I Reject, I Affirm. ''Raising the Black Flag'' in an Age of Devilry. - Page 16 - 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.
#15069987
late wrote:Or maybe they're just afraid of where Russian troops will invade next..


If you knew the history, which you don't apparently, those invasion routes usually lead into and not from, Russia. Every time Russia is invaded, she crushes her enemies and drives them from her land, and exacts a territorial price from the would-be plunderers.

The answer is simple; stop invading Russia. But geography is destiny, and geopolitical strategists have always known that one cannot secure the hegemony of the Old World without the conquest of Russia.

But remember this, always;

#15070005
late wrote:The answer is simple. Stop invading, Russia.


See, you're not engaging in a conversation or even debate, you're just trolling, because that is what you appear to be, a troll. You studiously ignore any information contrary to your worldview but continue the tired and pathological tropes of Anti-Russian demonization and mindless hysteria all too typical of the last three years or so. You claim to be some sort of progressive, but I highly doubt that, very seriously. I am a Communist at heart, in the tradition of both the Old and genuine Left, and in the Religious Socialism which runs clear back into the apostolic era. You? Who really knows? You've settled on this stupid and senseless pattern of belief and will not be swayed from it.

But that's okay, time will deal with that also. If this is all you have to ''contribute'' and in such a hostile manner, I'd as soon not have you comment on this thread at all.
#15070036
I'm reminded in Medieval times, if one wanted to fight outside the code of Chivalry ordinarily engaged in warfare of that period, when facing barbarians and/or infidels, one fought under a Red Banner, under the ''Guerre Mortelle''. No quarter given and none expected, a fight to the death.

War is something not lightly engaged in or talked about and serious adult men and serious adult countries know when to stop and be careful and know when they are dealing with relative madmen and children.

In future posts I intend for a while to talk about the adults and the madmen, and how each got to the point that they have. It has to do with Jesus Christ, it may come as a surprise to some.
#15070079
annatar1914 wrote:
See, you're not engaging in a conversation or even debate, you're just trolling, because that is what you appear to be, a troll. You studiously ignore any information contrary to your worldview but continue the tired and pathological tropes of Anti-Russian demonization




When Russia invaded Ukraine, did you notice that the soldiers in those absurd unmarked Russian uniforms were Spetznaz?

I did.

This is actually quite simple. Putin is playing the Great Game, the struggle of nations for empire.

His armies occasionally go for a vacation in other countries. He's in a cyberwar with several other countries.

Which makes the way to fix this very simple. Don't invade other countries. Stop fighting in Ukraine and leave.

Stop the cyberwar.

This is a dangerous game, revanchist ambitions never end well.
#15070200
When Russia invaded Ukraine


Did not happen.

did you notice that the soldiers in those absurd unmarked Russian uniforms were Spetznaz?


Those were not ''Spetsnaz''. ''Spetsnaz'' is short slang for ''Voyska spetsialnovo naznacheniya'', the closest analogue in English is ''Special Purpose Military Units''. And the ''Spetsnaz'' are under the direct operational control of the GRU (''Main Intelligence Directorate''); the troops you thought you saw in the Crimea were regular forces already stationed there, with Baklavas covering their faces and unit patches removed for their individual protection against any Ukrainian Fascist reprisals, as when the scum burned down that building full of Anti-Fascist activists in Odessa.

I did.

This is actually quite simple. Putin is playing the Great Game, the struggle of nations for empire.


Simple as in ''Simpleton'', that has got to be one of the stupidest god-damned things I've heard in quite a while. Putin doesn't want a re-unified Russia with all the Russians, or a new Soviet Union; it's too costly and too much of a headache for him, for one thing. Simply idiotic and dehumanizing hysterical propaganda.

His armies occasionally go for a vacation in other countries.


Are you on drugs, son?


He's in a cyberwar with several other countries.


Really? Could you provide solid evidence for that contention? You're engaging in the ''Cyberwar'' right now with your Fascist propaganda.

Which makes the way to fix this very simple. Don't invade other countries. Stop fighting in Ukraine and leave.


Listen here; I spent hours in Russia consoling an ethnic Russian refugee from the Donbass, an old woman who had been trapped in a cellar for 7 months while the Ukrainian military took potshots at her and other innocent civilians, shelling and mortaring their village day and night, she got out on a humanitarian convoy from Russia and got taken in by relatives. She survived the famine in the 1930'a and the Great Patriotic War in the 1940's, only to find her alleged country declaring war on her and her kin... You apparently know nothing of real life, the cost of war, or you simple don't care, because what you're talking are simply lies. There was no ''Invasion'' by Russia into the Ukraine, what there was was an attempted ethnic and religious cleansing of Russians who have always lived in the Donbass and are fighting for their homes and lives, their freedom. You can't see that, because you're either an ignorant and arrogant Western kid, or some kind of Fascist from Eastern Europe.

Stop the cyberwar.


You are the one fighting it.

This is a dangerous game, revanchist ambitions never end well.


Tell that to the American Government of either Obama or Trump, the Vatican, the EU, and the Fascist Banderists in the Ukraine, because that's who are playing this dangerous game of ''revanchism''.

I've had enough of this bullshit; please kindly take it elsewhere if you're intent on peddling it in the future to me.
#15070468
@Potemkin , and others;

On another part of Cyberspace I was told I had to decide on being a ''Tory'' or a ''Whig'', a ''Reactionary'' or a ''Revolutionary'', I guess.

Do I have to decide? Or do I simply allow myself a vantage point which best reflects reality as I see it, in all it's faceted glory?

Is Christian Tradition against antibiotics, electricity? Is it against a political and socio-economic system being organized which it's organizers think best for society at this time? What is this ''Modernity'' which I rail against if it isn't about the times we live in as such?

The ''Modernity'' which I am steadfastly against is as old as this fallen world. It's a mindset which is set against the God in which I believe in, a worldview which is entirely concerned with material things, wants and needs, to the point of exclusionary hatred of God and even one's fellow man, a worldview of Rebellion. It's the foundation upon which Capitalism and the Bourgeoisie were built (probably multiple times, before the Flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, Babel, and today in our age. Again, Rebellion.

But what about Revolution? Isn't that necessarily ''Rebellion'' too? Not quite.

All Revolutionaries have been Rebels against God and Man, partaking of that spirit which wrestles against that which Is, but Revolution is different, clearly showing the hand of Divine Providence at work to elevate the society as a whole. They know not what they do, and they often fail in everything for which they themselves plan personally, but somehow mysteriously change the very nature of things in the world, except human nature.

Is America or France or Russia what their Revolutionaries wished to bring about? Somehow I think not. But I also suspect that these Revolutions are still ongoing.

Another facet of their strange existence is that Revolutions as opposed to mere Rebellion come about in an absence or abdication (voluntarily or involuntarily) of Sovereign rule by the Monarchs of the lands which go into Revolution. This is by war being waged upon their subjects exactly as upon a foreign power being invaded, abdication of a Monarchy one cannot ethically abdicate from in the midst of war, attempted flight to foreign enemies of the Revolution which one had earlier tacitly supported, etc... Leaving a new government to develop organically from the people.

For Rebellion is actually ''Counter-Revolution'', where the Rebellion against man part of the rebellion against God and man is expressed by ''you work and i'll eat'' as Abraham Lincoln put it.... The freedom to kill and plunder and enslave others so they can work like industrial robots or domesticated animals, every single damn time when you look and reflect upon it. The writers of this song put it best;



''White is the Army and Black is the Baron, They want to restore the old Tsar's Throne...'' Aye and the Landlords and Capitalists too.

So I challenge someone to go back if they dare and show me where my Belief as I expressed It at the beginning of this thread, is a Tradition that leads to exploitation and reaction. It doesn't. It saves souls and lives and societies, transforms the human person both individually and collectively; ''Do unto others as you would have them do unto you'', and ''Love thy neighbor as you would yourself''.

Nobody seems to hold back from themselves much, after all. It comes down to Egoism versus Altruism on the political and social plane, does it not? For Revolutions result in Republics, which are for the Common Good, while Rebellion strives for Private selfish ''good'' at the expense of others.
#15070597
@Potemkin , @Hindsite , and others;

MARXISM IS REVOLUTION; OBJECTIVISM IS COUNTER-REVOLUTION

I want to be clear with people what the nature of the plainly anti-human principle motivating the Capitalist Bourgeoisie world truly is. It's Egoism, the exaltation of the Self, the elevation of one's wants and needs to a ''virtue of Selfishness.'' It is best explained as a rational socio-economic system by Ayn Rand and her Objectivism, but by no means however exhausted by commentary on her work. Rand is the Dialectical ''Karl Marx'' of the Capitalist Counter-Revolution, the ''reply'' in a strange parallel to Marx and Lenin that was in her own person a living result of the Bolshevik Revolution.

Funny that she hated and ridiculed Religion and the Religious more fiercely than either Marx or Lenin, and that many ''Christian'' Capitalists revere her and her teachings.

But even more ironic is that while Libertarians claim her influence the most, the most absolute Objectivist in action that has ever been to date is President Donald Trump, a man that today's alleged Objectivists and Libertarians pretty much despise. I explain this by saying that the man knows Rand better than her followers do, more entirely identifying America, Capitalism, and Objectivism as one Idea in his mind. They forget how her heroes would deal with the alleged ''Irrational'' were one of them to run for President and win said office. Today's rare but genuine Marxist Leninist might grasp this better than today's Christian, embedded in a worldview that is Capitalist almost out of necessity.



Next few posts, I will look at Ayn Rand's teachings and show how President Trump is a true Acolyte of Ayn Rand, an Objectivist. He is not a Christian, he is an Atheist, and entirely involved with the rational and material existence, his religion is Bourgeoisie Capitalism.
#15070650
@annatar1914

MARXISM IS RETARDATION; OBJECTIVISM IS COUNTER-RETARDATION.

I think real Christians in the US understand that Trump is not a holy roller, but there were no perfect holy rollers on the menu so they did what all pragmatists do and voted for the lesser of two evils. Did you forget that KKillary Klinton was the alternative? :eek:
#15070659
I've always admired Ayn Rand for one thing above all else - her unrelenting honesty. She could see very clearly what the basis of capitalism truly was - naked, pitiless self-interest. And she preferred that to the enforced cameraderie of Communism, being forced to live for and through others. But she couldn't lie to herself about the inner essence of capitalism, and in fact she embraced its essence as the dialectical opposite of the essence of Communism, more fully than perhaps any human being before or since.
The Communist Manifesto wrote:The bourgeoisie, wherever it has got the upper hand, has put an end to all feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations. It has pitilessly torn asunder the motley feudal ties that bound man to his “natural superiors”, and has left remaining no other nexus between man and man than naked self interest, than callous “cash payment”. It has drowned the most heavenly ecstasies of religious fervour, of chivalrous enthusiasm, of philistine sentimentalism, in the icy water of egotisticalcalculation. It has resolved personal worth into exchange value, and in place of the numberless indefeasible chartered freedoms, has set up that single, unconscionable freedom – Free Trade. In one word, for exploitation, veiled by religious and political illusions, it has substituted naked, shameless, direct, brutal exploitation.

The bourgeoisie has stripped of its halo every occupation hitherto honoured and looked up to with reverent awe. It has converted the physician, the lawyer, the priest, the poet, the man of science, into its paid wage labourers.
#15070706
Potemkin wrote:I've always admired Ayn Rand for one thing above all else - her unrelenting honesty. She could see very clearly what the basis of capitalism truly was - naked, pitiless self-interest. And she preferred that to the enforced cameraderie of Communism, being forced to live for and through others. But she couldn't lie to herself about the inner essence of capitalism, and in fact she embraced its essence as the dialectical opposite of the essence of Communism, more fully than perhaps any human being before or since.


That is why (in my opinion) her Philosophy will usher out the Capitalist phase of the Modern Age, with the Trumps and so forth expressing that general attitude of mind, before the Spenglerian period of Imperium and the ''Second Religiousity'' which will definitively ''fix'' as into stone the development of Western/Faustian Civilization. At that time, everything will have been ''privatized'' in the West, including the functions of government and rulership, and thus given over to the sort of Barbarism that the West displayed in it's youth circa 1000 AD.
#15070710
annatar1914 wrote:That is why (in my opinion) her Philosophy will usher out the Capitalist phase of the Modern Age, with the Trumps and so forth expressing that general attitude of mind, before the Spenglerian period of Imperium and the ''Second Religiousity'' which will definitively ''fix'' as into stone the development of Western/Faustian Civilization. At that time, everything will have been ''privatized'' in the West, including the functions of government and rulership, and thus given over to the sort of Barbarism that the West displayed in it's youth circa 1000 AD.

The logical end-point of Libertarianism is, of course, feudalism. We have seen this displayed many times on PoFo - the Libertarians have even begun openly fantasising about becoming feudal lords in the post-apocalyptic society which they hope will come to pass some time soon. This should not surprise us, of course - as Dostoyevsky pointed out, whatever begins with infinite freedom will always end with infinite slavery. Being a form of barbarism, and barbarism in its most infantile and autistic form at that, Libertarianism, and its ideological mother Objectivism, are well-suited to be the final ideological garb of bourgeois society before the curtain falls....
#15070713
Potemkin wrote:The logical end-point of Libertarianism is, of course, feudalism. We have seen this displayed many times on PoFo - the Libertarians have even begun openly fantasising about becoming feudal lords in the post-apocalyptic society which they hope will come to pass some time soon. This should not surprise us, of course - as Dostoyevsky pointed out, whatever begins with infinite freedom will always end with infinite slavery. Being a form of barbarism, and barbarism in its most infantile and autistic form at that, Libertarianism is well-suited to be the final ideological garb of bourgeois society before the curtain falls....


Very well said, my friend. And indeed we have seen this idea expressed on PoFo in rather recent memory, and certainly under the influence of Hans Herman Hoppe and Ludwig von Mises I'd say. It's just that it really does appear to be the end result after all that Promethean striving, Western man returns to where he began; Feudalism.

As the Lord said;

''When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through places without water, seeking rest; and not finding, he saith: 'I will return into my house whence I came out.' And when he is come, he findeth it swept and garnished. Then he goeth and taketh with him seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and entering in they dwell there. And the last state of that man becomes worse than the first.''
#15070715
Potemkin wrote:The logical end-point of Libertarianism is, of course, feudalism. We have seen this displayed many times on PoFo - the Libertarians have even begun openly fantasising about becoming feudal lords in the post-apocalyptic society which they hope will come to pass some time soon. This should not surprise us, of course - as Dostoyevsky pointed out, whatever begins with infinite freedom will always end with infinite slavery. Being a form of barbarism, and barbarism in its most infantile and autistic form at that, Libertarianism is well-suited to be the final ideological garb of bourgeois society before the curtain falls....

No one uses the word "feudal" correctly. It is a vague concept, made up by modern people as a way of labeling their own ahistorical fantasies.

However it is somewhat ironic that the word is derived from a frankish word that means cattle, wealth or money. And so it is in fact a more or less a direct translation for the latin word caput, which means "head" as in a head of cattle, as a unit of wealth. This word caput of course is the root and origin of the word capital which made the modern word capitalism. So actually "feudalism" if it had a genuine meaning at all would have the same meaning as the word "captialism", they both mean property-ism or money-ism.

Cattle of course was money alongside gold for being portable (cows are big and heavy but they can walk for themselves...), universally valued and trade-able wealth.
#15070716
SolarCross wrote:No one uses the word "feudal" correctly. It is a vague concept, made up by modern people as a way of labeling their own ahistorical fantasies.

However it is somewhat ironic that the word is derived from a frankish word that means cattle, wealth or money. And so it is in fact a more or less a direct translation for the latin word caput, which means "head" as in a head of cattle, as a unit of wealth. This word caput of course is the root and origin of the word capital which made the modern word capitalism. So actually "feudalism" if it had a genuine meaning at all would have the same meaning as the word "captialism", they both mean property-ism or money-ism.

Cattle of course was money alongside gold for being portable (cows are big and heavy but they can walk for themselves...), universally valued and trade-able wealth.


You're kind of proving our point :eh:

Human beings have been valued as just so many livestock under Feudalism, portable and universally valued and trade-able wealth...
#15070717
annatar1914 wrote:You're kind of proving our point :eh:

Human beings have been valued as just so many livestock under Feudalism, portable and universally valued and trade-able wealth...

It was the cows that were valued as money. "feudalism" in europe happened to coincide with peak christianity. Christian sentiment held that humans were special and sacred. Slavery was basically stamped out by warlords such as King William the Conquorer that you would regard as arch-feudalists on the advice of the Catholic church because of this sentiment. There is no such thing as feudalism but if there was it is absolutely entwined with Christianity, just saying.
#15070720
SolarCross wrote:It was the cows that were valued as money. "feudalism" in europe happened to coincide with peak christianity. Christian sentiment held that humans were special and sacred. Slavery was basically stamped out by warlords such as King William the Conquorer that you would regard as arch-feudalists on the advice of the Catholic church because of this sentiment. There is no such thing as feudalism but if there was it is absolutely entwined with Christianity, just saying.


Just saying falsehood. Almost nothing you said is in fact true;

''It was the cows that were valued as money.''


People were recorded as economic units.

''"feudalism" in europe happened to coincide with peak christianity.''


Feudalism happened to coincide with the rise of the Latin Papacy, shortly after 1000 AD, so in my opinion no.
''Christian sentiment held that humans were special and sacred.''


Strange turn of phrase, because people are special, being made in the Image and Likeness of Almighty God. They aren't mere economic units of production and consumption.

''Slavery was basically stamped out by warlords such as King William the Conquorer that you would regard as arch-feudalists on the advice of the Catholic church because of this sentiment.''


Reducing free farmers to serfdom or other variety of unfree Peasantry is a distinction without a difference when it comes to Slavery.

'' There is no such thing as feudalism but if there was it is absolutely entwined with Christianity, just saying.''


Wrong. It's when true Christianity is in decline that society slips into various forms of barbaric and despotic slavery, and Feudalism.
#15070723
annatar1914 wrote:People were recorded as economic units.

Citation? Your imagination is not a valid source.

annatar1914 wrote:Feudalism happened to coincide with the rise of the Latin Papacy, shortly after 1000 AD, so in my opinion no.

Feudalism is a myth but the "Latin Papacy" is hardly different to the Eastern church in ideological terms. It is all Christianity. Certainly today Christianity is only the world biggest religion on the backs of 1 billion Catholics. Deny them your Christ and you reduce Christianity to a religion of minor importance.

annatar1914 wrote:Strange turn of phrase, because people are special, being made in the Image and Likeness of Almighty God. They aren't mere economic units of production and consumption.

I am wearing my atheist hat today, so I will say I respect your beliefs but it could be that they are both at the same time. People need to eat for sure so if they are going to consume and if they want to consume they should certainly produce something, that is true for cavemen too btw and modern people. We can not live on holy water alone.

annatar1914 wrote:serfs

The free farmers remained free actually. It was their slaves that were promoted to serfs as a compromise, even that was banned in western europe by the 12th century. When was serfdom banned by the eastern church? Was it the 19th century?

annatar1914 wrote:Christiainty and barbarism

I sort of agree, in that it is clear Christianity has played a major role in bans on slavery. Feudalism is not real though, it is purely a modern flight of fancy.
  • 1
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 22

I honestly could not care less about your racist […]

I never said “colored”. I said “people of colour[…]

2. You do not have a right to infect others. Tha[…]

Election 2020

The fact that the Democrats will not support vote[…]