The Globalist Agenda - -

[Gary Childress]

So you're not passionate about the illegal immigration issue. Is that correct?

In no sense is passion involved. I have concerns however, and these concerns are connected to general political considerations.

Your concerns are valid. I share them. However, I feel a need to accept what is happening rather than struggle against it.

[Alexis Jacobi]

You, Gary, and others might find this conversation-debate interesting. One compares the decline in the US to the 80’s and 90’s in Russia, and the other disagrees.

It reveals, intelligently, many of the reasons for the problems we are facing.

[Gary Childress]

You, Gary, and others might find this conversation-debate interesting. One compares the decline in the US to the 80’s and 90’s in Russia, and the other disagrees.

It reveals, intelligently, many of the reasons for the problems we are facing.

We definitely have problems. I wish I knew the root cause of the problems and I wish I knew how to solve them.

[Gary Childress]

BTW. I did watch the video in its entirety. It was indeed interesting. Thank you for sharing it.

[Age]

You, Gary, and others might find this conversation-debate interesting. One compares the decline in the US to the 80’s and 90’s in Russia, and the other disagrees.

It reveals, intelligently, many of the reasons for the problems we are facing.

We definitely have problems. I wish I knew the root cause of the problems and I wish I knew how to solve them.

If you list the, supposed, 'problems', then the 'root causes' for them can be revealed to you.

[Gary Childress]

You, Gary, and others might find this conversation-debate interesting. One compares the decline in the US to the 80’s and 90’s in Russia, and the other disagrees.

It reveals, intelligently, many of the reasons for the problems we are facing.

We definitely have problems. I wish I knew the root cause of the problems and I wish I knew how to solve them.

If you list the, supposed, 'problems', then the 'root causes' for them can be revealed to you.

Well, for starters, according to the video, life expectancy is lower in the US than other developed countries, apparently significantly lower. Our infrastructure is decaying. A lot of people are dying from drug overdoses in what seems like a fentanyl epidemic.

[Alexis Jacobi]

We definitely have problems. I wish I knew the root cause of the problems and I wish I knew how to solve them.

And that is where the thought of the Dissident Right theorists enter into the picture.

As I have said a dozen times: when people see their world is heading into decline they must develop ideas about why.

Same on a personal level.

[Gary Childress]

We definitely have problems. I wish I knew the root cause of the problems and I wish I knew how to solve them.

And that is where the thought of the Dissident Right theorists enter into the picture.

As I have said a dozen times: when people see their world is heading into decline they must develop ideas about why.

Same on a personal level.

Do the ideas of "why" need to be accurate, or can we just blame the most convenient people we don't like?

Sorry, couldn't help the quip. It made me happy.

[Alexis Jacobi]

I think you all the time forget that instead of being an activist for some cause — that is your position and the position of the bickering philosophers here — my chief interest is in exposing the full gamut of perspectives to the light of day.

This does not mean that I do not have opinions or haven’t concluded anything — perhaps only in some areas.

In mass politics, PR and propaganda, influencing population blocks works best if the message has been reduced and simplified. And that, as you know, is a type of untruth.

The advantage we have is to have (theoretical) distance from specific commitments. I mean here an ideal philosopher/interpreter.

[Gary Childress]

I think you all the time forget that instead of being an activist for some cause — that is your position and the position of the bickering philosophers here — my chief interest is in exposing the full gamut of perspectives to the light of day.

This does not mean that I do not have opinions or haven’t concluded anything — perhaps only in some areas.

In mass politics, PR and propaganda, influencing population blocks works best if the message has been reduced and simplified. And that, as you know, is a type of untruth.

The advantage we have is to have (theoretical) distance from specific commitments. I mean here an ideal philosopher/interpreter.

I wasn't really aiming my response at you. It was more a general statement/quip.

[Alexis Jacobi]

So what wouId this mean in a university environment? WouId professors disaIIow the expression of the ideas which Iead to the bad? WouId there be wider poIicies aimed to curb these things? Or wouId 'discourage' be a better verb? And what ideas wouId be discourage or removed or......? And then with chiIdren. However much those who go to coIIege haven't quite reached aduIthood, they are in many ways aduIts.

You are asking me to describe then what I think is the proper University program then? I already have said that the entire educational program must turn around the classical liberal arts program: the Great Books so-called. My reference point is the education formerly offered in American and European schools, colleges and universities.

Within what I refer to as Occidental Categories of concern there are enough topics for a life-time — a dozen life-times.

When you speak of a theoretical university — what is allowed and what isn’t — you are really referring to a corrupted environment, and corrupted people. And then you ask: Well what do you propose? Shall sexual deviancy be given a semester’s course? Or, would the conversation and focus revolve around “real” issues and concerns like dedication to strong family, the life with children, and all “sane categories”.

When people are raised up “cleanly” and introduced to a sound paideia they will hold to those categories. Their commitments with carry through into their adult personal and social lives.

See, you are asking me a question that revolves around the important issue of redefining and rediscovering and regrounding within categories of value.

I have made it completely plain that one of the crucial elements that must be included are the very broad categories of Christian philosophical concern. I refer to The Oxford Companion to Christian Thought as a reference point. I do not say this for pious reasons but to show the depth of connection to real, valid, perennial and topical issues.

Again, I refer to “our traditions”.

There is no such focus in American education on a state or national level — only perhaps in private schools. And I assume that European education (as it was in France) is also deteriorating.

[Gary Childress]

So what wouId this mean in a university environment? WouId professors disaIIow the expression of the ideas which Iead to the bad? WouId there be wider poIicies aimed to curb these things? Or wouId 'discourage' be a better verb? And what ideas wouId be discourage or removed or......? And then with chiIdren. However much those who go to coIIege haven't quite reached aduIthood, they are in many ways aduIts.

You are asking me to describe then what I think is the proper University program then? I already have said that the entire educational program must turn around the classical liberal arts program: the Great Books so-called. My reference point is the education formerly offered in American and European schools, colleges and universities.

Within what I refer to as Occidental Categories of concern there are enough topics for a life-time — a dozen life-times.

When you speak of a theoretical university — what is allowed and what isn’t — you are really referring to a corrupted environment, and corrupted people. And then you ask: Well what do you propose? Shall sexual deviancy be given a semester’s course? Or, would the conversation and focus revolve around “real” issues and concerns like dedication to strong family, the life with children, and all “sane categories”.

When people are raised up “cleanly” and introduced to a sound paideia they will hold to those categories. Their commitments with carry through into their adult personal and social lives.

See, you are asking me a question that revolves around the important issue of redefining and rediscovering and regrounding within categories of value.

I have made it completely plain that one of the crucial elements that must be included are the very broad categories of Christian philosophical concern. I refer to The Oxford Companion to Christian Thought as a reference point. I do not say this for pious reasons but to show the depth of connection to real, valid, perennial and topical issues.

Again, I refer to “our traditions”.

There is no such focus in American education on a state or national level — only perhaps in private schools. And I assume that European education (as it was in France) is also deteriorating.

In my opinion, schools should teach skills and how to use the tools to create flourishing and prosperity out of those skills and tools. In my opinion indoctrinating students into a single belief system (whether liberal or conservative) is not appropriate for a university education curriculum. A university is a coming together of people from disparate views and places.

From the sounds of it, in the US and Europe, universities have become battle grounds between students fighting each other over who ought to lead, or who ought to educate the next generation. Let people educate themselves, at a university. That is the appropriate way to teach a university curriculum in my view.

[Alexis Jacobi]

I refer to Right-tending theorists. Here is Pierre Krebs in Fighting for the Essence:

[Somewhat knotty his style]

The history of peoples is invariably confused with the spirit that they bear from age to age, according to whether one comes across it in the maturity of its genius; when it elucidates the audacious decisions of its political leaders and shines on the dynamic intelligence of their cultures; or whether one discovers it at the midnight of its decline, when it fades away behind a society which submits to its history instead of letting itself be borne, at a time when it has not yet exchanged its old will to political power for the oligarchies of the new commercial power, by its destiny.

A dark or enlightened age, according to whether it is St. Paul who preaches or the Galilean [telescope inventor] who teaches; a dwarf or a giant age, ephemeral or astride the centuries, according to the civilizational choices decided upon by the ruling classes.

They have either abandoned themselves to the commercial profit strategies which excite the taste for filthy lucre and the purely venal-no spiritual or cultural satisfactions, allowing the Homo oeconomicus to dominate politics, culture and society within a society convinced of the superiority of profit above all other values in a tradition that stretches from Adam Smith to Friedrich vonHayek, or else they have opted, on the contrary, for a political project capable of causing a new historical destiny to flow forth, one capable of reigniting faith, or recreating a meaning for human life.

A nihilistic epoch or a meaningful one, depending on whether man in that age appeals, essentially, to his petty individual destiny folded back timidly on a narcissism that disconnects him from history, or whether he feels himself borne by the living destiny of a people dominated, according to Evola, by ‘quality, spirituality, living tradition, and race'; whether he adheres to the anonymous and vagabond society of a universal club whose fluctuations he suffers like a share-holder in the stock exchange, or whether he is part of the racial tradition of a community whose crises he assumes since he incorporates its values; whether he yields to the management system of the techno-society, or whether he desires from it a culture whose struggles he feels, like so many challenges, capable of inspiring in him a search for new solutions, adequate alternatives, and new lifestyles which leave the distinct footprints of peoples on the royal route of history.

[Alexis Jacobi]

In my opinion, schools should teach skills and how to use the tools to create flourishing and prosperity out of those skills and tools.

There are categories of value and meaning that do exist and have existed and will always exist. You have missed the point of what I have been referring to.

It cannot register within your intellectual system.

This is why you, Gary, can be described as a “symptom”. You are the product of that bad education (starting at the level of the child).

You constantly insert yourself! as if a world revolves around you. You are emblematic of vast hordes.

You have pushed yourselves and been pushed onto the horizons of contemporary life and your (pernicious) influence determines events.

It is you who requires reeducation in proper categories. But your disorder won’t allow that reconfiguration.

Don’t confuse you-singular with you-plural. You-singular only has relevance to the degree it illustrates a larger phenomenon.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Let people educate themselves, at a university.

This is an example of a distorted idea, based in false predicates.