Hermeneutics Circles Back to The Passions of Captain Chaos

Posted by DanielS on Wednesday, 20 May 2015 08:31.

“You fucked my brother? Yeah, I did and”... scene from Raging Bull:

I must say in defense of my father that he was never physically violent (aside from knocking-over the occasional sofa or hamster cage). But in display of rage, anger and hatred, Raging Bull was mellow by comparison, no comparison to my father, in fact.

This post may not ingratiate me any further with our Nordicist camp, but honest auto/biographical facts may help achieve a fuller picture of what we are up against and how we might cope. Although understanding can sometimes create more conflict than it alleviates, it is not necessarily the case that this will create conflict with the native national interests of northern, or any, European countries - and it may facilitate coordination of our interests.

Captain Chaos said: “Daniel, before you wedge your head any further up your own keister with all this talk of “hermeneutics” you should pay heed to this quote from the philosopher Hume”:

“Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them.”

Perhaps by “passion” CC was in fact suggesting something in line with what Ramzpaul was discussing with Stark - that “you should follow and work on what you feel most strongly about, even if you can only manage it as a hobby… that way, even if you don’t make much money at it, you will still be spending your life in a way that you find meaningful and enjoyable.” GW’s ontology project might be concerned to note that “passions” are speaking from our authentic nature and therefore provide an essential impetus in guiding an authentic narrative that mere rationalism cannot.

However, since CC posed empiricism in contrast to hermeneutics, I thought I’d draw upon an extreme example of “passion” to illustrate not only how passions might, but probably should, be ameliorated, crafted and channeled better with hermeneutics.

There is no reason why hermeneutics cannot take heed of the passions, if not follow them - if I were being cute, I’d say that following them would be another narrative (say, like the story of “raging bull”), with its own logic of meaning and action, but particularly as we are talking Hume, I’d tend to look at this as an observation to take under consideration at the empirical end, a part of the “circular” process of inquiry.

It’s good feedback though and that is why CC has been missed here.

He must be right that rationalism can be exaggerated. Even so, passions will be mitigated and subject to some rational consideration by socialization. If proposed as an alternative narrative by which to guide one’s life, the passions unbridled by the rational cultivation of hermeneutic process and its testing by social concerns would emerge quite speculative; life would be short and/or brutish.

Having been a very temperamental person (still am, some times), and not having had recourse to much rational discourse - being surrounded by people who gave free reign to their passions (temper) and wish to be expediently done with annoyances - I used to use my anger (which was intense, often a rage bigger than I was) as maps to show the way to social critique. It did seem to work to uncover some mysteries, but eventually it was used against me by those who know how to manipulate emotionalism - (as Truck Roy explains that sociopaths skillfully do; they are not moved by empathy with emotional appeals) - especially where I was not in Italy and sociopaths could stereotype me, “other” me and vilify me as a “crazy Italian.”

I figure that my father’s FANTASTIC displays of temper - histrionics of rage that honestly made “raging bull” seem fairly rational - were an evolutionary product of the small Italian village. It wasn’t so much a matter of serious competition, though frightening it was - it was more a matter of entertainment and display to break-up boredom and monotony of a small village. That was apparent in his displays of fantastic rage over quite trivial matters: whereas raging bull had a clear rationale of jealousy, my father’s rage over trivia bespoke histrionics of a vague power that was not welcoming any challenges or questions; the only semi-practical aspect of which was to enliven and dramatize matters otherwise unnoticed. Where it was confusing and disorienting, which it was quite, everyone around in the village would be kindred enough so that someone was likely to have affinity and empathy enough to help pick up the pieces of a shattered cortex.

The problem with this evolutionary strategy for me was that I was in America, not an Italian village. Therefore, there was not a community of kindred people around who could be bothered to talk; in fact the rule of individuality, particularly for males, would tend to look upon any such request to talk as manipulative or weakly borrowing against sovereign individuality; thus, you were likely to get a very angry rebuke rather than finding one who could understand and help pick up the pieces in an efficient way. Taking for granted the level of emotionality as the Italian village did may have served in a common population, as Christianity may have served there as well, but not in the antagonistic heterogeneity of The U.S.

“To be born is to be forced to choose to think” - Pascal

calabritto 1
My grandfather’s village, Calabritto - a Nordicist might see signs of gang collective in this, or even beginnings of eusociality; the more well-disposed might see optimal communitarianism; and the honest might experience a nightmarish gossip-mill.

Tags: Activism, Ethnicity and Ethnic Genetic Interests, Oh Tempora, Oh Mores, Popular Culture, Race realism

Comments:

Posted by Passions as guide to the authentic on Thu, 21 May 2015 06:03 | #

GW’s ontology project might be concerned to note that “passions” are speaking from our authentic nature and therefore provide an essential impetus in guiding an authentic narrative that mere rationalism cannot.

Posted by Dedmon's passion = 50 years on Thu, 21 May 2015 08:34 | #

Speaking of marshaling and controlling the passions being the better part of valor:

Dedmon, Rice and Butler

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/02/10/anderson-hate-crime-three-sentenced/23200357/

JACKSON, Miss.—James Craig Anderson’s partner, James Bradfield, said the couple’s young son sleeps in his bed now, because “he doesn’t want those people to get me.”

In the victim impact statement, Bradfield, who was too emotional to speak and had a prosecutor read his statement, told Deryl Paul Dedmon, John Aaron Rice, and Dylan Wade Butler that he hoped they never see the light of day again.

“There’s no room on earth for people like you,” he said.

The trio were sentenced to federal prison on Tuesday as a result of Anderson’s 2011 death, a hate crime in which he was beaten and run over by a truck because of the color of his skin.

The three pleaded guilty in March 2012 to one count of conspiracy and one count of committing a hate crime. U.S. District Judge Carlton Reeves sentenced Dedmon to 50 years and five years to be served concurrently; John Aaron Rice to 18 1/2 years and five years to be served concurrently; and Dylan Wade Butler to seven years and five years to be served concurrently. None of them are eligible for probation.

The judge said Dedmon’s federal sentence will run concurrent with his state sentence.

The three are part of a group of 10 young white people who have no all pleaded guilty to coming to Jackson, which they called “Jafrica,” to harass and assault African-Americans.
James Craig Anderson was the victim of a fatal hit

James Craig Anderson was the victim of a fatal hit and run on Sunday, June 26, 2011. (Photo: Anderson family)

Anderson’s sister, Barbara Anderson Young, gave an emotional statement in which she frequently looked straight at the defendants.

“Surely the violence you committed will fall upon your own head,” she said, adding that her brother “lives on in me, and in our family. He also lives in you, the last to see him alive on this earth.”

Butler wrote a letter to the family, part of which he read in court. He told the court about how he came from a mixed race family, with a black stepfather and stepsister and mixed cousins.

“I wish every day I could take everything back, not for me, but for the man who lost his life…” he said. “I never had a hatred for African Americans.”

Butler ended by saying that he took full responsibility for what he had done. His attorney Abby Brumley told the judge that in her time as an attorney, she’d never seen a defendant who so completely owned and so deeply regretted what he had done.

What a shame to waste a life to enact passion-filled rage upon one Negro.

This is war.

Control your passions, see the big picture and listen to TT

- stay out of the right!

Speaking of the stupid self righteousness of the Right, I once corrected Joe Adams of the now defunct “White Voice” to note that Elin Krantz was an innocent victim of a black American rapist-murderer.

Elin
That she was not the same one from the “mix-it-up” video:

mix-it-up video

Not Elin.

I suggested that he ought to apologize for this and redeem Elin’s name. Do you know that all he did was “take a high five”, from who, I do not know, but some right-wing idiot who encouraged Adams to “not apologize for anything on ‘The White Voice.”

He shouldn’t have apologized for saying this woman got what she deserved?

That’s Elin.

“Passions”, the Right and its flight from accountability make me sick to my stomach.

There she is being pursued off the bus by a perfect stranger, the Negro..

Posted by Black on Thu, 21 May 2015 20:14 | #

Black
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cs-XZ_dN4Hc

Posted by Captainchaos on Sat, 23 May 2015 08:17 | #

“passions” are speaking from our authentic nature and therefore provide an essential impetus in guiding an authentic narrative that mere rationalism cannot.

That’s the money shot right there. That’s what I was getting at. Otherwise we get the things that Bruce Charlton referred to as the products of “clever sillies.”

However imaginatively artful and passionately motivated, bullshit should be avoided, in that it is still bullshit.

Dedmon’s passion = 50 years

Sociopaths are the exception to the rule; they are around 1% of a given population if I am not mistaken. Any sound philosophy cannot use as its driving example that which is decidedly atypical.

Sociopathy most likely has a strong genetic underpinning and keeps cropping up unto the generations despite the harsh punishments the morally normal visit upon such afflicted individuals. (Said punishments could reasonably be expected to impinge on the reproductive fitness of sociopaths.) Therefore, we can safely conclude that sociopaths are, more or less, what I’ve heard called a “genetically stable polymorphism.”

Posted by anon on Sat, 23 May 2015 18:32 | #

He shouldn’t have apologized for saying this woman got what she deserved?

A lot of people who lurk around “official” WN are trolling for the other side - divide and rule etc.

Posted by definition of sociopathology on Sat, 23 May 2015 21:42 | #

Captain Chaos says:

“Sociopaths are the exception to the rule; they are around 1% of a given population if I am not mistaken. Any sound philosophy cannot use as its driving example that which is decidedly atypical.

Sociopathy most likely has a strong genetic underpinning and keeps cropping up unto the generations despite the harsh punishments the morally normal visit upon such afflicted individuals. (Said punishments could reasonably be expected to impinge on the reproductive fitness of sociopaths.) Therefore, we can safely conclude that sociopaths are, more or less, what I’ve heard called a “genetically stable polymorphism.”

It is more than valid to focus and analyze the most acute aspect of sociopathology as you do, but it isn’t really the “language game” that I have been playing.

I am calling “socio-pathology” that which begins to work against the sociology of our EGI - that is to say, where lack of empathy, dupe delight and sense of superiority begin to hurt the homeostasis and advance of our European group interests.

Sociopathology (for us) would thus be a definition relative to the group interests of Europeans and our subgroups.

Posted by talk about crypsis on Wed, 27 May 2015 11:37 | #

Talk about Jewish crypsis, I didn’t even suspect Vikki Lamotta of being Jewish

Vikki Lamotta was born Beverly Thailer to a Jewish family in The Bronx, N.Y. in 1930

Jake’s mother was Jewish too: “LaMotta was born to an Italian father and Jewish mother in the Bronx, New York City in 1921.”

MacDonald has discussed the particular intensity of Jewish communicative styles.

Posted by Mature women, puerile females &"marginals" on Wed, 27 May 2015 16:36 | #

Mature women, puerile females & “marginals”

The short piece by Greg Johnson below corresponds pretty well with part 2 of the gender thing that I will probably be putting up tomorrow: in which I will talk about the importance of distinguishing the boundaries of race as upheld by mature men and women socialized into the delimitations of their social classification as European peoples in relational to feedback with marginals and immature of that systemic classification, yet still within the class. As opposed to rupture of systemic maintenance by the pandered to puerile (females especially), who are central in the disordered and disordering situation at hand as they promote liberalism for those outside of the class and introduce them as phoney “marginals” i.e., non-Whites to be included in the White class as marginals according to Jewish academic twists, terms and pandering.

Forced to be Free: The Case for Paternalism

Full article at Counter-Currents
http://www.counter-currents.com/2015/05/forced-to-be-free/

..real paternalism has to be “for your own good,” i.e., in the actual interest of its object. People might claim to be abridging the liberty of others to help them, when in reality they are concerned to benefit only themselves. But that is fake rather than real paternalism. Real paternalism must be in the interest of its objects. Real paternalism is a kindness. Fake paternalism is merely a crime.

Second, there are true and false forms of freedom as well. Most people will agree that freedom is doing what you want to do. But what do we want to do? On this matter, I follow Plato and Aristotle, who argued that we all want basically one thing: the good life, happiness, self-actualization, or well-being (eudaimonia). That is the ultimate aim of every particular action. Every choice, whether we know it or not, is made in pursuit of the good life as we see it.

Thus if freedom is doing what we really want, and we all really want a good life, then living a good life is freedom. This implies that if we choose to do things that are not conducive to the good life, we are not acting freely, for doing things we don’t really want to do is unfreedom.

In other words, not every voluntary act is a free one. We are free when we pursue the good life (what we really want). We are unfree when we fail to pursue the good life (which we don’t really want to do).

There are two basic causes of unfreedom. First, there is ignorance of what is really conducive to happiness. We might think that smoking 20 cigarettes a day will make us happy, but it won’t. Second, there are occasions when we know perfectly well what will make us happy but we fail to do it because we are overcome by our emotions. We fear doing the right thing, or we find doing the wrong thing too pleasurable to resist.

We might choose to act out of ignorance or passion. We might even feel free when doing so. But if such actions are not conducive to the good life, they are not free, they are a form of bondage. Paternalism, therefore, can restore freedom by forcing us to stop throwing away our happiness out of ignorance or passion. Since freedom is doing what we really want, and we can be forced back onto that path, man can be forced to be free, as Jean-Jacques Rousseau put it so memorably.

This means that libertarianism, which claims that freedom is incompatible with paternalism, and that force is always the opposite of freedom, is simply wrong. If you really care about freedom, then the state should, in principle, have the power to paternalistically intervene when people are throwing away their freedom out of lack of knowledge or excess of feeling. One can debate the grounds and scope of such paternalistic interventions. But the principle is clear: paternalism is not an enemy of real freedom but one of its necessary guardians.

Posted by Carolina man, 21, comes unhinged, kills 9 blacks on Fri, 19 Jun 2015 14:09 | #

A South Carolina man, 21, comes unhinged, killes 9 blacks in a church:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/19/us/charleston-church-shooting.html?_r=0

Church Massacre Suspect Held as Charleston Grieves

Witnesses to the killings said the gunman asked for the pastor when he entered the church, and sat next to Mr. Pinckney during the Bible study.

They said that almost an hour after he arrived, the gunman suddenly stood and pulled a gun, and Ms. Washington’s cousin Tywanza Sanders, 26, known as the peacemaker of the family, tried to calmly talk the man out of violence.

“You don’t have to do this,” he told the gunman, Ms. Washington recounted.

The gunman replied, “Yes. You are raping our women and taking over the country.”

The gunman took aim at the oldest person present, Susie Jackson, 87, Mr. Sanders’s aunt, Ms. Washington said. Mr. Sanders told the man to point the gun at him instead, she said, but the man said, “It doesn’t matter. I’m going to shoot all of you.”

Mr. Sanders dived in front of his aunt and the first shot struck him, Ms. Washington said, and then the gunman began shooting others. She said Mr. Sanders’s mother, Felicia, and his niece, lay motionless on the floor, playing dead, and were not shot.

The gunman looked at one woman and told her “that she was going to live so that she can tell the story of what happened,” said City Councilman William Dudley Gregorie, a friend of the woman and a trustee of the church.

“She is still in shock, the carnage was just unbelievable is my understanding,” he said. “One of the younger kids in the church literally had to play dead, and it’s my understanding that my friend might have also laid down on top of him to protect him as well.”

The gunman left six women and three men dead or dying, including a library manager, a former county administrator, a speech therapist who also worked for the church, and two ministers.

Posted by life immitates story on Thu, 27 Apr 2017 09:16 | #

“If you put your hands in that plate one more time, I’m going to stab you with this knife.”

It is interesting to speculate that the emotiveness of the scene could have had an impact on Theresa Saldana’s stalker, who would eventually stab her with a knife, hideously, ten times.

Theresa Saldana

Theresa Saldana (August 20, 1954 – June 6, 2016) was an American actress and author. She is known for her role as Rachel Scali, the wife of Police Commissioner Tony Scali, in the 1990s television series The Commish, for which she received a Golden Globe nomination for Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role, in 1994. Major film roles include the part of ‘Lenore La Motta’, the wife of Joe Pesci’s character, in the 1980 feature film Raging Bull and Robert Zemeckis’s Beatlemania ensemble I Wanna Hold Your Hand. She was also known for raising public awareness of the crime of stalking, after surviving a murder attempt by an obsessed fan in 1982.

Early life

Saldana was born in Brooklyn, New York, and was adopted at five days old by Divina and Tony Saldana, a family of Puerto Rican and Italian-American heritage.[3][4]

Saldana took dance lessons as a child. After suffering a serious shoulder injury while part of a tumbling team, she enrolled in acting classes at age 12. After being spotted by a talent scout while performing in an Off Broadway musical called The New York City Street Show in 1977, she was cast in the 1978 film Nunzio.[5]

Stalking incident

On March 15, 1982, Saldana was the stalking victim of Arthur Richard Jackson, a 46-year-old drifter from Aberdeen. Jackson became attracted to Saldana after seeing her in the 1980 films Defiance and Raging Bull.[6][7] He obtained Saldana’s address by hiring a private investigator to obtain the unlisted phone number of Saldana’s mother. Jackson then called Saldana’s mother and posed as Martin Scorsese’s assistant, saying he needed Saldana’s residential address in order to contact her for replacing an actress in a film role in Europe.

Jackson approached Saldana in front of her West Hollywood residence in broad daylight and stabbed her in the torso 10 times with a 5½-inch (14 cm) knife, nearly killing her. His attack was so fierce that the blade bent. Although there were many nearby onlookers including children,[7] the attack was interrupted only when deliveryman Jeff Fenn intervened after hearing her cries, rushed from the second floor of an apartment building, and subdued Jackson. Saldana recovered after four hours of surgery and a four-month hospital stay at the Motion Picture Hospital. She relived the incident in the made-for-TV movie Victims for Victims: The Theresa Saldana Story and again in an episode of Hunter.

Jackson served almost 14 years in prison for the assault and making subsequent threats against Saldana and her rescuer while in prison. He was then extradited to the United Kingdom in 1996 to be tried for a 1966 robbery and murder. Jackson (who once saw himself as “the benevolent angel of death”) was found not guilty by diminished responsibility in 1997 and committed to a British psychiatric hospital, where he died of heart failure in 2004 at age 68.

Jackson’s method to find and approach Saldana inspired stalker Robert John Bardo to hire a private investigator to contact Rebecca Schaeffer, a young actress whom he subsequently murdered, also in West Hollywood, in 1989.

Victim advocacy

Following her long recovery, Saldana founded the Victims for Victims organization and participated in lobbying for the 1990 anti-stalking law and the 1994 Driver’s Privacy Protection Act, both of which came into being partly as a consequence of the attack. T

The experience also inspired Saldana to play herself in the television movie Victims for Victims: The Theresa Saldana Story, and she authored the book Beyond Survival, a memoir of her experiences after being attacked.

Performing arts advocacy

Saldana supported awareness for The Jazz Tap Ensemble, of which her daughter is a member. The group raises money for training gifted teenage dancers.[8][citation needed]

Death

Saldana died at age 61 on June 6, 2016, following her hospitalization for pneumonia[9] at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. Michael Chiklis, who played Saldana’s husband on The Commish, wrote that it was “painful to hear the news”.