COSMOTHEISM

Posted by torgrim on July 19, 2008, 09:18 PM | #

Many are the sites in our Holy Land, Europa, that will, with education, infuse mystery and awe.

The wonderful cathedrals, many were built at pre-Christian holy sites, where once stood a Heathen Temple or fane...I have been told that in England, there are ancient Yew trees that predate the Cathedrals that were part of the older Tradition, as they are living reminders of the older reverence of these sites.

As noted the Cathedrals imitate the forest, with columns and over arches of light and grandure.

A Bishop, once told a priest in a letter, when confronted at one of these sites, about how to bring the population into the Church, he said, but to build a new one, at their holy site, take out the gods of these people and replace them with our Saints.

Point is, we already have our indigenous spirituality, it just needs to have the “dust” blown away.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 19, 2008, 09:30 PM | #

Good points by Torgrim.  It may be that the sense of awe we feel, which the cathedral builders succeeded in capturing, didn’t originally come from Christianity but from the old religion Christianity replaced, just as the Yule log, the Christmas tree, and the date of December 25th did.  In the feelings Christianity gives us we may already, unbeknownst to ourselves, be celebrating our old religions under Christian disguise.

But in any case, if Christianity can’t get race straight it deserves to be replaced with a religion that can.  Period.  End of story.  I will accept no religion that race-replaces European peoples, as Catholicism and Protestantism are currently doing.

Posted by torgrim on July 19, 2008, 11:29 PM | #

Thank you Fred,

I agree, if Protestantism or Catholicism, does not, PROTECT, our people, then we must look to what will, and also create a sense of belonging to something that is from us. Natural, very old, giving the sense, of belonging, and an honoring of our ancestors that gave us life, as well, to our decendants.

Thankfully, Catholicism did not do a cultural replacement in Europe. As in other places that Catholicism, was “accepted”, It, adapted to the cultural/racial, place in which it found Itself.

It may be, that the sense of reverance we experience, in places as old as the Cathedrals of Europe, are because, these are places that were held in reverence, for thousands of years, before Christianity.

We are a people that comes from the heath and forest. With the advent of agriculture, much of the forest was removed for planting, I make the case, that the Cathedral, or the ancient Yew of the Heathen Temple, were but, a cultural/religious, expression of our past.

Posted by snax on July 21, 2008, 09:44 PM | #

The Bruce Charlton that Larry Nunn mentions is the same chap recently in the news for pointing out that IQ differs between social classes and should be factored into explanations of lower class relative under-achievement.

The article Nunn quotes from can be found here:

http://hedweb.com/bgcharlton/cosmology.html

While this is very interesting to me personally, I am not at all sure that a synthesis of Cosmotheism or Beyondism with pagan revival schools or Greek/Norse/national myths will offer much advantage anytime soon.

Posted by snax on July 21, 2008, 09:48 PM | #

Soren, Youtube and google video are are essential and adequate, but would you consider uploading the videos of the speeches in their entirety either to MR or a file sharing site?

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 21, 2008, 10:24 PM | #

“[...] IQ differs between social classes and should be factored into explanations of lower class relative under-achievement.” (—Snax)

Intuitively obvious (one would think), that’s also precisely one of the main themes of The Bell Curve by Herrnstein & Murray (available at Amazon.com in inexpensive paperback).

Posted by snax on July 21, 2008, 11:22 PM | #

One would think. But some people were shocked, shocked, at the suggestion Fred.

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=401980&c=1

Posted by torgrim on July 22, 2008, 05:44 AM | #

IQ differs between social classes and should be factored into lower class relative underachievement” snax…

Your opinion is noted, sir, however, I disagree.

Posted by Gregory on July 22, 2008, 06:13 AM | #

Your opinion is noted, sir, however, I disagree.

Torgrim—Your opinion/disagreement is noted as well, but I’d like to hear some reasons for your disagreement.  I have a feeling it has something to do with some of the “lower classes” actually being highly intelligent, but, due to politics, alien EGI influences, and more, the “lower classes” have no social space left open to them exercise their intelligence, or said intelligence is not rewarded appropriately because of “usura” and etc.  Is that it?  I’d really like to see your reasons.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 22, 2008, 12:07 PM | #

“some of the ‘lower classes’ [are] highly intelligent” (—Gregory)

Quite a lot of them are — no one at all disputes that, including Herrnstein & Murray — but not as high a proportion are as among the upper classes (and remeber also, regression to the mean goes both in the downward and the upward directions, downward if you’re above, as Sidney Goldberg and Norman Podhoretz found out with their sons JPod and Jonah, and upward if you’re below).  Hey I hold no brief for the upper classes — I’m pretty mad at them and as far as I’m concerned we can lop them off of the race, those who are pushing race-replacement on us, women’s lib, and all the other crap, and jettison them somewhere, Africa preferably (or Port Moresby along with Helen Keough and that other asshole, what was his name? — and put Richard Corbett MEP on that plane too) — but these are statistical facts you can’t get around, much as the Jews and other assholes would love to.

Posted by GT on July 22, 2008, 04:54 PM | #

FWIW: I am connected to new wealth.  Several of the gentiles are married to jews.  Several are dumb as dirt.  Overall verbal IQ is above average; abstract ability trails significantly and is considered less important.  Character deficiencies correlate with verbal IQ.  In business and law, all things jewish are considered “smart.” The jewish presence elevates the self-perceived status of the gentiles.  Subtract jews from the group and verbal IQ would decrease.  I strongly suspect this anecdotal observation is true of the American upperclass as a whole.

Posted by GT on July 22, 2008, 05:20 PM | #

I strongly suspect this anecdotal observation is true of the American upperclass as a whole. - GT

Whatever the differences in proportion, in terms of absolute numbers there are more high IQ individuals in the American underclasses than in the upperclass.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 22, 2008, 05:34 PM | #

“Whatever the differences in proportion, in terms of absolute numbers there are more high IQ individuals in the American underclasses than in the upperclass.”

... and in U.S. Euros than in U.S. Jews, many times more at given high-IQ levels including the highest, 140 and above.  Where the Euros suffer in relation to the Jews is in ethnocentrism:  pound-for-pound, Jews have what must be hundreds of times more of it than Euros.  Compared to Jews Euros seem to have zero.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 22, 2008, 05:39 PM | #

As for the upper classes, every Euro race — Englishmen, Italians, Germans, Dutchmen — could lop off and discard its entire upper class then generate a whole new one that would be just as good (or as bad), with the race as a whole none the worse for wear.  The same is not true of a race’s other layers:  these must remain intact.  The lower layer, let’s say, cannot be tampered with or race-replaced without loss of racial integrity of the whole race.  A race’s most expendable layer is its upper class.

Posted by .357 (Dave Johns) on July 22, 2008, 07:59 PM | #

Generally speaking, IQ as it related to class was distributed on a more even basis before the industrial revolution. Ruling elites aside, once the industrial revolution took place, a gradual stratification of class and IQ began to evolve. Through a long social process of sorting out, we are now in a place where people with the highest IQ are clustered in the upper class, i.e., the professional class. Conversely, the people on the left side of the Bell curve makeup the majority of the lower skilled, lower paying jobs.

Posted by GT on July 23, 2008, 01:17 AM | #

As for the upper classes, every Euro race — Englishmen, Italians, Germans, Dutchmen — could lop off and discard its entire upper class then generate a whole new one that would be just as good (or as bad), with the race as a whole none the worse for wear. The same is not true of a race’s other layers:  these must remain intact.  The lower layer, let’s say, cannot be tampered with or race-replaced without loss of racial integrity of the whole race.  A race’s most expendable layer is its upper class.

Absolutely concur with the above.  Furthermore, I’ll add that the majority of the American upperclass are post-1880’s “new wealth.” New wealth created by the economic exploitation of scientific innovation facilitated by an easy money monetarist system and a population explosion driven by longevity and the importation of cheap immigrant labor.  Very few among this group were actually capable of the scientific innovations involved.  They simply didn’t have the abstract ability.  They did, however, have the above average verbal IQ required for economic exploitation.  Thus every economic boom over the past century including those aided by increased property values has magnified the problem by rewarding con men and the labor-averse with entry into the upperclass.  The result is a Europid society top-heavy with technically incompetent “professionals” of marginal character.

Posted by GT on July 23, 2008, 01:20 AM | #

First paragraph - quoting Fred.

Second paragraph - “including those driven by increased property values”

Posted by .357 (Dave Johns) on July 23, 2008, 11:39 AM | #

“Furthermore, I’ll add that the majority of the American upperclass are post-1880’s “new wealth.” New wealth created by the economic exploitation of scientific innovation facilitated by an easy money monetarist system and a population explosion driven by longevity and the importation of cheap immigrant labor.  Very few among this group were actually capable of the scientific innovations involved...”

AHA!

Now I see where you’re coming from, GT. You’re a Marxist.

Posted by torgrim on July 24, 2008, 01:26 AM | #

Gregory-

“due to politics, alien EGI influences, and more, the “lower classes” have no social space left open to them exercise their intelligence or said intelligence is not rewarded appropriately because of “usura” and etc. Is that it? I’d really like to see your reasons.”

You are very close to my opinion as to why the lower classes do have intelligent people yet, have not been upwardly mobile, in reference to class.
Btw. thanks for asking.

We are not living in the world in the US pre-1965. Where traditionally such lower classes like the farmer, building contractor or other small business men could become upwardly mobile. All of that stopped right after, that fateful time around, 1965. There was “social space”. Usura was still contained, be it hardly. The risk and intelligence to create- be productive, still carried the appropriate reward.

I have come from one of these small busnesses, general contractor, which my father was/is, considered a semi-professional, class.
Like so many in the US, that used to make tool and die works, family farming, etc., all have taken on the “cloak” of, lower class today. To become upward in these trades/business, required intelligence, so one can assume that these same jobs/careers still have a percentage of intelligent people among this population.

I am relating personal observations while trying to logical about my observations. And surely, today, there are as many, “ dumb as stumps”, types in the upper classes, for an example, as there are in the building trades, because of this artificial political agenda foisted upon this Country since, 1965.

Posted by snax on July 24, 2008, 02:22 AM | #

torgrim, you know you haven’t refuted Charlton, common sense, and Murray, don’t you?

GT, I for one, don’t agree with Fred’s lopping ‘argument’. Neither did Stalin. Or Darwin. Or any decent man-manager. I’m amazed you agree with one of Hysterical Fred’s more hysterical comments.

You lead young men: are they as fit if you die today as if you continue to guide them? Prove it.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 24, 2008, 03:13 AM | #

The Brits find me “hysterical.” Different race.  Different blood.

Posted by GT on July 24, 2008, 05:36 AM | #

Now I see where you’re coming from, GT. You’re a Marxist.

Oh shit, I’ve been found out.  Now that people know I’m a marxist it’s only a matter of time before they discover that I’m a jew, Fed, and informer, too!  Damn.  I’ll have to be slicker next time.

Posted by .357 (Dave Johns) on July 24, 2008, 11:56 AM | #

“Oh shit, I’ve been found out.”—GT

No, GT, anyone who reads your comments can easily recognise the similarities between your ignorant worldview and the principles of Marxism. It’s all too obvious.

Eg.: juxtapose your comment above with a main idea of Marx:

GT states: “Furthermore, I’ll add that the majority of the American upperclass are post-1880’s “new wealth.” New wealth created by the economic exploitation of scientific innovation facilitated by an easy money monetarist system and a population explosion driven by longevity and the importation of cheap immigrant labor.  Very few among this group were actually capable of the scientific innovations involved...”

Marx main idea: Exploitation: Marx refers to the exploitation of an entire segment or class of society by another. He sees it as being an inherent feature and key element of capitalism and free markets. The profit gained by the capitalist is the difference between the value of the product made by the worker and the actual wage that the worker receives; in other words, capitalism functions on the basis of paying workers less than the full value of their labor, in order to enable the capitalist class to turn a profit. This profit is not however moderated in terms of risk vs. return.

Do you see how similar you are to Marxist thought, GT? Or is it a case, as I suspect, where you simply don’t know, and you don’t know you don’t know?

Posted by Maguire on July 24, 2008, 12:53 PM | #

Fred,

But in any case, if Christianity can’t get race straight it deserves to be replaced with a religion that can.  Period.  End of story.  I will accept no religion that race-replaces European peoples, as Catholicism and Protestantism are currently doing.

Eastern Orthodoxy has proven to be far more immune to this infection.  This is one underlying reason for the Jewish neocons’ superficially perverse enthusiasm for supporting Bosnian Muslims, Kosovo Muslims and Chechen Muslims.  Each case was a proxy war waged against Eastern Orthodox populations.

I would go further and suggest the center of gravity of “Western Civilization” in Europe is rapidly shifting East.  Is it possible to seriously argue the United Kingdom, France, Belgium and Holland have any future as white countries?  I honestly see no hope for them.  They were always resource poor and are now becoming population poor.  What’s called modern society in those regions is a mass social suicide cult like Jonestown, but on a far larger scale and operating more slowly.

It’s possible to pick a great many nits in the East.  In general vitality, masculinity and true femininity survives much better in eastern Europe and Russia than further ‘West’. 

Maguire

Posted by GT on July 24, 2008, 03:57 PM | #

May I live to be as well-educated, informed, and skilled as you, Mr. Johns.

Posted by GT on July 24, 2008, 04:46 PM | #

No, GT, anyone who reads your comments can easily recognise the similarities between your ignorant worldview and the principles of Marxism. It’s all too obvious.

Hmmm.  See quote, below. 

AHA!  Now I see where you’re coming from, GT. You’re a Marxist.

You’re a wannabe, Mr. Johns.  You are also an embarrassment to easy money conmen everywhere who are blessed with genuinely high verbal IQs.

---------

This profit is not however moderated in terms of risk vs. return.

I’m well acquainted with genuine risk –as opposed to risking other people’s money to make money.

Spare us the Ayn Randisms.

Posted by GT on July 24, 2008, 04:47 PM | #

Wannabe “elite,” that is.

Posted by torgrim on July 24, 2008, 04:50 PM | #

snax,

“torgrim you know you haven’t refuted Charlton, common sense or Murray, don’t you?”

Yes, I do not refute the findings of IQ and placement due to merit in higher education. I do not refute, Murray or Charlton. The point I am making is that there are people in the “lower classes” that are intelligent and for other reasons than intelligence are not able to participate in the benefits of an upwardly mobile society.
Common sense, tells me that the article in the Times, was written to provoke more than to illuminate.

Posted by .357 (Dave Johns) on July 24, 2008, 05:16 PM | #

“Wannabe “elite,” that is.”

That’s true, Mr. T. 

I WOULD like to be an elite. It’s no fun being a powerless pleb.

Posted by GT on July 24, 2008, 05:28 PM | #

That’s true, Mr. T.  I WOULD like to be an elite. It’s no fun being a powerless pleb.

Unfortunately, you’ll not make it.  Your lack of integrity is too readily obvious; it is on the level of a real estate or used er, pre-owned car salesman.  Why should competent conmen risk having you blow their cover?  They shouldn’t and won’t.

Posted by .357 (Dave Johns) on July 24, 2008, 05:45 PM | #

“Unfortunately, you’ll not make it...”

Darn!

Posted by Maguire on July 25, 2008, 01:42 AM | #

Now I see where you’re coming from, GT. You’re a Marxist.

If by this you mean GT doesn’t give two hutes about some printed pieces of paper you may be holding and which you imagine to represent real “‘wealth”, you are 100% correct.

And neither do I.

Posted by Paul Vogel on August 17, 2008, 11:25 PM | #

I want to start out by saying that most of what Larry Nunn said was true,
but, there were significant errors that must be mentioned or corrected at
a later date or in a later speech. Dawkins, Wayne MacLeod, and Ben K.
of NER were ALL ATHEISTS and not true Cosmotheists. Only the late Dr.
Pierce was a true Cosmotheist and any mention of ATHEISTS as being
Cosmotheists is mis-leading at best and counter-productive at worst.

Best regards,
Paul Vogel
aka
the Needle

http://www.cosmotheism.net