I Reject, I Affirm. ''Raising the Black Flag'' in an Age of Devilry. - Page 48 - 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.
#15195696
annatar1914 wrote:@Odiseizam
Is this what the Faustian Civilization is coming to? Right now, you'd think that it would be the last path followed. But I don't think so. I think people are being inoculated against certain reactions by hysterical and repeated Liberal over-reaction, Liberalism having lost the plot of it all of course.


its interesting to note that we live in the age of anathemago i.e. as is reveled to us that first for one thousand years Our Lord Jesus Christ will rule on the earth with his followers what would be Byzant while after will be loosen anathemago to tempt the world, after what follows armagedon and the Final Judgment ... knowing that as plane sky dimension (whoever how prefers) we are among the heights and the abyss thus the same amount of time of 1k years will the reign of the evil one in this world, yet we are warned by Our Lord that we need to Pray so the time will be shortened and the suffering will be smaller, what to say even till now there was great turmoils in the world what about later when next economical political and natural disasters will follow!? I can just speculate what would be the tagging alike (d'mark of d'beast) from now on > maybe through acing indeed [1][1] > and how that will strip even Christians from Grace let Our Lord forbid that, what eventually as transhumanism could be engaged also easily just coz surveillance alone and later misused for spiritual tagging [2][2][2] after all we all have Free Will as one of the utmost divine gift after The Love so its easy to fell in trap if we are blindly accepting everything what is offered by the authorities especially on west or those bellow western influence, why not to assume that mids neopagan western agendas eventual spiritual tagging can be executed through vaccines probably imposed to most when the fiat standard will be upgraded to digital currencies altho how even now are forced mrna vaccines on west probably is in motion eventual ground laying for such skim that can be easily misused later by the plutocratic elites and their big'pharma'culoars, if thats not already happening!? yeah I know this kind of reasoning is too heavy for most of the people even those that are Christians but what if the tagging with the mark would go in such manner i.e. take the jab or you cant buy, would anyone object!?

if I say just enjoy the show is wrong, if I say escape the same its also wrong if one dont have compass or refuge for selfsufficient lifestyle, but I'll say we all need to be cautious knowing in which and what kind of time we live, just transhumanism as scientific elitistic eugenic trend is huge temptation for Christians what about the neopagan agendas behind the scenes for which we can just speculate, yet we need to be awake, what if indeed anathemago has already found his false prophet and conspiring for ww3 and the jerusalem throne as way how to push even Christians to bow at his false image!? simply many events points to such inertia, but also there are many Orthodox Elders that patiently warns us that the time is approaching ...
#15195706
Odiseizam wrote:its interesting to note that we live in the age of anathemago i.e. as is reveled to us that first for one thousand years Our Lord Jesus Christ will rule on the earth with his followers what would be Byzant while after will be loosen anathemago to tempt the world, after what follows armagedon and the Final Judgment ... knowing that as plane sky dimension (whoever how prefers) we are among the heights and the abyss thus the same amount of time of 1k years will the reign of the evil one in this world, yet we are warned by Our Lord that we need to Pray so the time will be shortened and the suffering will be smaller, what to say even till now there was great turmoils in the world what about later when next economical political and natural disasters will follow!? I can just speculate what would be the tagging alike (d'mark of d'beast) from now on > maybe through acing indeed [1][1] > and how that will strip even Christians from Grace let Our Lord forbid that, what eventually as transhumanism could be engaged also easily just coz surveillance alone and later misused for spiritual tagging [2][2][2] after all we all have Free Will as one of the utmost divine gift after The Love so its easy to fell in trap if we are blindly accepting everything what is offered by the authorities especially on west or those bellow western influence, why not to assume that mids neopagan western agendas eventual spiritual tagging can be executed through vaccines probably imposed to most when the fiat standard will be upgraded to digital currencies altho how even now are forced mrna vaccines on west probably is in motion eventual ground laying for such skim that can be easily misused later by the plutocratic elites and their big'pharma'culoars, if thats not already happening!? yeah I know this kind of reasoning is too heavy for most of the people even those that are Christians but what if the tagging with the mark would go in such manner i.e. take the jab or you cant buy, would anyone object!?

if I say just enjoy the show is wrong, if I say escape the same its also wrong if one dont have compass or refuge for selfsufficient lifestyle, but I'll say we all need to be cautious knowing in which and what kind of time we live, just transhumanism as scientific elitistic eugenic trend is huge temptation for Christians what about the neopagan agendas behind the scenes for which we can just speculate, yet we need to be awake, what if indeed anathemago has already found his false prophet and conspiring for ww3 and the jerusalem throne as way how to push even Christians to bow at his false image!? simply many events points to such inertia, but also there are many Orthodox Elders that patiently warns us that the time is approaching ...


@Odiseizam ;

It won't be vaccines or a microchip or any of that. It will be Antichrist himself whose sign of fealty to him will be the mark. Recall the brand of Dionysius mentioned in the 3rd Book of Maccabees in Scripture? It will be something like that, an open and irrevocable symbol and sign of loyalty to the son of perdition.
#15195709
@Potemkin , @Political Interest , and @Odiseizam , among others who comment here;

Those who know me might know that I'm a fan of Jean Baudrillaud, but it happens that I'm also a fan of Stanley Kubrick and of Orson Welles, probably all for the same reasons.... Oswald Spengler wrote that the ''Prime Symbol'' of the Western-Faustian-Modernist Civilization is ''Pure and limitless Space'', extending through time and space into infinity.

Well, the real ''Prime Symbol'' of this Civilization is the Theater, or more properly, the Projection Screen of Movies and Television. Kubrick basically let the cat out of the bag with his ''Monolith'' in-joke, as this man helpfully explains (better than I could I think);







But he doesn't go far enough. That brilliant bastard Kubrick is saying that it's ALL bullshit, really, all of It, this perceptual frame which gives us the illusion of validation, validation of the inner meaning of Modern Society. We're being poisoned by the Theater, the illusion of the Simulacrum of the Real, when certain people know that the human mind and senses watching cannot distinguish between fantasy and reality on an unconscious level at least.

And I saw this earlier today, watching a video critique of the Biblical hero Sampson, in which the critic compares Sampson unfavorably, and unironically... To the DC superhero character Superman;



But I don't expect a ''Jehovah's Witness'' turned Atheist to understand these things in the same manner I might.

Those who know me and my discussions on modern morality and ethics, this miserable Bourgeoisie ethics, Lev Shestov and Dostyoevsky, etc... Can figure out that I believe Sampson comes out better in my view, in this critique...Guess that makes me a horrible monster, but there's so much unsaid here, the same discussion about ''Athens versus Jerusalem". Jerusalem has no Theatre.

And then there's Neitzsche versus Socrates and versus Wagner, and the birth of Tragedy (and Philosophy). Point being, in the Modern World, the Bourgeoisie have their temples and worship services, in which the values of Faustian Bourgeoisie society and Cosmological vision play out (inextricably linked with Money and the Market, too...), re-affirming the role of the Individual in the narrative frame, their supreme place in the Mythos/Cosmos.
#15195838
sorry for the typos in my previous post I've been sleepy, I'll just add wakefulness or watchfulness i.e. nepsis means questioning everything that comes as gift from this world, in a way vaxing how is pushed without any bioethical debate along mandatory skims on top in "liberal" west evokes more than suspicion in many, tho not all will engage in what if scenarios from eschatological perspective, as I've showed in neopagan cults prime way for invoking demons-anathema-to-them is through tags, what is also present even in the khazar syncretism of judaism and mazdaism know nowadays as kabalism, so its not far fetched to suppose that d'mark of d'beast could be also applied by vaccines, and what is more logical is if neopagan elites on west are prime motor behind the scenes then I can firmly claim such possibility is more than real sooner or later, altho such nanotags can be easily dispersed in population through alcoholic and nonalcoholic beverages even water eventually chemitrailed etc. so per'se my assumption can be misleading, but after all there are other older theories how luciferian transhumanists had have ideas for dna or rna splicing so we would be more easily opened for possession in which case magical tags are substituted by gmo alteration of our biocodes for what good points share Tom Horn in the tagged video of the next footnote [1]

~

about Kubrick you have a point, but again I'll say his last piece e'w's is his ultimate debunking of the current western idealism as neopagan sex cult towards we as Christians are also quietly drawn on various means, touching the decadence on blockbuster level so would mark the grotesque bourgeoisie that bow to luciferian freemasons through orgies if not mammonistic or esoteric path, epstein is think just silly home delivery service for these trends that actually are revival of the pagan dionysian fests nowadays extended on all western realm tho! was Stanley rewarded promptly [1] who knows!?

https://www.politicsforum.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=15175949#p15175949

#15195862
Odiseizam wrote:sorry for the typos in my previous post I've been sleepy, I'll just add wakefulness or watchfulness i.e. nepsis means questioning everything that comes as gift from this world, in a way vaxing how is pushed without any bioethical debate along mandatory skims on top in "liberal" west evokes more than suspicion in many, tho not all will engage in what if scenarios from eschatological perspective, as I've showed in neopagan cults prime way for invoking demons-anathema-to-them is through tags, what is also present even in the khazar syncretism of judaism and mazdaism know nowadays as kabalism, so its not far fetched to suppose that d'mark of d'beast could be also applied by vaccines, and what is more logical is if neopagan elites on west are prime motor behind the scenes then I can firmly claim such possibility is more than real sooner or later, altho such nanotags can be easily dispersed in population through alcoholic and nonalcoholic beverages even water eventually chemitrailed etc. so per'se my assumption can be misleading, but after all there are other older theories how luciferian transhumanists had have ideas for dna or rna splicing so we would be more easily opened for possession in which case magical tags are substituted by gmo alteration of our biocodes for what good points share Tom Horn in the tagged video of the next footnote [1]

~

about Kubrick you have a point, but again I'll say his last piece e'w's is his ultimate debunking of the current western idealism as neopagan sex cult towards we as Christians are also quietly drawn on various means, touching the decadence on blockbuster level so would mark the grotesque bourgeoisie that bow to luciferian freemasons through orgies if not mammonistic or esoteric path, epstein is think just silly home delivery service for these trends that actually are revival of the pagan dionysian fests nowadays extended on all western realm tho! was Stanley rewarded promptly [1] who knows!?

https://www.politicsforum.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=15175949#p15175949



@Odiseizam ,

It's no problem, thank you for your input.

I personally tend to a more bare bones approach to these matters, elusive and esoteric, by signs of larger dynamic trends among larger bodies of people, collective movements and the like.

Capitalism favors non-governmental organizational influence of a somewhat informal level because of the nature of Capitalism itself, so in a sense these posited hidden organizations become victims of their own success-they dwindle somewhat because the larger society they are within, have absorbed every secretive teaching and made it public and explicit, if not accepted than certainly permitted;

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/act ... -building/

Image

After this, what remains to be revealed or allowed?

I mean, here we have this still rather explicit even with Kubrick; themes of Nietzsche and the ''death of God'', the ''Starchild'', the Cosmology of this civilization itself, with infinite Space and Time, plus ''Evolution'';

#15196247
annatar1914 wrote:Political Interest, thank you for your thoughtful reply, my friend. Ishall try to give your thoughts the attention they deserve.


Thank you for your thoughtful reply as well, my friend. I will try to respond more rapidly.

annatar1914 wrote:You said regarding Socrates old question about the holiness of the gods that;

When you bring in the internal state of being of the Holy Ones, the ''gods'', so to speak, it becomes just how clearly blasphemous it really is. God by definition as you say is All-Good, else He isn't God.


Yes, it is a highly blasphemous line of discussion.

annatar1914 wrote:Indeed, but dispassion is one of their traits. Once they make a choice, that choice is made irrevocably because they have all the intellect to understand all the ramifications of their choices.


What are the implications of this within the context of the Greek understanding? This could potentially also lead to some problematic conclusions depending on how the Greeks understood this.

annatar1914 wrote:I think it says somewhere that the wicked ''go about in circles'', never quite having an ability or desire to get to resolve the issues. They much prefer ''truth'' as an ideal, not Truth, as a Person. Pilate said to Christ; ''what is truth?'', in the manner of Pagan philosophy, not ''Who is Truth?'' which is the Monotheist question of Questions.


Indeed.

annatar1914 wrote:It is indeed. Man and his ''reason'' wants to restrict God if not abolish Him altogether, because then they become the masters and arbiters of reality, not Him.


It is rather strange a concept to live without a belief in God, however. I cannot comprehend whether atheists are serious or if they are simply making an intellectual choice, while their inner being tells them something else. Didn't Stalin and many officially atheist Bolsheviks have moments where they used to express religious feelings?

annatar1914 wrote:I take a certain comfort in it, I truly do. I ravaged my brain and my health even, seeking to know everything that I could possibly know. I realized with ''The Preacher'' in the Book of Ecclesiastes that it's all vanity and vexation of spirit. You can't know everything or control everything. It's brought back Wonder into my life, Mystery.


Perhaps we need to simply come to terms with this. We want to control all that happens in the world and in our lives but there are severe limits to what we can control, both within our own lives and in the wider world.

Perhaps all we can aim for is the highest good, to maintain our moral and spiritual integrity right to the end of our lives. The highest good is a tangible objective. Of course this includes being faithful to the Lord and trying to avoid sins and purify our hearts. Thinking good thoughts, being good in both word and deed. What more can we do?

annatar1914 wrote:Shestov wrote a book called ''in Job's Balances'', which goes some length into aspects of that. You know, Job's friends said everything the world would say; on some level, Job had it coming to him, somehow. But he didn't deserve what happened to him nor the aftermath, Job's persecution by his friends. And God vindicated him His faithful servant, and not their Philosophy.


I must read this book.

annatar1914 wrote:Sure, man cannot live as a cog in a senseless machine, to no higher purpose in life.


Especially when people are ascribed traits and conditions which they must follow out of necessity, that there is some type of framework for their behaviour. We hear so much about freedom, or of peoples rights but the social behaviour as an expression of necessity deprives people of their true volition. It even prevents people from moral volition in a sense.

annatar1914 wrote:It has. I wonder how long this will last after the Pandemic itself is gone?


Probably not very long. There will be some other craze after this, again fueled by social media and all the internet pseudo-intellectuals.

annatar1914 wrote:Absolutely, closer to reality and less easy to fool.


You cannot sell stupidity to people who have no time for it, in the most literal sense. When nonsense theories can lead to questions of life and death, or cause fundamental dysfuction that prevents physical survival people will not accept them. It is similar to what you said a few months ago about the cloud dwellers and the people who have too much free time on their hands to come up with false elaborate nonsense. Although I remember that I put to you that we need some more dreamers and cloud dwellers these days I am of course referring to dreamers of a very different sort.

annatar1914 wrote:Exactly so, glad you agree! If God is free, since He commands, His people and servants are free also!


There is no limit to what the Lord Almighty can do.

annatar1914 wrote:Well put, I think that's the case.


Thank you.

annatar1914 wrote:These are questions of serious people, and perhaps not in the state of leisurely repose of the philosophers either, but people living out in the real world, closer to God.


Questions of religion and of one's soul are not merely intellectual exercises. They are as you say, part of real every day life. They can't be intellecutalised in such a detached fashion, because they are very much a lived experience.

annatar1914 wrote:Every philosophy and every pagan belief affirms the eternity of the universe and the material arrangement within it only being the object of change over time.

Monotheism of whatever sect both false and true, asserts the creation of the world at a certain time long ago from now, from nothing, by God. And, the resurrection of the dead.

This is not the West, is it?


Not while the West chooses to have little belief in much other than freedom and and consumserism.

annatar1914 wrote:I am absolutely an Orthodox Christian of the most traditional and doctrinaire sort. But I detest a certain kind of politics that takes it upon themselves to declare that I must be a Romanov Monarchist, that I must be in the camp of the White Guard, of Kolchak and Denikin and the rest, or I am not an Orthodox Christian.


If I may ask, what are your criticisms of the White Movement and of Denikin and Kolchak? I think Denikin and Kolchack were good men.

annatar1914 wrote:We read in Scripture in Genesis of fallen Angels who mate with mortal women. Our Lord spoke not that Angels have no Gender in Heaven, but that ''they neither marry nor are given in marriage''.

Clearly however, the history of thought on these matters in the West has been actually quite hostile, beginning with Scholasticism and a hatred of physicality, of ''gross'' Matter, that I think comes from both Greco-Roman Philosophy and the outcomes deriving from a male mandatory celibate Clergy in the West (and frankly, numerous clergy historically of ambiguous sexuality, with an ambivalence towards gender issues and all that, embedded within the Western celibate clergy).

Hmm, Gender as something foundational to physical reality of both seen and unseen realms, with the Highest Reality, God (in Christian and other teaching) indicating that it's important to see Him, as ''Him'', however mysterious that might appear...

Kind of fits in with my earlier ruminations on the West and Modernity tending towards Matriarchy over time, and what forms that takes or will take.

Discuss?


In my opinion the West is not moving so much towards matriarchy as much as it is moving towards a complete revision of all stability itself. Matriachy would suggest that there are fundamental established, rules, procedures and traditions (even if this is a contrived development of post-modernity), but what is happening now is the complete sort of deconstruction of the very notion of gender itself. This is why we are witnessing some clashes between the more old fashioned forms of what would have once been considered radical feminism with even more avant-garde ways of living that we've seen emerge in the last ten or so years. There are now even people who choose not to identify with any gender, for example. I agree with you that a lot of this is a product of Scholasticism and too much thinking of pseudo-profound thoughts by people who fancy themselves intelligent.

annatar1914 wrote:Watched ''Brat 2'' again, it had been quite a few years;


I thought you might have seen this. I watched it many years ago in the early days of my youth and it made a very strong impression on me. Danila was a type a Russian folk hero, it seems. It's interesting that throughout those two movies he never hurt anyone who was a good person. The Americans were also portrayed as a mix of good and bad, as were the Russians. The director could have tried to portray all the Russians as good and all the Americans as bad but he understood that this is not the way the world works.

annatar1914 wrote:It's not easy being of two worlds, and one has to go back and choose the world that is native to reality.


Sometimes I wonder, what if I feel drawn more towards a world that I am not fundamentally of, even if I feel closer to it? Perhaps it is the case that by being drawn to it, I am really of it.

annatar1914 wrote:I know, a lot of people won't get it, it's true. The fact that I do get it makes me feel like a stranger in a strange land, I know why I've always had such a hard time. Lot of other uncomfortable truths in the movie.


Truth is power. Money will never change the truth and it cannot buy it either. Truth concerns the eternal, whereas money is only a practical contingency for material existence. Man cannot live with money alone. And in any case, what use is money if one's soul is in anguish or if one is damned.
#15196274
@Political Interest ;

Thank you for your thoughtful reply as well, my friend. I will try to respond more rapidly.


We have lives, brother. As it happens, life perhaps can lend some answers and/or greater insight of some kind in the interim, before we engage in conversation.

On the old philosophical questions which tend to constrain God (and man for that matter);


Yes, it is a highly blasphemous line of discussion.


It seems to me even more so than when we first began this line of discussion. My recent posts are a kind of (perhaps angry) reaction to the obvious-in-hindsight propaganda with which my generation in particular was subjected to.

On the dispassionarity of the holy gods (and God Himself, of course)

What are the implications of this within the context of the Greek understanding? This could potentially also lead to some problematic conclusions depending on how the Greeks understood this.


Well, of the Greek philosophers Plato definitely was of a mind to discern that there could be nothing disordered in the passions of the Holy, and that the Pagan mythology was therefore a scandalous lie. I think that this was even brought up by Blessed St. Augustine himself, but I can't remember where in his writings just now.



It is rather strange a concept to live without a belief in God, however. I cannot comprehend whether atheists are serious or if they are simply making an intellectual choice, while their inner being tells them something else. Didn't Stalin and many officially atheist Bolsheviks have moments where they used to express religious feelings?


Yes, I believe that they did, Stalin in particular. Interestingly the one who appeared to be entirely Atheist was Adolf Hitler despite some official nods to religion, although it was more about having no rival to his inordinate love of self with him.



Perhaps we need to simply come to terms with this. We want to control all that happens in the world and in our lives but there are severe limits to what we can control, both within our own lives and in the wider world.

Perhaps all we can aim for is the highest good, to maintain our moral and spiritual integrity right to the end of our lives. The highest good is a tangible objective. Of course this includes being faithful to the Lord and trying to avoid sins and purify our hearts. Thinking good thoughts, being good in both word and deed. What more can we do?


Yes, I think that while we are less limited maybe than we realize in our effect on others, the best we can do is seek God's will and then faithfully follow it. St. Abraham didn't know where exactly God was leading him, nor how he would become ''the father of many nations'' at his age and barren state of his marriage. And having St. Isaac as his son, he had to trust in God even with a seemingly contrary command that might render his promise apparently impossible. But nothing is impossible with God.


I must read this book.


This is an awesome resource that includes that;

http://shestov.phonoarchive.org/

With the suggestion of artificial purposelessness of modern life;


Especially when people are ascribed traits and conditions which they must follow out of necessity, that there is some type of framework for their behaviour. We hear so much about freedom, or of peoples rights but the social behaviour as an expression of necessity deprives people of their true volition. It even prevents people from moral volition in a sense.


Pretty incredible, isn't it, the rigid conformity of people sunk into what the world system tells them how to be, who to be?


On the hysteria and social madness of the ''Covid years'';


Probably not very long. There will be some other craze after this, again fueled by social media and all the internet pseudo-intellectuals.


Bouncing from one thing to another, ''remembering nothing and forgetting nothing'', as Talleyrand once said of the Bourbons.


You cannot sell stupidity to people who have no time for it, in the most literal sense. When nonsense theories can lead to questions of life and death, or cause fundamental dysfuction that prevents physical survival people will not accept them. It is similar to what you said a few months ago about the cloud dwellers and the people who have too much free time on their hands to come up with false elaborate nonsense. Although I remember that I put to you that we need some more dreamers and cloud dwellers these days I am of course referring to dreamers of a very different sort.


Yes, people with true vision.


There is no limit to what the Lord Almighty can do.


Amen!



Questions of religion and of one's soul are not merely intellectual exercises. They are as you say, part of real every day life. They can't be intellecutalised in such a detached fashion, because they are very much a lived experience.


I agree, philosophy in one sense isn't worth the time, while the real existential matters, issues of ultimate concern, are ''answered'' I think by one in a state of ''lived receptivity''.

On the redemption of the West spiritually;


Not while the West chooses to have little belief in much other than freedom and and consumserism.


Absolutely right. Poverty might make some receptive, as I said before, as poverty in the pre-modern sense is totally necessary I think, a life where people don't know or have what they allegedly ''lack'', but seek what they need


If I may ask, what are your criticisms of the White Movement and of Denikin and Kolchak? I think Denikin and Kolchack were good men.


It's a good question and a fair one, that I've tried to wrap my mind around for a long time. They were good men, as were many of those in the White movement in general, even the very best. But I think they were too beholden to their allies in the West and Japan in the eyes of the common people, and that the common fear was that a White post-bolshevik Russia would be a dismembered and dying Russia. This is a more difficult and complex issue, tied as it is with modern events today, than many people realize. Of course General Denikin and Admiral Kolchak could not see all that far either, and could not refuse help in the existential struggle. I think that it helps the Russian people to know, now that the Soviet period is over, that there was an alternative which lost then, but possibly still exists today, which was at the core of White Anti-Bolshevik resistance. We should discuss this more I believe.


On my opinion of a materiarchal European destiny;


In my opinion the West is not moving so much towards matriarchy as much as it is moving towards a complete revision of all stability itself. Matriachy would suggest that there are fundamental established, rules, procedures and traditions (even if this is a contrived development of post-modernity), but what is happening now is the complete sort of deconstruction of the very notion of gender itself. This is why we are witnessing some clashes between the more old fashioned forms of what would have once been considered radical feminism with even more avant-garde ways of living that we've seen emerge in the last ten or so years. There are now even people who choose not to identify with any gender, for example. I agree with you that a lot of this is a product of Scholasticism and too much thinking of pseudo-profound thoughts by people who fancy themselves intelligent.


True enough, it's absolute madness then.

On my watching ''Brat'' and ''Brat 2'';



I thought you might have seen this. I watched it many years ago in the early days of my youth and it made a very strong impression on me. Danila was a type a Russian folk hero, it seems. It's interesting that throughout those two movies he never hurt anyone who was a good person. The Americans were also portrayed as a mix of good and bad, as were the Russians. The director could have tried to portray all the Russians as good and all the Americans as bad but he understood that this is not the way the world works.


Yes, I like ''Danila'' a lot. Non-Russians and particularly Americans might not understand so much, but it really resonated with me, and apparently many Russians of my era.


Sometimes I wonder, what if I feel drawn more towards a world that I am not fundamentally of, even if I feel closer to it? Perhaps it is the case that by being drawn to it, I am really of it.


Totally correct I think, to be drawn to is to be part of.


Truth is power. Money will never change the truth and it cannot buy it either. Truth concerns the eternal, whereas money is only a practical contingency for material existence. Man cannot live with money alone. And in any case, what use is money if one's soul is in anguish or if one is damned.


You're right. So much more is vitally important. Love/the Spirit/the Blood/the Land. All these things tend to die from the love of money.
#15196891
I have been thinking about the notion of the State, and of Anarchy.

Anyone who reads my posts knows that I've called myself a ''Statist'', and certainly I have railed against what I call ''Anarchism''.

But there are some caveats to this. I do not think of the modern state in what I've called ''Statism'', and the ''Anarchy'' I have railed against is not the natural and organic Anarchy common to all freedom-loving mankind.

What I believe in a positive and worldly sense is in nationalism, in communitarianism/socialism, and in true anarchism. The ''State'' in this view is the Unity and Icon of the Social Love, of the striving for the Common Good, Person and Community not the Individualistic Ego separated from the aforementioned.
#15196893
annatar1914 wrote:I have been thinking about the notion of the State, and of Anarchy.

Anyone who reads my posts knows that I've called myself a ''Statist'', and certainly I have railed against what I call ''Anarchism''.

But there are some caveats to this. I do not think of the modern state in what I've called ''Statism'', and the ''Anarchy'' I have railed against is not the natural and organic Anarchy common to all freedom-loving mankind.

What I believe in a positive and worldly sense is in nationalism, in communitarianism/socialism, and in true anarchism. The ''State'' in this view is the Unity and Icon of the Social Love, of the striving for the Common Good, Person and Community not the Individualistic Ego separated from the aforementioned.

The state does not embody the social love, @annatar1914, nor is it even a symbol of that love. It is a mechanism for maintaining a certain social order, usually at the expense of some class of people or other. Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and unto God what is God's.
#15196905
@Potemkin annantar1914 has point dejure its system for maintaining social structure but defacto the same needs common glue in whatever form usually cultural or religious so it would survive any turmoil ahead, in case of heterogeneous federalism that is artificially constructed coz the size eg. american dream or yugoslav brotherhood&unity but eventually as such is strong only if the ethnic flow is suppressed, in case of Russia the same eg. is managed by extra cheap energy, somehow China keeps its cohesion on prosperity of the system, tho all federations need to have extra surveillance so they would stop external spills, what in case of usA would be mexican if not southamerican surge of immigrants but if usA dont have extra bucks so it would keep them calm they are risking to built up tensions easily and waiting on the dollar to weaken ahead that is huge risk coz when the currency will slip the american dream will become nightmare predominantly on the liberalism and consumerism, what if happens eg. in eu as union will not provoke chaos coz simply the states will crunch in itself as members while usA could welcome potential defragmentation, and thats why the euroatlantic determinists are rushing for authoritarian technocratic shapeshifting but first they need to coup with all the weapons in citizens hands etc. etc. spoilers that can challenge that shift, knowing how impossible task is that probably they would seek to achieve the same through controlled chaos maybe in form of fast ww3 blitzkrieg so at least would compact the path toward such technocratic reality, essentially they are lacking behind China in that big time and Russia can easily and always reroute its system towards it coz the abundance of energy ...

    sadly but religions nowadays are lesser influential glue but nationalism is, and those that are have both reinforced as pillars of sovereignty can hope will survive easily even after ww3 eg. Iran, tho the question is how quick the population can restructure itself to live in scarcity frugality and selfsufficiency, simply mass surge of continental migration can swap any state in such circumstances if not else stall its recovery, what probably could be more easily reached by technological knowhow but if emp weapons are deployed widely that would be futile attempt if there is need for quick deterring of millions at its borders, challenge big enough for all!

seen in perspective of the causality in this world really its futile to expect that any empire or state can last indefinitely, but defacto those that had have simply were strongly glued by particular ideology, the question is which ideology can survive the current political economical and social trends on its soil, thus only possible way for peaceful future is embracing diversity and libertarianism but that is too enthusiastic whish if ww3 becomes reality, in which case in various means there would be restructuring and compacting on various levels, still causality will rulz and ideologies will be the prime glue for survival logically in such times haterate for sure!
#15196989
Potemkin wrote:The state does not embody the social love, @annatar1914, nor is it even a symbol of that love. It is a mechanism for maintaining a certain social order, usually at the expense of some class of people or other. Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and unto God what is God's.


@Potemkin , perhaps I can refine my earlier comment somewhat. The State as such should be the embodiment of the common good, and a sword in the hand of the common people against the other political tendency which is Oligarchy.

Edit; otherwise aside from those circumstances, I think that government should be communitarian and localized as much as possible, an organic bottom-up development rather than top-down if it can be at all helped.

The ''Anarchism'' I have been most against is not the communal kind of Anarchism, so much as the individualist ''Anarchism'' which Americans call Libertarianism and which is a disguised screen for the aforementioned Oligarchy I spoke of. A classic historical example of such an Oligarchical rule would be what was the case with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth of the 1600's and 1700's, to illustrate.
#15200879
annatar1914 wrote:We have lives, brother. As it happens, life perhaps can lend some answers and/or greater insight of some kind in the interim, before we engage in conversation.


Thank you for your patience.

annatar1914 wrote:It seems to me even more so than when we first began this line of discussion. My recent posts are a kind of (perhaps angry) reaction to the obvious-in-hindsight propaganda with which my generation in particular was subjected to.


Our generation as well I think.

annatar1914 wrote:Well, of the Greek philosophers Plato definitely was of a mind to discern that there could be nothing disordered in the passions of the Holy, and that the Pagan mythology was therefore a scandalous lie. I think that this was even brought up by Blessed St. Augustine himself, but I can't remember where in his writings just now.


In this case what would you consider the extent to which Greek philosophers were able to discern truth and the extent to which they weren't?

annatar1914 wrote:Yes, I believe that they did, Stalin in particular. Interestingly the one who appeared to be entirely Atheist was Adolf Hitler despite some official nods to religion, although it was more about having no rival to his inordinate love of self with him.


Yes, he seemed to look down with disdain even upon efforts to reconstruct paganism, but I have seen other sources which suggest he was in fact deeply influenced by pagan and occult thinking. I think religion was just a tool for his evil ends. All of it was ultimately just a ideological tool for him.

annatar1914 wrote:Yes, I think that while we are less limited maybe than we realize in our effect on others, the best we can do is seek God's will and then faithfully follow it. St. Abraham didn't know where exactly God was leading him, nor how he would become ''the father of many nations'' at his age and barren state of his marriage. And having St. Isaac as his son, he had to trust in God even with a seemingly contrary command that might render his promise apparently impossible. But nothing is impossible with God.


Which suggests a type of futility in that we can't divert ourselves from our ultimate destiny. But yet it is assuring to know that whatever happens we all have a destiny and are walking on the road of life, we just must follow it as best as we can in line with the commandments and injunctions of the Lord.

annatar1914 wrote:This is an awesome resource that includes that;

http://shestov.phonoarchive.org/


Thank you for this!

annatar1914 wrote:Pretty incredible, isn't it, the rigid conformity of people sunk into what the world system tells them how to be, who to be?


No one is free from conformity. Everyone conforms to some social norms and values. It's just a question of what these are at any given time.

annatar1914 wrote:Bouncing from one thing to another, ''remembering nothing and forgetting nothing'', as Talleyrand once said of the Bourbons.


A lot of what people discuss is topical, most of it is fueled by what the journalists or opinion makers are saying. Even the pro-vaccine and anti-vaccine discussions are largely framed around what the opinion makers have set out for everyone to think and talk about.

annatar1914 wrote:I agree, philosophy in one sense isn't worth the time, while the real existential matters, issues of ultimate concern, are ''answered'' I think by one in a state of ''lived receptivity''.


Each man can explore such subjects to the extent he is capable, as well, because these existential questions are divorced from a man but accessible to him regardless of his intellect.

annatar1914 wrote:Absolutely right. Poverty might make some receptive, as I said before, as poverty in the pre-modern sense is totally necessary I think, a life where people don't know or have what they allegedly ''lack'', but seek what they need


Or if not poverty at least the memory of it.

annatar1914 wrote:It's a good question and a fair one, that I've tried to wrap my mind around for a long time. They were good men, as were many of those in the White movement in general, even the very best. But I think they were too beholden to their allies in the West and Japan in the eyes of the common people, and that the common fear was that a White post-bolshevik Russia would be a dismembered and dying Russia. This is a more difficult and complex issue, tied as it is with modern events today, than many people realize. Of course General Denikin and Admiral Kolchak could not see all that far either, and could not refuse help in the existential struggle. I think that it helps the Russian people to know, now that the Soviet period is over, that there was an alternative which lost then, but possibly still exists today, which was at the core of White Anti-Bolshevik resistance. We should discuss this more I believe.


I agree. They didn't seem to realise, or perhaps they did, that a lot of their allies were not sincere friends of Russia and that they had their own agenda in helping the Whites. As far as I know Denikin refused to accept Western proposals that in return for increased aid he would have to agree to the dismemberment of Russia. Some people think that the Whiets would have been Western puppets if they had won the struggle but I am not certain of this. They would never have agreed to the partitioning of Russian and this would have put them in conflict with the Germans, English, Americans Japanese sooner or later. I have heard that some scholars have put forward the theory that the Whites could have industrialised Russia successfully in time for WWII, if it had still happened in such an alternate timeline. Who knows, maybe White Russia could have extended to Berlin in an alternative mid 20th century. I can imagine Kolchak being some type of industrialising modernising dictator.

annatar1914 wrote:Yes, I like ''Danila'' a lot. Non-Russians and particularly Americans might not understand so much, but it really resonated with me, and apparently many Russians of my era.


I've never quite understood why the movie would be difficult to understand considering many American movies operate along a similar plot line and have similar types of characters. Perhaps it was because the film was slightly less polite than other such movies, and portrayed a less than savoury image of some elements in US society.

annatar1914 wrote:You're right. So much more is vitally important. Love/the Spirit/the Blood/the Land. All these things tend to die from the love of money.


Even money itself is no guarantee of a comfortable material life. Today one may have money, tomorrow he may not. We can only survive every 24 hours and plan for the future as much as we can, but even then one can never really plan for any future because fate isn't in our hands. But we can do our best.

annatar1914 wrote:I have been thinking about the notion of the State, and of Anarchy.

Anyone who reads my posts knows that I've called myself a ''Statist'', and certainly I have railed against what I call ''Anarchism''.

But there are some caveats to this. I do not think of the modern state in what I've called ''Statism'', and the ''Anarchy'' I have railed against is not the natural and organic Anarchy common to all freedom-loving mankind.

What I believe in a positive and worldly sense is in nationalism, in communitarianism/socialism, and in true anarchism. The ''State'' in this view is the Unity and Icon of the Social Love, of the striving for the Common Good, Person and Community not the Individualistic Ego separated from the aforementioned.


This is all a state needs to do, it does not need to serve any purpose other than to ensure the common good and social stablity of the entire country. Ideological readings in which an ideology attempts to do something divert from the true purpose of governance which is the social cohesion and common prosperity of the nation, both in a material and spiritual sense.

Marxism, for example, posits that the purpose of the socialist state is to establish the rule of the working class over the bourgeoisie and then from this to build socialism. This is wrong because classes should not be at war but should instead exist in harmonious relationship guided by the state. Class warfare will always lead to instability. Marxists will argue that class struggle can't be avoided but I think we can at least lessen its intensity.

Libertarianism is similarly problematic because it again projects onto the state a certain role, that is to say the defender of individual liberties. But this line of thinking doesn't take into account the fact that a state's role is muh more than protecting liberties. The state's role is to serve as a paternal caretaker for all the citizens within the borders of the country.

And of course fascism was a disaster because it wanted to turn the state into a war machine to expand the borders and engage in permanent warfare as an end in itself. Naturally this does not lend itself to stability or harmony. It was completely contrary to any sense of Christian love or gentleness and as a result led to the destruction of Europe.

There doesn't need to be a narrative or reading of a certain role and purpose of the state, but only that everyone has a roof over their head, heating, good material to listen to and see in media, and security for the people. The state must provide a safe place for the family to exist so that people can grow up in a safe environment and one that allows people to even have a family in the first place. The state must provide the conditions for man to develop his spiritual life and inner world.

If all of this requires socialism, so be it. It most certainly will. But it should not be the doctrinaire socialism that puts dogma over pragmatism in economics.

Have you read the discussion in 'Brothers Karamazov' in which they argue whether or not the church should become the state? I am reluctant to comment on this but I always lean more to the opinion that the church is too sacred to be in such close contact with worldly matters as politics. But this is a different question entirely.

Potemkin wrote:The state does not embody the social love, nor is it even a symbol of that love. It is a mechanism for maintaining a certain social order, usually at the expense of some class of people or other. Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and unto God what is God's.


Can the state not cultivate such a social love, Potemkin? I think it is possible to balance the interests of all classes and communities, one need not rule over the other. Very few countries have attempted to do this successfully. In England for example the entire social discouse is about allocation of resources and is in many ways class based. Did no one ever consider that perhaps it could be possible to balance between poor and rich?

annatar1914 wrote:Potemkin, perhaps I can refine my earlier comment somewhat. The State as such should be the embodiment of the common good, and a sword in the hand of the common people against the other political tendency which is Oligarchy.

Edit; otherwise aside from those circumstances, I think that government should be communitarian and localized as much as possible, an organic bottom-up development rather than top-down if it can be at all helped.

The ''Anarchism'' I have been most against is not the communal kind of Anarchism, so much as the individualist ''Anarchism'' which Americans call Libertarianism and which is a disguised screen for the aforementioned Oligarchy I spoke of. A classic historical example of such an Oligarchical rule would be what was the case with the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth of the 1600's and 1700's, to illustrate.


I've not understood why this notion of the commmon good was not the central slogan of any political force in the 20th century. Everyone developed such elaborate theories, but no one put forward 'the common good' as the main slogan or banner to form a party. All policies should have been derived from this desire for the common good, no matter how nebulous such a proposal could seem. Everyone had some Marxist tracts or drivel written by people like the fascists and it never really led to the common good, but to ulterior projects that in the end caused a lot of suffering and problems for the people they governed.
#15200881
Political Interest wrote:Can the state not cultivate such a social love, Potemkin? I think it is possible to balance the interests of all classes and communities, one need not rule over the other. Very few countries have attempted to do this successfully. In England for example the entire social discouse is about allocation of resources and is in many ways class based. Did no one ever consider that perhaps it could be possible to balance between poor and rich?

The state apparatus is a tool in the hands of the dominant class of society. In Britain, this is entirely obvious - the bourgeoisie clearly dominate the state, and largely control it. Almost everyone in government has been privately educated, and is usually a graduate of Oxbridge. They cannot simply ignore the wishes and needs of the other social classes, of course, otherwise there would be a general uprising to overthrow that state apparatus. But they make sure that whatever happens, whatever policies are implemented, always operate in their own class interests.

Besides, I take what Christ said to heart - "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and unto God what is God's." Caesars are necessary, but we should not worship them. The state is necessary, but we should not worship it as the embodiment of social love and harmony. It clearly isn't.
  • 1
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48

By this logic a woman can simply choose not to ge[…]

Drlee wrote: @Pants-of-dog And for the […]

@Rancid Yes they do. I don't know why anybody […]

Lol Qatz ended up at Alex Jones talking points pu[…]