MR Radio: Dr Tomislav Sunic returns to talk to GW and DanielS

Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 24 February 2015 12:34.

Tom returns to MR radio to discuss the state of political nationalism in Europe, deep antagonisms that still exist among Europeans, problems of negative identity arising from that, and the performance of intellectual nationalism at this point in our struggle.
          sunci2sunict
_________________________________________________________________________

MYTHS AND MENDACITIES: THE ANCIENTS AND THE MODERNS - TOMISLAV SUNIC (The Occidental Quarterly, vol. 14, no. 4, Winter 2014–2015), run in addition to the podcast:

When discussing the myths of ancient Greece one must first define their meaning and locate their historical settings. The word “myth” has a specific meaning when one reads the ancient Greek tragedies or when one studies the theogony or cosmogony of the early Greeks. By contrast, fashionable expressions today such as “political mythology” is often laden with value judgments and derisory interpretations. Thus, a verbal construct such as “the myth of modernity” may be interpreted as an insult by proponents of modern liberalism. To a modern, self-proclaimed supporter of liberal democracy, enamored with his own system-supporting myths of permanent economic progress and the like, phrases like, “the myth of economic progress” or “the myth of democracy,” may appear as egregious political insults.

For many contemporaries, democracy is not just a doctrine that could be discussed; it is not a “fact” that experience could contradict; it is truth of faith beyond dispute.(1)

Criticizing, therefore, the myth of modern democracy may be often interpreted as a sign of pathological behavior. Given this modern liberal dispensation, how does one dare use such locutions as “the myth of modern democracy,” or “the myth of contemporary historiography,” or “the myth of progress” without being punished?

Ancient European myths, legends and folk tales are viewed by some scholars, including some Christian theologians, as gross re-enactments of European barbarism, superstition, and sexual promiscuity. (2)  However, if a reader or a researcher immerses himself in the symbolism of the European myths, let alone attempts to decipher the allegorical meaning of the diverse creatures in those myths, such as, for instance, the scenes from Orphic rituals, the hellhole of Tartarus, the carnage in the Iliad or in the Nibelungenlied, or the final divine battle in Ragnarök, then those mythical scenes take on a different, albeit often self-serving meaning. (3) After all, in our modern so-called enlightened and freedom-loving liberal societies, citizens are also entangled in a profusion of bizarre infra-political myths, in a myriad of hagiographic tales, especially those dealing with World War II victimhoods, as well as countless trans-political legends which are often enforced under penalty of law. Therefore, understanding ancient and modern European myths and myth-makers, means, first and foremost, reading between the lines and strengthening one’s sense of the metaphor.

In hindsight when one studies the ancient Greek myths with their surreal settings and hyperreal creatures, few will accord them historical veracity or any empirical or scientific value. However, few will reject them as outright fabrications. Why is that? In fact, citizens in Europe and America, both young and old, still enjoy reading the ancient Greek myths because most of them are aware not only of their strong symbolic nature, but also of their didactic message. This is the main reason why those ancient European myths and sagas are still popular. Ancient European myths and legends thrive in timelessness; they are meant to go beyond any historical time frame; they defy any historicity. They are open to anybody’s “historical revisionism” or interpretation. This is why ancient European myths or sagas can never be dogmatic; they never require the intervention of the thought police or a politically correct enforcer in order to make themselves readable or credible.

The prose of Homer or Hesiod is not just a part of the European cultural heritage, but could be interpreted also as a mirror of the pre-Christian European subconscious. In fact, one could describe ancient European myths as primal allegories where every stone, every creature, every god or demigod, let alone each monster, acts as a role model representing a symbol of good or evil. (4) Whether Hercules historically existed or not is beside the point. He still lives in our memory. When we were young and when we were reading Homer, who among us did not dream about making love to the goddess Aphrodite? Or at least make some furtive passes at Daphne? Apollo, a god with a sense of moderation and beauty was our hero, as was the pesky Titan Prometheus, always trying to surpass himself with his boundless intellectual curiosity. Prometheus unbound is the prime symbol of White man’s irresistible drive toward the unknown and toward the truth irrespective of the name he carries in ancient sagas, modern novels, or political treatises. The English and the German poets of the early nineteenth century, the so -called Romanticists, frequently invoked the Greek gods and especially the Titan Prometheus. The expression “Romanticism” is probably not adequate for that literary time period in Europe because there was nothing romantic about that epoch or for that matter about the prose of authors such as Coleridge, Byron, or Schiller, who often referred to the ancient Greek deities:

Whilst the smiling earth ye governed still,
And with rapture’s soft and guiding hand
Led the happy nations at your will,
Beauteous beings from the fable-land!
Whilst your blissful worship smiled around,
Ah! how different was it in that day!
When the people still thy temples crowned,
Venus Amathusia!  (5)

Many English and German Romanticists were political realists and not daydreamers, as modern textbooks are trying to depict them. All of them had a fine foreboding of the coming dark ages. Most of them can be described as thinkers of the tragic, all the more as many of them end-ed their lives tragically. Many, who wanted to arrest the merciless flow of time, ended up using drugs. A poetic drug of choice among those “pagan” Romanticists in the early nineteenth-century Europe was opium and its derivative, the sleeping beauty laudanum. (6)

Myth and religion are not synonymous, although they are often used synonymously—depending again on the mood and political beliefs of the storyteller, the interpreter, or the word abuser. There is a difference between religion and myth—a difference, as stated above, depending more on the interpreter and less on the etymological differences between these two words. Some will persuasively argue that the miracles performed by Jesus Christ were a series of Levantine myths, a kind of Oriental hocus-pocus designed by an obscure Galilean drifter in order to fool the rootless, homeless, raceless, and multicultural masses in the dying days of Rome.(7)

Some of our Christian contemporaries will, of course, reject such statements. If such anti-Christian remarks were uttered loudly today in front of a large church congregation, or in front of devout Christians, it may lead to public rebuke.

In the modern liberal system, the expression “the religion of liberalism” can have a derisory effect, even if not intended. The word “religion” derives from the Latin word religare, which means to bind together or to tie together. In the same vein some modern writers and historians use the expression “the religion of the Holocaust” without necessarily assigning to the noun “religion” a pejorative or abusive meaning and without wishing to denigrate Jews. (8)

However, the expression “the religion of the Holocaust” definitely raises eyebrows among the scribes of the modern liberal system given that the memory of the Holocaust is not meant to enter the realm of religious or mythical transcendence, but instead remain in the realm of secular, rational belief. It must be viewed as an undisputed historical fact. The memory of the Holocaust, however, has ironically acquired quasi-transcendental features going well beyond a simple historical narrative. It has become a didactic message stretching well beyond a given historical time period or a given people or civilization, thus escaping any time frame and any scientific measurement. The notion of its “uniqueness” seems to be the trait of all monotheistic religions which are hardly in need of historical proof, let alone of forensic or material documentation in order to assert themselves as universally credible.

The ancestors of modern Europeans, the ancient polytheist Greeks, were never tempted to export their gods or myths to distant foreign peoples. By contrast, Judeo -Christianity and Islam have a universal message, just like their secular modalities, liberalism and communism. Failure to accept these Islamic or Christian beliefs or, for that matter, deriding the modern secular myths embedded today in the liberal system, may result in the persecution or banishment of modern heretics, often under the legal verbiage of protecting “human rights” or “protecting the memory of the dead,” or “fighting against intolerance.” (9).

There is, however, a difference between “myth” and “religion,” although these words are often used synonymously. Each religion is history-bound; it has a historical beginning and it contains the projection of its goals into a distant future. After all, we all measure the flow of time from the real or the alleged birth of Jesus Christ. We no longer measure the flow of time from the fall of Troy, ab urbem condita, as our Roman ancestors did. The same Christian frame of time measurement is true not just for the Catholic Vatican today, or the Christian-inspired, yet very secular European Union, but also for an overtly atheist state such as North Korea. So do Muslims count their time differently—since the Hegira (i.e., the flight of Muhammad from Mecca), and they still spiritually dwell in the fifth century, despite the fact that most states where Muslims form a majority use modern Western calendars. We can observe that all religions, including the secular ones, unlike myths, are located in a historical time frame, with well-marked beginnings and with clear projections of historical end-times.

On a secular level, for contemporary dedicated liberals, the true undisputed “religion” (which they, of course, never call “religion”) started in 1776, with the day of the American Declaration of Independence, whereas the Bolsheviks began enforcing their “religion” in 1917. For all of them, all historical events prior to those fateful years are considered symbols of “the dark ages.”

What myth and religion do have in common, however, is that they both rest on powerful symbolism, on allegories, on proverbs, on rituals, on initiating labors, such as the ones the mythical Hercules endured, or the riddles Jason had to solve with his Argonauts in his search for the Golden Fleece. (10) In a similar manner, the modern ideology of liberalism, having become a quasi-secular religion, consists also of a whole set and subsets of myths where modern heroes and anti-heroes appear to be quite active. Undoubtedly, modern liberals sternly reject expressions such as “the liberal religion,” “the liberal myth,” or “the liberal cult.” By contrast, they readily resort to the expressions such as “the fascist myth” or “the communist myth,” or “the Islamo-fascist myth” whenever they wish to denigrate or criminalize their political opponents. The modern liberal system possesses also its own canons and its own sets of rituals and incantations that need to be observed by contemporary believers— particularly when it comes to the removal of political heretics.

Myths are generally held to be able to thrive in primitive societies only. Yet based on the above descriptions, this is not always the case. Ancient Greece had a fully developed language of mythology, yet on the spiritual and scientific level it was a rather advanced society. Ancient Greek mythology had little in common with the mythology of today’s Polynesia whose inhabitants also cherish their own myths, but whose level of philosophical or scientific inquiry is not on a par with that of the ancient Greeks.

Did Socrates or Plato or Aristotle believe in the existence of harpies, Cyclops, Giants, or Titans? Did they believe in their gods or were their gods only the personified projects of their rituals? Very likely they did believe in their gods, but not in the way we think they did. Some modern scholars of the ancient Greek mythology support this thesis: “The dominant modern view is the exact opposite. For modern ritualists and indeed for most students of Greek religion in the late nineteenth and throughout the twentieth century, rituals are social agendas that are in conception and origin prior to the gods, who are regarded as mere human constructs that have no reality outside the religious belief system that created them.” (11).

One can argue that the symbolism in the myths of ancient Greece had an entirely different significance for the ancient Greeks than it does for our contemporaries. The main reason lies in the desperate effort of the moderns to rationally explain away the mythical world of their ancestors by using rationalist concepts and symbols. Such an ultrarational drive for the comprehension of the distant and the unknown is largely due to the unilinear, monotheist mindset inherited from Judaism and from its offshoot Christianity and later on from the Enlightenment. In the same vein, the widespread modern political belief in progress, as Georges Sorel wrote a century ago, can also be observed as a secularization of the biblical paradise myth. “The theory of progress was adopted as a dogma at the time when the bourgeoisie was the conquering class; thus one must see it as a bourgeois doctrine.” (12)

The Western liberal system sincerely believes in the myth of perpetual progress. Or to put it somewhat crudely, its disciples argue that the purchasing power of citizens must grow indefinitely. Such a linear and optimistic mindset, directly inherited from the Enlightenment, prevents modern citizens in the European Union and America from gaining a full insight into the mental world of their ancestors, thereby depriving them of the ability to conceive of other social and political realities. Undoubtedly, White Americans and Europeans have been considerably affected by the monotheistic mindset of Judaism and its less dogmatic offshoot, Christianity, to the extent that they have now considerable difficulties in conceptualizing other truths, other levels of knowledge.

It needs to be stressed, though, that ancient European myths have a strong component of the tragic bordering on outright nihilism. Due to the onslaught of the modern myth of progress, the quasi-inborn sense of the tragic, which was until recently a unique character trait of the White European heritage, has fallen into oblivion. In the modern liberal system the notion of the tragic is often viewed as a social aberration among individuals professing skepticism or voicing pessimism about the future of the modern liberal system. Nothing remains static in the notion of the tragic. The sheer exuberance of a hero can lead a moment later to his catastrophe. The tragic trait is most visible in the legendary Sophocles’ tragedy Oedipus at Colonus when Oedipus realizes that he is doomed forever for having unknowingly killed his father and for having unknowingly had an incestuous relationship with his mother. Yet he struggles in vain to the very end in order to escape his destiny. Here is the often quoted line Nr. 1225, i.e., the refrain of the Chorus:

Not to be born is past all prizing best; but when a man has seen the light this is next best by far, that with all speed he should go thither whence he has come. (13)

The tragic consists in the fact that insofar as one strives to avoid a catastrophe, one actually brings a catastrophe upon himself. Such a tragic state of mind is largely rejected by the proponents of the liberal myth of progress.

MYTHS AND THE TRAGIC: THE COMING OF THE TITANIC AGE

Without myths there is no tragic, just like without the Titans there can be no Gods. It was the twelve Titans who gave birth to the Gods and not the other way around. It was the titanesque Kronos who gave birth to Zeus, and then, after being dethroned by his son Zeus, forced to dwell with his fellow Titans in the underworld. But one cannot rule out that the resurrection of the head Titan Kronos, along with the other Titans, may reoccur again, perhaps tomorrow, or perhaps in an upcoming eon, thus enabling the recommencement of the new titanic age. After all Prometheus was himself a Titan, although, as a dissident Titan, he had decided to be on the side of the Gods and combat his own fellow Titans. Here is how Friedrich Georg Jünger, an avid student of the ancient Greek myths and the younger brother of the famous contemporary essayist Ernst Jünger, sees it:

Neither are the Titans unrestrained power-hungry beings, nor do they scorn the law; rather, they are the rulers over a legal system whose necessity must never be put into doubt. In an awe-inspiring fashion, it is the flux of primordial elements over which they rule, holding bridle and reins in their hands, as seen in Helios. They are the guardians, custodians, supervisors, and the guides of order. They are the founders unfolding beyond chaos, as pointed out by Homer in his remarks about Atlas who shoulders the long columns holding the heavens and the Earth. Their rule rules out any confusion, any disorderly power performance. They constitute a powerful deterrent against chaos. (14)

Nothing remains new for the locked-up Titans: they know everything. They are the central feature in the cosmic eternal return. The Titans are not the creators of chaos, although they reside closer to chaos and are, therefore, better than the Gods—more aware of possible chaotic times. They can be called telluric deities, and it remains to be seen whether in the near future they may side up with some chthonic monsters, such as those described by the novelist H. P. Lovecraft.

It seems that the Titans are the necessary element in the cosmic balance, although they have not received due acknowledgment by contemporary students of ancient and modern mythologies. The Titans are the central feature in the study of the will to power and each White man who demonstrates this will has a good ingredient of Titanic spirit:

What is Titanic about man? The Titanic trait occurs everywhere and it can be described in many ways. Titanic is a man who completely relies only upon himself and has boundless confidence in his own powers. This confidence absolves him, but at the same time it isolates him in a Promethean mode. It gives him a feeling of independence, albeit not devoid of arrogance, violence, and defiance. (15)

Today, in our disenchanted world, from which all gods have departed, the resurgence of the Titans may be an option for a dying Western civilization. The Titans and the titanic humans are known to be outspoken about their supreme independence, their aversion to cutting deals, and their uncompromising, impenitent attitude. What they need in addition is a good portion of luck, or fortuna.

Notes:
1. Louis Rougier, La mystique démocratique (Paris: Albatros, 1983), p. 13.
2. Nicole Belmont, Paroles païennes: mythe et folklore (Paris: Imago, 1986) quotes on page 106 the German-born English Orientalist and philologist Max Müller who sees in ancient myths “a disease of language,” an approach criticized by the anthropological school of thought. His critic Andrew Lang writes: “The general problem is this: Has language—especially language in a state of ‘disease,’ been the great source of the mythology of the world? Or does mythology, on the whole, represent the survival of an old stage of thought—not caused by language—from which civilised men have slowly emancipated themselves? Mr. Max Müller is of the former, anthropologists are of the latter, opinion.” Cf. A. Lang, Modern Mythology (N.Y: Longmans, Green, Co., 1897), p.x.
3. T. Bullfinch, The Golden Age of Myth and Legend (London: Wordsworth Editions, ‘93).
4.See the German classicist, Walter F. Otto, The Homeric Gods: The Spiritual Significance of Greek Religion, trans. Moses Hadas (North Stratford, NH: Ayer Company Publishers, 2001). Otto is quite critical of Christian epistemology. Some excerpts from this work appeared in French translation also in his article, “Les Grecs et leurs dieux,” in the quarterly Krisis (Paris), no. 23 (January 2000).
5. F.Schiller,The Gods of Greece, trans.E. Bowring.ttp://www.bartleby.com/270/9/2.html
6. Tomislav Sunic, “The Right Stuff,” Chronicles (October 1996), 21–22; Tomislav Sunic, “The Party Is Over,” The Occidental Observer (November 5, 2009).  http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Sunic-Drugs.html
7.Tomislav Sunic, “Marx, Moses, and the Pagans in the Secular City,” CLIO: A Journal of Literature, History, and the Philosophy of History 24, no. 2 (Winter 1995).
8.Gilad Atzmon, The Wandering Who? A Study of Jewish Identity Politics (Winchester, UK: Zero Books, 2011), 148–49.
9. Alain de Benoist, “Die Methoden der Neuen Inquisition,” in Schöne vernetzte Welt (Tübingen: Hohenrain Verlag, 2001), p. 190–205.
10. Michael Grant, Myths of the Greeks and Romans (London: Phoenix, 1989), p. 289–303.
11. Albert Henrichs, “What Is a Greek God?,” in The Gods of Ancient Greece, ed. Jan Bremmer and Andrew Erskine (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2010), p- 26.
12. Georges Sorel, Les Illusions du progrès (Paris: Marcel Rivière, 1911), p. 5–6.
13. Sophocles, Oedipus at Colonus, in The Complete Plays of Sophocles, ed. and trans. R. C. Jebb (New York: Bantam Books, 1979), p. 250.
14. Friedrich Georg Jünger, Die Titanen (Frankfurt: Klostermann, 1944), p. 89–90.
15. Ibid., 105.



Comments:


1

Posted by Once on Tue, 24 Feb 2015 16:23 | #

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqYIwJDsinM

Once


2

Posted by Aspirations on Tue, 24 Feb 2015 18:42 | #

Aspirations:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8tpBYUIvTk


3

Posted by Immigrant song on Wed, 25 Feb 2015 01:01 | #

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC-T0rC6m7I


4

Posted by Man on Wed, 25 Feb 2015 01:11 | #

Stevie Winwood: I’m a man
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POCUgBSVENQ


5

Posted by Guestlurker on Wed, 25 Feb 2015 19:59 | #

This map well illustrates the mere three towns of any size that were granted to Poland by Versailles and that Nazi Germany might have wished to dispute: Posen, Bromberg, Thorn and one town, Danzig, made neutral.

Of the four, Bromberg and Thorn were Nazi Germany’s most legitimate outright complaint, but were given to Poland for logistical contiguity and other reasons.

Posen was the Pole’s ancient capital; they fought to re-take it in the Wlkp Uprising.

Danzig had changed demographics and had been disputed historically, from Germanic, to Polish and Neutral. The Versailles committee made it neutral again.

To Hitler and the deleted commenter’s mind, this constituted a good reason for annihilating major cities up to the Urals (including Moscow, Petersburg, Kiev, Minsk and Warsaw), displacing the Slavic populations with Germans (while calling me a “Polak” because I don’t think that is a great idea), saying that pandering to a particular disgruntled and uninformed niche of Germanic and Irish audience of The US which might not be averse to hearing such egregious bullocks presented as “truth”, and the number of hits that that pandering brings to a site, is being “successful.”

That’s not to mention the number of European deaths Hitler’s gambit cost.

Unfortunately, the population of Nazi Germany supported Hitler’s gambit to take over up to the Urals. They thought they’d get away with it, gambled and lost.

Its too bad for them that they could not have been satisfied with regaining the Sudetenland and resolving issues, over the 3 cities granted to Poland and the neutralization of Danzig, in another way.

But you are talking about Hitler and his massive military build up for obvious aggressive purposes, which had already moved beyond the Sudetenland once granted it; proving his intentions for aggrandizement - so, what reasonable negotiations could there be? None, of course. Hitler’s disposition and intentions were well known as were those of the commentator.


6

Posted by jamesUK on Thu, 26 Feb 2015 06:20 | #

Sunic is right as if the Balkans war was not proof enough of the fallacy of a unified European national identity the current crisis in Ukraine is the death nail to the idea just like the myth of pan-Arab nationalism.


7

Posted by DanielS on Thu, 26 Feb 2015 07:06 | #

“Sunic is right as if the Balkans war was not proof enough of the fallacy of a unified European national identity the current crisis in Ukraine is the death nail to the idea just like the myth of pan-Arab nationalism.”

First of all, Sunic doesn’t say that Europeans cannot cooperate, only that has been difficult, particularly as seen from his perspective of Croatian - Serbian relations.

The Ukrainian crisis is not the deathknell that you wish.

It is precisely Jewish interests that stirred this conflict with Russia in order to punish Russia for their backing of Iran and Syria. In addition, these same interests want the fertile land of Ukraine for themselves and the half Ukrainian bastards of the sex trade - the fathers being Jewish they cannot become Israeli.

It is your wish and goal to stir-up conflict between Europeans, “that this crisis is the deathknell of any such cooperation.”

The only reason that I do not remove your comment is for its didactic effect. One can see the wishes and designs in your comments.


8

Posted by jamesUK on Thu, 26 Feb 2015 20:51 | #

@DanielS

I’m surprised my comment didn’t get deleted to. You are the Jihad John of the internet moderators.

No the Ukrainian crisis is not because of Jewish interests as in both Russia and Ukraine Jews support the position of their national governments.

Who is the only country so far to actually pledge weapons to the Ukrainian government to fight Russian backed separatists in Ukraine? The Sunni Arab Muslim state of UAE.

Putin’s puppet was overthrown in Ukraine, a corrupt buffoon so Putin thought he could seize on the opportunity by annexing Ukrainian territory and trying to seize total control and influence in the country by seizing the Eastern regions of Ukraine all for his own vanity and narcissism who has completely fucked up the Russian economy. 


9

Posted by JamesUKtrollwatch on Thu, 26 Feb 2015 22:12 | #

JamesUK, the Ukrainian conflict is funded by, and serves the interests of, Jews/Israel and to some extent, their proxies, viz., corporations and The US govt/military industrial complex.

The only reason I allow this comment (number 8) is because, again, it is didactic in illustrating the type of disinformation a troll would put across.


10

Posted by jamesUK on Fri, 27 Feb 2015 02:39 | #

JamesUK, the Ukrainian conflict is funded by, and serves the interests of, Jews/Israel and to some extent, their proxies, viz., corporations and The US govt/military industrial complex

.

Proof? So called European nationalists use this Jewish boogeyman as something to focus on as a diversion problem between nationalist sentiment between countries themselves like WW1, WW2, War on Terror, etc. 

Adolf Hitler’s Final Testament (4/29/45)

More than thirty years have now passed since I in 1914 made my modest contribution as a volunteer in the first world war that was forced upon the Reich.

In these three decades I have been actuated solely by love and loyalty to my people in all my thoughts, acts, and life. They gave me the strength to make the most difficult decisions which have ever confronted mortal man. I have spent my time, my working strength, and my health in these three decades.

It is untrue that I or anyone else in Germany wanted the war in 1939. It was desired and instigated exclusively by those international statesmen who were either of Jewish descent or worked for Jewish interests.

There are western economic and geo strategic interests in Ukraine but Israel/Jewish interests are more focused on Iran and its nuclear program with neighbouring states and Cold war strategists like Zbignew Brzezinski who opposed the post 9/11 foreign policy focus towards Iraq and the Mid East and against US support of Israel and a possible war with Iran wanting a harsher line against Putin in Ukraine.


11

Posted by jamesUK on Fri, 27 Feb 2015 02:45 | #

Proof? So called European nationalists use this Jewish boogeyman as something to focus on as a diversion problem between nationalist sentiment between countries themselves like WW1, WW2, War on Terror, etc. 

Screwed that comment up meant to say:

Proof? So called European nationalists use this Jewish boogeyman as something to focus on as a diversion rather than the problem of opposing nationalist sentiment between countries themselves like pre-WW1 European conflicts,WW1 and WW2 and current issue of unified economic, trade and law agreements of the European Union.


12

Posted by DanielS on Fri, 27 Feb 2015 07:35 | #

GW makes a subtle, interesting and good point about peoples who’ve come through communism acquiring a (bad) habit of being overly critical of “big thinking.”

Tom makes an equally excellent point of their “economic miracle” being dependent upon international corporations which do not necessarily allow for a living wage, such that ordinary people have got to emigrate to make a living and find upward mobility.


13

Posted by No son of mine on Sat, 28 Feb 2015 18:50 | #

From Genesis’ “We Can’t Dance”:

No son of mine

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZbHcAPsllE

Jesus he knows me

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EprQGmZ3Imw

Driving the last spike

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHGqGmzzQaY

Tell me why

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1QuSrRU4UM

 

 


14

Posted by Sunic on Capitalist Babelization on Sun, 01 Mar 2015 04:04 | #

Babel and the Capitalist Babelization

February 27, 2015 — Tom Sunic

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2015/02/babel-and-the-capitalist-babelization/#more-26824

Review of Babel Inc.: Multiculturalism, Globalisation, and the New World Order
by Dr. Kerry Bolton
Black House Publishing Ltd, 2013

The tower of Babel is rightly used as a metaphor for contemporary rootless and mongrelized masses stashed together in the towering inferno of end times. As an allegory, however, the process of “babelization” signifies a distorted reality and an inhumane political process in which standard forms of cognition and speech are subject to entirely new denominations, requiring a completely different method of conceptualization. Attempting, therefore, to draw some parallels between George Orwell’s 1984 and Bolton’s Babel Inc., cannot be valid; Orwell’s vision of the static future has become outdated.  Bolton’s Babel Inc. offers, instead, a dynamic description of the process of capitalist entropy in which Babel Inc. and its ruling class continue to grind human beings, including themselves, to dust.

Which are these ruling classes in this Babel Inc.? This is where the author masterfully steps in and rejects the wide-spread right-wing babble about the Babel Inc. being allegedly run by a conspiratorial and homogenous group of wicked people, or some extra-terrestrial golems allegedly bent on ruling the White world. Rather, the Babel Inc., or simply put,  the System, resembles a nameless, albeit grotesque polity that can in no way be reduced to just one single free-lance Orwellian big brother or some big postmenopausal feminist mama. The Babel Inc., as Bolton sees it, is a logical postmodern transposition of the myth of economism and egalitarianism, two doctrines whose genealogy can be traced from well before the period of Enlightenment in Europe.

Twin Brothers: Communism and Capitalism

This does not mean at all that Bolton avoids elucidating the mindset and the self-perception of the main movers and shakers in the Babel Inc. In fact, Bolton’s scholarly credibility can best be spotted through the wealth of bibliographic references which indicate the intellectual depth of this effort. Bolton uses a three- pronged approach: theoretical, historical and descriptive. Such a threefold approach to this heavy subject is a prime necessity if the book is to retain a lasting educational value. Thus we learn in the first half of his book that capitalism, being a prime factor in the construction of the modern Babel Inc. and in the deconstruction of the nation-state, has always been a “modern and revolutionary” force. Its inherent dynamics aims at destroying traditional communities, regardless of their spot on the planet Earth. In fact, the much decried and alleged foe of capitalism (or rather its mirror- image), communism, fell apart in the East, in the late 20th century, because its paleo-communistic goals of egalitarianism and economism had already been better achieved in the capitalist West. Both communism and capitalism share a common ideological thread, namely a common belief in progress and common hatred of all racial, ethnic and territorial identities. The Banker and the Merchant, just like their mirror-image the Commissar, detect in any historical rootedness, in any national or racial consciousness a major hindrance on the way to the glorious future under the banner of “free market, democracy and human rights”.

On the daily political front, however, or better yet within the historical context of the development of the Babel Inc., Bolton does not spare the names of organizations and individuals promoting the borderless and globalist Babel Inc. project; knowledge of these forces can help the uninitiated reader dispel the myth of a “freedom- loving West” and its main transmission belt the United States of America. In fact, as Werner Sombart, the German sociologist of the early 20th century noted, “Holy Economy” (“heilige Wirtschaftlichkeit”) is a far more powerful revolutionary process than any anarchistic get together or a communist rabble-rousing pamphlet.

The author starts with his home turf with an examination of the early Australian working class, which under the banner of the Labor Party, as early as the 19th century, was bit by bit defrauded by the bankers and speculators who were all too eager to open Australia to Asian migrants and thus drive down the wages of white local workers.  The loudest advocates, and later on the beneficiaries of the process of the so-called decolonisation in Asia and Africa, were not just Marxist professors in Western academe, or Soviet Cold War apparatchiks, but primarily international big businessmen, “as old empires had become too restive to capitalism.” The author well illustrates this point by looking at the tragic fate of South Africa and Rhodesia, once upon a time White-ruled countries which used to be the bread basket of Africa, only to turn into violence-torn African basket cases with no future in sight. The iconic figure of the ANC, the Black activist Nelson Mandela, still hailed by starry-eyed globalists as the canonized Black Saint, once upon a time was determined to kick capitalism out of South Africa, only to declare in 1996, that is to say, after South Africa had already turned into an ungovernable entity, that “privatisation is the fundamental policy of the African Nation Congress and will remain so.”

The American government, The Trilateral Commission, along with many self-proclaimed humanitarian NGOs, such as the famed George Soros’ Open Society Institute, behind their mask of lacrimal multiculturalism and behind their culinary diplomacy, have been the main motors in turning Asia and Africa into a giant pool of cheap labor and permanent political unrest. This is the true goal of Babel Incorporated.  Hence the first conclusion one can draw after completing reading the first half of the book, and just before one starts railing and ranting against colored immigrants flooding now Europe and the USA: Massive non-White immigration, and now its reverse side, i.e. the colonisation of Europe and the USA, is just a logical outcome of political designs framed long time ago by rootless plutocrats and their leftist acolytes.

Bolton does not forget to look at the importance of “culture wars” and notes how global plutocrats use those wars in an attempt to subvert recalcitrant governments all over the word. Contrary to false presumptions, still strongly held by many right-wing intellectuals, the “uncultured” USA plutocrats have been very slick in fostering the multicultural “American dream” by resorting beforehand to the creation of a myriad of “independent” cultural outlets and think tanks in the target countries. One could enumerate a dozen post-communist countries in Eastern Europe which, in the mid- 90’s and early 2000’s, were all subjected to the Babel Inc.-inspired “velvet” and “rainbow” revolutions, as well as the so- called “Arab spring revolutions.” In an attempt to destroy a sense of national and racial pride and in an effort to impose a hybrid mishmash of new consumer species — i.e., homo consumens — the Babel Inc. decision makers do not need to send F14s to the Serbian skies or over the Iraqi desert, but instead resort first to Hollywood imagery and hip-hop political acrobatics in order to enchant the youth of the target country. The costs are negligible; the benefits are great.

The author rightly sees that before Whites start bewailing the destructive consequences of forced multiculturalism and its inevitable corollary of non-White immigration flooding their countries, they must critically re-examine the now redundant notion of their own nation-state. It is fundamentally wrong to blame all our ills on the SPLC, or the ADL, or the LICRA, or the Trilateral Commission, or some real or hypothetical Jew, or some hostile, plutocratic, culture-destroying Babel Inc. elites only.  We White Europeans and Americans must accept our full share of the blame. We must first and foremost reject the religion of progress and its underlying principle of permanent economic growth, before considering setting up our own ethnic enclaves. Whether these ethnic enclaves are in the Northwest of the U.S., or in Orania in South Africa, or somewhere in Europe, they must keep capitalism on a short leash aimed at preserving the racial/ethnic integrity of these enclaves, as occurred under the White Australia policy and the 1924 immigration restriction law in the U.S. Given the still strong and age-old squabbles among and amidst European peoples, this nearly impossible task can only be bestowed upon dispassionate White individuals capable of transcending their own narrow tribal interests — and their own egos.

Dr. Tom Sunic (http://www.tomsunic.com) is a writer and a board member of the American Freedom Party.


15

Posted by jamesUK on Mon, 02 Mar 2015 04:54 | #

“The Great European Disaster Movie” Official Film TRAILER

http://youtu.be/9ZLHi0bRkeU

Now on BBC iPlayer


16

Posted by jamesUK on Wed, 04 Mar 2015 03:33 | #

BBC The Great European Disaster Movie, Newsnight Debate-HD

http://youtu.be/TyvIXPwg_LE


17

Posted by Russian opposition 5th column on Thu, 05 Mar 2015 10:51 | #

“Nearly all the leaders of the liberal opposition [in Russia] are either fully Jewish or have Jewish background” March 3, 2015 — Kevin MacDonald

It’s obvious that there is a strong Jewish influence in the West opposed to Russia, particularly noticeable among the Israel Lobby and the neocons — Victoria Nuland‘s family ties and her role in the Ukrainian revolution come to mind.

There are many reasons for this, certainly including Russia’s alliance with Iran and Syria at a time when Israel and the Israel Lobby are doing all they can to promote war with both. Quite simply, Jewish hostility stems from the fact that Russia under Vladimir Putin has proved to be far more nationalistic than is good for the Jews or for Israel.

An article in The Jerusalem Post, excerpted below, notes the very prominent role of Jews within Russia in opposing Putin — Putin refers to the opposition as a “fifth column” in Russia. But, in addition to foreign policy differences, there are also overtones of festering resentment about the role of Jewish oligarchs under Yeltsin in looting the country

Full article at TOO:

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2015/03/nearly-all-the-leaders-of-the-liberal-opposition-in-russia-are-either-fully-jewish-or-have-jewish-background/#more-26860


Some comment excerpts

Seraphim
March 3, 2015 - 5:52 pm | Permalink

The neocons are all descendants of Russian Jews (Trotskysts) disaffected by “Stalinism” which reduced the number of Jews in all echelons of power (Party, Army, Security, Economy, Culture) and replaced them with (incredibly!) with… Russians. In addition “Stalinism” refused to accede to their demands to create an Jewish Soviet Republic on the Black Sea coast from Bessarabia to Abkhaz with its capital in Odessa, or in Crimean and Azov region centered in Kerch. They were hoping that “the Jewish masses of all countries, in particular the United States would give substantial aid” to building up such a republic!


Ezra Pound’s Ghost
March 3, 2015 - 9:15 am | Permalink

Dr. MacDonald, if you still have them, go back and read the essays I had written in response to Pavlo Khomenko and submitted to you. Parts 3 and 5 cover this issue extensively vis-a-vis Ukraine. The anti-Russian elite in Ukraine is dominated by Jews (e.g., Serhiy Taruta, Victor Pinchuk, Dmytro Firtash, Vadim Rabinovich and Ihor Kolomoisky). I can understand, for a variety of reasons, why you chose not to proceed with the series, but there is some good info in those pieces and I think now that 9 months have gone by, the position propounded in those papers is largely vindicated. Has Pavlo Khonemko reach out at all since then? I would love to hear what he thinks about how the situation in Ukraine has unfolded and regret that he was unable to read an extensive rebuttal to his series.

 

 

 


18

Posted by Netanyahu barges in to lecture US Capitol on Thu, 05 Mar 2015 17:12 | #

Date: 03-04-15

Netanyahu, the leader of a country that has repeatedly attacked us, marched right into our Capitol uninvited by the government to lecture The US President and legislators on how they are not being diligent enough in serving the interests of Israel. He commented on how the apparent animosity between Netanyahu and Obama is not evidence that Obama is standing up to Jewish supremacist power, but rather that he is beholden to a faction of Jewish supremacists who feel that Netanyahu’s drive for war on Iran would actually not be “good for the Jews.”

 


19

Posted by jrackell on Fri, 06 Mar 2015 18:43 | #

O/T
I was wondering what the commentariat thought of this discussion of Salter’s EGI concept Brotherhood of warmblood.  Most of the analysis is in the comments, up to 208 now.  But a lot of them are detailed and theoretical.  I think the upshot is that there is no genetic predisposition that would cause us to favor our own ethny; there is no ethnic or group specific altruism.  This seems pretty convincing to me, but the counter argument is that the EGI concept is still valid as a measure of our relatedness and quantifies how much would be lost from outbreeding.

Is the EGI concept pointless if there does not exist a gene that encodes for altruism for the ingroup?


20

Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 08 Mar 2015 00:33 | #

John,

If you go back a few years to JR’s articles on beauty, you might recall that he quoted research showing that appreciation of facial beauty turns out to about recognising within-group averages for facial structure.  Ideally, we select at the median point for the ethny.  We do not naturally select for outliers.  It is absurd to construct arguments claiming that we do not place value on kind above that we place upon non-kind.  All human evolution operates on that basis, and were it not so, gene-maps would be flat and cluster-free and there would be no evolutionary process at all, actually.  All Salter has done is to render the reality of self-preference in mathematical terms and call it ethnic genetic interests.

In my experience, most of the people who argue against EGI do so because they are exogamists and, ultimately, their reproductive choices have hag-ridden their reason.  It is always worth attacking these people at the level of their motives.  They very quickly crack.


21

Posted by Vehicle on Mon, 16 Mar 2015 13:39 | #

Ides of March - Vehicle
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxJFjO4Skgo


22

Posted by Tom on Thu, 21 May 2015 21:16 | #

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2015/05/what-to-read-part-3-hero-and-heretic-vs-the-system-from-literature-to-politics/#more-27954

Tom Sunic

The article below is based on the speech given at the “London Forum,” London UK, May 16, 2015).

The nouns ‘hero’ and ‘heretic’ are used as frequent figures of speech in daily communication. Every day, almost every minute of our time, either consciously or subconsciously, we refer to the notion of hero and heretic, albeit by using often different words and expressions. The highly generic nouns ‘hero’ and ‘heretic’ lack a precise common denominator. What may be considered a heretical behavior today may be viewed as heroic behavior tomorrow. The meaning of the noun ‘hero’ is further complicated by its semantic shifts and its awkward equivalents in other languages and cultures. Thus the German word for hero is ‘Held’, although this word conveys a wider meaning in Germanic languages than the English word ‘hero’ or the French ‘héros’, deriving from the ancient Greek, and largely associated with political and military prowess only.

One must also refer to some well-known authors who dealt with the study of heros, such as Joseph Campbell and his book The Hero with a Thousand Faces, a book still serving as a primer in religious science courses at universities in the USA, but also a book which influenced many Hollywood moguls.  Although Campbell never addressed the notion of the hero from a racial perspective, the fact that he sat on the editorial board of the Mankind Quarterly and that he had once upon a distant time allegedly cracked a small joke in front of his colleagues about the Jews earned him the title of “anti-Semite,” , a label not usually associated with heroism.

The nouns ‘hero’ and ‘heretic’ are used as frequent figures of speech in daily communication. Every day, almost every minute of our time, either consciously or subconsciously, we refer to the notion of hero and heretic, albeit by using often different words and expressions. The highly generic nouns ‘hero’ and ‘heretic’ lack a precise common denominator. What may be considered a heretical behavior today may be viewed as heroic behavior tomorrow. The meaning of the noun ‘hero’ is further complicated by its semantic shifts and its awkward equivalents in other languages and cultures. Thus the German word for hero is ‘Held’, although this word conveys a wider meaning in Germanic languages than the English word ‘hero’ or the French ‘héros’, deriving from the ancient Greek, and largely associated with political and military prowess only.

One must also refer to some well-known authors who dealt with the study of heros, such as Joseph Campbell and his book The Hero with a Thousand Faces, a book still serving as a primer in religious science courses at universities in the USA, but also a book which influenced many Hollywood moguls.  Although Campbell never addressed the notion of the hero from a racial perspective, the fact that he sat on the editorial board of the Mankind Quarterly and that he had once upon a distant time allegedly cracked a small joke in front of his colleagues about the Jews earned him the title of “anti-Semite,” , a label not usually associated with heroism.



The same heroic and individualistic pattern of death-wish for the benefit of common good can be observed in Homer’s death challenger, the Greek hero Achilles who besieges the town of Troy and in the equally well death-driven hero Hector who defends his home town Troy.

    Hector:  “For me it would be a great deal better to meet Achilles man to man, kill him, and go home, or get killed before the city, dying in glory.” (Iliad, Book XXII, lines 108-110).

The future founder of Rome, Vergil’s mythical Aeneas during his interminable trials in the underworld, acted in a similar communal and death-braving fashion. So did his other mythical counterpart, the seafaring Homer’s Odysseus, always enwrapped in solitary musings, always having his life hovering on the brink of death.

  “His eyes were perpetually wet with tears now / His life draining away in homesickness.” (Odysseus, Book V, lines 156–158)

Thousands of similar heroic characters have become household names all over the West. Those mythical heroes stood as symbols for the survival of their tribal, racial or political community, yet strangely enough, all of them always attempted to stay above the fray, always shunning gregarious, communal and folkish behavior of their noisy kinsmen.

 


23

Posted by Tom on the desert gods on Sat, 23 May 2015 21:32 | #

Tom Sunic
May 23, 2015 - 12:13 pm | Permalink

To Mari. Thanks for the comments. Ancient mythical figures like Theseus, or Hercules who in a fit of madness killed his own children, or the womanizer and adulterous Agamemnon, or the naive patricidal Oedipus, or the Germanic fidelity- bound hero Hagen killing his brother in arms Siegfried from behind, are all puzzling figures in our heritage. They should induce us to more introspection, particularly when examining incessant infighting among Whites. Yet they seem to make more sense when studying evolutionary behavior than genocide driven self-chosenites and other Semitic heroes from Deuteronomy commanded by their vindictive god to perpetual vindictiveness against goyim- heretics. Those desert Levantine deities and secular modern offshoots (Marx, Friedman, Dershowitz, Spielberg, Sontag, et al.) were soon to become the new guiding “heroes” of the West.


24

Posted by Hero & Heretic in Western Literature on Wed, 27 May 2015 06:23 | #

Tom Sunic: Hero and Heretic in Western Literature:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQYT-R53RVo


25

Posted by RI adds Hitler's dingleberries to the muslix on Wed, 05 Aug 2015 09:46 | #

Veronica Clark adding Hitler’s dingleberries to the RI muslix.

But that’s standard operating procedure for a network that purports to be in neutral pursuit of “truth”, considering all angles (just so happens the angles they pursue are always biased and sometimes enormously so, on behalf of Nazi Germany) and takes the position that if people don’t agree with promoting distortions from that angle then they “must be afraid of truth.”

So, with that editorial policy, should it be surprising that they’ve brought the hack, Veronica Clark, on board to Red Ice?

She’s hawking her new book alleging that the Nazi false flag at Gleiwitz was a hoax. To begin, she..

“needs to set some background, on the strained history of relations between Poland and Germany….the Versailles Treaty, where Poland was handed parts of Germany for really no good reason at all by the Allied powers at that time ....and Germany just lost out, they were encircled and they had a lot of their territory and resources snagged from them and they felt affronted by it ...this was a deep wound in the German psyche and Poland just kind of flouted this.”

She is talking about a concession of 3 small cities which were “granted” to Poland for good reason and Danzig being made neutral (not Polish), also for good reason.

At the same time, she makes no mention of how huge that Germany was after the Versailles Treaty. It was vast and even included present day Wroclaw and Kaliningrad.

Again, there were three cities that Germany “lost” outright to Poland by the Versailles Treaty:

1. Poznan, which was Poland’s ancient capital, established by the Polane (after whom Poland was named) in the heart of their tribal area.

It had been stolen from Poland by Prussia in 1793,  retaken by Poland in the Greater Poland Uprising of 1918-1919, and affirmed (justifiably) as Polish territory by The Treaty of Versailles.

2. Bydgoszcz, a small city which began as a Slavic (a tribe to become known as Polish) settlement until it was taken by the Teutonic Knights in the 1300’s. It was soon thereafter retaken by the Polish and was not lost until the 1600’s when the Prussians took joint control of it with the Poles against the Swedes. Then, under (Hitler’s beloved) Friedrich The Great, it came more fully into Prussian hands until the Treaty of Versailles. 

It is a small city and its extrusion (along with Torun, which I will mention shortly) into Polish territory and sea access made it practical to give to Poland. It was correctly seen as a dangerous beachhead for potential fifth column activity against Polish nationalism.

Those were good reasons to give this small city to Poland.

Indeed, fifth column activity there combined with the Nazi attack just 2 days prior, combusting with nationalist passions and perhaps Jewish passions (more than a few there) to explode into violence against civilians - back and forth between Poles and Germans (the Nazis more than made up for incidents of exectution there of Germans treated as non-official combatants).

3. Regarding Torun, the only other city given to Poland by Versailles, the reasoning would be pretty much the same - only more-so, as it was even farther to the east and would make an even greater salient into reasonable Polish territory.

It was (still is) a small city having sentimental value in particular as the birthplace of Copernicus. While Copernicus was a German, he sided with Polish nationalism against the atrocities and aggrandizement of the Teutonic Knights.

While it was founded by Lusatians, who could be called “pre-Germanic”, to make a concession of this small city along with Bydgoszcz in order to avoid World War II would be beyond a doubt the reasonable option. But Hitler’s gigantic and hurt pride, his Friedrich the Great fetish, etc., illustrate exactly why he was not a great statesman - quite the opposite, and a world war ensued that killed over 50 million Europeans.

Of course there has been a dishonest pattern and pandering in WN which promotes the nonsense that Hitler had no responsibility for the war but was a man of peace, making reasonable offers to return German territory -

Hitler was making “polite, non-threatening little requests” to undo the results of World War I and the hard, but reasoned decisions of the victor’s committee.

...as if his ambitions stopped at a modest request to return lost German territory and did not obviously go beyond that.

4. The only other concession on the Polish border that Versailles required was that Danzig became neutral as opposed to fully German.

Again, it had been neutral at times in history, and being a city of international trade was well conceived as neutral. It’s population was not always German. It had also been Polish at times in history and was the source of bitter dispute with Germany (particularly after Polish inhabitants were slaughtered in the Teutonic Knight take-over). It’s being designated once again as neutral was a reasonable attempt at reconciliation. It also had the logisical aspect of extruding into Polish territory - thus, if it were exclusively German it would have been more than geo-politically precarious, especially with Hitler’s reasoning.

Notice again, no mention is made that Germany still had a huge country and all cities to the west - including Breslau, which had been Polish until the Polish population there was wiped-out by a Mongol invasion in the 1200’s, after which the Germans moved in.

 



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: Majority Radio: Dr Christian Lindtner speaks to DanielS and GW
Previous entry: Wonderwall

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

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)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 07:44. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 06:48. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Wed, 13 Mar 2024 06:02. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Tue, 12 Mar 2024 23:17. (View)

affection-tone