[annatar1914]

So, before I go into an excursus on the City and Sin ( something which Blessed Augustine covered much better and more extensively in his " City of God"), I must mention the curious architecture and layout of modern cities in comparison with pre modern ones. Is there a hidden symbolism there? Spengler opines that the modern city is a ' petrifact', that the chess or checker board pattern they are laid out in is a symbol of their soulless artificiality. In comparison, the great cities of the past are hardly " cities at all upon examination. What new species of mankind makes such cities as those of today? Where are the sacred spaces? There is only a hermetic geometry suggestive of infinite space and time and a ceaseless motion. That is, an 'rationally' planned Panopticon writ large beyond the dreams of Jeremy Bentham. How can any man act otherwise than a mere beast, a herd animal or even a wolf, when made to live in such a fashion? But this environment did not make men evil, rather it was created by certain evil men who needed an environment favorable to their aims.

@Potemkin , @Political Interest , @Verv , and others:

It is a useful thought expression, when beginning this part of my comments on sin and the city, to think of Sin as a kind of substance (even though the Scholastics would vehemently disagree) which is like a pathogen or poison, toxic substances, and thus something which requires people to live at least as long as it takes to further propagate It. Furthermore, it is a substantial thing that is intelligently directed, therefore a weapon against God and man and something that leads to another substance: Death. These things require a maximizing of people in a minimum of space, in order to have their fullest effect. So, the City, at least in this fallen condition of existence, is something which arises out of necessity not only in a material sense, but out of the long war of the fallen Angels against mankind too.

[Verv]

@Potemkin , @Political Interest , @Verv , and others:

It is a useful thought expression, when beginning this part of my comments on sin and the city, to think of Sin as a kind of substance (even though the Scholastics would vehemently disagree) which is like a pathogen or poison, toxic substances, and thus something which requires people to live at least as long as it takes to further propagate It. Furthermore, it is a substantial thing that is intelligently directed, therefore a weapon against God and man and something that leads to another substance: Death. These things require a maximizing of people in a minimum of space, in order to have their fullest effect. So, the City, at least in this fallen condition of existence, is something which arises out of necessity not only in a material sense, but out of the long war of the fallen Angels against mankind too.

We could conceive of sin as behaving like a photon: it is a massless, neutral vector boson.

I had once learned that light, of course, has a physical reality, that moves physically, and thus can be blocked. It can be physically present and effect a thing. It can go through some things.

Sin could be like a photon in the sense that it is massless and can radiate off. While some can ignore it, it still impacts everyone.

It is interesting to think of sin congregating in the cities - it definitely does. And the presence and convenience of certain things make it result in greater amounts of indulgence in them.

I think you have come up with an interesting way to think about sin and would love to hear you elaborate on it more sometime.

[annatar1914]

We could conceive of sin as behaving like a photon: it is a massless, neutral vector boson.

I had once learned that light, of course, has a physical reality, that moves physically, and thus can be blocked. It can be physically present and effect a thing. It can go through some things.

Sin could be like a photon in the sense that it is massless and can radiate off. While some can ignore it, it still impacts everyone.

It is interesting to think of sin congregating in the cities - it definitely does. And the presence and convenience of certain things make it result in greater amounts of indulgence in them.

I think you have come up with an interesting way to think about sin and would love to hear you elaborate on it more sometime.

@Verv , thank you, and I think that you have made an excellent analogy to what I'm thinking, better than I could perhaps!

I guess my thinking is rather simple on this, really. As I've stated before, I tend to think of everything in categories of " substance " of one kind or another: refined and subtle to massive and gross, visible and sensuous to invisible and plastic. All of it " matter", whatever that is. Only God being " Spirit" from a certain perspective, beyond our comprehension.

So Sin then is a substantial being, transferred from generations to generations, by human generation itself. The City in one way limits man's activities, especially in pre modern times, but now enables him an almost limitless range of activity. I am also thinking that the City inhibits any possible natural homeostatic mechanism to limit (not abolish) human evil, by usually preventing civilization's total destruction at the hands of less sophisticated and civilized peoples.

Civilized life then creates a zone of safety for the propagation of what really is anti human behaviour and vice, to the point where structures are formed in human society not for the protection of human beings as such, but for the sins they commit.

But again, I'm thinking that this has always been a feature, not a bug, from the very beginning of cities in history.

[annatar1914]

@Verv , thank you, and I think that you have made an excellent analogy to what I'm thinking, better than I could perhaps!

I guess my thinking is rather simple on this, really. As I've stated before, I tend to think of everything in categories of " substance " of one kind or another: refined and subtle to massive and gross, visible and sensuous to invisible and plastic. All of it " matter", whatever that is. Only God being " Spirit" from a certain perspective, beyond our comprehension.

So Sin then is a substantial being, transferred from generations to generations, by human generation itself. The City in one way limits man's activities, especially in pre modern times, but now enables him an almost limitless range of activity. I am also thinking that the City inhibits any possible natural homeostatic mechanism to limit (not abolish) human evil, by usually preventing civilization's total destruction at the hands of less sophisticated and civilized peoples.

Civilized life then creates a zone of safety for the propagation of what really is anti human behaviour and vice, to the point where structures are formed in human society not for the protection of human beings as such, but for the sins they commit.

But again, I'm thinking that this has always been a feature, not a bug, from the very beginning of cities in history.

But, @Political Interest , @Verv , and @Potemkin , How does this connect with my earlier commentary on Barriers, and the " coats of skins" of our fallen first parents?

With the City, the Barriers fall down, all that are not inclusive to existing in the City itself. In the City, one can find (much more easily than outside the City) the " Other" , who presents opportunities for hybridization in a literal sense but also even up to not only hybridization, but a conquest of the native culture and way of life. Thus we have for example a Tsar Peter who spent his youth in the German quarter of Moscow and forced a Cosmopolitan Westernization upon the Russian people: no beards, uncovered and low bodices on women, a complete mixing of everything and everyone, and lowering of all barriers, symbolized by the presence of Tsar Peter's servant Hannibal, forced to marry into Russian nobility and becoming the the great grandfather of Alexander Pushkin. Married to the rise of technology, it leads to another concept of humanity, the rise of what would be considered in any other context, the rise of another and newer species of human.

This will lead to my next post, on the Copernican Revolution and the discovery of the New World in 1492 AD, where again I will relate it back to the Beginning and those " coats of skins", and towards to the End.

[annatar1914]

But, @Political Interest , @Verv , and @Potemkin , How does this connect with my earlier commentary on Barriers, and the " coats of skins" of our fallen first parents?

With the City, the Barriers fall down, all that are not inclusive to existing in the City itself. In the City, one can find (much more easily than outside the City) the " Other" , who presents opportunities for hybridization in a literal sense but also even up to not only hybridization, but a conquest of the native culture and way of life. Thus we have for example a Tsar Peter who spent his youth in the German quarter of Moscow and forced a Cosmopolitan Westernization upon the Russian people: no beards, uncovered and low bodices on women, a complete mixing of everything and everyone, and lowering of all barriers, symbolized by the presence of Tsar Peter's servant Hannibal, forced to marry into Russian nobility and becoming the the great grandfather of Alexander Pushkin. Married to the rise of technology, it leads to another concept of humanity, the rise of what would be considered in any other context, the rise of another and newer species of human.

This will lead to my next post, on the Copernican Revolution and the discovery of the New World in 1492 AD, where again I will relate it back to the Beginning and those " coats of skins", and towards to the End.

So, @Verv , @Potemkin , and @Political Interest , my friends, we're getting close to an important point here, in which three revolutionary movements converge.

The first is one I've talked about before, the Copernican Revolution. Begun in 1515 AD. It changed everything, crowned by Kants dictum that man would thereafter determine " a priori " the nature of objects prior to observation. One Barrier down.

The second revolutionary movement is likewise novel, begun in 1492 AD with the discovery of the New World, which became the embodiment of starting over for mankind and recovering some alleged lost purity or lost doctrine which could be a new light to mankind, a " empire of liberty " or " philosophical republic " that is also the esoteric Atlantis reborn. Another Barrier down.

The third revolution is not in the cosmological or philosophical/terrestrial realms, but in the spiritual, with the birth of Protestantism in 1517 AD. Where every human being ultimately determines their own spirituality ( at the time, Christianity of some sort), or none at all. The final Barrier down.

At what point do these converge? With the United States of America. No barriers, no veils, no limits allowed. The convergence symbolically culminated in the Moon landings of 1969 AD, as the story goes.... The triumph over Heaven and Earth, symbolized in recapitulation by speaking the words of Genesis chapter one by the Apollo crew, the esoteric and hermetic dreams realized. And earlier, the Trinity test in the New Mexico desert in 1945 of the Atomic Bomb. And around that same era, Playboy magazine and its later iterations. No " coats of skins" to cover us, no sin or guilt, shame or honor, tradition or hierarchy.

We live in the aftermath, the result of all this. There has been and only can be one Revolution, the American Revolution. Will the world be an American Civilization, or something else? Will Atlantis triumph, reborn from the Flood, or will Hyperborea?

I have my own idea of what the answer is. But I welcome you to discuss your answers for sure. For that is traditional too: " come, let us reason together ".

[annatar1914]

When I was preparing for writing on these issues, as a side note I read of what is clear about Sodom and Gommorah and the three other cities of the plain. The cities were on a downward spiral: having rebelled against their Mesopotamian overlords means that they had already lost one war against them in the first place, and then later their rebellion resulted in having their cities sacked and burned down and the survivors marched off into slavery, including Righteous Lot, before being rescued by Saint
Abraham. They clearly were immune to the prodding of conscience and this led to their final Heavenly destruction.

But that rescue by Abraham and his handful of servants and allies over an entire Mesopotamian army is of interest. For the rescuers were not civilized men, but Shepherds, Barbarians almost by definition. Already a tremendous disparity is at play, early on in human history. Does the wickedness of the City and of the more civilized peoples render them weakened and subject to the predation of strong people, or of deliverance from the same by even stronger but fiercer folk? Like Roman's using Huns to repel Germans?

[annatar1914]

So, @Verv , @Potemkin , and @Political Interest , my friends, we're getting close to an important point here, in which three revolutionary movements converge.

The first is one I've talked about before, the Copernican Revolution. Begun in 1515 AD. It changed everything, crowned by Kants dictum that man would thereafter determine " a priori " the nature of objects prior to observation. One Barrier down.

The second revolutionary movement is likewise novel, begun in 1492 AD with the discovery of the New World, which became the embodiment of starting over for mankind and recovering some alleged lost purity or lost doctrine which could be a new light to mankind, a " empire of liberty " or " philosophical republic " that is also the esoteric Atlantis reborn. Another Barrier down.

The third revolution is not in the cosmological or philosophical/terrestrial realms, but in the spiritual, with the birth of Protestantism in 1517 AD. Where every human being ultimately determines their own spirituality ( at the time, Christianity of some sort), or none at all. The final Barrier down.

At what point do these converge? With the United States of America. No barriers, no veils, no limits allowed. The convergence symbolically culminated in the Moon landings of 1969 AD, as the story goes.... The triumph over Heaven and Earth, symbolized in recapitulation by speaking the words of Genesis chapter one by the Apollo crew, the esoteric and hermetic dreams realized. And earlier, the Trinity test in the New Mexico desert in 1945 of the Atomic Bomb. And around that same era, Playboy magazine and its later iterations. No " coats of skins" to cover us, no sin or guilt, shame or honor, tradition or hierarchy.

We live in the aftermath, the result of all this. There has been and only can be one Revolution, the American Revolution. Will the world be an American Civilization, or something else? Will Atlantis triumph, reborn from the Flood, or will Hyperborea?

I have my own idea of what the answer is. But I welcome you to discuss your answers for sure. For that is traditional too: " come, let us reason together ".

@Verv , @Political Interest , and @Potemkin , and others:

I know that others are quite comfortable with this lawless Titanism, this Promethean and Luciferian way, agree with it and find it quite in keeping with their own worldview. Others are very hesitant to believe that this is the case, especially if it can be shown to be the case from American beginnings. Consider Ethan Allen or Thomas Paine, or Benjamin Franklin and his past, especially in Europe. Following in the footsteps of the proud Giants, following the Secret Doctrine, is easy in this milieu in any case, even if one didn't know about them and maybe even especially if one was ignorant of them. Perhaps a change in worldview is necessary in some eyes in order to try to create the " New Man", who looks to be awfully like the Old, at least some hybrid and terrible form of life, an Abomination like Hitler among others wanted to bring about. Thus I will return to themes known to readers of Miguel Serrano and Julius Evola, and tie them in with my earlier recent posts. A leap is required: some think non human entities are involved in the process I'm talking about, and with the rebirth of certain points of view.

[annatar1914]

@Potemkin , @Verv , and @Political Interest , and others:

The " Giants", whether metaphorically or otherwise literally Gigantic, are as Scripture says, the " heroes of old, the men of renown" , with something better than human or rather non-human about them. That is, the notion of innate natural superiority, of Aristocracy, of Caste, Race, and so forth, alleged superiority over others in mind and of body. God Himself destroys them in the Flood, in the Fire, and the invasion of the Israelites of the Holy Land. Their Proud ideals are as nothing in His eyes, and contrary to Him. Serrano and Evola give the game away, the essence of the " Secret Doctrine ", when they declare the " god of the Jews" to be a fallen " Demiurge".

And indeed, their heroes and mighty men are praised in the Illiad and the Odyssey, while a man nurtured by these tales, Antiochus the Selucid king, offered sacrifice to Zeus on the desecrated Altar of the Temple.... The tale of the Maccabees is that of all Scripture, the Proud and Mighty being humbled by God through the means of regular people, even women and children. Or the Woman, and The Child.

What does this have to do with America and our earlier themes? Well America is (secretly) very much an illiberal Aristocratic Republic, " the people " having a Classical Greco Roman meaning that is quite limited in scope. It is a person of means, of wealth and of birth, who has the real franchise and the real say in how things are run. Only, Jefferson calls it government by a " natural aristocracy ", of " merit". America is a country of " Giants", trusting in their gifts of mind and body to take what they think rightfully belongs to them in life.

[Potemkin]

@Potemkin , @Verv , and @Political Interest , and others:

The " Giants", whether metaphorically or otherwise literally Gigantic, are as Scripture says, the " heroes of old, the men of renown" , with something better than human or rather non-human about them. That is, the notion of innate natural superiority, of Aristocracy, of Caste, Race, and so forth, alleged superiority over others in mind and of body. God Himself destroys them in the Flood, in the Fire, and the invasion of the Israelites of the Holy Land. Their Proud ideals are as nothing in His eyes, and contrary to Him. Serrano and Evola give the game away, the essence of the " Secret Doctrine ", when they declare the " god of the Jews" to be a fallen " Demiurge".

And indeed, their heroes and mighty men are praised in the Illiad and the Odyssey, while a man nurtured by these tales, Antiochus the Selucid king, offered sacrifice to Zeus on the desecrated Altar of the Temple.... The tale of the Maccabees is that of all Scripture, the Proud and Mighty being humbled by God through the means of regular people, even women and children. Or the Woman, and The Child.

What does this have to do with America and our earlier themes? Well America is (secretly) very much an illiberal Aristocratic Republic, " the people " having a Classical Greco Roman meaning that is quite limited in scope. It is a person of means, of wealth and of birth, who has the real franchise and the real say in how things are run. Only, Jefferson calls it government by a " natural aristocracy ", of " merit". America is a country of " Giants", trusting in their gifts of mind and body to take what they think rightfully belongs to them in life.

The 'equality' enshrined in American politics is actually not true equality at all, but is a 'meritocracy', which implies that citizenship or even basic human consideration must be earned, through mighty works or through superiority of mind or intellect. This attitude is clearly a pagan one, not a Christian one. It is an 'equality' of Giants, of the natural-born rulers of the rabble. When Octavian made himself the master of Rome, he called himself "primus inter pares", first among equals. Whom did he regard as his "equals"? Was it the beggar in the street? The prisoner in chains? The humblest toiler? Christ considered all of these people to be his equals - "what you do unto the least of these, you do unto me." Would the Emperor Augustus have agreed with him? Would our present rulers agree with him?

[annatar1914]

The 'equality' enshrined in American politics is actually not true equality at all, but is a 'meritocracy', which implies that citizenship or even basic human consideration must be earned, through mighty works or through superiority of mind or intellect. This attitude is clearly a pagan one, not a Christian one. It is an 'equality' of Giants, of the natural-born rulers of the rabble. When Octavian made himself the master of Rome, he called himself "primus inter pares", first among equals. Whom did he regard as his "equals"? Was it the beggar in the street? The prisoner in chains? The humblest toiler? Christ considered all of these people to be his equals - "what you do unto the least of these, you do unto me." Would the Emperor Augustus have agreed with him? Would our present rulers agree with him?

@Potemkin , well put.

I'd say that the answers to your questions would be " no" and " no", unfortunately. Which is why any Monotheism and the entire Abrahamic legacy (from their perspective), no matter the sect, simply has to go. Our rulers are increasingly more aware and more comfortable in being quite open about their necessity in seeing this happening. And with Monotheism, any trace of Egalitarianism whatsoever.

[annatar1914]

@Potemkin , well put.

I'd say that the answers to your questions would be " no" and " no", unfortunately. Which is why any Monotheism and the entire Abrahamic legacy (from their perspective), no matter the sect, simply has to go. Our rulers are increasingly more aware and more comfortable in being quite open about their necessity in seeing this happening. And with Monotheism, any trace of Egalitarianism whatsoever.

@Potemkin , @Verv , and @Political Interest , and others:

And so, today I see the turning point, where the " Sovoks", the " Aborigines" of the Wild Field, took up the fight of their grandparents. For Nation. For Socialism. For Orthodoxy. And have won, by not losing.

Now the real revolution begins, the decisive rejection of Western civilization and the preservation of integral humanity in the face of Faustian/Promethean transhumanism.

It will be interesting in the coming days how people's attitudes towards the Donbass situation might reflect a worldview coming down on one side of the aforementioned devide or the other. One will likely now witness the acceleration of the decline in Western forms of Christianity and/or a reaction that results in civil wars and conflict in numerous places in the West.

The Americanization of Europe will now proceed almost unhindered.

[annatar1914]

@Political Interest , @Verv , @Tainari88, and @Potemkin :

Earlier I spoke offhandedly of " Americanization ", which is almost but not quite identical in meaning to " Modernization " or " Westernization ". Almost, but not quite. The magic of the symbolism of the New World is that it is in fact, new. A person is modern who can move to this New World and create a seemingly new existence, rejecting centuries if not thousands of years of the experience and belief of their ancestors as if it were nothing.

Admit it folks: to be American or to be Modern is to say that all your ancestors were wrong, were idiots. What kind of person moves from everything they have ever known, willingly, except someone with a psychotic break from previous reality? I say: willingly, because so many immigrants did not....And those native to the New World saw it as the World, of course, and nothing particularly different in the Modernist sense, a new and novel chance to remake human beings and their environment.

I can see that in the New World, there is the ultimate and final Bastion of Faustian Civilization, indeed of Civilization itself, of the City. Of the Bourgeoisie. It is different in the " Old World " , in which one's past and one's ancestors cannot be dismissed from everyday experiences, because there are some tangible reminders all around. Whereas most of the New World that is experienced is younger than 1492 AD.

So part of what I mean by Americanization taking a hold over Europe after 2-22-22, is that Western Europe will increasingly resemble in form the World of the New World in its tangible characteristics as well as its thought forms, and that European people will be, in essence, American. Nothing from before will make much sense to them, and little of it will exist or be noticed anymore. And, America will provide the leadership of European life in that final phase. Faustian Civilization coming full circle.

I would like to be wrong. Am I, my friends?

[Patrickov]

1. What is the evidence of Europe undergoing "Americanization"?
2. In your opinion, does "Americanization" happen elsewhere in the world, e.g. in China, where anti-CCP people (including those residing in America) accuse the CCP of destroying the good parts of their ancestry, while CCP supporters claim the vice versa?
3. You seem to suggest "Americanization" as a bad thing. Is it true?

[annatar1914]

1. What is the evidence of Europe undergoing "Americanization"?
2. In your opinion, does "Americanization" happen elsewhere in the world, e.g. in China, where anti-CCP people (including those residing in America) accuse the CCP of destroying the good parts of their ancestry, while CCP supporters claim the vice versa?
3. You seem to suggest "Americanization" as a bad thing. Is it true?

@Patrickov , I asked if I was wrong, and here you ask me further questions, lol. Thanks for your reply.

But I'm game, to broadly answer your questions:

1. The evidence of Americanization upon European thinking and everyday life is profound, beginning with the concept of the " noble savage", say, to the influence of American political forms since 1776 and the age of Revolution. Not to mention American popular culture. Ask a European, hopefully they can tell us, at least the ones I mentioned at the beginning of my last post.

2. Americanization can and is happening everywhere as " global culture ", and evidence for this can be seen on both sides in the Chinese case. However the CCP appears to be embracing native nationalism and a form of Confucianism modified by the Legist philosophy. Its Chinese opposition seems to be more influenced by Western examples and political philosophies, except with Falun Gong.

3. Americanization is indeed suggested by me as a bad thing. To understand why that might be the case, one can go back and read this thread in its entirety. However since I am of the persuasion that people are not generally convinced of their own will voluntarily, it will probably take serious disruptions and disorders before mankind that is influenced by Americanization will see this as true. And that is precisely my point. It is like the fish who cannot see the water all around them, exactly because it is indeed pervasively all around them. In Chinas case, look at China before and after 1911 and the evidence is clear, such as the influence of America upon the political philosophy of Sun Yat-Sen and his federalism in particular.

But my question was more directly a question asking if I was wrong or at least not entirely correct, and hopefully one could provide examples of where I am incorrect and why. Can you provide examples of the positive impact of America and why it has been positive?

[annatar1914]

@Political Interest , @Verv , @Tainari88, and @Potemkin :

Earlier I spoke offhandedly of " Americanization ", which is almost but not quite identical in meaning to " Modernization " or " Westernization ". Almost, but not quite. The magic of the symbolism of the New World is that it is in fact, new. A person is modern who can move to this New World and create a seemingly new existence, rejecting centuries if not thousands of years of the experience and belief of their ancestors as if it were nothing.

Admit it folks: to be American or to be Modern is to say that all your ancestors were wrong, were idiots. What kind of person moves from everything they have ever known, willingly, except someone with a psychotic break from previous reality? I say: willingly, because so many immigrants did not....And those native to the New World saw it as the World, of course, and nothing particularly different in the Modernist sense, a new and novel chance to remake human beings and their environment.

I can see that in the New World, there is the ultimate and final Bastion of Faustian Civilization, indeed of Civilization itself, of the City. Of the Bourgeoisie. It is different in the " Old World " , in which one's past and one's ancestors cannot be dismissed from everyday experiences, because there are some tangible reminders all around. Whereas most of the New World that is experienced is younger than 1492 AD.

So part of what I mean by Americanization taking a hold over Europe after 2-22-22, is that Western Europe will increasingly resemble in form the World of the New World in its tangible characteristics as well as its thought forms, and that European people will be, in essence, American. Nothing from before will make much sense to them, and little of it will exist or be noticed anymore. And, America will provide the leadership of European life in that final phase. Faustian Civilization coming full circle.

I would like to be wrong. Am I, my friends?

Posted as these musings are on the Spirituality sub forum of a political forum, I try to thread a needle of discussing spiritual worldviews that have political implications, without going overboard into branding various ideas couched in the language of metaphysical evil and apocalyptic anathema.

But, this is not one of those types of post. Ideas have consequences. I note too that in the meta historical sweep of our conversation, it bears reminding that the work of sinful men can have good outcomes, while in this life the work of good men can know failure and have dubious results.

All that being said, I am doubling down on my own cultural and spiritual critique of our abberent modern civilization, the heart of which does reside and draw life from more specifically the American civilization. To be reminded of the Proud Giants of Scripture and use that language and symbolism to convey that critique in a deeper level, I find to be quite valid. If I skewer cultural favorites like Alexander or Achilles onward and call them Giants, worthy of condemnation, then so be it. I chose Jerusalem over Athens, and Rome over Carthage, any day of the week.

[annatar1914]

But in this world of fallen mankind and of sin, sin both personal and collective, I have to say that while modern civilization makes it easier to sin , there is plenty of blame to go around in the East and the South of the world. The Light, the Right Belief, grows dim with Schism and Heresy rampant in the world. Leaders of once Orthodox countries strive to be as the West is in its own realm, strive to be Great instead of Good. People regard Nation or People, in this world, temporary and transitory, as a greater good than the Kingdom of Heaven, eternal and full of the Christian Race of all kinds of people. Brother kills brother. This cannot stand, those who lose are those with one foot in the camp of the Enemy.

[Rancid]

I have sinned, therefore I am.

[annatar1914]

I have sinned, therefore I am.

No reason to despair my friend, we all sin and fall short in this life, and I am the worst of these as for myself, a horrible person.

But. God is good and loves mankind, raising us up while we lie in the dust defeated by our enemy, and gives us the means to carry on fighting, to gradually reconcile with Him Who loves His prodigal children. (It is the week of the Prodigal Son before Great Lent, in fact). We can begin to love one another better, and love Our Heavenly Father.

[Rancid]

No reason to despair my friend, we all sin and fall short in this life, and I am the worst of these as for myself, a horrible person.

But. God is good and loves mankind, raising us up while we lie in the dust defeated by our enemy, and gives us the means to carry on fighting, to gradually reconcile with Him Who loves His prodigal children. (It is the week of the Prodigal Son before Great Lent, in fact). We can begin to love one another better, and love Our Heavenly Father.

I've grown to like your posting even when we don't agree.

[annatar1914]

So, @Potemkin , @Verv , @Political Interest , @Rancid , @Patrickov , and others:

When I speak of the " Giants" as the Israelites called them, the Pagan " Heroes and Mighty Men, Men of Renown ", I want to be clear that this Type of mankind is at the core of the Aristocratic principle, and integral to the thinking of a Neitzsche or Ludovici. I will describe this type of person when they are in the ascendancy:

Firstly, they hold to a Master Morality, where they are free but regard most others as cattle, as servants. They come to power through their alleged superiority of natural gifts and aggressive instincts and will to power. They are passionate, giving free reign to their lusts and expressions of desire. They do not conceal their power but revel in it and in taking overt actions against opponents. They are often magnanimous to like minded foes of similar status, but are inhuman to those beneath. They rejoice in conflict as the development of their gifts and abilities, the opportunity to test their self against others. The ways of pity are strange to them, as are concepts of democracy, socialism, equality, and the religious and spiritual impulses. They see religion as suppressing the drives of greater and superior mankind, which operates beyond rules of morality and the thinking of the " common herd".

Such were Achilles and Hercules and the Heroes, and so too men like Caesar and Alexander. And today we can see others like this, no doubt, but this Aristocratic thinking was the organizing framework, literally, for Pagan society.

For a thousand years, this was suppressed somewhat by Christianity, but certain historical events led to its return in the modern era, to the point where it is making its return.