Nicholas J Fuentes Phenomenon

[FlashDangerpants]

Awesome. TBH you probably have to return to a pre-Galileo time for those metaphysics. They generally involve a notion derived from the ancients that the Earthly world of corruptible matter is an imperfect mirror of a Heavenly realm cast from incorruptible and unchanging matter.

Indeed if you are into those grand sweeping histories that explain the rise of the Europeans to power and eventual global hegemony - and I know you are a sucker for that shit - the point at which the Europeans broke away from that view (some time between the Black Death and Galileo which is a span of around 250 years) was the decisive point at which Europe took over from those other regions in spite of relative poverty, and became the engine of new ideas, powers and wealth.

The French Revolution created the modern world, but some combination of labour shortages in late middle ages leading to the end of serfdom, the printing press, Reformation, Counter-Reformation and Renaissance killed off that metaphysics. The notion that had run from antiquity all the way through the middle ages and placed man above the animals but below a celestial sphere, which for some weird reason you think is worth bringing back.

Not sure I see why you want to do away with the modern rejection of heavenly hierarchy though. It's sort of the source of all that special white man goo you love so much.

[Iwannaplato]

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”:

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.

Well, this description would probably alienate most US conservatives, but let's hop past that. Where are these people in the US? Are there any public figures who are in this group? What are some of their positions in current politics?

[Alexis Jacobi]

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”.

Well, this description would probably alienate most US conservatives, but let's hop past that. Where are these people in the US? Are there any public figures who are in this group? What are some of their positions in current politics?

You need to go a bit slower here. It is important to realize, at least as I see it, in what are rooted these 'conservative' notions. It is not, as the 6 leggèd cockroach-like denizen of PN who goes by the moniker FDP says, that I am interested in re-establishing the view of Reality that The Great Chain of Being presented, but rather to point out that at one time, and among people generally, they existed and lived in relation to the view that such Order existed.

What I seem to be able to do, and that no one else can do or even desires to do -- this is in large part what makes Alexis Jacobi a wonderful gift from the upper-world to the lower -- is to attempt to explain what is going on in our present. To explain is not, not necessarily, to become an advocate of one view or another, or even an intellectual movement to recover or to re-establish the formerly-conceived hierarchy, or to topple all hierarchies in a Marxian revolution, but my amazing project only really has to do with helping those who wander lost through the Maze of Chaos that is our Present, to understand things better, and then -- all praises where praises are due! -- to understand ourselves better.

One interesting thing that Richard Weaver wrote about in Ideas Have Consequences is the notion of our 'metaphysical dream of the world'. What might this mean? Well, what did it mean for the generation that read his book and worked to re-establish a conceptual order based in metaphysical notions about life, about the world, about existence? Weaver included this Thomas Carlyle quote:

But the thing a man does practically believe (and this is often enough without asserting it even to himself, much less to others); the thing a man does practically lay to heart, and know for certain, concerning his vital relations to this mysterious Universe, and his duty and destiny there, that is in all cases the primary thing for him, and creatively determines all the rest. That is his religion; or, it may be, his mere scepticism and no-religion: the manner it is in which he feels himself to be spiritually related to the Unseen World or No-World; and I say, if you tell me what that is, you tell me to a very great extent what the man is, what the kind of things he will do is.

So, the real objective here is not to jump so quickly into cultural polemics -- leave that to the six-leggèd! -- but to spend a bit of meditative time thinking over these notions.

[Middle English nocioun, concept, from Latin nōtiō, nōtiōn-, from nōtus, known, past participle of nōscere, to get to know; see gnō- in Indo-European roots.]

[Alexis Jacobi]

Well, this description would probably alienate most US conservatives, but let's hop past that. Where are these people in the US? Are there any public figures who are in this group? What are some of their positions in current politics?

One interesting thing that Richard Weaver wrote about in Ideas Have Consequences is the notion of our 'metaphysical dream of the world'. What might this mean? Well, what did it mean for the generation that read his book and worked to re-establish a conceptual order based in metaphysical notions about life, about the world, about existence?

Some common ideas re: Weaver's influence on American Conservatism:

Richard Weaver’s 1948 book Ideas Have Consequences is a foundational text of modern American conservatism, arguing that Western civilization is in decline due to the abandonment of absolute truths and the embrace of nominalism. Weaver's work championed objective morality, property rights, and piety, influencing the conservative intellectual movement against modern moral relativism, mass culture, and statism.

Foundation of Modern Conservatism: Ideas Have Consequences is considered a major catalyst for the post-WWII American conservative movement, influencing thinkers to challenge liberal orthodoxy and secularism.

Critique of Modernity: Weaver argued that Western culture was disintegrating because it abandoned belief in absolute, transcendent truth, leading to a "spoiled child" psychology and a lack of moral restraint.

Defense of Tradition: He warned against "Prometheanism"—the attempt to turn man into God by subjugating the world to human will, which he believed would destroy social order.

[phyllo]

Look at the lies, blasphemy and immorality embraced by conservatives today.

There seem to be hardly any Weaver-style conservatives left.

[Iwannaplato]

One interesting thing that Richard Weaver wrote about in Ideas Have Consequences is the notion of our 'metaphysical dream of the world'. What might this mean? Well, what did it mean for the generation that read his book and worked to re-establish a conceptual order based in metaphysical notions about life, about the world, about existence?

Some common ideas re: Weaver's influence on American Conservatism:

Richard Weaver’s 1948 book Ideas Have Consequences is a foundational text of modern American conservatism, arguing that Western civilization is in decline due to the abandonment of absolute truths and the embrace of nominalism. Weaver's work championed objective morality, property rights, and piety, influencing the conservative intellectual movement against modern moral relativism, mass culture, and statism.

At first in your posts I was dealing with a quasi-Stephen Daedelus, then good old Lord Henry Wotton lounging on a divan of Persian saddlebags. I'd love to bring in Judge Holden from an American genius as another vibe, but he's not f****** around and is also a man of action. So, I'll have to go with the real life Julius Evola. Just triangulating.

Defense of Tradition: He warned against "Prometheanism"—the attempt to turn man into God by subjugating the world to human will, which he believed would destroy social order,

the modern technocrat dream...wouldn't it be lovely if conservatives in any significant numbers were concerned at all about that. Whatever one thinks of drag queens reading to kids at the library, it's easy to avoid, but nano-tech, AI and gmo are making thousands of little deities with tiny hearts. It's like giving kids tactical nukes to play with on snow days. But for most conservatives being critical of these things, and what the middle one is already doing to minds, comes to close to sounding like restricting free markets, so they'll happily avoid potential unity across position lines and focus on something trivial by comparison.

Critique of Modernity: Weaver argued that Western culture was disintegrating because it abandoned belief in absolute, transcendent truth, leading to a "spoiled child" psychology and a lack of moral restraint.

It's all just trees, not forest now and power. The only place I hear this coming from in the US is the religious right, which is one of the most banal versions of it. You simply can't have Trump here. Though he does seem to have a sacred messiah, a Jewish one, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, who believed Jewish people have divine souls and non-Jews mere human ones. I swear I think Trump was made by a very stressed bricoleur. But I don't think Trump counts before he seems to think he is the transcendent truth. The healer AI image and calling himself King on Easter. It's funny that anyone would consider him conservative. It's not true on any level. But anyway that's all a tangent, as he is.

Foundation of Modern Conservatism: Ideas Have Consequences is considered a major catalyst for the post-WWII American conservative movement, influencing thinkers to challenge liberal orthodoxy and secularism.

Well, that's a nice reversal of the frame: traditional deontological conservatives vs. the consequentialist liberals (who are told they have no values). But certainly modern conservatives are also consequentialists.

Unfortunately, I see little of the other two strains.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Look at the lies, blasphemy and immorality embraced by conservatives today.

There seem to be hardly any Weaver-style conservatives left.

Well, you guys seem to want to go fast through material that should be lingered over. However, that being said, there is a major opinion about the impossibility of all influence on society at this later juncture, where corruption (of the individual) has become so extreme that there is no longer anyone *there* to hear the call to serve 'metaphysical dreams' of a higher order. Hence: The Benedict Option:

Today, a new post-Christian barbarism reigns. Many believers are blind to it, and their churches are too weak to resist. Politics offers little help in this spiritual crisis. What is needed is the Benedict Option, a strategy that draws on the authority of Scripture and the wisdom of the ancient church. The goal: to embrace exile from the mainstream culture and construct a resilient counterculture.

Then one would have to examine what is really being referred to when 'scripture' is referred to; what 'wisdom' is; and what 'the ancient church' has to offer (or why it is referenced).

At least on one level 'the Church' is meant to represent an older order of metaphysical understanding and, it must also be noted, is similar to the conception of The Great Chain of Being. See? When people seek 'solidities' in the metaphysical order they inevitably refer to past systems.

But Alexis Jacobi heralds -- is herald to -- the future!

[Alexis Jacobi]

It's all just trees, not forest now and power. The only place I hear this coming from in the US is the religious right, which is one of the most banal versions of it. You simply can't have Trump here. Though he does seem to have a sacred messiah, a Jewish one, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, who believed Jewish people have divine souls and non-Jews mere human ones. I swear I think Trump was made by a very stressed bricoleur. But I don't think Trump counts before he seems to think he is the transcendent truth. The healer AI image and calling himself King on Easter. It's funny that anyone would consider him conservative. It's not true on any level. But anyway that's all a tangent, as he is.

Take it slow, brother! One step at a time. Plenty of rest in between.

:::breathe!:::

This is a good time to consider the Matzo Ball Soup program! Gary? Flash? Is it time?

[phyllo]

Well, you guys seem to want to go fast through material that should be lingered over.

Well, when you can see the "conservatives" daily on your screen ...

Then one would have to examine what is really being referred to when 'scripture' is referred to; what 'wisdom' is; and what 'the ancient church' has to offer (or why it is referenced).

Isn't that just going to produce division, relativism, subjectivity and paralysis by analysis?

The "blind" are not going to see the absolute truth.

[Iwannaplato]

Take it slow, brother! One step at a time. Plenty of rest in between.

You gave me three pieces, I took a step with each. Since then I've breathed, worked, had a psychospiritual session and eaten dinner.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Allah be praised!

[Iwannaplato]

Allah be praised!

Ha, ha, but actually, ironically, precisely the opposite.

[phyllo]

Allah be praised!

Is Allah the absolute truth?

[Iwannaplato]

Take it slow, brother! One step at a time. Plenty of rest in between.

Sure, take it slow. Please include a response to:
viewtopic.php?p=804225#p804225

[Alexis Jacobi]

It's all just trees, not forest now and power. The only place I hear this coming from in the US is the religious right, which is one of the most banal versions of it. You simply can't have Trump here. Though he does seem to have a sacred messiah, a Jewish one, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, who believed Jewish people have divine souls and non-Jews mere human ones. I swear I think Trump was made by a very stressed bricoleur. But I don't think Trump counts before he seems to think he is the transcendent truth. The healer AI image and calling himself King on Easter. It's funny that anyone would consider him conservative. It's not true on any level. But anyway that's all a tangent, as he is.

How could I improve on this? The present is a spectacle being performed before our mind's eyes...

I suppose that of those who were affected by a depth reading of Ideas Have Consequences may have gone in various directions, not just those that we might consider rather unattractive or empty.