Anti-Anarchy

Posted by Guest Blogger on Saturday, 13 June 2015 00:10.

by Neil Vodavzny

Following a discussion on MR I wrote this as an attempt to amplify and clarify, particularly relative to the state. Anarchy is highly individualist, and those from antiquity who are known as innovators – Aeschylus, Archimedes, Socrates, Pericles et al – we also know as individuals. Everyone’s an individual, you might say, but how does that explain the classical period?

Modern Greece is just as state-minded as other European nations, though luckily exists in a type of stasis that preserves their heritage. Over in Syria, the Roman columns of Palmyra that are the very picture of picturesque stasis, are possibly going to get run over by Isil on their way to establishing a proto-Caliphate or Islamic State.

It’s not just the state that is so pernicious. What they call the free-market is actually governed by intractable rules, as we can see in the case of the leftist Syriza’s showdown with its European creditors. If the state is inherently against anarchic traditions, capital is even more so.

In the global system, every particle of monetary value is micro-managed to an absurd level. So, the capitalist nations – which include most of the world – are actually managed by capital systems that are on the lines of cybernetics or a computer data-base/robot.

Capitalism is supposedly not an ideology in the sense Marxism is; it’s just free competition. Except, it’s not free; as noted, it’s micro-managed on a global scale. As an ideology, Marxism seeks to change socio-economic systems. Capitalism has no such ideology, nevertheless still does change reality since, as noted, it is akin to cybernetics. Any traditional community, say a Greek island, that exists in relative stasis, has a type of anarchic energy. The villagers and the inhabitants exist mainly as individuals with no particular agenda other than to live the daily round, shop at the market, trawl for lobsters, sightsee, recite Homer etc.

The idea of stasis enables the tradition to speak for itself. I actually lived in Spain as a kid under Franco’s reign and the same was true then in the 60s, evocation of local color. Anything which essentially does nothing to alter things, such as stasis or anarchy, is a type of natural energy.

If there is social disorder in these communities (as there is in Greece with the anti-austerity elderly protesters) the local police are called in. Order and disorder exist side-by-side. This is actually the natural state of affairs and any attempt to change it simply destroys the natural energy.

Capital is very destructive since while seemingly non-ideological and invisible, is in reality a control and management system becoming more cybernetic by the week. This means it has an ontological effect, an effect on the energy of communities. What Marxism does with ideology, capital does by stealth.

The state or the corporate state is the biggest anti anarchic force in existence. We cannot therefore approach European ontology by way of the state. It’s not a political argument, it’s actually a classical one to do with restraint in all things.

The classical is a type of freedom that I relate to Tao, energy. Bruce Lee as I see it was more classical in his approach, not robotic. Lee was very aware of his Chinese heritage, but was against the imposition of strict tradition in kung fu styles - that argument is quite complicated. Routines that are imposed are like formulaic exercises. But to be “classic” means having an immediate felt expression. One cannot act systemically and still act spontaneously.

Relating this to communities, anarchy is there in the way places are governed by common consent, not imposition. This allows for conflicts to exist, to not need to be resolved, debate. Drama. I mean quite literally films and plays. The self-sufficiency of a small Norwegian town lends Ibsen’s An Enemy of the People an ethical context you would not otherwise find, as the townsfolk turn against the good doctor.

At the other end of the scale, Carpenter’s Assault on Precinct 13 has a disparate group of police and outlaws becoming ethically entwined as they face a prolonged siege by an unseen enemy that knows no fear (shades of Isil). There’s even time for a dash of romance for the condemned hero Wilson and policewoman Leigh. Carpenter’s nominally city-setting is more of a homage to Hawks’ Rio Bravo, even down to Lieutenant Bishop chucking Wilson the gun as the spooks emerge from a corridor.

Wilson’s line “I was born out of time” you could imagine is an attitude Carpenter shares, since he wrote the script. The West of yore is an archetypal example of individualism and self-sufficiency. I recall from the 60s The High Chaparral, set after the Mexican war, with the Chaparral operating as a sort of fiefdom with Hispanic connections in the hinterlands. Ethical drama is made from rugged self-reliance and ethnicity, the Spanishness of Victoria and her compadres set against the more dour rigging of the Chaparral speaks eloquently for racial heritage and traditions.

This is where I have to say that nothing should get in the way of racial epithets, since they presuppose racial traits. Modern dramas tend to be “color-blind” as if it’s a benefit that one is of no particular breed. If you allow for some anarchy in the way places are governed, though, the opposite is the case. Black Harlem, Spanish Harlem, that type of thing, where neighbourhoods are under informal rule in terms of ethnicity. That actually is a type of anarchy because there is no formal government. What you generally get is some civil disorder, gangs if you like, and law enforcement.

That situation is just made for drama in in its ethical context. What I am saying is that that type of anarchy enables races to be self-governing to quite a degree. There will be some disorder and law enforcement. Not only is there a natural energy to these communities, there are no formal restrictions on the use of terms like “kike” or “chink”. There are much fewer formal rules so speech is freer and spontaneous.

The fact is, societies of the past were much more individualist and spontaneous. There are no bars on thought or speech so you get racial tropes as in Marlowe’s The Jew of Malta. Racial tropes are a sign of informality and not the formal rules of government. Therefore, if you want to express a racial context, you can’t do it formally by way of the nation-state. The formality does not allow for free expression; anything rule-bound imposes itself on the individual.

On MR it seems caricatures are allowed as it’s a non-rule-bound situation. In the modern world the state prohibits this so what you are dealing with is some abstract, behind the scenes influence. This is the essence of a conspiracy, but it’s completely the product of an abstract mode of thought that the state engenders. Even if there were a conspiracy, you are still trapped by abstraction. As noted previously, you can’t confuse Amy Winehouse with a conspiracy as they’re two totally different things.

Obviously one could make a caricature of Amy Winehouse which would make a great deal of sense; the state might not “get” it which suggests anti-anarchy and anti-racism are closer than some might imagine. Another thing that strikes me is that the Eurovision song contest has morphed into almost a freak show for transgenders and anything goes entertainment as Europe widens its doors. Almost the idea of ethnicity is lost in the mix. There are still good acts to be found, but they tend to get submerged by the globalising brand (next stop China).

Where I live in S England, immigrants from the east tend to resemble Konrad Lorenz’s geese as they waddle round with their brood. They have truly been imprinted by anti-anarchy. The crux of the argument is we, the people, live off the land and not off the state. We need to be more like the French who do not allow their small farmsteaders to be conglomerated into the capitalist mix.

The mix is toxic because it amounts to an ultimate nothingness. Livestock herds are brought indoors so we don’t know they’re there. The argument is ecological because societies also have an ecology. An ecology of living with animals and an ecology of race. Sheep-husbandry is equally vital to political commentary or more so in a way.

The contrast with China is worth making here. Tao is celebrated in the famous dragon-dance as a type of untameable oneness. Historically, this principle is almost the opposite to the Chinese ideal of harmony, and in practice Confucianism aims at harmony with the anarchic energy of Tao as a curb on the power of the emperor. Harmony is something of a double-edged sword in that it gives the emperor power, and this is the basic difference with Europe which practised feudalism. Feudalism is actually quite an anarchic system, and was backed-up by the Church in its iconography of struggle and battle between good and evil (see In The Mouth of Madness).

The Church, as I’ve been trying to make out, has quite classical roots; in place of Apollo is Christ and in place of Dionysis is sin, lust. Although the fallen angel is supposed to be evil, the whole structure depends on the battle being fought. Without that battle you are left with pure goodness which just doesn’t exist. You need Judas in order for the whole thing to work dramatically and ethically.

So, the link to ancient Greece is there. The underlying message is that neither order nor chaos are good or bad in themselves; they define each other. This is remarkably similar to the concept of Tao, particularly as specified by Bruce Lee. This is what leads me to think Lee is quite classical in his approach to king fu.

Lee’s films are direct expressions of a Fist of Fury. This is not necessarily a Chinese trait. The Assassin by Hou Hsiao-hsien is up for a palme d’or at Cannes; a truly elaborate, florid, hypnotically atmospheric visual epic of encounters glimpsed through dappled woods and ornate interiors, of a female kung fu warrior who glides around mysteriously. That gilded harmony makes it quite Chinese, but less classical.

Harmony, as I say, is a double-edged sword; a typical Western view of the Chinks was Ming the Merciless in Flash Gordon comicstrip. Someone with no moral compunctions. The Dragon Lady in Terry and the Pirates is likewise morally dubious (but who cares with those features?). Hong Kong used to be very Terry , with its carnivalesque water-traffic. Like a Roman Prefecture, the indigenous culture was self-sufficient with local institutions overseeing political-economy.

Chinese tend to aim at harmony, but their saving grace is anarchic Tao. Harmony, like Apollo, is the ultimate nullifier. Anarchy isn’t anti-social, it’s anti imposition. Therefore, it’s an essential counter to reason and any man-made attempt at harmony. Look on it as a type of gaiety, of loose spontaneity of a free people. Order cannot be established without its counter, because that would be stultified inertia. Bruce Lee uses the word constipation for set routines that are pre-formulated and negate any direct, unthought expression. Attack is defence (Artist of Life, page 158).

This to me means that Lee is being classical at least as much as he is being Chinese; it’s known that his views created enemies among the Chinese diaspora. To me, classicism is something that saw its peak in Greece, but differences are of degree, not kind. The technical perfection of Greek sculpture has never been bettered; that is set against Dionysic expression.

Pure technique is Apple, which happens to be the biggest (gay) company today. Their control is total, which is the negative thing. No restraint and no hint of chaos (gods forbid, ducky). I say “gay” because of their preciousness, everything just so. Steven Fry is their biggest fan. This is to be distinguished from gay in the Greek sense (all elitist societies are gay in a Blackadder sense, aren’t they?) There is quite a fad now for retro-tech and I think the reason is there. Technique set against expression or imperfection. Here’s a quote from Lee:

Many different “stylists” have become desensitized, patternised robots. They become these organized form, victims of conditioning handed down for thousands of years. A martial artist is never a replica of “this” style or “that” style. He is definitely not a product but a live individual, and remember, the individual is always more important than the system.
Artist of Life, page 157

For “individual” read man, woman, race.. anything which is not equivalent. Liberal “rights”, which are another type of social management, go against all these individual traits. Post-50s, through the hippy rebellion, the various “rights” have seen the state impose its doctrine of nothingness. In the US today killer cops are the end result (no neighborhoods, no compunctions). Marvin Gaye’s What’s Going On, the first introspective eco-conscious concept-album resounds with neighbourhood in a Black streetwise sensibility sense – The Ecology, Dionysis Holler (dig it).

The less efficient the state the better; R Crumb and others fled to France. His view everything is turning into junk may not be far off. Everything has to be equivalent so we have feminism and then gay marriage. Germaine Greer said of Jane Fonda:

Poor old Jane has a replacement hip but not a replacement brain.

… a feminist speaking of a woman’s free choice. As Fonda said, it gave her “ten years of work”, and unlike Bardot she chose to act. Free choice. That is the mark of a society that recognizes antagonism, the relationship of predator to prey, harvest, intermediary (Levi-Strauss). From that relationship come materials, crops, woods, leather, hay and horses that have extempore qualities. Remember, Bardot is a lover of animals, not “humankind”. To a society that doesn’t recognize antagonism, everything is equivalent. In Godard’s Le Weekend, capital is a metaphor for junk.

Whereas for Freud capital signifies Eros, to Godard Eros has value in itself, like the grandiloquent sensuality of the Taj Mahal. Beehives, which happen to be in decline, are Eros supplying the abundance of honey, not money. Eco-value. Also artistic value, what I like to call craftwork. Here’s a quote on Russian icons:

Three to four days are spent preparing the lime, cedar and poplar board. Rabbit-skin glue is then carefully boiled to prime the board. A muslin cloth is glued in place and 12 layers of gesso applied. Once dry it’s sanded to perfection. Only then can a scene be created.

Not unlike a process of revealing the material, chipping away at clay (a metaphor by Lee). Sir Richard Temple notes:

The calm presence, the inner contemplation.. is the artistic energy that radiates through hundreds of years.

Lest you think I’m being religious, similar remarks apply to Roman frescoes at Pompeii. Here’s a quote from Georg Basilitz:

To create something that hasn’t been seen before, you have to react against something. But when I go to the Venice Biennale today it seems that young artists are too close together. Where are the scandals, where is the conflict today?

Condict Byulding

Marionettes

It’s about content, and where there’s content conflict, contradiction. Religious conflict is prevalent, I cop to it. Were there no conflict there would be no ecology, so you’re welcome to it. Religion is prejudice by nature, the Madonna is a woman. Also, creative outsider types tends to reveal similar attitudes. Pope Francis hasn’t watched TV since 1990, likewise R Crumb, Harlan Ellison.

The prejudice we see nowadays is towards equivalence, paraphrased as liberal rights. Being prejudicial in the other, Rightist, way though, is simply recognizing individuals as men, women or race as distinct from any sterile system.

This harks back to CC Beck’s quote on stereotypes; they are useful devices to summarise reality. An orthodox Jew in a tall hat is very easy to distinguish, and en masse fairly easy to caricature as resembling human penguins. That has a long tradition in Western artifice. Prejudice is mainly the ability to detect an individual who is other, man, woman, race. In ethology it would be predator and prey. If there was no other, everything would be equivalent.

More to the point, equivalence is a form of junk, of nothingness or sterility. It is a system of prefabricated reality, not free expression. How does one avoid such systems? As I said, by having a classical sense of restraint. If you take the medieval Church, it was not a temporal power as such but a spiritual one, presiding over a feudal system, something relatively anarchic. A system that is highly organized is never anarchic; for example, Isil have no conception of either order or chaos in their advance. They have no knowledge of, or place any value on, the ancient Aramaic culture that was infused with Greco-Roman forms. The only things they have are nihilism and money.

Antagonisms, not rights, are a type of natural order. Even thought is a type of energy, creative disorder, not prefabricated rules. The structures, as Levi-Strauss shows, are antagonistic. This reflects on social structure and speech patterns. Symbols are also antagonistic; a painting of the Madonna breastfeeding is a potent symbol of marriage (to God). Only women can marry (men) in that context. Maybe the Church should get onto it?

To do without systems is also good practice if they are increasingly cybernetic. Complex systems can become chaotic probably because there’s just no getting away from it. Then we get something that is both sterile and impossible logically to fathom. Natural systems are simple because antagonistic. Symbols, icons, myths, ibis, hieroglyphs.

Tags:



Comments:


1

Posted by Alfred J. Nock, Our Enemy, The State on Sat, 13 Jun 2015 06:46 | #

Alfred J. Nock, Our Enemy, The State

http://famguardian.org/Publications/OurEnemyTheState/OurEnemyTheState-byAlbertJKnock.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Jay_Nock


“Our Enemy, The State”, by Alfred J. Nock, is frequently cited approvingly by a few people whom I like.
..................................................................................................................................

I will pat myself on the back here for a passage that I believe makes good use of Neil’s commendation of anarchy, as I have been persuaded by him that some degree of it is necessary:

Jews do not want us to be a White Left. The reason that they do not want that is because it is our best outlook - an orientation which, together with sufficient anarchy, allows for our coordination and strategic evasion of their infiltration. This capacity to evade their infiltration is facilitated by coordination not merely by place but by language - that is why the terms are so important. Shared terminology serves to coordinate our people wherever they might be while at the same time allowing for sufficient anarchy to evade infiltration, counter our enemies and counter corruption - especially tactical in the clear terminological position of a White Left, its eye on elite betrayal and “scabbing” - i.e., any attempted entry into our “union” by non-Whites.

And although I am warming-up to the idea of anarchy facilitating natural order -  (which seems to coincide with GW’s concept of ontology) - including of race, it does seem a bit extreme to be quite so averse to agreed upon rules and boundaries of the people… as the merest rule of the boundary of our people is what I mean by The White Left…but rather to value conflict only as creating those bounds… well..

“Black Harlem, Spanish Harlem”

Yep, you might just get something like that.

Atomized individuals maintaining anarchy because rules are bad…

...the resulting hypergamy is wonderful.. it is so wonderful that the one’s who are being flushed down the toilet shouldn’t even be allowed to talk, discussion should not be engaged. Having snoozed - and wondered if maybe we could do better by our social capital, including their own individually - they lose.

Isn’t an institutionlized option for monogamy, as a rule based consensus, just so horrible? After all, its of no concern to every self satisfied asshole that you know.

Lets have a condescending smile for the quaint victims so lacking the joie de vivre of anarchism.

It’s funny, I do appreciate what this essay is saying, and what Beam is saying in that one must be a bit tough and not feel all of the pings of competition that you get against your armor.. Sometimes we are just being too sensitive and it is a sign of only reasonable immuno-health to be antagonistic or even perhaps loving in return.

Still, I can’t help but look upon the sentiments of Neil’s piece with a bit of sarcasm.

Still, when one comes through certain circumstances where the natural wonderfulness of antagonism has been fully exercised, one can’t help but wonder if we could do a little better and be a little less wasteful of the life given to us.

It was all so natural, my antagonists said.

...

Cooperation is as ubiquitous as competition, after all.

When I use the word system, I am referring to natural systems.

Their absences may be a figment of the imagination of the anarchist.

When I refer to the Nation, I refer to the bounds of the people - it is held together by rules, implicit or explicit - though I would agree with the anarchist that the fewer the better - still, some will be indispensable.

But beware of people who are going to say that you are too sensitive. That nature is all competition and life is war. You have been taught to rise above, that doesn’t mean that they will. You want to show them that you are not too sensitive, that you can handle a little of their cruelty, barbs and insults - you are like them.

You didn’t know that they are sociopaths and are going to take the ten in this game.

....

Membership and non-membership of a nation, that’s bad. It might do something like keep track of responsibility to ancient racial, social capital..I know, I know, this is all kept in place by the Tao, or is it the Dow (Dow-Jones) of non-cybernetics.

..something horrible might happen, like we might sort and curate our kinds so that we have at least some idea of who we are and where we’d like to go…we might discover DNA… naaah!

That might disrupt the great Chief’s tribal vision..

We might do something like be able to determine good, fair, appropriate matches - and cooperate to make that determination for those who might not want to focus their efforts on gaming the opposite sex.

No matter that we appreciate what the anarchist says, and can allow that as even a majority option - he/she can even breed outside the race if he/she doesn’t mind being expelled (so that he/she does not impose his/her choice upon us)... no, we have to eliminate those who see beyond moment and episode.. in a word, who threaten the puerile female’s anarcho-tyranny…

...................................................................................


2

Posted by NEIL VODAVZNY on Sat, 13 Jun 2015 14:06 | #

I just had an idea that actions sometimes speak louder than words. Instead of worrying about statism, hypothetically and theoretically, an alternate way is to initiate a program for Europeans, cross-border. The program would be along the lines of NGOs in developing countries, but would be Right Europe. It would need some finance and would be a breeding program, possibly called Retro-Rural Revivalism. The aim would be to breed as well as obtain property, as an informal society of mainly rural-based populations, cross-border. Rural dwellers are more independent and so more capable of building a society. There would be cooperation, financial maybe. I noticed Greece has an Agricultural Bank which sounds a good idea, better than RBS. Just an idea.


3

Posted by international white inc. on Sat, 13 Jun 2015 15:57 | #

Not a bad idea, I believe it could be accommodated.


4

Posted by neil vodavzny on Sun, 14 Jun 2015 14:37 | #

I have a sort of American Indian analogy. The elders have pow-wows to discuss tribal incursions etc. Meanwhile the squaws tend to the teepees and the braves inhabit the general culture of games, hunting, warfare. The squaws keep the culture going while the young run wild round the encampment. The culture at that early stage is not intellectual so has a quality of youthful anarchy. Young energy has a way of purifying decadence, you might say. Any culture could do with new generations in that way, to avoid stultifying. That could be a hippy ideal. It seems to me anarchy is a general purpose thing that applies to any living culture.

Our cultures are managed, and managers are mediocre. The young mind needs to keep clear of premeditated programming to develop imagination. Imagination is never mediocre. See for example Laurie Lee, Cider With Rosie


5

Posted by melvin polatnick on Wed, 17 Jun 2015 14:32 | #

Smarter and shrewder people always enslave the pack. A good example are the clever Jews that organize slower goys to labor for them. Large organizations are run by shrewd CEOs who threaten employees with being fired if they do not produce. Anarchy or absolute individualism is impossible, even bums depend on government run soup kitchens. But masturbating in privacy can still be enjoyed by frustrated anarchists.


6

Posted by neil vodavzny on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 11:06 | #

Otherness, I would say, is a universal instinct which is suppressed by modernism. At roots it’s the family - male, female, son, daughter - so is as basic as that, the dysfunctional family of Greek drama, the roots of European culture.

My feeling is we overemphasize the difference of Jews because in reality it’s normal to be different. As a natural way of life there is a lot of anarchy and disorder. The fact that peoples are different I don’t think should worry us too much.
What I’m thinking is peoples used to have different self-sufficient cultures, lineages. A type of quasi-anarchy without diktats.

It seems to me that the elephant in the room is capital, because that makes everything similar.  This battle between capital and orthodox left is going on in Greece at the moment; oddly I don’t mind that as at least they’re independent minded!
It says something that the Greeks are the bad boys of Europe when they’re being the most European. In short, recognizing otherness is extremely basic, everything else is secondary.
If there’s a battle and you are not aware of that the battle may already be lost.


7

Posted by esp.given crypsis, J difference not overemphasized on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 12:02 | #

No and yes, I say in response to Neil:


“My feeling is we overemphasize the difference of Jews because in reality it’s normal to be different. As a natural way of life there is a lot of anarchy and disorder. The fact that peoples are different I don’t think should worry us too much.”


The difference between us and the Jews must be emphasized for the fact of their crypsis if nothing else - the way they infiltrate and manipulate White interests.

By empasizing and abolutizing this difference we do not risk the mstake of letting them back in and giving them the reins of power once again as we have throughout history to our destruction.

Once again I hasten to emphasize, if it is not our agenda to kill them then whether “we”... and I say “we” in scare quotes, because you, Neil, appear to continuously, suspicioulsy, downplwy their negative impact .... but whether we over-emphasize their pejorative influence (which is not likely) or underestimate their impact, “we” are on the safe ground of simply advocating our sovereignty from them and other non-Europeans.

But Neil, I cannot not stand by and let you or anyone else advocate the inclusion of Jews into our interst group.

If anyone insists upon including them in European interests that person can well be looked upon as a mortal enemy.


“It seems to me that the elephant in the room is capital, because that makes everything similar.”

I can agree that this is AN elephant in the room, but not the only elephant.

More, Jewish interests have it, too, and its usury, largely at their disposal.


8

Posted by neil vodavzny on Mon, 06 Jul 2015 15:02 | #

I’m really thinking that maybe Jews, those in the know, are wise to the effects of capital. Marx was one, after all. Therefore, in our own interests, we should also be wise to it. If the effects are so corrosive all this flailing around will do very little.

I’m quite keen on this idea of mini states or autonomous areas, such as the Kurds have in Syria. Maybe that is the way of the future? America too seems under threat from central diktats from the supreme court, and Texas and others are rebelling (gay marriage).

The world, and its problems, could be made a lot smaller in one fell swoop by such measures. Marine le Pen said “next Frexit” which could be right. That is an easy way of recognizing differences. Jews tend to be globalists so that would mitigate any sway.

I always tend to think that Greeks are very different to Germans, even just physically, swarthy and satyrnine. That is what European culture is.



Post a comment:


Name: (required)

Email: (required but not displayed)

URL: (optional)

Note: You should copy your comment to the clipboard or paste it somewhere before submitting it, so that it will not be lost if the session times out.

Remember me


Next entry: “Rock solid, unwavering, enduring, forever!”
Previous entry: Should we deviate from authenticity in order to “game” women?

image of the day

Existential Issues

DNA Nations

Categories

Contributors

Each author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer.

Links

Endorsement not implied.

Immigration

Islamist Threat

Anti-white Media Networks

Audio/Video

Crime

Economics

Education

General

Historical Re-Evaluation

Controlled Opposition

Nationalist Political Parties

Science

Europeans in Africa

Of Note

Comments

Al Ross commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Tue, 19 Mar 2024 06:26. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Tue, 19 Mar 2024 06:09. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Tue, 19 Mar 2024 05:41. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Tue, 19 Mar 2024 05:24. (View)

James Bowery commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Tue, 19 Mar 2024 02:16. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'On Spengler and the inevitable' on Mon, 18 Mar 2024 23:20. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'On Spengler and the inevitable' on Mon, 18 Mar 2024 00:31. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'On Spengler and the inevitable' on Sun, 17 Mar 2024 23:58. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'A Russian Passion' on Sun, 17 Mar 2024 23:12. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Sun, 17 Mar 2024 13:01. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Sun, 17 Mar 2024 12:27. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Sun, 17 Mar 2024 08:34. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Patriotic Alternative given the black spot' on Sun, 17 Mar 2024 08:11. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Patriotic Alternative given the black spot' on Sun, 17 Mar 2024 07:20. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'Patriotic Alternative given the black spot' on Sat, 16 Mar 2024 22:29. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Patriotic Alternative given the black spot' on Sat, 16 Mar 2024 19:15. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Patriotic Alternative given the black spot' on Sat, 16 Mar 2024 19:03. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'Patriotic Alternative given the black spot' on Sat, 16 Mar 2024 18:15. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Patriotic Alternative given the black spot' on Sat, 16 Mar 2024 17:31. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Patriotic Alternative given the black spot' on Sat, 16 Mar 2024 12:46. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Patriotic Alternative given the black spot' on Sat, 16 Mar 2024 12:27. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Patriotic Alternative given the black spot' on Sat, 16 Mar 2024 07:14. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Patriotic Alternative given the black spot' on Sat, 16 Mar 2024 05:38. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Patriotic Alternative given the black spot' on Sat, 16 Mar 2024 04:54. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Sat, 16 Mar 2024 03:51. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Patriotic Alternative given the black spot' on Sat, 16 Mar 2024 03:47. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Patriotic Alternative given the black spot' on Sat, 16 Mar 2024 03:44. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Patriotic Alternative given the black spot' on Sat, 16 Mar 2024 03:39. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'What lies at the core' on Sat, 16 Mar 2024 03:28. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Sat, 16 Mar 2024 03:19. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Patriotic Alternative given the black spot' on Fri, 15 Mar 2024 23:34. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Patriotic Alternative given the black spot' on Fri, 15 Mar 2024 23:32. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Patriotic Alternative given the black spot' on Fri, 15 Mar 2024 22:53. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 23:04. (View)

James Bowery commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 12:35. (View)

affection-tone