By Mister FoxWe must understand the difference between a patriotic way of thinking and that of “Progressives” and “Internationalists.” Their ideological view is often based on a book and people are expected to refer to it and divergence from orthodoxy leads to being denounced or given correctional training. This happened in the Soviet Union, Mao's China, Cambodia under Pol Pot and in the West now under Political Correctness. This is a Marxist strain but it came in with the New Left under the guise of a new Liberalism. Even now well-meaning liberals promote PC without understanding its totalitarian nature.
This debate is contemporary Metaphysics, the branch of philosophy that examines the nature of reality. It includes the relationship between mind and matter, essence and attribute and fact and value. Metaphysics is the philosophical study of being and knowing. What is real, what is illusion; what is actually happening and what are political myths.
Progressivism encompasses Liberalism through to Marxism. They believe in abstract universals, we believe in concrete “particulars.” These type of Universals are abstract terms like humanity whereas a specific people is a particular. Abstract universalist thinking leads to intervention in the internal policies of other sovereign states. We concrete particularists are concerned with our own nation. We do believe in substantial universals which I will come to later.
Progressives erect a set of idealisations – what we are becoming, what we should think and how we should behave. Our human nature is fixed in the sense that we inherit genes, which give us our essence, but how we act it out or think is given form by our cultures and communities which themselves grew out of our collective psyches. We can not step outside what we are and where we belong. We are part of it and it is what makes us social beings .
The great Daily Telegraph satirist Michael Wharton aka Peter Simple used fictional figures to satirise this trait in his column. Dr. Heinz Kiosk embodied guilt: ”We are all guilty; Dr Spacely-Trellis “go-ahead” Bishop of Bevindon in the Stretchford Conurbation, progressive’s; Dorothy Dutt-Pauker “the Hampstead thinker,” who lived at Marxmount, embodied Bourgoise Socialism.
Wharton used to enjoy going for a drink in an ordinary pub which is “being” as opposed to “becoming.” It is contentment in one's culture and community not a constant striving to adopt a role created for us by progressives. We are social beings and it is the everyday pleasures in our communities in which we belong, that give us happiness. This respect for our everyday life leads to our duty to our families and responsibility for them, not to outsiders like the elites.
The word Progressive encapsulates the intellectual movement from the Enlightenment that led to the orthodoxy of the current elite. It has some common dogmas – like change being better than conservation and the belief that we are progressing to a Utopian future – The Brotherhood of Man, a classless society etc It originated with the Enlightenment idea of Progress which is related to the classical liberal belief in the “perfectibility of man” and a supposed God-like ability to transcend nature including their own human nature.
This debate is contemporary Metaphysics, the branch of philosophy that examines the nature of reality. It includes the relationship between mind and matter, essence and attribute and fact and value. Metaphysics is the philosophical study of being and knowing. What is real, what is illusion; what is actually happening and what are political myths.
Progressivism encompasses Liberalism through to Marxism. They believe in abstract universals, we believe in concrete “particulars.” These type of Universals are abstract terms like humanity whereas a specific people is a particular. Abstract universalist thinking leads to intervention in the internal policies of other sovereign states. We concrete particularists are concerned with our own nation. We do believe in substantial universals which I will come to later.
Progressives erect a set of idealisations – what we are becoming, what we should think and how we should behave. Our human nature is fixed in the sense that we inherit genes, which give us our essence, but how we act it out or think is given form by our cultures and communities which themselves grew out of our collective psyches. We can not step outside what we are and where we belong. We are part of it and it is what makes us social beings .
The great Daily Telegraph satirist Michael Wharton aka Peter Simple used fictional figures to satirise this trait in his column. Dr. Heinz Kiosk embodied guilt: ”We are all guilty; Dr Spacely-Trellis “go-ahead” Bishop of Bevindon in the Stretchford Conurbation, progressive’s; Dorothy Dutt-Pauker “the Hampstead thinker,” who lived at Marxmount, embodied Bourgoise Socialism.
Wharton used to enjoy going for a drink in an ordinary pub which is “being” as opposed to “becoming.” It is contentment in one's culture and community not a constant striving to adopt a role created for us by progressives. We are social beings and it is the everyday pleasures in our communities in which we belong, that give us happiness. This respect for our everyday life leads to our duty to our families and responsibility for them, not to outsiders like the elites.
The word Progressive encapsulates the intellectual movement from the Enlightenment that led to the orthodoxy of the current elite. It has some common dogmas – like change being better than conservation and the belief that we are progressing to a Utopian future – The Brotherhood of Man, a classless society etc It originated with the Enlightenment idea of Progress which is related to the classical liberal belief in the “perfectibility of man” and a supposed God-like ability to transcend nature including their own human nature.
Continue reading at National Conservatism
6 comments:
Juggling their idols (ideal ideals) won't help LOL!
Here's your (simple, binary, as usual LOL) solution:
Stolid Conservatives think more slowly than flighty Libtards, BECAUSE they are trying to solve problems. They focus on Hope.
Libtards have already thrown in the towel (like their muslim brothers) because they focus on obeying their Fears. SO they seem to think faster, because they are only aiming to protest symptoms (which they then call "causes").
They avoid personal responsibility like a plague, because thinking is painful for them. Thus, they are idolaters, who choose to pretend mere groups are the correct categories to juggle and spin.
(That evil Salesman, Karl Marx, started this nonsense with his "Eternal Struggles for Understanding" and "CLASS"(ification) "WARS")!
But all groups are only groups OF individuals.
Only individuals should have Rights, and groups should at most be assigned temporary, situational and revokable privileges.
Libtards pretend groups have Rights, and individuals only have revokable privileges.
It's the difference between learning how to learn (as did the Jews under first, King Yehuda/Judah, and lastly under Prophet Isaiah) and how to avoid thinking, (as did the ancient Hebrews and Pharisees) in preference for replacing thought with imitative gestures (rituals) i.e: group-idols and totem-words, like "Inclusive Diversity."
;-)
At worst, these proto-muslim idolaters only say:
"I didn't do it - The Group did it!"
And, (worse):
"NO member of the group did it, either! ONLY The Group did it!"
It's the psychological effect of transference and displacement and projection or whatever pseudo-psychological babbling idol-words they want to use; they excuse themeseves by pretending that there IS no real individual responsibility for one's own actions, either, invoking such magic metaphoric illness words as "cognitive dissonance," "confirmation bias" and "bi-polar disorders" - all of which are meaningless and simply mean the difference between the thought and memory hemispheres of all our brains - in order enable their victimology myths!
OK sorry that was a bit longer than it really requires, but libtards (deliberately?) frustrate me.
Anyway: Problem. Solved!
;-)
Juggling their idols (ideal ideals) won't help LOL!
Here's your (simple, binary, as usual LOL) solution:
Stolid Conservatives think more slowly than flighty Libtards, BECAUSE they are trying to solve problems. They focus on Hope.
Libtards have already thrown in the towel (like their muslim brothers) because they focus on obeying their Fears. SO they seem to think faster, because they are only aiming to protest symptoms (which they then call "causes").
They avoid personal responsibility like a plague, because thinking is painful for them. Thus, they are idolaters, who choose to pretend mere groups are the correct categories to juggle and spin.
(That evil Salesman, Karl Marx, started this nonsense with his "Eternal Struggles for Understanding" and "CLASS"(ification) "WARS")!
But all groups are only groups OF individuals.
Only individuals should have Rights, and groups should at most be assigned temporary, situational and revokable privileges.
Libtards pretend groups have Rights, and individuals only have revokable privileges.
It's the difference between learning how to learn (as did the Jews under first, King Yehuda/Judah, and lastly under Prophet Isaiah) and how to avoid thinking, (as did the ancient Hebrews and Pharisees) in preference for replacing thought with imitative gestures (rituals) i.e: group-idols and totem-words, like "Inclusive Diversity."
;-)
At worst, these proto-muslim idolaters only say:
"I didn't do it - The Group did it!"
And, (worse):
"NO member of the group did it, either! ONLY The Group did it!"
It's the psychological effect of transference and displacement and projection or whatever pseudo-psychological babbling idol-words they want to use; they excuse themeseves by pretending that there IS no real individual responsibility for one's own actions, either, invoking such magic metaphoric illness words as "cognitive dissonance," "confirmation bias" and "bi-polar disorders" - all of which are meaningless and simply mean the difference between the thought and memory hemispheres of all our brains - in order enable their victimology myths!
OK sorry that was a bit longer than it really requires, but libtards (deliberately?) frustrate me.
Anyway: Problem. Solved!
;-)
The point is not to understand what passes for the low I.Q. and irrational socialist mind and its Marxist ideology.
The point is the complete destruction of socialism that has hijacked most governments on the Planet Earth.
If I were a U.S. Senator, I would take a cue from old Senator Cato of the Roman Republic, and end every speech with, "Furthermore, socialism in any form anywhere on the planet must be destroyed."
Ronbo, you are not a US senator though, are you? So how do we begin to destroy these things if we sare not able to distinguish the one from our way of thinking?
This was a bit strange to begin with and I wondered why. I realised after a few reads. It is almost unique to find a patriot lay down a base for developing our own way of thinking. When people realise what this is it will probably be seen as the answer to Adorno's The Authoritarian Personality. We must start disvcussing this exp[ositrion of the two different ways of thinking and begin affirming ourselves and children's priority in their own countries.
Many nationalists are confused and have adopted old-fashioned liberal arguments to support patriotic ideas and there is something very dated about this. In his excellent articles for the BNPreform blog Lee John Barnes uses "The rights of British citizens" as underpinning for his call to civil disobedience. This is borrowed from the Enlightenment and very old-fashioned. Far from making people want to take to the streets it makes them want to take to their bookshelves and reach for Dicken's A Tale Of Two Cities."
Post a Comment