to those reported in Antioch in 4AD.

Monasticism, hesychasts and 'yurodivy' (Holy fools) have fascinated me for a long time now.

Your thread is full of fascinating posts. Thanks for your truly inspired stuff.

(Just to say, I'm a hypocrite and a sinner too, never will I allow my arrogance and pride to control my life - just saying in case my post sounds arrogant or boastful).


It all sounds good brother :)

And yes, we do exist :D

Happy you have enjoyed my posts, and feel free to join in on anything i've said at any point in this thread:-)
#15034659
Nearly every post in the first 4 pages, is like an echo of my thoughts on the matters under discussion.

As you said several times; there are some really good & atypical Western Christians, who fought against the tyrannies of their time.

Some good ones from my country:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diggers

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lollardy

(ok not entirely onboard with their ideas but still)

A proto christian-collectivist society from China

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiping ... ly_Kingdom

Hopefully that's an interesting contribution.

The Monastic life appeals to me, I think a small set of micro societies that had monastic values would be great.

There is a large degree of collectivism and self sufficiency in monastic communities even today. ...And perfect harmony.

+++
#15035109
@Presvias ; thanks for reading my thread, taking the time to glance at some pretty ''stream of consciousness'' ramblings and zig zags through various aspects of problems I am working on.

Nearly every post in the first 4 pages, is like an echo of my thoughts on the matters under discussion.


Then I think that you can agree too that these truly are serious matters, in fact the most serious of all in this world and this life. ''What is the proper attitude of a genuine Christian to Justice and Right in the established social order?'', and ''How can we as a society best enable the working out of the Common Good of all, regardless of personal beliefs and sectarian positions held by society at large?'' among those questions.
As you said several times; there are some really good & atypical Western Christians, who fought against the tyrannies of their time.

Some good ones from my country:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diggers

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lollardy

(ok not entirely onboard with their ideas but still)


Yes, very much so an expression of that fight against tyranny, even if some beliefs held were wrong, beliefs held as an over-reaction to the teachings of the established church.

A proto christian-collectivist society from China

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiping ... ly_Kingdom

Hopefully that's an interesting contribution.


It certainly is; we are not alone in our commitments to trying to build a more just society. Not because we have given up our Heavenly hopes, but because the Kingdom of Heaven is already within us, working as a Leaven to be fully realized if we collectively let it happen.

The Monastic life appeals to me, I think a small set of micro societies that had monastic values would be great.


The Monastic life is indeed, very appealing to me when I consider the World.

There is a large degree of collectivism and self sufficiency in monastic communities even today. ...And perfect harmony.


Yes, it can't be said that it's not successful as some liars say, because it has worked on that level for many centuries now :)

+++[/quote]
#15036477
Reading the Infamous ''Protocols of the Elders of Zion''. I've had a copy for years and actually decided to read it recently, it's a kind of pornography where one debates if the shame lies in reading it or in not reading it, so I decided all these years to err on the side of not doing so. I discovered much to my interest that it have little if anything to do with Jews. It's like reading the footnotes of the Devil in the margins to the Book of Apocalypse, or the same insights one might gather from reading the ''Legend of the Grand Inquisitor'' in Dostyoevsky's ''Brothers Karamazov''.

It's profoundly and loathsomely Anti-Semitic, of course, but i'm focusing on what the anonymous narrator appears to be FOR, not what they are Against. Pretty diabolically clever to disguise your own political programs and intentions as something your intended Victim is for. Fiendishly wise to conceal his true allegiances as remarks of praise given in the Protocols to certain of his alleged opponents.

Such a strange book, and it's origins as popularly told made no sense at all to me at first as I began reading it. I'm going to finish reading it, and without going into details just yet, I'll tell more of what i've learned.
#15036481
It's irrelevant and highly fictional. It's obviously written by a kook or a nut. It reads like the Unibomber's manifesto but if he was an anonymous Zionist terrorist. It's design is to paint Jews as infiltrating terrorists and it's obviously ghost written by Russian intelligence of some kind.

I listened to it in audiobook form a few years back.

The Talmud is bad enough with it's openly anti-goyim bigoted against Christians and Jesus sections. It doesn't need ghostwritten Russian fiction to help it. Ultra-Orthodox and Orthodox Jews are still widely openly racist against non-Jews.
#15036814
@colliric ;


It's irrelevant and highly fictional.


Yes, it is fictional. But what precisely is it ''irrelevant'' to?


It's obviously written by a kook or a nut.


Nothing is ''Obvious'' about the Protocols, about the agenda of the writer of this fictional work.

It reads like the Unibomber's manifesto but if he was an anonymous Zionist terrorist.


There's nothing clearly terroristic or even Zionist about the Protocols. In fact the aim of the fictional person engaged in the writing's only dialogue appears to be world conquest.


It's design is to paint Jews as infiltrating terrorists and it's obviously ghost written by Russian intelligence of some kind.


That is neither clear nor obvious. I'm having difficulty believing that Russian intelligence of the Tsarist period would have such praise for the Papacy as the fictional speaker does, for example.

I listened to it in audiobook form a few years back.


You should read it.

The Talmud is bad enough with it's openly anti-goyim bigoted against Christians and Jesus sections.


I've read all 14 volumes of the Soncino edition of the Babylonian Talmud, I'm aware of what it says and why. However, I don't find your mention of it particularly relevant to a discussion of the political and/or spiritual agenda of the writer of the Protocols.

It doesn't need ghostwritten Russian fiction to help it.


It isn't clear at all that it was written by a Russian, although that is a common idea, that Sergei Nilus wrote it.


Ultra-Orthodox and Orthodox Jews are still widely openly racist against non-Jews.


Are you upset for some reason that the Protocols being a fake somehow help serve to de-legitimize anti-semitism?
#15037434
@Victoribus Spolia, @Potemkin , @Political Interest, @Rei Murasame and others,

It could be said that a sign of maturity is a gradual dovetailing of one's overall philosophy of life with the actual realities of the world, not so much a resignation towards what is, but towards what is coming, or returning, back into the world that shall be.

There are only two real political factions in the world; those who say that there is nothing new under the sun, and those who say that there is something new under the sun, and attempt to bring that newness into being. All true Socialists are of one mind with all true Reactionaries and Monarchists and the like on this, even Fascists. Even the only real Anarchists, the Anarcho-Capitalists, are at heart reverting to the Family as the basis for the State, as it was in the beginning of the human experience.

That leaves only America itself as the attempt at a New Thing, albeit with what Spengler would have called ''Faustian Civilization'' roots, and her ''Conservatives'' and ''Liberals'' are the least Statist and most Libertarian of all peoples in the World, in keeping with the Enlightenment, the Copernican/Galilean/Newtonian and Darwinian and Sexual Revolutions. The ''New Atlantis'' and ''Philosophical Empire'' of the Esoteric and Hermetic European thinkers. If it is an unreal Thing, a Bubble of ''reality denial'' in the World, I would say that the psychosis, the ''Bubble'' of reality-denial, is a growing one.

So there are Americans, who live in a geographic location in North America, and then there is Americanism, and while there is an overlap between the two, there is not quite total Identity of the two. Lenin and Trotsky and even Marx himself were more American in their time than even many Americans themselves (and Stalin the true Bolshevik was more Reactionary), and the American Civil War saw the physical destruction of the only American Reactionary polity of the CSA ever, but by no means it's total spiritual and cultural destruction.

President Donald Trump, the promoter of LGBTQ at the United Nations... Missed that, didn't you? I bet @Rei Murasame didn't miss it.

First step in recognizing a problem is seeing that there is one. Is the political problem America?
#15037454
annatar1914 wrote:@Victoribus Spolia, @Potemkin , @Political Interest, @Rei Murasame and others,

It could be said that a sign of maturity is a gradual dovetailing of one's overall philosophy of life with the actual realities of the world, not so much a resignation towards what is, but towards what is coming, or returning, back into the world that shall be.

There are only two real political factions in the world; those who say that there is nothing new under the sun, and those who say that there is something new under the sun, and attempt to bring that newness into being. All true Socialists are of one mind with all true Reactionaries and Monarchists and the like on this, even Fascists. Even the only real Anarchists, the Anarcho-Capitalists, are at heart reverting to the Family as the basis for the State, as it was in the beginning of the human experience.

That leaves only America itself as the attempt at a New Thing, albeit with what Spengler would have called ''Faustian Civilization'' roots, and her ''Conservatives'' and ''Liberals'' are the least Statist and most Libertarian of all peoples in the World, in keeping with the Enlightenment, the Copernican/Galilean/Newtonian and Darwinian and Sexual Revolutions. The ''New Atlantis'' and ''Philosophical Empire'' of the Esoteric and Hermetic European thinkers. If it is an unreal Thing, a Bubble of ''reality denial'' in the World, I would say that the psychosis, the ''Bubble'' of reality-denial, is a growing one.

So there are Americans, who live in a geographic location in North America, and then there is Americanism, and while there is an overlap between the two, there is not quite total Identity of the two. Lenin and Trotsky and even Marx himself were more American in their time than even many Americans themselves (and Stalin the true Bolshevik was more Reactionary), and the American Civil War saw the physical destruction of the only American Reactionary polity of the CSA ever, but by no means it's total spiritual and cultural destruction.

President Donald Trump, the promoter of LGBTQ at the United Nations... Missed that, didn't you? I bet @Rei Murasame didn't miss it.

First step in recognizing a problem is seeing that there is one. Is the political problem America?


So, I'm going to be looking at the essential unity within each of the two sides. Recall a video I posted a while back, of Russian Anti-Yeltsin protestors?



A few seconds in, and one sees Tsarist Russian flags, and Soviet Union flags. Are they all lunatics, or do they know something some of us don't know?
#15037783
So what am I getting at, that the other side from mine is going to do, or is already in the process of doing?

It comes down to the moral and spiritual justification for government at the very bare naked foundations. Human nature being what it is (and internally, we're tempted to believe that there is no human nature as such...), government exists to restrain us from exterminating each other in an orgy of rapine, plunder, and murder, in the absence of law and order... And even if those who rule in order to restrain are rapists, plunderers, and murderers to a degree themselves. Everyone who has the slightest bit of sanity realizes that we have to hold back on our desires and whims, our passions, in consideration for and modified by the desires and whims of others. Key word; sanity...

But what is the measure of sanity in the experience of the ongoing American Revolution, the only true and successful Revolution? Let's look at it's founding document, the ''Declaration of Independence'', at the second sentence of it's preamble;

''We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.''


Is it ''self evident'' that all men as individuals are equally endowed with rights to life, and liberty, and the pursuit of what they believe to be ''happiness''? But it goes on;

''That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,--That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.''


Is this true, or is government granted it's powers by the simple fact that government is the absolute precondition for all societies that enjoy any kind of civilization and genuine progress at all, not some vague and ambiguously loaded phrase like ''consent of the governed''?

It really does come down to philosophies like that of Ayn Rand. To Selfishness versus the Altruism she so terribly lampooned and maligned. America is built on the foundation of ''man is the measure'' which built on the Western concept of the Self and exalted it into a kind of religion; the ''American way of life''.

America is Atheistic, necessarily so. Man is the measure, the secret of the Declaration's ''Nature and Nature's God'' is that ''Nature is God''. Man is brought to believe he is only bound by Nature, but that he can overcome Nature with Science and Technology, and become a 'God over Nature' himself.

America is an aggregate of individuals bound by the common desire to fulfill their individual passions of life, of liberty, and the pursuit of ''happiness'' from the perspective of the singular human individual.

So there are Americans by belief, and then there are people who are native born within that land, who are geographic Americans who are citizens of that Polity. There's an overlap, almost but not quite identity.

No American by belief is a Statist, the State is an uncomfortable afterthought that is to be limited as much as is possible. One may disagree with those limits upon government, but not that it would be better somehow if the State didn't exist at all.
#15039121
On another thread I had this to say, which I repeat and will expand upon here; Socialism is just part of a continuum politically between the poles of Civic Altruism and Antisocial Egoism. Also elsewhere, I have said that if in the Non-Socialist world people lived lives of thrift, industry, honesty, mutual help, and unselfishness, the de facto result would still be indistinguishable from the social effect of Socialism.

If this is the case, why aren't we at that better and more progressive stage of civilization?

Because it has to be fought for, the Common Good, and defended, from within and from without. Not everyone is thrifty. Some are lazy. Some are dishonest, help only themselves and/or a select group of others, some are selfish. Human nature has this propensity. Next few posts, I'll be looking more into that.
#15039186
annatar1914 wrote:On another thread I had this to say, which I repeat and will expand upon here; Socialism is just part of a continuum politically between the poles of Civic Altruism and Antisocial Egoism. Also elsewhere, I have said that if in the Non-Socialist world people lived lives of thrift, industry, honesty, mutual help, and unselfishness, the de facto result would still be indistinguishable from the social effect of Socialism.

If this is the case, why aren't we at that better and more progressive stage of civilization?

Because it has to be fought for, the Common Good, and defended, from within and from without. Not everyone is thrifty. Some are lazy. Some are dishonest, help only themselves and/or a select group of others, some are selfish. Human nature has this propensity. Next few posts, I'll be looking more into that.

"Out of the warped wood of human nature, nothing straight was ever made." - Immanuel Kant.
#15039237
Potemkin wrote:"Out of the warped wood of human nature, nothing straight was ever made." - Immanuel Kant.


Ah, Immanuel Kant, who with his Idealist sophistry has befuddled the minds of men...
#15039239
annatar1914 wrote:Ah, Immanuel Kant, who with his Idealist sophistry has befuddled the minds of men...

Indeed. But he had one or two good ideas, and a very good turn of phrase. Here's another good one: "Rules for happiness: something to do, someone to love, something to hope for." :)
  • 1
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
The Irishman...

As far as Harvey Weinstein comment your post to @[…]

He definitely wouldn't be looming behind her as he[…]

Unfortunately, Time has a record of picking PotYs[…]

The one that erased the 1910-1940 warming and the[…]