a ''return'' to traditionalism, a rejection of ''communism''... - Page 4 - 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.
#14939293
annatar1914 wrote:St. Matthew was an Apostle

St. Mark was a disciple of St. Peter, and was made Bishop of the Christian community in Alexandria Egypt

St. Luke was an associate and follower of St. Paul originally, and by tradition knew those closest to Christ

St. John was an Apostle


Wait a minute, wait a minute, you seriously believe that the Gospels were written by the Apostles? :lol: :?: :lol:
#14939294
Annatar, who executed Christ? The Romans?


I did.

Do not confuse science with modern social depravity, one and the other is not the same.


Believe me, I'm the last to confuse modern social depravity with genuine science.

Darwin wanted to be a clergyman.


At other times, he wanted to sail around the world and catalogue finches. He was an Agnostic most of his life, not someone who would have fearlessly defended Christianity.
#14939301
Albert wrote:I do not think you are clever enough to be The Prince of this World.


Albert, again not being a Christian you fail to understand. I by my sins, and mankind collectively, we have sinned, and Christ paid for those sins out of His own superabundant mercy and goodness, so that we can be elevated to living His divine life with Him in His Glory.

What I said has absolutely nothing with what you might be thinking.

Edit; and this is the deeper reason why I am hesitant to speak of holy things, to be reverent and speak well, and not be the occasion of sin for others, I am mediocre at best in doing these things.
#14939306
John 14 wrote:27"Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. It is not as the world gives that I give to you. Do not let your heart be troubled, and do not let it be afraid." 28"You have heard that I said to you, 'I am going away, and I am coming to you'; if you had loved me, you would have rejoiced that I am going to join my Father, for my Father is greater than I." 29"And now, behold, I have told you before it happens, that when it has happened, you may believe." 30"After this I will not be speaking much with you, for The Prince of the world is coming and he has nothing to use against me*. 31But that the world may know that I love my Father, and just as my Father has taught me, so I have done. Rise up, let us depart from here."
#14939321
annatar1914 wrote:The point is that He indicates as much, that we live on a young and created Earth. God is Truth, and so I cannot believe in the lie of evolution, no matter how skillfully wrapped in a package that lie is.

False again. Nothing in true Science will ever contradict the Truth of Scripture and Holy Tradition, so if the fault lies anywhere, it lies with human limitations.


:lol: "lie of evolution" truth of holy scripture." He's the most deluded character I've ever seen post here.
#14939322
annatar1914 wrote:I do believe that the Christian worldview is still sufficiently understood even by those against Christianity that there need be no special digression to understand what was going in European civilization for over a thousand years, from roughly St. Constantine's reign in the 300's AD up until the 16th century. Then, it was not just I who believed in ''biblical inerrancy'', but all who cling to the salvific Apostolic teaching, the teaching of the Fathers of Orthodoxy.

What I am for, is not so much a replay of that period, as a call for more ''leaven in the dough''. That is, a deepening of the Christian expression of life into temporal society, not a increasing alienation and secularization of human life by modern mores. This is not ''traditionalism'' for the sake of holding to what our ancestors did and believed, but the Gospel that still burns in the human heart.

However, that time has not come, or come back, and so those who are as I am are increasingly under attack, and have been so for centuries. It's your world for now, the world of Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, Kant, Darwin, Freud, Einstein, and Marx; we'll clean up the mess later, or rather God will.

But that discussion is not the subject of this thread as I had intended, but a discussion of Communism and anti-communist traditionalism

Anti-communist traditionalism looks to the 19th century era of monarchs and empires. What do you see in that which is inspired by the words of Jesus? It wasn't exactly an era of "sell all your goods and follow me", or "what you did to the least of these you did to me", was it? Neither, for that matter, were the feudal Middle Ages you yearn for.
#14939345
Prosthetic Conscience you stated;

Anti-communist traditionalism looks to the 19th century era of monarchs and empires.


I'm not so much an ''Anti'' about Communism to be that kind of 19th century ''traditionalist''.

What do you see in that which is inspired by the words of Jesus? It wasn't exactly an era of "sell all your goods and follow me", or "what you did to the least of these you did to me", was it? Neither, for that matter, were the feudal Middle Ages you yearn for.


BOycey, you wrote;

Clearly annatar1914 has been reading the teachings of Apostle VS and has changed his opinions on things.


VS has no more, or less, helped me to see what it's like to be an active Christian in a setting like PoFo. I am still favoring Socialism at least on an emotional level, and I likewise am very much against modern Capitalism in it's current and previous expressions. Theologically VS and I have disagreements as well that may not seem important to one outside the Christian traditions, but which are of profound importance to us. Despite all that, we seem to value the other's opinion.


But I am sure VS is no longer a Monarchist btw.


As an traditional Orthodox Christian, I am hard put to justify not being a Monarchist, so even during my Christian Communist/Socialist phase, I tried to square that circle. Nor was I alone in trying to do that, either, what with Alexander Kazembek and the ''Mladorossi'' doing the same thing during the 1920's-1940's.

At least annatar is honest to himself so no judgement from me. He doesn't need prove anything if he has faith in his beliefs I might add.


Well, thank you, not all are as understanding as you are.

But I want also to point out that I do not ''yearn'' for the ''feudal Middle Ages''. For me as well as other individuals and communities of believers in today's world, it's clear that this ''traditionalism'' is not opposed to the modern age so much itself as it's opposing a certain mindset that has grown up in this modern age and by which the modern age is so dominated by. It's not about being opposed to automobiles necessarily, or vaccines, or indoor plumbing, as being opposed to secularism, moral relativism, godlessness, an addiction to technique and a worship of ''science''. About maintaining, not the ''traditions of men'', but the traditions of God, living life holding fast to the salvific doctrines.
#14939441
annatar1914 wrote:But I want also to point out that I do not ''yearn'' for the ''feudal Middle Ages''.


In a sense you do; that was the age of unquestioined faith.

For me as well as other individuals and communities of believers in today's world, it's clear that this ''traditionalism'' is not opposed to the modern age so much itself as it's opposing a certain mindset that has grown up in this modern age and by which the modern age is so dominated by. It's not about being opposed to automobiles necessarily, or vaccines, or indoor plumbing, as being opposed to secularism, moral relativism, godlessness, an addiction to technique and a worship of ''science''.


But as technology progresses, enabling Man to become more successful and confident in the real world, inevitably society becomes more secular. This isn't the medieval period when all you could do about illness (to cite one example) was pray. As civilization advances, the need for "god" (either as an explanation or a solution) declines. Extrapolate that trend into the future and the last vestiges of "god" and faith will be gone. :) But the point is, to expect pristine faith in an era of technical and material progress is to have your cake and eat it too.
#14939447
annatar1914 wrote:But I want also to point out that I do not ''yearn'' for the ''feudal Middle Ages''. For me as well as other individuals and communities of believers in today's world, it's clear that this ''traditionalism'' is not opposed to the modern age so much itself as it's opposing a certain mindset that has grown up in this modern age and by which the modern age is so dominated by. It's not about being opposed to automobiles necessarily, or vaccines, or indoor plumbing, as being opposed to secularism, moral relativism, godlessness, an addiction to technique and a worship of ''science''. About maintaining, not the ''traditions of men'', but the traditions of God, living life holding fast to the salvific doctrines.

Which is why I said "feudal", and not "primitive", "non-scientific" or similar. You seem to want a feudal structure, which you think is required by your god:

I have always been a Monarchist, a supporter of Orthodox Autocracy.
...
Hierarchy, it's real and it's natural to the condition of life. The Cosmos is Hierarchical. No further egalitarianism from me. ''Star differs from star in glory'', while still remaining stars...

A. Faith

B. Family

C. Tsar and Nation

That's what I'm about, once more and forever.

But I can't see, in the New Testament, anything saying there must be a hierarchy in society. There are some messages to the effect of "just grin and bear it", but the overall NT message is egalitarian. Parts of the OT are hierarchical, especially giving priests power (most people would then point out priests wrote it; but you give it inerrancy). But your period from Constantine to the 16th century is one of people claiming 'god-given' power over others, and enforcing it with plenty of violence. It's also people forbidding the proles to even read the Bible for themselves, but to instead shut up and do what the priests and nobles tell them. Was that really a "salvific" life?
#14939485
@annatar1914

Sorry to see that all the trolls decided to shit all over your thread on points you specifically said you did not want to debate. Note that these are predominantly leftists or godless fashy types. This is not coincidental, after all, such worldviews are not well known for producing cultures of respect and honor.

I will now examine the meat of your OP brother.

annatar1914 wrote:1. A literal six day, young earth Creationist, in line with Scripture and the Holy Fathers of the Orthodox Christian Faith.


Same here and for the same reasons. Plus, i have no reason not to believe in such, as no theoretical construct erected in challenge to this is logically tenable.

annatar1914 wrote:2. Yes folks, I am also a Geocentrist.... I don't talk about it, it isn't subject to debate (nor is #1, above), it just is.


I am cosmologically ambivalent, but I would generally consider myself a geocentrist, perhaps not in the scientific sense but in the purely theological sense. The earth and man's drama within it are the center of God's redemptive purposes and I have no reason to believe in anything beyond it of any real significance unless it can be experienced directly or inferred by necessary consequence. Otherwise, I have no reason to care about it, No matter how much I enjoy sci-fi fantasy.

annatar1914 wrote:3. I have always been a Monarchist, a supporter of Orthodox Autocracy. Even as a ''Christian Communist'', I held to the seeming dichotomy of such a position just as did the ''Mladorossi'' of the 1920's and 1930's. But there's no reason for the political schizophrenia, I have rejected the Socialism for good.


Congratulations.

annatar1914 wrote:4. I support private property and free enterprise, not without conditions and caveats, and there is a higher voluntary communal life possible, the monastic life, but that cannot righteously be compared to the damnable and secular attempts at ''Heaven on Earth''.


I also agree with this note on monasticism, I have never seen a conflict between communal living and private property, indeed the former thrived the most in human history under conditions of the latter. I don't think this is coincidental.

annatar1914 wrote:5. In fact, one will find i'm back to being about as ''reactionary'' in my traditionalism as one can get, not just in my politics or cosmology, but also in my attitudes on daily life, in morality and one's societal roles, etc... Orthodox Christianity as a full way of life the way it should be lived, in Christ Jesus.


Correct, The Christian faith is incredibly patriarchal, traditionalist, and even theocratic in its demands. Its exclusivist, and it tolerates and compromises no other ideology. God demands dominion over all the earth and every aspect of human life. This is why its hated by leftists. They see the True Faith as shackles, but those that believe see it as the very foundation for true freedom.

annatar1914 wrote:Why? I've been a Lion, trying to convince myself that I was among these Goats, those Gaderene Swine of Marxist-Leninists... I won't be numbered among them. I was there, I saw what happened and what they did. They have only themselves to blame, but God and History will Judge.

Past is future, and I won't be numbered with the Losers. Sure, Capitalism has many evils associated with it, and my critique of it continues, but I realized that unlike Socialism, It is capable of modification, of producing a ''Third Way'' that is better for mankind than either Socialism or Communism.

And that calls to my mind another final point; Hierarchy, it's real and it's natural to the condition of life. The Cosmos is Hierarchical. No further egalitarianism from me. ''Star differs from star in glory'', while still remaining stars...

A. Faith

B. Family

C. Tsar and Nation

That's what I'm about, once more and forever. I expect to be a Terror here, to be sure.


All very good insights and I hope God blesses you in your journey and I am sure we will have many more edifying conversations.

Prosthetic Conscience wrote:But I can't see, in the New Testament, anything saying there must be a hierarchy in society. There are some messages to the effect of "just grin and bear it", but the overall NT message is egalitarian. Parts of the OT are hierarchical, especially giving priests power (most people would then point out priests wrote it; but you give it inerrancy). But your period from Constantine to the 16th century is one of people claiming 'god-given' power over others, and enforcing it with plenty of violence. It's also people forbidding the proles to even read the Bible for themselves, but to instead shut up and do what the priests and nobles tell them. Was that really a "salvific" life?


This is all a load of horseshit.

Christianity is absolutely anti-egalitarian.

It is hyper patriarchal, especially regarding gender, in both the Old and New Testaments and its feudal character comes from the Hebraic notion of inheritance and land possession which continues in the NT as affirmed by both Christ and St. Paul.

Likewise the distinction between the spiritual and political kingdoms further marks hierarchical societal strata.

Furthermore, the Scriptures permit certain qualified forms of slavery in both the old and new testaments.

and Lastly, all discussion by Christ and the apostles regarding "giving to the poor" are purely voluntarist or in regards to spiritual tests.

Christianity opposes the worship and love of money for its own sake, but it does not oppose wealth or land possession. Christianity commands charitable giving for its adherents out of a spirit of sacrifice of love of one's brethren, but it absolutely does not teach the forcible and violent stealing from citizenry to redistribute to the poor except in extreme emergency in certain cases that are likely not duplicable outside and of a very narrow context.

Indeed, the idea of forcing someone to give to the poor at gunpoint defeats the whole purpose of Christ's point in giving to the poor. Giving to the poor is only valuable to God as a voluntary act of sacrifice. Indeed, Christ praised the poor widow who gave a single mite in the collection as "giving the most" in comparison to the heaps of Gold contributed by the rich, because it was "all she had" whereas the riches were a portion of the wealthy people's total wealth. This is contrary to communism which values the mass riches that can be confiscated and redistributed because of their actual capital value. This is not Christ's message. The voluntary sacrifice of a poor person is worth more to Christ's kingdom than the involuntary confiscation of every dime from the Coke brothers.

So, in response to your silly views, we have strict heirachies according to land, gender, class, and religion in Christianity and all aspects of "giving to the poor" and eschewing riches are commanded on the basis of a voluntary spirit (contra marxism).

All of this can be supported with a plethora of texts.

B0ycey wrote:Clearly annatar1914 has been reading the teachings of Apostle VS and has changed his opinions on things. But I am sure VS is no longer a Monarchist btw.


I remember you saying like this regarding @SolarCross one time and I assure you its the delusions of your own mind and making. I consider both SolarCross and Anatar1914 as friends and allies in the realm of PoFo, and I am sure there have been mutual influences, but your paranoia regarding me leading some sort of far-right pofo revolution or that I am somehow a major influencer of others on here is highly exaggerated. PoFo would not notice my absence.

annatar1914 wrote:VS has no more, or less, helped me to see what it's like to be an active Christian in a setting like PoFo. I am still favoring Socialism at least on an emotional level, and I likewise am very much against modern Capitalism in it's current and previous expressions. Theologically VS and I have disagreements as well that may not seem important to one outside the Christian traditions, but which are of profound importance to us. Despite all that, we seem to value the other's opinion.


Agreed.

annatar1914 wrote:As an traditional Orthodox Christian, I am hard put to justify not being a Monarchist, so even during my Christian Communist/Socialist phase, I tried to square that circle. Nor was I alone in trying to do that, either, what with Alexander Kazembek and the ''Mladorossi'' doing the same thing during the 1920's-1940's.


@B0ycey's perception of my political views, as his perception with my philosophical views, tend to be both narrow and simplistic.

I am an Anarcho-Capitalist because I am patriarchal where the head of one's family is the ruler of such and rules likewise over his own property and all that live on it. I am opposed to monarchy inasmuch as monarchy is warned against by the Prophet Samuel, but also affirm the possible need of a spiritual or symbolic ruler uniting all lords and their properties much as the pope provided (in spite of his errors) for medieval Europe or the Emperor did during feudal japan (warring states period).

Hence, I might also be called an Anarcho-Monarchist.

Likewise, I would argue that monarchy, even if being a state (a third-party monopolist of coercion), is infinitely better than any other form of third-party monopolist because it is private in its ownership of government.

My preferences are as follows:

1. Anarcho-Capitalism/Anarcho-Monarchism.
2. Monarchy (minarchist)

*considerable gap*

3. Monarchy (Imperialist/Colonialist)
4. Decentralized Constitutional Republic (Wild West/Old Confederacy)

*Distant Gap.....*


5. Fascist/Casarism.


*Even More Distant Gap*

6. Corporatist Republic (mono-cultural) (Japan/Some places in U.S.A, Hungary, et al.)


*Greatest Gap*

7.Everything Else Starting With Social Democracy with most preferred and Socialism/Communism being the worst.
#14939492
James 2 wrote:The Sin of Partiality

My brothers, show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory. For if a man wearing a gold ring and fine clothing comes into your assembly, and a poor man in shabby clothing also comes in, and if you pay attention to the one who wears the fine clothing and say, “You sit here in a good place,” while you say to the poor man, “You stand over there,” or, “Sit down at my feet,” have you not then made distinctions among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts? Listen, my beloved brothers, has not God chosen those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom, which he has promised to those who love him? But you have dishonored the poor man. Are not the rich the ones who oppress you, and the ones who drag you into court? Are they not the ones who blaspheme the honorable name by which you were called?

If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing well. But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it. For he who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. So speak and so act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty. For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment.
#14939499
Perhaps these sudden appearances of almost medieval faith musings on PoFo were merely coincidences @Victoribus Spolia. But if you read previous posts of both SolarCross and (less so) annatar, I would say you have influenced their opinions actually. Not that you would be missed on PoFo if you left of course. But I suspect you would be remembered nonetheless btw. I doubt I have the same presents or influence actually. So take it as a complement.

However faith is just that. If people suddenly see the light, I am not here to bring them down. They do not have to answer to anyone. So I hope annatar finds what he is looking for. Though no teachings from anyone would ever make me bow to the Windors I might add.
#14939507
B0ycey wrote:Perhaps these sudden appearances of almost medieval faith musings on PoFo were merely coincidences @Victoribus Spolia. But if you read previous posts of both SolarCross and (less so) annatar, I would say you have influenced their opinions actually. Not that you would be missed on PoFo if you left of course. But I suspect you would be remembered nonetheless btw. I doubt I have the same presents or influence actually. So take it as a complement.

However faith is just that. If people suddenly see the light, I am not here to bring them down. They do not have to answer to anyone. So I hope annatar finds what he is looking for. Though no teachings from anyone would ever make me bow to the Windors I might add.

Just speaking for myself I am a fervent anti-communist and becoming more fervent in my anti-communism the more time I spend with communists here on pofo. I'll take @Victoribus Spolia as an ally because he is anti-communist too but ideologically this is almost the only point we could agree on. The an-cap thing might be the other but I was an an-cap here years ago as you can see from my posting history, nowadays I am a bit more pragmatic about governance and leaning towards minarchism. I am happy for governance in the situation of mutual defence but I don't need anyone to tell me what to think or what to do in my daily life. The biggest influence on me here on pofo is the communists here and what they taught me is a murderous hatred of communism!
#14939734
Thanks for the reply VS, let's talk;

Sorry to see that all the trolls decided to shit all over your thread on points you specifically said you did not want to debate. Note that these are predominantly leftists or godless fashy types. This is not coincidental, after all, such worldviews are not well known for producing cultures of respect and honor.


Such is life. I guarantee you that in an earlier pre-modern age, vile parasites of fortune sang the tunes of the prevailing major worldview whether they believed them at heart or just parroted what they thought expedient to parrot. Either way, they do it for it's comfort. So no, not well known for producing cultures of respect or honor.



On Young Earth, Six Day Creationism;

Same here and for the same reasons. Plus, i have no reason not to believe in such, as no theoretical construct erected in challenge to this is logically tenable.


Indeed, I spent years engaged in an honest attempt to knock holes in the idea, and found myself accepting it, even warmly so now.

On Geocentrism;


I am cosmologically ambivalent, but I would generally consider myself a geocentrist, perhaps not in the scientific sense but in the purely theological sense. The earth and man's drama within it are the center of God's redemptive purposes and I have no reason to believe in anything beyond it of any real significance unless it can be experienced directly or inferred by necessary consequence. Otherwise, I have no reason to care about it, No matter how much I enjoy sci-fi fantasy.


I could produce, and have before done so, evidence from Physics that suggest Geocentrism, but again I simply accept Geocentrism just as I would accept from Scripture that St. Jacob had 12 sons and not five, and that St. Joshua bade the Moon and the Sun hold still as Israel did battle against the 7 kings of the Canaanites, etc...

On dismissal of Socialism;

Congratulations.


Thank you.



I also agree with this note on monasticism, I have never seen a conflict between communal living and private property, indeed the former thrived the most in human history under conditions of the latter. I don't think this is coincidental.


No, I don't think it's coincidental at all

On Christianity as the Way of Life;

Correct, The Christian faith is incredibly patriarchal, traditionalist, and even theocratic in its demands. Its exclusivist, and it tolerates and compromises no other ideology. God demands dominion over all the earth and every aspect of human life. This is why its hated by leftists. They see the True Faith as shackles, but those that believe see it as the very foundation for true freedom.


Just so, these commandments seem severe to some, but they're more like telling someone not to jump off a cliff, not jaywalking or exceeding the speed limit.



All very good insights and I hope God blesses you in your journey and I am sure we will have many more edifying conversations.


Thank you, and I believe we shall.
#14939747
Albert wrote:Guys come on.


Looks the same from any inertial frame of reference. And then there's the so-called ''null result'' of the Michaelson-Moreley Interferometer experiment of 1887, which was only considered ''null'' on the fringe readings because the alternative was... A motionless Earth. But little matter, I take it on simple faith. If that's foolishness to the world than so be it.
#14940201
Annatar,

I am delighted to hear this from you.

Like you I also believe in a third economic system between capitalism and communism.

I reject communism because of what they did to the Russian royal family, their contempt for religion and their less than pragmatic views on economic questions. The more excessive cultural forms of Marxism that we saw in Maoist China and in the Anglosphere are absolutley horrendous.

Although capitalism is out of control the alternative was never communism.

And we can certainly have the good aspects of the Soviet Union without the negative ones. I think that a lot of what was good about the Soviet experience would have existed with or without communism. Those were qualities and traits that would have existed in whatever system the Russians attempted to set up in the course of their negotiation into modernity.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 11

Here's Mark Blyth on the macro'n'cheese podcast, […]

This could be a platform for our conquest of Green[…]

October 15, Tuesday A band of Jeff Thompson’s r[…]

Canadian Federal Election

Ted Cruz is a Canadian and might be a future presi[…]