|
|
|
The Importance of Tragedy By exPF Guessedworker asked what our answer is to the liberal concept of “happiness” which has been so vital to human life post-1787. The answer is: tragedy. Or, as Dostoevsky described it: “the spiritually regenerative power of suffering.” Nietzsche once commented that happiness and sadness are twin sisters, they either grow large together, or they grow small together. A life full of happiness has to be equally full of suffering; likewise, a life lacking in suffering has to be equally lacking in happiness. What this means concretely is that, in order to truly become anything, one needs to go through processes which consist largely of negative experiences. Suffering tends to push one further down the road towards becoming, towards change - simply because when we experience suffering that is serious or profound, we tend to alter our approaches and ourselves in response to these painful stimuli. Having changed, having become something new, we can reap the benefits of our new state of existence, and thus have a higher degree of pleasure than we previously knew. The lack of suffering, or pleasure, tends to facilitate continued being - i.e. people are lazy and will continue doing something as long as it continues to please them. Like electrons, humans tend to take the path of least resistance. A person who experiences only pleasure after pleasure, finds little reason to become anything. A great example of this, which most MR readers will be able to relate to, is the process of racial awakening. Typically, as Rusty Mason once commented here on MR re: awakening, it is a very difficult and psychologically traumatic process which causes some people to just “drop out”- rather than become WN’s, they apparently just become inwardly destroyed and withdraw from society generally. I have never observed this but it appears plausible. At any rate, we all know how traumatic the “awakening” can be. The realization that the world is a serious place, not a liberal fun-playground with plastic slides and a ball-pit. And the whole horror of having to undergo this process as a lone person, when society condemns you as a thought-criminal, etc. But following the schema established above, this tragedy is spiritually regenerative, and conducive to the process of becoming a more aware, more in-tune and spiritual human being. Svigor and Lurker brought attention to the fact that awakening racially has a deep spiritual element to it. Svigor said it completes a man, as if before that point, something had been missing. I can attest to the truth of that. Even beyond that, racialism simplifies what has become a deeply problematized area for most people: regulating their own behavioral protocols with regard to diversity. Does one act black around blacks? Does one befriend them? Take them as lovers? Does one accept new family members if they are wogs? The modern son of liberalism is on his own, as far as determining these matters - but we have a clear and definitive answer, which cannot waiver. This greatly simplifies life in a divided polity where opposing r and K moralities, reproductive strategies and genomes are in a perpetual clash. It is much easier being a racialist in some sense, than the position which liberalism demands whites in racially diverse districts take upon themselves. There is a caveat - that of course this method of thinking cannot be taken to extremes. There are some natural limits placed on humans which make certain kinds of suffering “unproductive” and indeed destructive. For example, molesting children does not give them spiritual strength. Being poisoned with heavy metals does not give one spiritual strength. In fact, there is only a certain “window” of suffering which is spiritually productive, most of it relating to the frustration of drives in attaining ends and offenses against overly delicate sensibilities, leading to the restructuring of one’s mental map and relation to self. What does the realization of this belief in tragedy look like? Well, what does it look like when a large group of people come to believe that suffering is necessary for life, rather than something to be avoided? Here’s how I imagine it: A nationalism that views tragedy as important would not make a priority of “fun” or happiness. Rather, it would view that as something that humans would always strive for anyway. In today’s world we have a wealth of public celebration - so many games, so much visible “fun” going on - and a wealth of private calamity: so much drug abuse, depression, so much invisible yet still present misery. Its likewise possible for the visible aspect of a society, the public aspect to be formal, rigorous and boring - placing social imperatives to tragedy such as the demanding of sacrifices in the name of higher goods, delayed gratification, the subordination to discipline, as foremost in the public pantheon - and allowing privately all the fun and games which we, as humans, do when we have met our other needs. At 5:22 in this video Jonathan Bowden discusses the statement of Heidegger as to why he joined the Nazi party:
If anyone has any thoughts about tragedy, its role in our philosophy and in politics I, for one, would be interested to read them in the comment thread. Comments:2
Posted by Svigor on Wed, 08 Apr 2009 02:37 | # I don’t know about its role in politics and our struggle, but I wholeheartedly agree that suffering makes us stronger. Suffering should be broadly interpreted, from “bad” experiences, to “effort.” Anyone know if painful experiences have been proved more memorable? They certainly have in my case. Makes biological sense - don’t touch the pan, junior. I’m reminded of the Crucifixion (which was cribbed from Dionysian cults, if I’m not mistaken? Some Greek cult popular at the time, in any case). And I was just about to post a mention of Blade Runner to GW in his Red Riding thread, too. 3
Posted by exPF on Wed, 08 Apr 2009 04:13 | # Further elaborating the vision of a society that accepts tragedy and cherishes it as part of the human experience: This would mean that we had a class of people whose first instinct was not to run from pain, but to understand that there are “oceans of pleasure which can only be reached after traversing tundras of pain” ( forgive me, I’m feeling literary, carb-loading for soccer games..) One could imagine the different responses to our economic crisis, or our immigration crisis, which might occur as a result of people believing in the need for tragedy: a bit of suffering can actually teach you more about life than one would otherwise learn, thus it can be a benefit! 4
Posted by Svigor on Wed, 08 Apr 2009 04:45 | # Suffering sounds like the thing to incorporate into rites of passage into manhood. 5
Posted by USA=Jewish Dominated Land of Misery and Greed on Wed, 08 Apr 2009 06:26 | # Five dead in Alabama murder-suicide: reports MIAMI (AFP) — A gunman shot dead his wife, daughter and two other people before killing himself, reports said Tuesday, the latest in a series of recent murder-suicides that have shocked America. ... The United States has been rocked by several fatal mass shootings in the past three weeks. Last weekend a man in Washington state shot dead his five children before killing himself after discovering his wife was leaving him. On Saturday three police officers were killed by a 23-year-old man at his home in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The attack came a day after a recently unemployed man stormed an immigrant services center where he had been learning English in Binghamton, New York and went on a murderous rampage, killing 13 people before taking his own life. On March 29, a heavily armed gunman shot dead eight people at a North Carolina nursing home, days after six people were killed in a murder-suicide in an upscale neighborhood in northern California’s Silicon Valley. And on March 10, an unemployed man killed his mother, grandmother and eight others on a vicious shooting rampage in Alabama. - http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iHZ31toPbXc7TAqh5Wd8KfPlK4EQ 7
Posted by Ernest Wesley on Wed, 08 Apr 2009 09:11 | # I like this post. It is important to our conception of the heroic. The hero not only undergoes suffering but the great hero undergoes suffering in part because he causes it. Kicking out non-indigenous peoples will never be airy fairy and cotton-wool pleasing while mutliculturalist platitudes always will; but it takes so much the greater man to do it. Doing what is right is easy when it is pleasant, but doing what is right is heroic when it is extremely painful. Deporting millions of people and ruining so many lives is this exactly - it is extremely traumatic. Yet undergoing trauma to redeem your people as an action appeals to all and undergoing the trauma of being deeply nasty is so much more profound than undergoing personal physical trauma like being nailed to the cross. Everyone understands this on some level. People simply have not thought it through. This leads some in the movement to try and make deportations and racism seem nice. They are not nice and have never been nice. Trying to make them seem nice makes one look evil. No wonder in the modern world racism and evil are almost synonyms. Racism and deportations are necessary for our survival and a path to a greater being. They cause the racist and deporter incredible emotional suffering, surely? The racist and deporter will not simply nail his body to the cross in the salvation of his people but his soul as well. For this reason he is a thousand times the greater man. 8
Posted by Unhinged and Crumbling Jewnited States on Wed, 08 Apr 2009 09:55 | # 4 shot, 1 dead at Korean retreat center in Calif. “TEMECULA, Calif. – A gunman opened fire at a remote Korean Christian retreat center Tuesday (April 8, 2009) night, leaving one person dead and at least three people injured, authorities said.” - http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090408/ap_on_re_us/retreat_shooting 9
Posted by the Narrator... on Wed, 08 Apr 2009 10:26 | # It’s an interesting thought exPF. Our society does indeed avoid tragedy or, better still, reality, as though suffering were a foe that could be kept perpetually at arms length, provided there were enough entertainment, drugs, government regulation and so on to hold the front lines. Maybe its the Fairy Tale syndrome. The notion of ‘Happily Ever After’. How many people today are on prescribed medications that take them out of reality and place them in a hazy stupor of “happiness”? All the feelings and thoughts that they attempt to suppress (depression, anger, rage, oppression, hopelessness, despair, doom etc…) are the very thoughts and feelings they should be having considering the current state of their world. I don’t know that suffering/tragedy makes us stronger. I think it reminds us of how precarious our existence is. It reveals to us our limitations and the fragility of all that we hold dear. And that feeling of exposure, of not being as invincible as we imagined we were, puts us on our guard and teaches us not to be careless in the upkeep of all in our charge…...be it everything from brushing our teeth to avoid cavity’s to keeping out invaders to protect our genes and avoid civilizational decay. It is only when we realize how susceptible we are to so many ailments and sicknesses that we work the hardest to stay healthy. ... 10
Posted by danielj on Wed, 08 Apr 2009 10:51 | #
The liberal concept of ‘happiness’ is tragedy. 12
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 08 Apr 2009 12:06 | # A very good essay: important topic, well put, and thought provoking. ExPF excels in putting into words things that are hard to put into words. On Ernest Wesley’s comment: the greater the difficulties of undoing race-replacement immigration, the greater the crime of those who’ve forced race-replacement immigration on us. They continue to force it, making it even worse and even harder to undo with every passing minute they impose it in full knowledge of our discontent which they suppress the way one clamps the lid down on a pressure cooker. It’s outrages like this which are so grave they cannot even be put into words which make men who finally have had enough wreak terrible vengeance once they’ve burst the chains and are looking to settle accounts. The culprits know this as well, they’re not fools, but they believe they’ll get race-replacement so completely done so quickly, there’ll be no chance of a remnant rising against them. You can see it in how they hurry with it constantly, how they will support ABOLUTELY NO DELAY IN THE TIMETABLE. We are talking about great crimes here, crimes that words almost cannot express. Should the punishments, once we’re in a position to mete them out, be ones that words cannot express? Though that would be soul-satisfying, no, they should be standard punishments all according to law and cool-headed reason. (But hey a man can dream can’t he?) 13
Posted by Ernest Wesley on Wed, 08 Apr 2009 15:21 | # For Fred Scrooby: We are completely at crossed wires here. I do not believe that meting out punishments that words can not express could ever be soul-satisfying. Indeed I do not believe it could be anything other than complete agony. Deportation is not such a punishment. It would break lives, and will never be pretty. Only a sadist could enjoy deporting millions. Indeed only a sadist could remain unpained by it. Sometimes people in this movement ignore this obvious fact and are quite unable to face up to it. Worse, they try to make it sound fun. In doing so they appear practically evil to those who see the pain and suffering such government actions would cause. Let us not ignore the downside, let us feel the pain which we must necessarily inflict, let us allow ourselves to suffer this realisation because greatness lies in saving our people and remaining human. On a side note: if anyone wonders why women do not flock to our movement then here you have part of your answer. Every woman can feel the turmoil our necessary policies would create, but when we can not recognise third world suffering we are dehumanized. Recognize the suffering; acknowledge the pain inflicting it would cause you; but be willing to undergo it in order to save our people. Vote White Nationalist despite the deportations not because of them. 14
Posted by Ernest Wesley on Wed, 08 Apr 2009 15:24 | # * Deportation is not even so bad a punishment although it would break lives, and could never be pretty. 15
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 08 Apr 2009 15:54 | # Ernest, I was not saying you “believed” this or that. I was using your comment as the point of departure for my own comment. In expressing my views I was not attributing them to anyone else. 16
Posted by Ernest Wesley on Wed, 08 Apr 2009 16:19 | # Excuse me then, I am all but new to talking like this; however I do not believe you can really mean what you write. Should the punishments, once we’re in a position to mete them out, be ones that words cannot express? Though that would be soul-satisfying, no, they should be standard punishments all according to law and cool-headed reason. Meting out horric punishment is not soul-satisfying. It is agony, however deserved. 17
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 08 Apr 2009 17:52 | # (Agony-aunt Ernest is attempting to “triangulate” against me now.) Don’t give me lessons in morality, Ernest. Give them to the race-replacers. 18
Posted by Ernest Wesley on Wed, 08 Apr 2009 18:35 | # When I inform girls I know of our current predicament they at least go away curious. No doubt when you say things like you do they think you are flippant at best or downright horrible. Killing people is not the perk of being a soldier and it certainly is not a perk of revolution. If you apply to the military and tell them in interview that you wish to join to kill people they will rightly tell you to get lost and most women are rather more bloody-shy than military HR and revolution is rather less accepted. By making such comments you appear twisted, dehumnize yourself and so are easily demonized. I assumed you were merely flippant (I still assume) and so I was not giving you a morality lesson only some presentational advice. 19
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 08 Apr 2009 22:10 | # When I need your advice, Ernest, I’ll be sure to ask for it. In the meantime, don’t bore the readership to death. 20
Posted by Ernest Wesley on Thu, 09 Apr 2009 11:27 | # Forget big conspiracies, long historical explanations and inter-dimensional reptiles. If anyone wants to know why an American White Nationalist movement can not get off the ground look at Fred Scrooby. Loving to cause others immense pain is not attractive, calling someone boring for realising this, well, is revolting. Sadistic and adolescently ignorant is how most people characterize this movement, and no wonder… 21
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 09 Apr 2009 13:34 | # I thought people had to be in the three digits to log on here (three to the left of the decimal point). How did Ernest get in here??? Ernest I’m sure there’s a site where feebleminds and assholes discuss these things. Please go there. 22
Posted by Ernest Wesley on Thu, 09 Apr 2009 17:12 | # Supporters of WN want to evangelize and to improve the evangelized. My advice turned constructive criticismaims at the latter. Fred Scrooby aims at the opposite. 23
Posted by Red Mercury on Thu, 09 Apr 2009 20:26 | # Americans are weirdly allergic to the tragic. Americans are like children who live according to a fairy tale; they are generally unable seriously to acknowledge the dark(er) side of life. When they do, they safely cordon it off in art. They just can not accept it as a normal part of living. The reason a WN movement has not surfaced in the US is because most Whites simply do not recognise tragedy. Suffering is what happens to starving kids in Africa or tsunami victims in Asia. They do not realise what is happening on a larger scale at home. They do not know what is at stake. For them, the paradigm has not yet shifted. They are living in the past. Or in a fantasy world. Speaking for myself, Fred Scrooby has played an immense role in my racial thinking, from the first time I encountered his comments several years ago at Auster’s site. In the meantime I have become more radical, if that is the right term, in my thinking and the actions that I advocate, most of which would rightly horrify weak-stomached individuals such as our Ernest. That’s fine. I guess I won’t be receiving any invitations to your next cocktail party. Meting out horrific punishment to our enemies would not only be hugely soul-satisfying, but would also be completely just, for me at least. If you can’t stand the sight of blood, Ernest, then this fight is not for you. Step aside and allow me and others like me to mete out the punishment. Allow us to express our righteous anger and opposition towards those who are genociding us. 24
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 09 Apr 2009 23:41 | # Remember a place called France? Picture in your mind your image of what it looks like. Now have a look at what the Jews have done to it: see if you still recognize it from this video, a video which must be to the Jews’ liking since they’re the ones who shout loudest for these kinds of people to come pouring in as immigrants. (Have the Jews done this single-handedly? No but no group ever does anything single-handedly: there are always alliances. Have the Jews been the main force pushing this demographic transformation and preventing any remedying of it, and are they still the main force doing those things? Yes.) http://www.fdesouche.com/articles/33981 In the video a pair of Arabs operate in tandem to pick a young French bus rider’s pocket, and when he realizes his pocket has just been picked and tries to retrieve his belongings from the thief he’s savagely beaten and stomped by the Arabs on the bus, four against one. France didn’t use to be like this. Europe didn’t. I know first-hand: I lived there. It’s mainly the Jews who’ve brought these incompatible people to the country once identifiable as France (alas, no longer) and mainly they, the Jews, who organize extremely aggressively to keep any political movement from succeeding in getting these incompatible peoples sent back where they came from. The Jews insist on ramming these people who don’t belong in France or any white country down French throats. Why? Maybe Ilana Mercer has an answer? In reply to Ilana Mercer’s recent appeal for “paleocons” to join in support of Israel, I offer LICRA, Julien Dray, “Jack” Lang, the ACLU, the ADL, the AJC, the $PLC, the CJC, Ted Cantle, Progress by Pesach, the Paris “banlieus,” and the above video as examples of the ways in which Jewry “supports” Euro societies and countries and I ask her, should we model our support for Israel after the kind of “support” we, the Euro countries and societies of the world, have learned to expect from Jewry? Just wondering, Ilana …………. 25
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 09 Apr 2009 23:55 | # Here’s Julien Dray, by the way: http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/m_le_pen_has_a_new_spokesperson/#c66613 And here’s Progress by Pesach: http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/progress_by_pesach/ And here’s … well, I could go on but I trust few here will need help locating references which richly illustrate the ways in which Euro societies are “supported” by such examples of Jewry as the AJC, the ADL, the ACLU, the $PLC, and so on, ad infinitum … Is that the way in which Ilana Mercer wishes Euros to “support” Israel, the same way Jewry “supports” Euro societies and nations? If so, I think that can be arranged …. 26
Posted by Captainchaos on Fri, 10 Apr 2009 00:21 | # Fred: “...I ask her [Ilana Mercer], should we model our support for Israel after the kind of “support” we, the Euro countries and societies of the world, have learned to expect from Jewry?” The Jews can stick their “Sampson Option” where the sun don’t shine. Not only should support for Israel be withheld on the part of Whites so long as Jews threaten our existence, but, if pushed, the existence of Israel should be held hostage until all Jews submit to expulsion from White lands. If the White race is to burn, then so should Israel. These filthy parasites are trying exterminate us, I wonder if they are willing to pay the price to go the distance. 27
Posted by danielj on Fri, 10 Apr 2009 01:02 | # The Jews can stick their “Sampson Option” where the sun don’t shine. Not only should support for Israel be withheld on the part of Whites so long as Jews threaten our existence, but, if pushed, the existence of Israel should be held hostage until all Jews submit to expulsion from White lands. Definitely. The worst they can do is destroy a few Arabs and disrupt the oil supply temporarily. 29
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 10 Apr 2009 14:10 | #
Euro support for Israel should be made strictly conditional on Diaspora Judeosphere agreement not to contest race-replacement-reversal. Where the U.S. is concerned: in return for support for Israel Judah should be required to agree to 1) restoration of the 1924 immigration law and 2) the humane undoing, as far as is possible, of adverse demography brought about by the 1965 Jewish law. The writers of the 1924 law used the U.S.‘s demography of the year 1895 as their standard of ethnoracial proportions to be maintained for this country. That standard of the year 1895 should be recussitated. 30
Posted by gorboduc on Fri, 10 Apr 2009 19:13 | # I don’t think anyone from the WN side is actually impeding the elbows of Scrooby and Mercury. They can surely wriggle out of Ernest’s apron-strings and start cracking skulls and drinking blood. So, when’s it all going to kick off? After church, perhaps. Today is Good Friday, so I’ll be buying quite a few papers on Easter Sunday. I hope the pictures are all in colour so we can REALLy relish the sanguinary nature of the events. Come to think of it, Sunday would be a better day for the New Crusade (I hope you two won’t be like the Moslems in objecting to that word.) So back to the newsagents on Wednesday, perhaps? Is there a plan of action, or will inspiration and a bit of improvisation be sufficient, or will it end up like a high-school shooting? ... tut, tactless of me. Scrooby had better carry out a bit of cleansing on this site, just to show us he can, before he steps out into the real world. However, I like his notion of Jews “supporting” a European state. Some French guy (who?) said “Bankers support the State as the rope supports the hanged man”. For “bankers”, substitute “Jews”. 31
Posted by Wandrin on Fri, 10 Apr 2009 19:58 | #
I’ve come round to that way of thinking. Privately I see Israel as a pretty good example of a nationalist state but I see no advantage in showing any public support stronger than neutrality. Parasite jews in the west, no matter how pro-Israel they are, are never going to support homogenous White nations. No matter what they say the most they’ll accept is to restrict muslim immigration only and then replace it with non-white immigrants from elsewhere. In fact they’d use the exclusion of muslim immigrants as a reason to import more non-white immigrants as proof the policy wasn’t racist. The only thing I am still unsure of is whether to join in attacks on Israel or just stay out of it. The leftist and muslim attacks on Israel inevitably spill out into more general anti-jewish sentiment and I think that anti-jewish sentiment will eventually help to crack the media matrix that is so important in keeping our people asleep. On the other hand attacks on Israel often end up as attacks on ethno-nationalism itself and also on the hard-headed Israeli attitude to national security, both of which I want Britain to copy. On balance I’m sticking to silent neutrality whenever it comes up but I’m tempted sometimes to join in the attacks just to feed the anti-jewish trend which I think will help White ethno-nationalism in the future. 32
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 10 Apr 2009 20:32 | #
Good idea: let’s cleanse you, Monitor. You’re the equivalent of a cancerous tumor. Drop off, please, or drop dead, one or the other. Take your brand of stinking genocidal “Christianity”-filth with you. It’s not wanted by the self-respecting, those able to look at themselves in the mirror every morning. 33
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 10 Apr 2009 20:37 | #
Very well said. 34
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 10 Apr 2009 20:47 | # The position outlined there by Wandrin is also that of the goy neocons such as Paul Belien and most who blog at Belien’s site: for them it must be perfectly OK to race-replace the entire populations of all European nations with Sub-Saharan African Christians, because they’ve never breathed a word explicitly stating it wouldn’t be perfectly OK. FJ has come closest to saying it wouldn’t, followed by Takuan in second place (although Takuan has back-tracked on that a lot, since his first appearance there), and after those two, no one. Not a soul. 35
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 10 Apr 2009 20:49 | # Tiberge over there is a near-complete waste of electrons. 36
Posted by Svigor on Fri, 10 Apr 2009 22:28 | #
Euro ethnic nationalism is a vector. When you start out you’re still able to think wholly as a lemming, so you try hard to bridge the gap. I was the same way, a few years back. Now I’m so far past that I can’t relate to the lemmings as well as I used to. They’re crazy people to me now. My kin, but crazy. 37
Posted by gorboduc on Fri, 10 Apr 2009 22:59 | # Scrooby! Sir! I have not yet finished casting my pearls… 38
Posted by Captainchaos on Fri, 10 Apr 2009 23:08 | # Gorboduc might find this Gaurdian article on the “Samson Option” interesting reading: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/sep/21/israelandthepalestinians.bookextracts Excerpt: Iran can never be threatened in its very existence. Israel can. Indeed, such a threat could even grow out of the current intifada. That, at least, is the pessimistic opinion of Martin van Creveld, professor of military history at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. ‘If it went on much longer,’ he said, ‘the Israeli government [would] lose control of the people. In campaigns like this, the anti-terror forces lose, because they don’t win, and the rebels win by not losing. I regard a total Israeli defeat as unavoidable. That will mean the collapse of the Israeli state and society. We’ll destroy ourselves.’ In this situation, he went on, more and more Israelis were coming to regard the ‘transfer’ of the Palestinians as the only salvation; resort to it was growing ‘more probable’ with each passing day. Sharon ‘wants to escalate the conflict and knows that nothing else will succeed’. But would the world permit such ethnic cleansing? ‘That depends on who does it and how quickly it happens. We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force. Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: “Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.” I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.’ 39
Posted by exPF on Fri, 10 Apr 2009 23:35 | #
Gorboduc, do you have a mode outside that of “garbled hissy-fit”? Or do you only do that one style of discourse? BTW, your hissy-fit is quite reminiscent of a late Edwardian, scared of the barbarity of the Hun: “Ooh, a silly and provocative quote, attributed to no one in particular! It may become a pillar of my argument!” Much like that other mental dwarf, [insert name of famous scientist here who I don’t agree with], your fabled insanity will make a mockery of this entire website - everything I say is GARBLED because I suffer from a severe mental fog… GARBLE GARBLE!! My arguments break down in delivery and filled with ; inexplainable. gaps some sentences I cant be bothered to fin Oh you WNs, dreaming of slaughter - when will you begin with it? [chuckle chuckle] I’m superior because here in my suburban lair, with a six month emergency supply of cookies, I’m isolated both from wogs and angry whites - so I can sneer at you, Christianity, the race lives on AS Christians, don’t be monstrous, your hatred of wogs uncouth, damnit everything I say is garbled. Can’t seem to separate my thoughts and and and form cohesive sentences. *guaahh….[chortling, gurgling noises]* I’m gonna read a newspaper and walk out disgusted from this blog. Fred Skrewdriver-by, does this website belong to you. If so I shant, I shant, I shant taunt yall with my garbles, look at how enraged my normal-person sensibility is, oh you barbarians, my IQ is 168 - thanks for slapping my bottom, I’m like a naughty Catholic schoolgirl - I just want to be put in my place by the boisterous lads at this website. Do as you will, stern devotees of Thor, for as barbarous as you are, I have nothing better to do than hang out here and flirt with you, you brutish nasties. So rough yet so masculine, I can never say it but I’m secretly in love with you and in my dreams I’m ravished by MR’s commentariat. [end gorboduc parody] 40
Posted by gorboduc on Fri, 10 Apr 2009 23:41 | # Guardian. That was quick. Jewish Nazi-Hunter “Where did you get all these ideas from, Hitler?” A.H “From your people, the Jews!” Think about it. Couldn’t make anything of the Tragedy stuff, myself. What “Tragedy”? Sacred goat-skin, Sophocles, Seneca, mediaeval Falle of Prynces stuff, Shakespeare, “Life is a comedy to those that think, a tragedy to those that feel”, Little Dorrit? Unamuno, whatever? On recommending Hardy to readers, I generally find myself saying “Read him for the colourful, if slightly condescending, portraits of Wessex rustics, and the marvellous landscapes, but if you look at the tragic plots with their preposterous machineries of misunderstanding and the associated pessimistic philosophy, you’ll be tempted to laugh.” 41
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 10 Apr 2009 23:47 | # The tragic, for me, comes to us out of our distant ancestors having to fight Nature for every inch of existence in the European EEA. There was survival and there was loss ... tragedy. But this was not a static condition, for European Man adapted high intelligence and thence his Nature-mastering technologies for pushing tragedy away. To be European is to push tragedy away. We make a mistake in comparing ourselves to the “spiritual demeanour” of peoples who have not the intelligence to accomplish this feat. This pushing away of the tragic explains the ease with which, today, we accomodate modernity’s gift of happiness. Is it possible for us to choose a little tragedy instead of wall-to-wall happiness, to liven the old spirit up a bit? No, we don’t want to lose our loved ones. We don’t want to go to war for the sake of “spirituality”. We don’t want tragedy in any shape or form, in fact. We might miss the adrenalin rush a little, and partake through Jewish film entertainment. But that’s as far as we want to go, I think. So ... we have to do what we must relying solely on our qualities today, as we are, and without some Nazi-esque tragedy-niteriding process. Are we capable of it? I think I’ve mentioned here before that in the run-up to the Falkland landings there was a lot of talk - mostly among people of my generation who had never fought - about how the youth born in the early sixties were not like their forebears who suffered in the trenches of northern France and at Gallipoli, or, like my own father, in a wrecked bomber over the Reich in ‘44, or on Gloucester Hill in Korea and deep in the Malayan jungle. The boys who went down to the South Atlantic, who included a good friend of mine, proved the doubters utterly, completely wrong. They were magnificent. From that day forth I have seen no reason not to have faith in ourselves. That doesn’t mean it won’t be one hell of a job to motivate the couch potatoes, of course. But watch the BNP vote over the next couple of years before you come to any conclusions about that. 42
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 11 Apr 2009 00:04 | # Perhaps I should qualify that statement a little, insomuch as there is Nature’s happiness and there is the happiness of the politically liberated. I mean men and women who are free to lead small, unfruitful lives, couples who are free to divorce. Women who are free never to marry at all, free from childbirth to have careers and material things ... homosexuals who are free to cottage, get married, adopt. As this happiness was brought into being politically, it can be taken out again politically. Then people should be left to find their own meanings to their lives, albeit within a formative ideational milieu that is sympathetic to our European nature and our genetic interests - should it prove possible to construct such a thing. 43
Posted by gorboduc on Sat, 11 Apr 2009 01:09 | # You mean Sparta, I suppose 44
Posted by exPF on Sat, 11 Apr 2009 03:26 | # GW, My view of tragedy isn’t that we need to impose it on people through making them wage wars or “why are you torturing us?” “to make you spiritually stronger!” ....one could make lots of jokes on that basis. I see tragedy as pre-dating politics in the sense that it is something extremely personal and idiosyncratic. And far from being something that one creates through political action, I see it as being something But I falter again here on the inability to articulate exactly what I mean. I feel that a politics which acknowledged life’s tragic elements would make far less promises, but that also fails to articulate what I wanted to say.. 45
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 11 Apr 2009 09:55 | # PF, Perhaps, the sense in which “happiness” short-changes us is in its ubiquity. It is cheap, like anything in over-supply. Remember, it replaced salvation as the common man’s consolation for his life of struggle and loss. This is what I originally meant when I raised the issue on that other thread. Wall-to-wall happiness flattens life, and takes meaning and value away. In theory Homo sapiens needs the contrast of high and low points to find the worth in things - look at all those accounts of how happy people were in the last war. But we have coccooned ourselves in cotton wool. For example, Man the hunter has become Homo economicus. He hunts for sport. There is no necessity in it or in anything else, except that he attends his place of work and goes home again afterwards to consume some more. Life is safe. It may be sweet. But for many of us it is not fulfilling. And yet we cannot select tragedy. We are, in any case, European, and we’re meant to devise ways out of danger and loss. I think the most we can aim to do is to provide for more human values in the zeitgeist than consumerism allows. But it would doubtless take another essay and a long and thoughtful thread to explore that one. 46
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 17 Dec 2013 07:55 | # I view a tragic view of life as important because it underscores the idea that there is a social and individual order which is both real and ideal. Therefore, given the criteria, the set-back may not appear quite so necessary to accept, nor the individual or society’s “fault” that destruction (tragedy) has befallen them, but rather an injustice to rectify - an ennobling and motivating notion is tragedy, wherein the noble and good are not always subject to their just deserts but may in fact, undergo what can be called the injustice of tragedy. Post a comment:
Next entry: Warren: The Coming Collapse of the Middle Class
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement 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 MR Central & News— CENTRAL— An Ancient Race In The Myths Of Time by James Bowery on Wednesday, 21 August 2024 15:26. (View) Slaying The Dragon by James Bowery on Monday, 05 August 2024 15:32. (View) The legacy of Southport by Guessedworker on Friday, 02 August 2024 07:34. (View) Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) — NEWS — Farage only goes down on one knee. by Guessedworker on Saturday, 29 June 2024 06:55. (View) |
Posted by skeptical on Wed, 08 Apr 2009 00:14 | #
exPF,
Interesting thoughts. Certainly, today’s liberaldom does it all can to ignore the tragedy of human existence. I suppose one can’t exactly appreciate such things while striving on behalf of idealistic nonsense.
Let me recall, for the moment, the words of Lennon. Yes, John Lennon:
Honestly, what can possibly be more characteristic of today’s liberalism than this?
It is worth noting that Lennon and his ilk couldn’t let their dreams be limited by an appreciation of human tragedy. In their view, the human existence didn’t have to be a tragic affair, fraught with peril. No, we could make heaven on Earth, all we needed was love. It is this dream that still captivates our race, even if it requires our very lives.