Once again I’m dismayed by the absence of second-tier heart to hit on re-read 🤦 The centuries-old entrenched paradigm virtually no one longer questions is one big heck of a boulder to shift! So very lucky your discovery of sleeper-function within Word fuelled the breakthrough to Michéan conceptual world. Doubly fascinating that still not directly, but rather through Benoist’s midwifery instead 😁🤸
That was an exceptionally insightful piece. Disentangling the lazy rhetoric of politics from the reality of historical experience is extraordinarily important. You provide your readership with clarity and accessible rigour...I cannot presently think of higher praise.
The games under way over the prospects of the right, and conservatism in particular, make work like your essential reading.
A good read, once again. I think I need to revisit every post here and make myself a few diagrams and flowcharts to help with my retention!
I cannot add much in the way of commentary on this instalment but I will provide an anecdote: a friend, retired professor of criminal psychology, recently emailed me that - although he is often mistaken as “left wing” - he has confirmed in his own mind that is is definitely “conservative”. How is he so sure? He found a Canadian group that advocates for population reduction that published an opinion piece on their website (which I don’t have handy, but I’ll post it when I get back to my computer) asserting that reducing global population is compatible with conservatism because by eliminating people the environment will be subsequently conserved. Is this opinion perhaps conflating conservatism (even as we inconsistently understand its meaning) with conservationism? Or is that too fine a distinction?
1/ the main idea of an initial difference between a 'socialism' valuing organic communities and a 'Progressive' left is sound
2/ acknowledging 1/ gets you very close to the third rail of contemporary culture - the NSDAP and the lying Jews who vilified and continue to vilify the German people and all European Christendom
3/ 'capitalism' is an ideology of conquest (power) and the worship of Mammon. Unregulated markets may be how it is sold to LOLbertarians, but capital-ism in practice is about government regulation of markets in order to ensure that international capital faces no real competition
4/ re use value v exchange value - the producer can only focus upon obsolescence instead of durability when external factors have already eliminated competition from the marketplace - for this, we must focus upon fractional-reserve banking, the limited liability corporation, and the ability of international capital to capture 'democratic' governments.
5/ again, we return to a necessary re-evalution of the Third Reich and its socialism in comparison to the rapacious technocratic societies of Anglo-America that set out to destroy it on behalf of international capital - it does us no good to continue to accept Jew lies about that era of European and World history because it is acceptance of those lies that has gotten us to the state of our disintegrating societies today.
Once again I’m dismayed by the absence of second-tier heart to hit on re-read 🤦 The centuries-old entrenched paradigm virtually no one longer questions is one big heck of a boulder to shift! So very lucky your discovery of sleeper-function within Word fuelled the breakthrough to Michéan conceptual world. Doubly fascinating that still not directly, but rather through Benoist’s midwifery instead 😁🤸
That was an exceptionally insightful piece. Disentangling the lazy rhetoric of politics from the reality of historical experience is extraordinarily important. You provide your readership with clarity and accessible rigour...I cannot presently think of higher praise.
The games under way over the prospects of the right, and conservatism in particular, make work like your essential reading.
A good read, once again. I think I need to revisit every post here and make myself a few diagrams and flowcharts to help with my retention!
I cannot add much in the way of commentary on this instalment but I will provide an anecdote: a friend, retired professor of criminal psychology, recently emailed me that - although he is often mistaken as “left wing” - he has confirmed in his own mind that is is definitely “conservative”. How is he so sure? He found a Canadian group that advocates for population reduction that published an opinion piece on their website (which I don’t have handy, but I’ll post it when I get back to my computer) asserting that reducing global population is compatible with conservatism because by eliminating people the environment will be subsequently conserved. Is this opinion perhaps conflating conservatism (even as we inconsistently understand its meaning) with conservationism? Or is that too fine a distinction?
A few thoughts:
1/ the main idea of an initial difference between a 'socialism' valuing organic communities and a 'Progressive' left is sound
2/ acknowledging 1/ gets you very close to the third rail of contemporary culture - the NSDAP and the lying Jews who vilified and continue to vilify the German people and all European Christendom
3/ 'capitalism' is an ideology of conquest (power) and the worship of Mammon. Unregulated markets may be how it is sold to LOLbertarians, but capital-ism in practice is about government regulation of markets in order to ensure that international capital faces no real competition
4/ re use value v exchange value - the producer can only focus upon obsolescence instead of durability when external factors have already eliminated competition from the marketplace - for this, we must focus upon fractional-reserve banking, the limited liability corporation, and the ability of international capital to capture 'democratic' governments.
5/ again, we return to a necessary re-evalution of the Third Reich and its socialism in comparison to the rapacious technocratic societies of Anglo-America that set out to destroy it on behalf of international capital - it does us no good to continue to accept Jew lies about that era of European and World history because it is acceptance of those lies that has gotten us to the state of our disintegrating societies today.
Thanks.
Thank you for this.
fyi, and w/ apologies for being pedantic, "lightning", not "lightening" for rods. Your work deserves no spelling errors.