Really profound talk. I especially liked the imagery where you were talking about the Civic Religion squirming away from the knife of vivisection, dissection.
Top notch analysis my friend. I'm really enjoying this series and even for those very well versed in these subjects you are providing some new insights. On a complete side note after listening the first time I had a fucking crazy dream where I was summoning and battling demons that went lucid and holy fuck this content must have influenced those events. R E S P E C T
"At some point, you rack up enough mutations and speciation occurs. It is telling that classical liberals and boomer communists, the kind who think all this race and gender stuff distracts people from focusing on class consciousness, they all recognize the woke as something apart from themselves.
Though it’s probably more the case that they are refusing to recognize their own children, refusing to recognize to accept responsibility for the whirlwind they are reaping."
Personally, I just call them all collectively, "Leftish". I just couldn't find a word for what they saw as differences between themselves (and qualities of the other they didn't want to be pinned with and evade), and the commonalities they shared in terms of habits, values, and general interests. So I settled on that.
"There is no stable equilibrium between the belief that all men are created equal and the inherent and ineradicable inequality of the real world. Any attempt to institute partial equality is unstable, and wants to collapse into total equality."
Now what's the evidence or argument? Something like an inductive historical slippery slope? You start with X (St Paul's equality in Christ, the French Revolution's egalité, the inalienable 1st generation human rights, or whatever), and little by little you end up in woke hell? Just my guess. This trope that certain Christian or apparently common sense ideas are Trojan horses (memes slowly but inescapably mutating according to some subliminal logic of development of degen doctrine), is quite common among the prople of alt right, dissident right, Neo-Reaction (NRx), and so called frog Twitter.
It seems to me like you are conflating egalitarianism/equality vs. hierarchy with excellence and beauty vs. ugliness.
It's true that an extreme of equality is a Procrustrean bed that will kill all that is greater than the lowest common denominator, but where competition and relative excellence is worshipped, one has a perverse incentive to destroy the others rather than create. You can be the smartest guy in the room by upping your intelligence OR by busting heads until brain damage.
In short, the question of balance between these two are clearly very skewed in modern society. But they are but means for objective beauty and excellence, which can be lost if hierarchy is itself made an end.
Really profound talk. I especially liked the imagery where you were talking about the Civic Religion squirming away from the knife of vivisection, dissection.
Top notch analysis my friend. I'm really enjoying this series and even for those very well versed in these subjects you are providing some new insights. On a complete side note after listening the first time I had a fucking crazy dream where I was summoning and battling demons that went lucid and holy fuck this content must have influenced those events. R E S P E C T
Do you believe material wealth flows from spiritual wealth? I suspect that it doesn’t. Camel through the eye of a needle and all.
"At some point, you rack up enough mutations and speciation occurs. It is telling that classical liberals and boomer communists, the kind who think all this race and gender stuff distracts people from focusing on class consciousness, they all recognize the woke as something apart from themselves.
Though it’s probably more the case that they are refusing to recognize their own children, refusing to recognize to accept responsibility for the whirlwind they are reaping."
Personally, I just call them all collectively, "Leftish". I just couldn't find a word for what they saw as differences between themselves (and qualities of the other they didn't want to be pinned with and evade), and the commonalities they shared in terms of habits, values, and general interests. So I settled on that.
This crucial line is worth fleshing out:
"There is no stable equilibrium between the belief that all men are created equal and the inherent and ineradicable inequality of the real world. Any attempt to institute partial equality is unstable, and wants to collapse into total equality."
Now what's the evidence or argument? Something like an inductive historical slippery slope? You start with X (St Paul's equality in Christ, the French Revolution's egalité, the inalienable 1st generation human rights, or whatever), and little by little you end up in woke hell? Just my guess. This trope that certain Christian or apparently common sense ideas are Trojan horses (memes slowly but inescapably mutating according to some subliminal logic of development of degen doctrine), is quite common among the prople of alt right, dissident right, Neo-Reaction (NRx), and so called frog Twitter.
It seems to me like you are conflating egalitarianism/equality vs. hierarchy with excellence and beauty vs. ugliness.
It's true that an extreme of equality is a Procrustrean bed that will kill all that is greater than the lowest common denominator, but where competition and relative excellence is worshipped, one has a perverse incentive to destroy the others rather than create. You can be the smartest guy in the room by upping your intelligence OR by busting heads until brain damage.
In short, the question of balance between these two are clearly very skewed in modern society. But they are but means for objective beauty and excellence, which can be lost if hierarchy is itself made an end.
Any thoughts on this?