Mythos and democracy - Part 3

Posted by Guest Blogger on Thursday, 30 January 2014 23:35.

by Neil Vodavzny

Democracy, as everyone knows, is a Greek invention. Nevertheless, their societies were just as much under the influence of the irrational as was medieval Europe. Signs and portents (check comic-book film 300), Delphic oracles, patron spirits and the gods themselves gazed with disdain on Man’s attempts to establish rational civilization. To counter the Apollonian light was Dionysian superstition and revelry. To the Greeks, pure order and rationality was not in the way of the divine muse. This also was the view of Christendom – until the Enlightenment. So, in fact, all societies bar our own recognize the irrational nature of being.

The more Talking Heads try to rationalise cyber-culture, the more irrational forces accumulate. Conversely, an irrational belief-system may create common-sense, simplified societies that may appear fairly rational (to an alien observer). See also this:

Si j’ai toujours raison
Tu sais j’ai pas toute ma raison.

Why is this? Partly because information is tending towards the same cyber-flows, whether it’s genetic, global-markets, social-nets, advertising – it’s all information. Reality in essence is antagonistic, so the way to construct a sensible order is to recognize it and make sense of it via poetry and myth (or religion, which is a similar thing).

For example, a story is told of “The naming of Athens”, favoured by the gods for its wisdom and spectacle. Poseidon and Athena were the principle rivals for the people’s affections. The former struck a rock with his trident, and there was a spring – seeing as he’s of the sea, the water was salty. Athena then planted an olive which quickly grew into a tree providing not only oil but wood for burning, beauty and shelter, so she obviously won out.

Now, Athens may have been democratic, but it was still a city-state under divine protection and providence. Democracy as an abstract concept is a bit like race as an abstract concept – all very hypothetical. Reality is a drama played-out between competing elements – hubris, nemesis.. – which have to be reconciled. The idea of Europe is there in Greek drama and tragedy. The Right’s notion of Europe should work towards that ideal, meaning a fragmentation of power, not a political solution per se.

I hate to say it, but Tim Stanley got one thing half right in his attack on Dark Enlightenment.

However, there is a distinctly unlibertarian note of crazy about the neo-reactionary interest in IQ. Aside from the bad science and the irony of being anti-statist yet sympathetic to the idea that you can measure intelligence and use it to justify social policy

If European identity is considered from the ontogeny of race, can it also be considered from state-imposition of race-related social rules? For sure no, since that is the way to fascistic eugenics. That in itself is anti-European from the point of view of fragmentation of power. Instead of ending up with European identity, you end up with clone-like imperial storm-troopers.

In that we’re seeing a burgeoning cyber (social) sphere, this is bound to impact on any future state politics, and there’s no reason to doubt the possibilities of a cyborg “race” composed of designer-DNA and cyber-implants, as one with the machine. Fantasy? Actually, there is a graphic novel on that type of theme. Grant Morrison, while writing X-Men, enthused on their “fascistic costumes” and that’s pretty accurate – quite Hugo Boss (see image). The X-Men are products of nature, though, that’s the difference. They’re their own “boss” – micro-fascism you might call it.

There is no safe, rational answer to the question of European identity. It has to respect ethnicity, but beyond that is best left in the lap of the gods – their quarrels are more entertaining and insightful.

The point of a mytho-culture – medieval Christendom can serve as an example of fragmented power with dynastic and ecclesiastical patronage – is there are racial differences, but mythical similarities which direct behaviour in appropriate ways more or less irrespective of race, because beliefs are so similar. In that way, the culture has an irrational stability.

There is no attempt to iron-out political differences or disputes, but they can be settled informally or by inter-marriage, or quaint rituals. Present day India may be the world’s biggest democracy, but it owes its stability to its peculiar and convoluted caste system. Castes are divided along various lines – professions, religions, ethnicity. The main result is it prevents a complete blurring of racial boundaries, with emphasis placed on lineage, inheritance, dynastic heritage. That is not so different to medieval Europe’s relatively immobile aristocracies, peasants and dynastic rulers. An irrational society will preserve its origins and legends, not through politics but through lineage.

Politically-speaking, compare modernday Chinese with the laisez-faire, joi-de-vivre racial admixtures of 19th century Western concessionary ports Shanghai and Hong Kong – see image (Terry & The Pirates), spot the racial stereotype! ChineseConfucionism has a similar belief in fragmentation of power, so in all these cases irrational belief-systems act as a type of glue irrespective of race, which can’t be viewed as a product of rational, state-instituted politics, which denies the spiritual or antagonistic origins of all peoples, and hence their mythic similarities.

The way of the warrior is another common theme across cultures. I read somewhere that ancient Greek statues may have been more true to their Hellenic forebears’ “cut” physique than is generally supposed – the image from Apocalypto of Mayan warriors may have something in common with ancient Greece. Here’s something on a dark, blue-eyed, 7000 year old European that muddies the waters a bit more.

Any serious appraisal of European identity that isn’t politically suspect is more of a mythical one, ie, a Grecian one. I might just mention here I was reading about Sarah Palin’s supposed avowal of Dominion Theology, or a Christianised state. That would seem to be politically suspect in terms of America’s founding principles. Instead of concerning ourselves with the state, we ought to be more concerned with the burgeoning cyber social-sphere that de-mythologizes all relationships (including racial) – half of all inter-personal relationships will be conducted online, so” they” say.

The Greek maxim was “Nothing to excess”, and yet this is the rationalizing of socially-cyborg civilization. If modern society is to become less rational, it has to become more active, if not as warriors, then as farmers, technicians, manufacturers. Technology at present is there to rationalize the efficiency of socially-cyborg lifestyles. As the graphic artist commissioned to paint murals at Facebook HQ, David Choe, said, it’s ridiculous and pointless .. at least it’s efficient at it.

I don’t like to tout Mel Gibson, God knows, but Mad Max (2 and Beyond Thunderdome) is a nice example of. a more mythical use for technology. In this case, the myth is the place, Thunderdome, the children, survival and the myth of Max. Survival of place, tradition and people is, after all, a fairly sensible thing to aim for, and it does have a legendary sound to it.

Technology could thereby be used to aid survival, meaning of people and place. Also, resources, and in the case of Mad Max, these are recycled from the leavings of civilization. There are new technologies which are appropriate to this type of use. 3D-printing can manufacture things onsite – to any design-blueprint, using available resources, usually plastic. One could envisage a farm where recycled resources could be fed into 3-D printers.

The point is, technology can be put to various uses, it depends on the mythos or lack of mythos of a civilization. If resources were allocated to farmers, an industry of 3-D printing might develop to technologize their lifestyles – who knows? China may send a Rabbit to the moon, but they do so with an old legend. If Europe is to have a mythos appropriate to Greek maxims of proportion and restraint, the technology has to be appropriate. It’s not even a case of political will, more of re-mythologizing culture.

Tags:

Comments:

Posted by DanielS on Fri, 31 Jan 2014 11:48 | #

.
If European identity is considered from the ontogeny of race, can it also be considered from state-imposition of race-related social rules? For sure no, since that is the way to fascistic eugenics. That in itself is anti-European from the point of view of fragmentation of power. Instead of ending up with European identity, you end up with clone-like imperial storm-troopers.

Is that a corollary or a non-sequiter?

I don’t dispute the utility of myth and intermarriage as ways of mediation, but to ask indigenous Europeans to apply no broad rigor to look after their genetic parameter is reckless.

There needs to be a little more rigor involved in protecting Europeans and their kinds.

But perhaps just a little: I believe Renner’s and Bowery’s call for the right to banish those who violate social consensus is well considered. Thoughtful Europeans should not have to pay for and suffer the consequences of self righteous racial experiments and predilections. What miscegenators are doing is a kind of pernicious eugenics as well.

How those violations are to be verified is a bit tricky and I think an interesting topic.
.

Posted by DanielS on Fri, 31 Jan 2014 12:00 | #

http://www.hyperaktiv.co.uk/recent-surge-in-hiv-rates-amongst-heterosexuals-in-the-uk-caused-by-female-sex-tourism-say-experts/

How to prevent, verify, account for and punish this sort of thing without going into some sort of Orwellian monitoring system…

Posted by neil vodavzny on Fri, 31 Jan 2014 16:36 | #

The cave-man from 7,000 years ago is not so different from the city-dwellers of today

This tagline to the link got a lot of comments. Whatever his racial origins might have been, his culture bore no relation to our urbanised one. People are goaded into what you might call an ideological trap by this type of journalese. Ancient people of whatever race have cultural/mythical similarities modern Man is lacking at present

Posted by DanielS on Fri, 31 Jan 2014 18:27 | #

.
You make some excellent points, Neil, and that the cultural/mythical unifying properties that all cultures have had except for the Enlightenment text is among them.

However, the ideological trap we are goaded into is not merely a habit form of journalese - it is an editorial decision imposed by Jewish/liberal editors to refer to us “the right” and maneuver us into Enlightenment text’s ramifications of fragmentation, blindness… perfidy…

...imperviousness..you name it, to apparently..

...keep us from organizing as a White Left, a union of our people which holds elites accountable and also normal folk accountable

.... and disallowing scabs (non-native-Whites).

Posted by neil vodavzny on January 31, 2014, 11:36 AM | #

The cave-man from 7,000 years ago is not so different from the city-dwellers of today

This tagline to the link got a lot of comments. Whatever his racial origins might have been, his culture bore no relation to our urbanised one. People are goaded into what you might call an ideological trap by this type of journalese. Ancient people of whatever race have cultural/mythical similarities modern Man is lacking at present

GW rendered a good criticism of Greg Johnson’s strict valuation of an ideal form of Euro man in a comment on his last post.

That is another place where the White Left assists the ontology project, it allows for a reading of Euroman and appreciating them as they are, as their nature is.

This thing about “the dark enlightenment” emerges as a way of co-opting and heading off the White Left’s potential awareness of organic unification.

Neil says

“I hate to say it, but Tim Stanley got one thing half right in his attack on Dark Enlightenment.

‘However, there is a distinctly unlibertarian note of crazy about the neo-reactionary interest in IQ. Aside from the bad science and the irony of being anti-statist yet sympathetic to the idea that you can measure intelligence and use it to justify social policy”

That statement of Stanley is confused, deliberately or accidentally, I don’t know which. I will get to my major points in a second after addressing a few matters of confusion.

1. libertarianism is connected with objectivism which I imagine, would not contradict a valuation (and over-valuation) of i.q. - i.e. not UNlibertarian.

2. bad science, maybe, irony of being anti statist…well, of course that depends upon the state.

Now then, here is an example I wanted to show, about how the idea of the White Left/White Class easily solves confusions like this as they crop-up…confusions which can in fact, be important:

You tell your daughter that I.Q. is so damn important and that is why Whites deserve their position and place…

Your daughter notes that Jews have high I.Q.s…. ok, so Whites deserve their place (screwed)..

Your daughter listens to Jazz musicians: Thelonius Monk, Oscar Peterson, John Coletrane, Lafayette Gilchrist, you name it…

Something isn’t right… she definitely hears a kind of intelligence here in these people, a kind of genius even that she might not even experience in Whites…a different kind of intelligence perhaps but you have been saying Whites are so much better because of I.Q.

Well, she is going to instinctively grasp that you are not being especially comprehensive and wholistic in your measurement model. She will not trust your argument and may well rebel against it.

Now the Jews have got you - White right winger - where they want you.

They want that paper thin lineality and unaccountable objectivity

They don’t want us organizing on a racial basis, as a full White Class, our whole class unifying people of high and basic abilities and fortune, as having qualitatively different but symbiotic qualities to bear. If we have people of great I.Q. and they can do special things, wonderful, we’ll even see to it that they have added reward. But we are not going to allow them to betray ordinary White people, nor are we going to allow ordinary White people to betray the union. Membership is not based on I.Q. let alone musical creativity, it is based on a protracted appreciation of our genetic people. All are accountable. That is the White Left.

That is effective, motivating organization and why the rogues on the White right and the Jews want us to cop as rightists.

Sure they’ll give Mathew Heinbach airtime…him and The Political Cesspool preaching Jesus Christ and all..

Father Frances will get on Rense Network’s Don Black show and tell you how blacks are really ok. Christoper Newsome and Channon Christian should have been more aware of the do’s and don’ts regarding blacks (just what they did wrong to deserve their fate, I don’t know). He actually said something to that effect.

Yes, blacks are all Garveyites, they want separatism and not the state welfare tit and the White woman’s tit. Amen to those that are Garveyites - take the good old oreo “brothers” too!

Yes, blacks are ok, (our senses are deluding us as to the marked patterns, we need to be up-in-our-heads like the right is….genuflecting to the nice, smart, talented exceptions as all-important) and now they’ve got additional guests on their radio show saying, of course, Hitler was the best, just totally misunderstood and misrepresented…that’s the right wing for you. “So many people are watching the History Channel, that just goes to show that they like Hitler.” ...I sometimes do (but not often… in fact, I am not “tired” of the holocaust because I don’t pay attention to MSM as a rule) watch MSM depictions of Hitler and WWII because I get sick of hearing what saints Hitler and the Nazis were

I’ve listened to Mein Kempf too (yawn), not because I admire the guy.

...and as if they were the only one’s willing to take on the international Jew.

...killing-off so many Europeans in order to kill Jewish violin players - as opposed to expelling them; and as opposed to holding virulent Jewish elite accountable rather than allowing them to escaped to the US or Russia - was a flawless plan. We can’t let a little thing objection to Hitler idolatry keep us from organizing under Hitler and Jesus.

That’s right, they want us to be right wingers… because they do not want to be accountable..

and the Jews want us to be right wingers (or to say the right/left distinction is phoney) for a reason: because they do not want us organizing socially and the White Left is the way to do it (and no, we are not against private property!).

Though I knew even at the time that occupy WallStreet was manipulated by Soros, as OW had its points besides, I thought it worth noting in a positive sense; I would mark that caveat a little more, but otherwise there is nothing yet about this essay that I have seen fit to change:

http://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/leftism_as_a_code_word_part_1_the_white_left
.................

Posted by Lurker on Sat, 01 Feb 2014 04:00 | #

I rarely use IQ in any of our arguments, sometimes it comes in handy though. Its more useful against the left since they don’t want to face its implications at all. Against the mainstream right, not so good, they love talking about stupid whites, clever chinese, clever jews etc. So against them I barely mention it.

Jews are often happy to trumpet their supposed IQ superiority but then its as much a trap for them as it can be for us. As one can show jews being statistically overrepresented in jobs, professions etc even when you control for IQ

Posted by DanielS on Sat, 01 Feb 2014 05:58 | #

Jews are over-represented yes, but still they would be somewhat over represented overall in higher I.Q. More, that pattern of over representation, those among it and their kinds of concerns would have greater impact which would be “justified” by their I.Q.

That their nepotism has them vastly over represented is a good and important argument, yes. But it does not dispose of the hazard of pinning inclusive merit on I.Q. (as opposed to something like qualitative patterns of group concern).

Posted by Lurker on Sat, 01 Feb 2014 07:00 | #

That their nepotism has them vastly over represented is a good and important argument, yes. But it does not dispose of the hazard of pinning inclusive merit on I.Q. (as opposed to something like qualitative patterns of group concern).

Quite agree. Its for occasional tactical use only. We shouldnt be building on it strategically.

Posted by Dude on Sat, 01 Feb 2014 13:07 | #

Encountered this man’s site the other day. Not so highbrow but we do need the degree of balance therein in our discussions, that stops us being IQ fetishists and instead, more ethnophiles. Ethnohiles who want to be inclined towards eugenic practice, yes.

Posted by Lurker on Sun, 02 Feb 2014 03:54 | #

Dude - thanks for that.

So thats where JWH is now!

I had better add that to the links.

Posted by neil vodavzny on Mon, 03 Feb 2014 11:18 | #

I posted the images above. What I like about the old idea of ethnicity is it’s ok to have racial stereotypes - makes life more interesting. I sent a reply to comments which should be up sometime. You’re not going to like it, to quote Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. My ideal cultures are stratified, with rulers and ruled, I tend to think it’s more interesting to have class and lineage - less deterministic. Also very tribal - we can’t deny our tribal ancestors. To be honest, I’d support a king Charles III Monarchy as opposed to Parliament - are Les Cavaliers ready?

Posted by neil vodavzy on Thu, 06 Feb 2014 15:12 | #

Here’s the piece, which carries-on the theme. As you’ll gather, I tend to think racial-orientation is a left/right ideological trap. Societies which have been known to work without damaging friction tend to be in tiers (not tears) - often these are fictionalised, so you can actually hear it happen. British listeneners to The Archers will be aware of the Pargiter/Grundy dynamic. This is how societies pragmatically function without outside interference.

There are also geographical considerations. “Foreigners” enter a country & develop emotional attachments - the Indus Valley Civilization of 5,000 years ago is mythically bound to Pakistan, even though they are later invaders (Moghul). I would point to immagration in Britain being a product of political interference. In terms of culture, Indians share a British heritage.

Even where there are legitimate grievances, such as the formulaic drek churned-out by Hollywood elite, applying racial connotations may not be useful, as the culture is liberal/sentimental/suburban. The Mad Max franchise makes a good contrast, but there are others, notably Carpenter. I’d go more retro-rightwing, non-racial, of which there’s a type of sub-culture prevalent.

http://www.accomics.com/category/shop-dvds/