D
Deleted member
Guest
@The Immortal Watch Dog in response to your questions... I think your view of policy is too narrow. I reject the entire prepositional foundation of the modern world.
Who's harder right?
- Thread starter The Immortal Watch Dog
- Start date
I mean, I was ballparking there and being rather general. I agree though, my stances are about targeting immediate problems while subtly building the foundations for longer problem solving. By the way, feudalism with modern tech sounds awesome on paper until you realize that's communism.
What's your vision boss? I'm kinda curious about how you would see things set up if you could? I might find myself in agreement here.
D
Deleted member
Guest
I would say that the idea you could compare feudalism to communism is badly flawed, and reflective of just how little the modern world understands feudalism. The eye-opening moment for me was reading Solzhenitsyn's defence of the medieval times in the Red Wheel Cycle. Not to say we need precisely feudalism. But, first of all, I don't believe there's a universal solution to governance. I think that any given combination of ecoregion and culture will probably have a different optimal natural solution to governance. Some of those will be Republics and some will be Monarchies, but to be ultimately stable and enduring, they will evolve local particularisms which suit their people and environment. Of course, by referring to the Perennial philosophy--the principles in the west best represented in Neo-Platonism--we can define certain standards to which any enduring and righteous government must adhere.
Dealing with the mess in the United States today, but also the commitment and belief of the people and the legacy of the past three hundred years, I would certainly advocate for something very different than I would in a clean-sheet ideal world.
Naw, I'm saying communism was a shitty attempt by a bunch of aspies who were resentful they weren't fawned on by the masses to implement a new kind of feudalism. It certainly lacks all the cultural intricacies and religious and social drives feudalism had and unlike the real deal, it didn't innovate or produce anything of value.
I agree with you here, which is why I think the emphasis should be on culture, not governance. When we're talking about playing around with other peoples, or preserving a nation.
Interesting, from my end, I've always held platonic values to be fundamentally ignoble and a harbinger of social corruption and the empowerment of the unqualified.
How would you go about it?
D
Deleted member 88
Guest
I'd actually struggle to describe my politics.
I dance and flirt with different ideas, but in usual fashion am noncommittal.
I would say I am reactionary in some ways, conservative in others, while holding a wider view of what the state can do if used for certain ends, while also prioritizing liberty in principle.
For example-I'm not in favor of rampant suburb construction and the destruction of farms or wilderness for "growth". I'm generally promethean but my attitude in this area can be summed up as "support the environment balanced with advancing human prosperity" as difficult and sometimes impossible as that is.
The sexual revolution can not be reversed-at least not in any practical way that actually changes people's morals. The liberal nightmare of some dominionist fundamentalist American state would be unable to reverse it. In a way that transformed people, not just laws.
I do still oppose sexual immorality on religious grounds, and also on the grounds of their social effects. Things like teenage sex or adultery-are basically impossible to suppress. As they are too widespread and ingrained.
I believe in the sanctity of the nation state, and its worth in preserving and continuing. I viciously condemn any guilt tripping historical narratives, or civilizational suicide-this includes guilt over slavery and colonialism. I believe in the sanctity of the family.
I believe in looking at reality as it is, and working with it as it is. Not raging against it or creating fantasy delusions because it doesn't meet how I would like the world to be.
To a leftist I would be seen as undoubtedly reactionary, the blackest of black hearted fascists. To actual fascists, I'd probably be seen as some wishy washy conservative/pseudo reactionary who doesn't hold the right opinions on certain concerns.
I dance and flirt with different ideas, but in usual fashion am noncommittal.
I would say I am reactionary in some ways, conservative in others, while holding a wider view of what the state can do if used for certain ends, while also prioritizing liberty in principle.
For example-I'm not in favor of rampant suburb construction and the destruction of farms or wilderness for "growth". I'm generally promethean but my attitude in this area can be summed up as "support the environment balanced with advancing human prosperity" as difficult and sometimes impossible as that is.
The sexual revolution can not be reversed-at least not in any practical way that actually changes people's morals. The liberal nightmare of some dominionist fundamentalist American state would be unable to reverse it. In a way that transformed people, not just laws.
I do still oppose sexual immorality on religious grounds, and also on the grounds of their social effects. Things like teenage sex or adultery-are basically impossible to suppress. As they are too widespread and ingrained.
I believe in the sanctity of the nation state, and its worth in preserving and continuing. I viciously condemn any guilt tripping historical narratives, or civilizational suicide-this includes guilt over slavery and colonialism. I believe in the sanctity of the family.
I believe in looking at reality as it is, and working with it as it is. Not raging against it or creating fantasy delusions because it doesn't meet how I would like the world to be.
To a leftist I would be seen as undoubtedly reactionary, the blackest of black hearted fascists. To actual fascists, I'd probably be seen as some wishy washy conservative/pseudo reactionary who doesn't hold the right opinions on certain concerns.
The sexual revolution doesn't necessarily need to be reversed, it's starting to burn itself out. Deviancy has been normalized to the point that there's an exhaustion over it and the most rebellious thing a zoomer can do is start a family.
We're starting to see that now, lot of young people talking being homemakers, stay at home dads or housewives and the like. The whole "pedo acceptance" movement becoming the norm enough that Hilary Clinton supposedly endorsed it in a rally in 2015...and certainly being promoted by silicon valley kinda killed tolerance as it applies to sexuality.
We're starting to see that now, lot of young people talking being homemakers, stay at home dads or housewives and the like. The whole "pedo acceptance" movement becoming the norm enough that Hilary Clinton supposedly endorsed it in a rally in 2015...and certainly being promoted by silicon valley kinda killed tolerance as it applies to sexuality.
D
Deleted member 88
Guest
And also-people had premarital sex before 1969. In the 1940s and 1920s. Even in puritan New England.
Adultery happened, and has happened since the beginning of marriage, as people will inevitably be dissatisfied with their spouses at some point.
All the sexual revolution did for the above is normalize them, when before they were officially condemned but still very much aspects of sex in society that could not be suppressed.
As for burning itself out-the gay rights movement may(hopefully) be the last real triumph of the sexual revolution. Everything else-incest, polyamory, pedophilia, and beyond(like zoophilia or necrophilia) are either too niche(polyamory still only appeals to a very small section of the population, far smaller than homosexuals), incest-I can see being normalized but never something promoted widely, beyond, "if your a consenting adult and want to bang your sister, be you", and even then I doubt it will officially be decriminalized, just no longer prosecuted for the small section of society that does it consensually, pedophilia and anything else-will require a total collapse of social morals, the very idea of consent itself would need to be disposed of-for the triumph of those forms of degeneracy.
Also I don't think we have seen the full fruits of the sexual revolution-but once it has ripened and rotted in its fullest, people will see through it, as your example bring up.
Adultery happened, and has happened since the beginning of marriage, as people will inevitably be dissatisfied with their spouses at some point.
All the sexual revolution did for the above is normalize them, when before they were officially condemned but still very much aspects of sex in society that could not be suppressed.
As for burning itself out-the gay rights movement may(hopefully) be the last real triumph of the sexual revolution. Everything else-incest, polyamory, pedophilia, and beyond(like zoophilia or necrophilia) are either too niche(polyamory still only appeals to a very small section of the population, far smaller than homosexuals), incest-I can see being normalized but never something promoted widely, beyond, "if your a consenting adult and want to bang your sister, be you", and even then I doubt it will officially be decriminalized, just no longer prosecuted for the small section of society that does it consensually, pedophilia and anything else-will require a total collapse of social morals, the very idea of consent itself would need to be disposed of-for the triumph of those forms of degeneracy.
Also I don't think we have seen the full fruits of the sexual revolution-but once it has ripened and rotted in its fullest, people will see through it, as your example bring up.
Considering most Americans who've been here more than a century have some ancestry either via descent by marriage or inherited descent from what? 6 settlers? Pocahantus and John Rolfe?
Genghis and his how many millions?
Considering how much non homosapien hominid DNA we have, we were probably a bunch of degenerate beastmen roaming around looking for a good time
The difference is back then, it was understood the clan and the family came first...and you unfucked your dysfunction or you endured it. Now its all glorified.
Single parenting is also somewhat, unnatural.
I had a great uncle who was gay, he'd been married for almost 70 years when he passed away, he'd also been with men on the side. His wife happily married him because she at least knew he wasn't going to beat the crap out of her like the guy she was actually promised too by her dad.
The way he explained it to me was that "It was always normal, its just in my day it was understood you did right by your family, by continuing your family. So you made damn sure you had kids and you didn't disrespect your wife"
I don't know if that's more or less moral, but I know that he died hating pride culture and seeing it as inherently destructive not just to gay men and lesbians but to family units as a whole. I also know, his kids and grandkids and great grandkids all turned out amazing.
As a whole he was very much against the gay rights movement because I remember him saying "we had more rights than straight men because when we cheated on our wives, we did it with their blessing and it was seen as better than just stewing in silence until you became a degenerate"- Dunno what that last part meant, I mean I know what it means and a lot of older gay men will confirm that..which..is..distressing in its implications about that subculture.
Mind ye, that's the anecdotal view of one dude, a hundred and two year old man who died about a decade ago. Not the views of everyone who was LGB in his generation. But I always found that take interesting.
It was, until pride culture burned that parade float down. They've sadly done a shitload of damage to themselves, once they came "out" and the whole 11 year old boys grinding on floors and twerking at pride events is...no..
They're not just niche, they're abhorrent and aberrant and wholly destructive. My concern about pedophilia is that the Transgender community and large elements of the gay and lesbian community have an incredibly disturbingly high level of child sex abuse and grooming and to scrutinize that at all is dangerous. People have been assaulted, nearly killed, killed, lost their medical licenses and have had their lives ruined.
A lot of people who detransition cite rape and grooming and brainwashing as why they transitioned and detransitioning was letting go of their trauma and breaking said programming.
The problem with incest is that the retard babies it produces become societies problem. IE its a collective issue and then also, injecting the fucked up genes of many generations of incest into the gen pop causes other problems. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have a serious problem with generational incest and the health problems those societies face are severe.
India too, 1.3 billion people and over half suffer from varying degrees of NASH due to their metabolism being shit from so much inbreeding.
That's kind of already happening though, that's the mission statement of that group the Mermaids, the one Ocasio Cortes endorsed.
On this I agree..granted...Aristocracies are plenty degenerate too, we had a Pope who fucked a monkey in a public orgy after all.
The biggest difference is, in the society Tayana seems (admittedly from what little I'm reading of her/his? stuff) to endorse is that tradition was both adaptable and practical, yet also squarely rooted in a common norm.
that allowed leg room for people to be safely cavalier and dumb and promiscuous without ruinating society.
D
Deleted member 88
Guest
With incest-its mostly sexual abuse.
Or arranged marriages within extended kin groups(usually to cousins).
People having romantic/sexual relationships with siblings, parents, or aunts/uncles that are entirely consensual are extremely rare.
With birth control-in theory you could have a consensual sexual relationship with your sister, or hell your mother without inbred children. Thing is-that sort of behavior appeals to a very small section of the population that is unaffected or unswayed by the inherent ickiness of incest.
As for pedophilia-your right. Efforts to normalize it are well under way. Thing is, unlike with homosexuality between adults its going to be a much much harder PR war for them to wage. And conservatives I hope will not be caught flat footed as they were before.
Or arranged marriages within extended kin groups(usually to cousins).
People having romantic/sexual relationships with siblings, parents, or aunts/uncles that are entirely consensual are extremely rare.
With birth control-in theory you could have a consensual sexual relationship with your sister, or hell your mother without inbred children. Thing is-that sort of behavior appeals to a very small section of the population that is unaffected or unswayed by the inherent ickiness of incest.
As for pedophilia-your right. Efforts to normalize it are well under way. Thing is, unlike with homosexuality between adults its going to be a much much harder PR war for them to wage. And conservatives I hope will not be caught flat footed as they were before.
ShieldWife
Marchioness
It may depend on how one defines being right wing. Of course, some of us may also be concealing our true power level 😏
Shipmaster Sane
You have been weighed
Those are far left positions.
I think that the left right wing split doesn't really cover beliefs very well.
Personally I think the political triangle does a better job of explaining things
there are three ideals
Liberty, Fraternity and equality and by their very nature they conflict.
I like liberty in order to get the amount I like I have to give up stability or Fraternity, and equality because some people will do better. Others value different things.
Personally I think the political triangle does a better job of explaining things
there are three ideals
Liberty, Fraternity and equality and by their very nature they conflict.
I like liberty in order to get the amount I like I have to give up stability or Fraternity, and equality because some people will do better. Others value different things.
King Krávoka
An infection of Your universe.
Wings are a horrible way of explaining a subjective understanding of the objective truth. My beliefs are less discordant with the American "right", but only because the modern Left is a Gadianton psyop. I'm Left Wing - by the standards of the late 18th century, because I believe that the governmental right to decide right and wrong is an idea which has been discredited by all reliably recorded history.
D
Deleted member
Guest
You are possibly right, but I believe that "we westerners haven't actually improved civilisation since Queen Anne, in fact, it's been mostly down-hill since then, we've just piled a lot of technology on top" would probably be a legitimate description of my beliefs. Now, I think the United States could and should look a lot more like the Dutch First Stadtholderless Period than some European Monarchy... But it's all a matter of degrees. To some extent I oppose certain strains that have been part of western culture since Hellenic times.
@Lord Invictus @The Immortal Watch Dog I don't agree with the obsession with Christian morality at all. It only became socially predominant with the rise of the bourgeoisie in the 19th century -- the morality of the medieval period was a very different thing. The Roman Republic also lasted almost 500 years without it; and gave way to the Empire and its glory, with the degradation of Liberty but suffused with Glory, which comfortably lasted another 450 years. Indeed, some like Gibbon ascribe the fall of Rome precisely to the spread of Christendom. Julian the Apostate certainly felt it was enervating Roman strength. We haven't even gotten to 250 years yet, we seem to have half the longevity of Rome--and that only if we manage to transition into an Empire at the end of this.
D
Deleted member 88
Guest
@Tyanna of Pentos
I know we disagree on that. Religion aside-what really makes me "far right" is my burning world consuming hate for all forms of degeneracy.
That is why folks on the left have called me a fascist.
I believe in the sanctity not only of marriage and the family, but the gross immorality of behavior they celebrate.
I know we disagree on that. Religion aside-what really makes me "far right" is my burning world consuming hate for all forms of degeneracy.
That is why folks on the left have called me a fascist.
I believe in the sanctity not only of marriage and the family, but the gross immorality of behavior they celebrate.
King Krávoka
An infection of Your universe.
I too have horrific psychological trauma from parental smoochiness.
D
Deleted member 88
Guest
King Krávoka
An infection of Your universe.
And your
's. More ****ing inexcusable than whatever you're pretending isn't fascism at this point. Have half the mind to move to /pol/ where at least overused
's are considered a serious taboo.
D
Deleted member
Guest
I also hate degeneracy and consider the family supreme above all other considerations, you know. Also that you cannot separate religion and social life. To be honest, I sometimes think that if I succeeded, I would end up an exile as my grandparents were and have to expatriate myself to India, but that won’t stop me from fighting for what I believe in.
D
Deleted member 88
Guest
I have absolutely no idea what your talking about.
Please use words, not asterisks and apostrophes please. I’m not a telepath.