The Philosophy Discussion Forum

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2026 2:43 pm Yes, but if one reads your posts it is as if the liberals knee jerk react to signs that someone or something is on Team C, as if Team C has a different set of habits.

Team C being Team California? Or simply the alternative (synthesis) of teams A and B?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2026 12:28 am

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2026 11:29 pm

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2026 8:30 pm And why do you think Nick Fuentes thinks "Hiter was right"? Clearly, our culture generally sees Hitler as an example of what not to do or who not to vote for. Nick Fuentes doesn't agree with that assessment. Why do you think Nick Fuentes doesn't agree with that assessment. Should we all read Mein Kampf in order to be able to talk to Nick Fuentes, assuming that talking to him is going to make any difference whatsoever?

Though Fuentes is often totally in bad taste, he is trolling for the most part. I said "for the most part". He is anti-Zionist in the sense that he feels, believes that Israel has far too much influence over US policy. I do not think he has true-blue antisemitic sentiments in the classic sense of Judenhass.

I think you should get a poetic version of Mein Kampf and -- hey I got it! -- read it with Ma and Pa on one of those lazy Florida afternoons!

I'll wait for the Broadway musical to come out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovCf9VRLnDY

Mel Brooks is a genius

-Imp

Impenitent wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2026 3:16 pm

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2026 12:28 am

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2026 11:29 pm
Though Fuentes is often totally in bad taste, he is trolling for the most part. I said "for the most part". He is anti-Zionist in the sense that he feels, believes that Israel has far too much influence over US policy. I do not think he has true-blue antisemitic sentiments in the classic sense of Judenhass.

I think you should get a poetic version of Mein Kampf and -- hey I got it! -- read it with Ma and Pa on one of those lazy Florida afternoons!

I'll wait for the Broadway musical to come out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovCf9VRLnDY

Mel Brooks is a genius

-Imp

Without looking at the link, let me guess, History of the World Part I, "Hitler on Ice".

Springtime for Hitler

phyllo wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2026 4:19 pm Springtime for Hitler

"The ice is alive, with the sound of music!"

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2026 3:10 pm

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2026 2:43 pm Yes, but if one reads your posts it is as if the liberals knee jerk react to signs that someone or something is on Team C, as if Team C has a different set of habits.

Team C being Team California? Or simply the alternative (synthesis) of teams A and B?

Team Conservative.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2026 5:43 am

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2026 3:10 pm

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2026 2:43 pm Yes, but if one reads your posts it is as if the liberals knee jerk react to signs that someone or something is on Team C, as if Team C has a different set of habits.

Team C being Team California? Or simply the alternative (synthesis) of teams A and B?

Team Conservative.

I think we would have to define what each of us means by that term: Conservative.

I busted my ass for 40+ hours this week

(A) I earned it, it's mine

or

(B) I earned it, it belongs to the collective

B? I ain't bustin my ass next week

-Imp

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2026 4:52 pm

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2026 5:43 am

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2026 3:10 pm
Team C being Team California? Or simply the alternative (synthesis) of teams A and B?

Team Conservative.

I think we would have to define what each of us means by that term: Conservative.

Well, you seem to distinguish some group or other from liberals. So, whatever that is, I'm skeptical there less knee-jerk hysterical.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2026 5:28 pm

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2026 4:52 pm

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2026 5:43 am
Team Conservative.

I think we would have to define what each of us means by that term: Conservative.

Well, you seem to distinguish some group or other from liberals. So, whatever that is, I'm skeptical there less knee-jerk hysterical.

The people who believe that they are at risk of sending their sons to school in the morning and receiving shrieking blue haired lesbians in return at the end of the day... knee-jerk hysterical sorts?... why how could you suspect such a thing?

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2026 5:28 pm

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2026 4:52 pm

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2026 5:43 am Team Conservative.

I think we would have to define what each of us means by that term: Conservative.

Well, you seem to distinguish some group or other from liberals. So, whatever that is, I'm skeptical there less knee-jerk hysterical.

Are you interested in working out a sensible definition? I make all sorts of distinctions.

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2026 5:45 pm

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2026 5:28 pm

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2026 4:52 pm
I think we would have to define what each of us means by that term: Conservative.

Well, you seem to distinguish some group or other from liberals. So, whatever that is, I'm skeptical there less knee-jerk hysterical.

Are you interested in working out a sensible definition? I make all sorts of distinctions.

Please do

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2026 6:09 pm

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2026 5:45 pm

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Apr 22, 2026 5:28 pm
Well, you seem to distinguish some group or other from liberals. So, whatever that is, I'm skeptical there less knee-jerk hysterical.

Are you interested in working out a sensible definition? I make all sorts of distinctions.

Please do

My view at this point is that we can define an ur-conservatism. Maybe a base for all conservative thought, social practice, ethics and political organization. My understanding is that all conservatism is rooted in a conceived metaphysical order. In India “Ṛta” is a term denoting “cosmic order”:

Wiki wrote:In the Vedic religion, Ṛta (/ɹ̩t̪ɐ/; Sanskrit ऋत ṛta "order, rhythm, rule; truth; logos") is the principle of natural order which regulates and coordinates the operation of the universe and everything within it. In the hymns of the Vedas, Ṛta is described as that which is ultimately responsible for the proper functioning of the natural, moral and sacrificial orders. Conceptually, it is closely allied to the injunctions and ordinances thought to uphold it, collectively referred to as Dharma, and the action of the individual in relation to those ordinances, referred to as Karma – two terms which eventually eclipsed Ṛta in importance as signifying natural, religious and moral order in later Hinduism. Sanskrit scholar Maurice Bloomfield referred to Ṛta as "one of the most important religious conceptions of the Rigveda", going on to note that, "from the point of view of the history of religious ideas we may, in fact we must, begin the history of Hindu religion at least with the history of this conception".

All such systems, usually religious, understand that the manifest reality has an “order” and an “orderer”. Hebrew, Christian, Platonic, Buddhist, Taoist: if one accepts this sense of things, one is inclined to believe there is right action and wrong action. And the “systems” are developed through time and in response to appreciation of the concept.

On the other side, and in our present, and especially in our Occident, many broke the conceptual connection with belief in such an established order. Then, what takes over is (usually) some later philosophical notions, or scientistic notions, and certainly postmodern and also Marxist notions, essentially non-metaphysical, but no less rigidly “believed in” and which at times mirror religiousness and religious zealousness.

Almost to a man on this forum (and in Flash’s case to a sort of hybrid of a man-like entity) each denizen exists in an intellectual netherworld, in a shadow of former times when ‘belief’ as possible.

Kafka expresses it like this (in The Hunter Gracchus):

“I have no intentions,” said the hunter with a smile and, to make up for his mocking tone, laid a hand on the burgomaster’s knee. “I am here. I don’t know any more than that. There’s nothing more I can do. My boat is without a helm—it journeys with the wind which blows in the deepest regions of death.

Alexis Jacobi arrives and displays a sort of Matzo-level (fluffy, not stuffy) revelation of curative truth directly in response to this horrifying condition and fate …

Our resident medievalist is trying to resurrect the Great Chain of Being now.

It's no good trying to go back only as far as the imaginary fifties where a shoe salesman could have a nice house and demure wife to mother his seven children and wash a handful of "mother's little helpers" down with some gin because there's no divorces.

He needs to go back much further than that in support of his version of conservatism. He must reverse the French Revolution, reinstate subjects and do away with all the modern citizens stuff. He has to restore a religion he doesn't himself believe in (See Seneca "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" for an adequate description of why) so that he can inflict a "metaphysics" on whichever idiots fall for his ruses.

I’m on it!