This Week in Reaction (2016/10/09)

An overwhelming week this week in This Week in Reaction. The sphere was ablaze with quantity as well as quality. The caste-divide between Brahmins and Vaisyas, Students vs. Townies, Rootless Cosmopolitans vs. Flyoverites, Right Kind of White People vs. Wrong Kind, featured prominently. There were so many notable articles, The Committee had to invent a new level of award, for articles that would likely win if they had been written in other weeks. Since that name was too long, we refer to this echelon as Silver Circle. Let’s jump right in, shall we?


Shylock Holmes has very fine piece on The Long Shadow of Decolonialisation. It’s part review of Froude’s 1870s Bow of Ulysses, part analysis of subsequent history. And 100% great. Even “Chris B.” showed up to tut-tut it.

What is remarkable, however, is that both Apartheid South Africa and Rhodesia were crushed under the weight of progressive western opinion, even in the teeth of strong efforts from the local white population to maintain the status quo. In the 19th century, there was no hegemon to push around the British Empire, and no major outside country demanding devolution of power (other than London elites). And yet the result was the same anyway. The same red/blue tribal and ideological conflict was playing out internally within London, rather than between Washington and Salisbury.

What is most striking in Froude’s descriptions, even more than the economic aspect of the decline, is the decline of will. Even by 1887, there is the general sense that people have lost the sense of quite what the empire is meant to be for. The West Indian colonies were fought over strongly when sugar was such a lucrative crop that they were valuable as a merely economic proposition. There remains a sense of noblesse oblige in remaining to secure good government for the subjects of these islands. But as the economy declines and the cost of the proposition increases, there arises a general question—what exactly are we doing all this for?

The soul of a society can be sick, even though it’s its other vital organs appear to be functioning normally. The New Social Sciences will have to keep this dichotomy in view. Holmes takes home a rare ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Silver Circle Award☀.

Dissenting Sociologist Douglas Smythe was on fire here: Weaving the Basket of Deplorables: On the Effort to reduce the White Working Class to an Untouchable Caste in America. “Not America,” in the, well-rehearsed, well-focus-grouped words of Frau Klinton. Not America let that sink in. That’s what Smythe did. It’s normal, natural, and healthy for the high caste to tend to look down on the vulgar middle caste. But we’re way past normal, natural, and healthy territory… We’re into lebensunwertes leben territory:

White working class men: An endangered species.

White working class men: An endangered species.

The effort, in present American society, to banish an entire subset of the citizenry from the political community is clearly analogous to the older form of ritual exclusion. In this light, there can no longer be any doubt concerning the meaning of phrases like “basket of deplorables” in elite political discourse, with its image of a garbage bin filled with White people (cf. “White trash”) who fully deserve to have been discarded there: the elite is attempting to debase the White working class to the status of an untouchable caste, a new chandala for the secular 21st century milieu.

Basically Smythe lays out, as well as as ever been done, all in one place, with excellent supporting arguments and documentation, the nature of the caste warfare that neoreactionaries (and others) have been babbling about for years. I cannot do this masterpiece justice by excerpt. You’ll hafta RTWT. It’s long, but worth it, and an ☀☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Award☀☀ winner.

Michael Rothblatt points to a fine quote from Dalrymple on liberalism.

Nick Land has one from Angelo Codevilla. And another from Steve Sailer. Also: L. O. L. And a sweet tweet from Count ∅-face, whom I had the pleasure of meeting IRL this week.

Lawrence Glarus has a helpful Venn Diagram of Complex Adaptive Systems.

William Scott, over at Teleologic Folkways, begins to tackle The RQ—the Religious Question. More specifically: Is “reactionary pluralism” even possible? And what if it isn’t? The answer lies, I think, more in the direction of religious toleration.

Seriouslypleasedropit has a bit of an epiphany (in time for Christmas): Noblesse Oblige, Dogs.

This Week in Dutch Neoreaction… Alf ponders the question: To anon or not to anon. Tl;dr? Anon… but along the way:

The central defection lie that ‘different = the same’ has made it so that truth has become hatespeech and hatespeech is forbidden and punishable. Talking truth is samizdat and if you are reckless you and your loved ones will be targeted and shut-out. The cathedral is by no means as effective a killing machine as the USSR, but that is due to its inherent madness, not its lack of hatred.

Also: an evo-psych etiology of: “Let’s you and him fight”.

It’s always good to hear from Sarah Perry. This week’s masterpiece is The Art of the Conspiracy Theory. She’s fair and balanced as always (and 53.2% more quotable!!):

Related photo.

Related photo.

Here, we will explore how to feel superior not only to the conspiracy theorists, but also to the people who hate the conspiracy theorists. We will look at the interplay between the “crippled epistemology” of conspiracy theorists and conventional epistemologies. Rather than viewing conspiracy theories as mind viruses that infect passive participants, I will defend the view that the conspiracy theory is an active, creative art form, whose truth claims serve as formal obstructions rather than being the primary point of the endeavor. False conspiracy theories might even help us understand reality.

“Oh! You’re not one of those kinds of people, who look down their noses at Conspiracy Theorists, are you?” But if Cass Sunstein is conspiring against conspiracy theorists?! Yeah, but who the hell is Cass Sunstein?

My assertion at the beginning, that the negative connotations of “conspiracy theory” outweigh denotative content such that the word is basically a slur, is a sort of metaconspiracy theory. I don’t propose using a different term; if we started calling them “alternative epistemologies” or “subversion myths” instead, the euphemistic treadmill would soon turn those into slurs as well. So let’s use the scare word, but keep an eye on the fact that it’s a scare word. Let’s see how well it describes things we like, as well as things we don’t like.

So “conspiracy theorist” means “icky person”… kinda like “racist”… or “NASCAR fan”. But USG, and its mandarins, sure do seem to take an interest. Obviously, I’m not going to be able to excerpt my way into a fair overview of Mrs. Perry’s article. You’ll just hafta RTWT! This earned an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Silver Circle Award☀.

Titus Q. Cincinnatus continues his development of Curriculum for Recovering Conservatives®: The “Will of the People” is a Farce:

From a stability and cohesion standpoint, democracy is toxic. It’s a superfund site which can only be dealt with by digging it out of the earth in toto and burying it in a lead-lined vault for a hundred centuries.

Basically, democracy amplifies the normal and natural tensions that come with governing to an insane extent. War is result of conflict plus uncertainty. Democracy formalizes uncertainty. News at 11. Cincinnatus goes back to the source, and dispells the manifest errors of The Enlightenment.

Gratuitous pic of Keira Knightley c. 2004

Gratuitous pic of Keira Knightley c. 2004

The simple fact of the matter is that no matter how much modern man may repeat the equalitarian mantras about everyone being equal and everyone deserving an equal voice, the fact of the matter is that the vast, vast majority of people in our Western societies – as with any other – are simply not fitted for nor capable of genuine self-government. Most people simply cannot handle being given a share of governing power, and are prone to abuse it and misunderstand it when they do possess it.

Also… gotta love his choice of feature image! The Committee awards Cincinnatus an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀.

Could someone please tell Reactionary Future that King Canute’s humility before the waves was not advocacy of Imperium in Imperio? I know he won’t listen to me. Inspired by RF’s read of William Cavanaugh’s The Myth of Religious Violence, this was helpful: Culture Above Power: The Liberal Mistake. Rothblatt offers a few caveats.

Sydney Trads link to a Black Pigeon video: Research Shows ONLY MEN Pay Taxes.

From Spandrell, “Feminism is the strongest Schelling Point of the progressive system, the indestructible idea that will bury us all”. Also another diatribe on getting the “right” religion: The balance of the natural and social world. Here’s the problem: when religious autists, through no apparent fault of their own, think about religion, they cannot help but think of it as a totalizing, all-or-nothing metanarrative… which is the exact problem with the current religion (progressivism) that needs fixing. Such prescriptions, therefore, are not so much wrong as not even wrong.

And finally from the tireless, prophetic CWNY: The Lost European Chord.

[F]rom a genuine Christian standpoint there can be no compromise with the apologists for the French Revolution. Nor can there be any tolerance for those who want to find a middle ground: “There were some excesses, but there were also some good things…” No, either Burke was right when he warned us that the French Revolution was from hell, or the liberals were right when they said the French Revolution would usher in a new age of peace and brotherhood.

Do you reject The Enlightenment? And all its works? And all its empty show?

 



This Week in Jim Donald

Jim’s Big Piece This Week® takes a tragicomical look at Cathedral decision making. Not quite putting the “cis” in decision.

Attila The Hun by Hellkrusher (Deviant Art)

Attila The Hun by Hellkrusher (Deviant Art)

If Xenophon, or Raffles, or Clive of India, or Atilla the Hun was running the show, he would decide whether to hold them, fold them, walk away or run. What we see the American government doing is drifting and wobbling, and right now it is gradually drifting amorphously and slowly towards abandoning its long held plans for regime change in Syria. By and large, the decisions of the presidency have no clear motive, no clear objective, and are not well modeled as decisions by a self interested individual. When IBM does X, it is generally because the CEO has decided that X would be profitable. When the presidency does something, it is the net outcome of a bunch of individuals each pursuing his particular self interest, each maximizing his particular microslice of power and his particular reputation for holiness, the net outcome of a great many individuals each with a tiny microslice of power each doing something that serves his particular interest, as a river changes its course as the net outcome of the drift of many tiny grains of sand. There are no elders of Zion, or if there are, they don’t care what happens to Zion.

In a brief, scandalously hopeful note: Deus Vult, Jim avers:

God wills our survival. We shall therefore win.

God… or Leprechauns. But either way…

Jim also has a brief note on Nuclear Technological decline. Apparently:

The US no longer produces weapons grade plutonium. Supposedly this is a choice.

Like not sending men out of low earth orbit is a “choice”. Let’s hope those rusty old nukes still work… in case we ever need to use them.

 



This Week in Social Matter

This Week in Social Matter begins with Ryan Landry’s The Original ‘Stay Out of Our Country Club’ Scandal. The Jews persist claiming this, an otherwise embarrassingly weak victimhood narrative, as their own for some very important reasons. Private clubs are places where things get done. Landry’s account reads suspiciously like his patented Hidden Histories™ series, even tho’ the article is not labelled that way.

635228_20150427103234[Super rich Jew] Seligman’s [1877] exclusion created the seeds for modern nostalgia discrimination essays from American Jewish media members. The “not allowed in country clubs” refrain is not as innocent as it’s portrayed. Like all media events, there is something bigger at stake. The fight between what the Left frames as inclusion today, versus the right of the freedom of association continues to this day, with the Left forever seeking new groups to infiltrate and ruin.

Why Seligman would even want to be a member of a club that would have him as a member remains unclear.

Hubert Collins returns Monday with a review of Sam Francis’ Leviathan And Its Enemies, which he dubs “The Alt-Right’s Das Kapital—an allusion to the fact that Marx & Engel’s bogeymen have been entirely replaced a new and even more entrenched elite: the Managerial (I’d argue “priestly”) Caste.

While the first two thirds of Leviathan explain the managerial revolution and all its implications; the real telos of the text is in the last third: on the potential to undo it all and why past anti-managerial movements failed.

Here we move from lions and foxes to Middle American Radicals. Readers get a tour of those beautiful losers, who tried to send an arrow into Leviathan’s eye–like Joe McCarthy and George Wallace, but Francis shows great maturity in considering the New Left as well, the Bern Victims of his day. Many of you may know Francis by his enthusiasm for, and involvement with, the insurrectional candidacies of Pat Buchanan throughout the ‘90s, but Leviathan precedes that, and ends in a considerably different tone than his more paleoconservative books like Revolution from the Middle. Instead of a call to arms to join “Pat’s peasant army,” Francis dwells on the general breakdown of American society. He saw an alienation and loneliness in American society not limited to whites in Kansas, but present throughout all non-elite sectors of the country.

Collins nabs an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀ for his work here.

Thom Bargest is back with a second article in as many weeks asking Where Did It All Go Wrong? The game of dating the “start” of the “collapse” is a popular one in reactionary circles. And Barghest plays it better than most, in reductio ad absurdum. In a way, his is an answer to Mark Lilla’s recent sincere (and sincerely tone-deaf) assessment of reactionaries: The Shipwrecked Mind: On Political Reaction. (More on this next week from P. T. Carlo.) Concern trolls mistake the reactionary critique as nostalgia for a mythical golden age. That is rather a straw man…

Yet another gratuitous pic of Keira Knightley

Yet another gratuitous pic of Keira Knightley

Reactionaries must be, rather, good judges of both past and present: we know that most mutations are deleterious and that innovation is not an unalloyed good, but also that mutation is the engine of evolution and that even our oldest, fondest traditions were once innovations far back in forgotten time.

As I’ve written before, reaction is also not a celebration of stasis; reactionary order is organic harmony, adaptation, and civilization. Stasis is in conflict with the God or Nature of the world and therefore disordered, just as surely as pessimism is. So we do not long for fixed, historical, perfect Golden Age societies, only aspirational, mythical ones or ones that we’re willing to acknowledge had foundations destined to crumble. If we model the myths after our ancestors—well, we remember how to love what is best in our fathers without denying their faults.

Ryan Landry is back after the birth of his third child, so the topic for Weimerica Weekly was bound to be children: Episode 41 – Accessory Kids.

And Saturday’s Prose & Poetry™ shifts to poetry this week and an offering from H. W. Delacroix: Friend Request. A bit humorous, and very bittersweet. Autobiographical? Plausibly.

 



This Week in 28 Sherman

On the home blog, Landry looks at The Nationalization of Police. This is example #3,767 of All Your Institutions Are Belong to Massachusetts, but a particularly frightening one.

This is how the Black Lives Matter crowd does fit into the scheme. Each incident, no matter justified or not, becomes a reminder to wider society that the evil cops are shooting the poor blacks. For a day or two, black acquaintances may say how they don’t know how to handle the fear their sons go through, and then return to posting how their sons are so cray-cray and don’t take shit from nobody.

Progs want federalization so that they can control local police department procedures and neuter them. Anarcho-tyranny means possibly even disarming the cops, allowing only certain police members to carry guns. Number one priority will be hiring cops that reflect “the community”.

And besides, local control of anything is racist.

Next up, SoBL reads the tea leaves and foresees Possible Chaos At Future Protests. You can’t always count on riots to happen, but when and where they do, you can bet it’s because people want them to happen… “theater to drive particular progressive political goals and generate feelz inside you the viewer.”

The new wave of protests of our underclass (Low) on orders and in pay of the foundations and NGOs (High) often end in violence. Arson, looting and even murder of fellow protestors has popped up in the latest events in Charlotte. When a BLM protest occurs now, it is simply a matter of when will they go violent.

Landry looks at the ways this phenomenon may continue to evolve. And wins a grateful ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀.

This Week in WW1 pics: A War Prize.

Finally, Landry finds the comical Heet Jeer taking seriously the secondary implications of “Weimerica” (without evaluating, ya know, whether the shoe actually fits) in This Won’t End Well. Says Landry:

"Be prepared!" --Ryan Landry

“Be prepared!” –Ryan Landry

I am a Trump skeptic because it seems the Left has stuffed enough states with just enough immigrants to lock them in for elections. Forget Texas going blue in the 2030s, Florida and Virginia may be lost, and that is enough to doom the Trumpist insurgency and any remaining right nationally. This is the empire. They bring in foreign subjects to call them citizens to hurt the only subjects that give them a real threat. The USG empire gets periphery characters to tell it off, and this is still with the reserve currency and mightiest military in place. All empires end. The American empire is no different. Build your social network, harden your community, buy guns, keep fit, and keep your eyes and ears open.

 



This Week in Kakistocracy

Porter kicks off the week with The Hungary Games and a fantastic new trick to “win” at referenda… by not playing.

Next, he looks at the then present “Curator of Sweden”: Jenny Jenny, Who Can I Turn To? A particularly hateful slanty-eyed Swedish meatball, if ya ask me. But this bit was particularly well constructed:

Have you ever noticed how plainly feet speak the truth once the tongue has ceased lying? The 90% of the world’s population we call “minorities” live in vast majority among their own kind. Yet all seem to seek the yoke of so-called white supremacy. So supreme apparently that it compels them from native hovels to the western oppresion epicenter where their bitter suffering may at least be better subsidized.

Obviously someone is moved by this rationale. I hate you racists so much now let me in! is not a line I would find personally persuasive, though hell I’ve never even been the spokesman of a single Asian country.

Next Porter watches the Vice-Presidential Debate so you don’t have to—until the power of sleep overtook him: The Pain of Kaine. What little he did glean from that initial encounter is more than enough to make an “informed choice”…

huma-abedinIt’s interesting to contemplate the rationale behind his selection on the ticket. Of course all such decisions are premised strictly on identity optics. And since Clinton already brings a swarthy sapphic subtext, it would seem counterintuitive to balance the lesbian lead with a homo in the rear.

So presumably Buffalo Bill is there to corral skittish white voters who are increasingly concerned that the left isn’t joking about its stated racial intentions. Unfortunately, I doubt many had their reservations assuaged by Kaine’s ability to lick his own eyebrows.

LOL.

Finally in Cowards are for Tolerance, Porter explores the privileged and incoherent (because privileged) ramblings of AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson, who was recently morally whacked upside the head by the reality that “discrimination” had “impacted” a black buddy’s life. Talk about yer paradigm shift!

Courage, work, and emotion. These traits are why he is a heroic plainspoken CEO and you are a craven shitposter. For instance, you may yearn to publicly exclaim I oppose the Ku Klux Klan! but the penalties for doing so are simply too dire. Career ruination, media frenzy, and hate crime prosecutions all conspire to keep anti (white)-racists either silent or resolutely anonymous. It is into this void men like Stonewall Stephenson brace against the pitiless rightist regime. Though if it weren’t for the unanimous sympathetic support of government, business, media, and academia, I doubt even he could have summoned the courage to take this stand.

If you think tolerance is the easy out, Mr. Stephenson, you should give telling the truth a try.

 



This Week in Evolutionist X

Evolutionist X puts her stout research and Excel (or Libre Office) skills to work in creating Two Graphs, never before seen, on the—remarkably overblown (taken in context)—subject of lynching.

And that theme continues and greatly expands on Monday with some needful perspective: When “Crime” is a Euphemism for “Lynching”. Not only was lynching not a statistically “big deal” anywhere, it may be have been mostly justified:

An example of primate retributive justice

An example of primate retributive justice

I have said before that intra-racial killing is crime, and inter-racial crime is war. People who commit crimes are entitled to a lawyer, a fair trial, a jury of their peers, and a chance at rehabilitation if they are not clearly psychopaths. People who commit war (or treason) do not get trials; they get rounded up in a counter-raid and executed back.

We like to think that we enlightened moderns can rise above the level of the raw, primal chimpanzee bashing another chimp’s brains out with a rock for daring to wander near its territory, but much of the time we don’t.

(Really, one wonders how the North thought this would all turn out.)

Indeed. Evolutionist X curb-stomps the myth that fear of lynching had much to do with the Great Migration. For her legendary research and efforts here, Mrs. X takes home an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Silver Circle Award☀.

And here are the—still totally interesting— leftovers from that research.

And This Week in Anthropology Friday, it’s… Anthropology Friday: Travels into Bokhara, parte deux (of troi). A reminder pf tje amazing level of truth-telling and objectivity that comes from an observer who feels himself the civilizational superior of those he studies.

 



This Week in West Coast Reactionaries

A sudden burst of activity this week over at WCR. First, Arcane Archivist makes at debut with a view of English Identity 114 Years Ago—excerpts from a 1902 promotional pamphlet entitled “King Edward’s Realm”. Refreshing.

Argent Templar begins mapping out Our Path to Victory, Principle One of Five: “Preserve Your Men and Materials Above All Else”. He brings his ideas together with some excellent practical advice. An ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀.

Adam Wallace has the transcript of his London Forum Speech. As well as the video.

And another debut at West Coast Reactionaries… Mark Citadel comes aboard with a sketch of Alternative Evropa, which begins with an analysis of the Alt-Right as a peculiarly American phenomenon. He advocates a distinct approach for Europe. His bullet points are awesome…

  1. American “whiteness” is a new ethnic identity, one without a history.
  2. American whites do not have an authentic Christian history.
  3. The United States faces different problems than Europe does.

    Awesome… but I hope my quoting them doesn’t dissuade you from reading the remarkable analysis in-between them and the ways in which American and Europeans should cooperate to bring about The Restoration. No stranger to the podium, Citadel wins an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀.

    Finally, Platalea Ajaja finds some respite in The Allegorical Nature of Things. As well as a warning.

     



    This Week Around The Orthosphere

    Briggs’ get a very favorable review from the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons. Also scientism by another name: The New Religion Of Dataism (Another Version Of Man-As-God)… or Man as Cosmic Accountant as the case may be.

    Briggs, inspired by TUJ discovers Prince Metternich Predicts Our Future From 1834 & Nails It. He also has an entertaining review of John Zmirak’s The Politically Incorrect Guide to Catholicism. For example:

    No Catholic must profess that every pope is above average. We must even admit that some popes have even been heretics.

    Back at the home blog, he answers the question: Is Homosexuality A Disability? The answer: without teleology, it’s impossible to answer.

    And back at The Stream, Briggs finds the EPA Issues 57-State Climate Warning!IMPACTS!” the Bureaucrats cry, “IMPACTS!!“.

    Cato the Younger has a few Random Thoughts, many of which were quite good. Like:

    The modern American complains that everything gets politicized, yet still wants to live in a democratic system. Get used to the Faustian bargains of modernity folks.

    RTWT! Also a wise word on the passions in The Forge of Struggle.

    And wow! Cato was a busy guy this week… The bad news from Poland on the ultimate failure of an outright abortion band prompted this meditation: Of Kings And Demagogues.

    Bonald has some thoughts on Sexual hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is totally overrated as sins go. It’s far worse to believe that just because I do a thing, that somehow makes it a virtue.

    J. M. Smith has more thoughts after the SCP dust-up, and near apology, over Richard Swinburne’s insufficient jubilance over homosexuality: Nothing Sacred. This is not about that dust-up so much as the question as to whether there are questions “beyond the pale”. He shows, in fact, that there must be…

    Carolina, dressed for celebration of Our Lady of Agony, Viana do Castelo, Northern Portugal

    Carolina, dressed for celebration of Our Lady of Agony, Viana do Castelo, Northern Portugal

    I am not about to defend the nonsensical view that “nothing is sacred,” since this view simply makes sacrilege a holy object that must be protected at all costs. This nonsensical view is popular among comedians, who like to dress low mockery in the robes of noble thought. It is also popular among militant atheists, who are scornful of all reverence except the reverence they feel for scorn. What these sophistries point to is the fact that there can be no society in which “nothing is sacred” because a shared sense of the sacred is what makes a society a society, and not just a mass of men.

    So there are questions “beyond the pale”… but the liceity of homosexuality and antebellum slavery would not seem to be among them.

    Also at The Orthosphere (proper), Kristor tells How He Got Religion. “Got”, as in “understood”, not as in “contracted”. It is very, very good. First, his… our… everybody’s problem:

    Modernity’s inadequacy to spiritual realities is echoed in its incomprehension of consciousness, agency, meaning, value, morality, and in the limit truth, beauty, and virtue—or their antipodes. Under its own terms, Modernism cannot account for these things, and must if it is to discuss them at all resort to unprincipled exceptions. This renders it incapable of coherent treatment of any of the basic aspects of life as it is actually lived and experienced. It is, in a word, unable to understand minds, or therefore persons, or a fortiori their lives.

    Regina Magazine, Oct. 2016, pg. 84.

    Regina Magazine, Oct. 2016, pg. 84.

    Kristor proceeds to tell of the “skeleton key” that unlocked his modernist cage. It seems the spiritual should not thought of as epiphenomenon of the physical, but rather pretty much the other way around. Kristor earns a nod from The Committee, an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀.

    Knight of Númenor kicks off his podcasting career with The four needs all religions should satisfy, and a message to Christian churches in the West.

    Chris Gale takes note of A confession for this time. I like what (Based) +Chaput has to say, but I’d go farther: There’s no such thing as a “healthy democracy”. No more than there’s such a thing as a healthy cancer patient.

    And over at Faith & Heritage, David Carlton writes well and persuasively In Defense of Privilege, White or Otherwise.

    The new issue of Regina Magazine is up: The Secret Catholic Insider’s Guide to Sacred Beauty. It is a photographic feast—150 pages worth—for the eyes. I can’t actually believe they give it away (in pdf) for free.

    Dean Abbot reports Evangelical Churches as Feminist Strongholds. Don’t know how I came to follow this guy, but he’s pretty good.

    The degree to which basic feminist assumptions have been taken for granted in most of the church can barely be overstated. Naturally, this doesn’t mean that every church, let alone every member of every church, is a committed feminist, but that almost everyone in most Evangelical churches accepts two or three ideas foundational to the feminist worldview.

    That certainly comports with my experience attending a major Evangelical university and evangelical churches from 1980 through 2005. All the progressivism, with only half the social status points.

     



    This Week in Arts & Letters

    Testis Gratus goes on an Original Translation Tear! For your inspection: Gesta Francorum, Book One, Parts I & II. And here are Parts III & IV. And lo, he translates Golden Legends: Life of St. Longinus and a Passage on the Venerable Bede.

    Sydney Trads’ obligatory @WrathOfGnon classics this week: St Justin Martyr on Truth and Judgement (I don’t think that one’s quite right, but beautiful just the same), whether to Retreat to Hell or Advance to Heaven, on Old Books, and from Julius Evola on Man and Woman, King and Farmer.

    E. Antony Gray has a fresh and rather humorous: Tanuki Song with real-world applications. And also… an ode to a subject hitherto long neglected by The Poets: The Onion.

    Richard Carroll has a syllabus of sorts: Getting Started with Plato (Lysis, Laches, and Charmides).

    Heather Mac Donald is another one of those exceptions that proves the rule… She has an update on the burgeoning violence in the Windy City: Chicago Blood. Politicians score moral status points, while criminals run rampage…

    The simply stunning Victoria Justice.

    The simply stunning Victoria Justice.

    Who can blame the Chicago cops for backing off of discretionary activity? They are responding to political signals being sent by the most powerful segments of society. President Barack Obama takes every opportunity to accuse the nation’s police of lethally profiling blacks and Hispanics. The media, activists, and academics routinely denounce pedestrian stops and public-order enforcement as racially driven oppression intended simply to “control African-American and poor communities,” in the words of Columbia law professor Bernard Harcourt. Never mind that it is the law-abiding residents of high-crime areas who beg the police to clear their corners of large groups of teens and other loiterers. Those residents know through hard experience that such disorderly gatherings often produce shootings. But their voices aren’t heard by anyone, it seems, other than the police.

    Also at City Journal, in spite of low oil prices and (the execreble) Paul Krugman dancing on Texas’ grave: The state is once again the key producer in the global oil market.. And NYT’s assertion that untreated psychotic people are just part of Our Wonderful Diversity™ comes under fire in Policy Madness. Extra onions, please, and hold the vibrancy!

    Chris Gale finds C. S. Lewis and Rudyard Kipling at odds regarding the nature of theosis. Gale gives Kipling the last word. Also there: The High Church Atheist Looks at His Impending Death—strangely affective.

     



    This Week… Elsewhere

    Ed Realist: “Twitter is your choice. But it’s not your property.” It seems it’s not only the extreme right that has their panties in a wad over Twitter. It remains what it is.

    Decius Mus is still at it over at American Greatness with The Case Against “the Conservative Case. . .” … against just about anything:

    Whenever you find an article that begins with the title, “The Conservative Case” for or against something, lock your door, check your wallet, and grab your gun. You know what’s coming is an unadulterated sell-out of everything “conservatism” purports to hold dear.

    Unorthodoxy comments.

    This week in Dangerous Children… Raising a Dangerous Child is One of the Most Difficult Things One Can Do.

    A good read here, Unorthodoxy’s Learning the Taboos—a compare and contrast between Censorship American Style and the rather less intolerable Peking Duck Style.

    The Chinese and Singaporean universities are rising in the rankings because if you don’t care about local politics, you have more academic freedom than in much of the West and given existing trends, this will become more true in time. There is a severe cost to censorship, even if carried out in the private economy.

    The simplest and most likely explanation for what we’re witnessing is we’re approaching the point of the revolution eating its own in America, but with a few retrograde holdouts still available. The revolution will eat Yale and Missouri professors if necessary, but if “racist trolls” want to jump in front waving their arms, it makes an inviting snack. We need a new 2 minutes of hate every 2 minutes, otherwise people will stop supporting the regime.

    Unorthodoxy gets well-deserved ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀ for his analysis here.

    Olga Katysheva in weird shoes.

    Olga Katysheva in weird shoes.

    Also there: he digs up a classic: Angelo Codevilla’s America’s Ruling Class—And the Perils of Revolution. (One which I too have had bookmarked for a while.)

    He also takes a look at the what the betting markets are saying about the election. Something doesn’t add up.

    Axel McKibbin continues with the next installment of: Neocameral Future, Chapter 4a: “Exitocracy”—wherein the sawed off branches, upon which he sits, are ostensibly held up by the best branch suspension technology yet invented. Antinomia Imediata’s annotations I agree even less with. McKibbin also digs up a lovely gem from Moldbug.

    In case you forgot (which would be totally understandble), Lawrence Murray offers a Reminder that the Green Party Exists. Also: Democrats are the Real Paleoconservatives—or at least the latest real-talkers on racial demographics.

    There’s a lot right with Butch’s Explaination Why Cthulhu Always Swims Left and also a fair amount wrong. I’ll leave the latter as an exercise for the reader viewer.

    TUJ sketches out an argument that Rushton’s Theory of r/K Selection is Wrong. If so (or even if not): Is the Only Way to Increase Western Birth Rates Religion? Well… yes, but not in the way religious autists (and I mean that in the kindest way possible) like TUJ think.

    Cyborg Nomade comments briefly, poignantly on the fall of Western Civilization: fear. fear. fear.

    Generative Anthopologist Adam continues to examine the Absolutist Theory of Sovereignty in Ideology, Revisited. Also here: Absolutist Sovereignty and here: The Prospects of Sovereignty. A bit hard on the eyes over there, but solid content.

    Dating websites have made it possible to put a figure on the relative strength of money versus looks. It’s not that women care only about money in a potential partner. It’s more that men hardly care about it at all. Also, Heartiste links Free Northerner (only 3 years after the fact) and adds his own… colorful… views on divorce risk.

    Much has been said about Pussy-gate (or whatever they’re calling it). Locker-room banter is not news at Social Matter, nor political dirty tricks. Nor feigned indignation at coarseness whilst we live cling to life rafts in an ocean of depravity. So we’ll let Roman Dmowski say all that needs to be said about Our Pearl-Clutching Elite.

     


    Well, it was an amazing week around here. 6000 words, 139 links. I’m shocked that I’m done, and it isn’t even 1:30am local time! Anyway: Don’t be retarded. Keep on reactin’! Til next week, NBS… over and out!!

    Liked it? Take a second to support Social Matter on Patreon!
    View All

    31 Comments

    1. Thanks for the award. It’s been quite a week!

    2. Well, this is why I keep insisting you guys either drop the Moldbug theory link or clean house. Your use of Land’s “Canute” strawman says it all. You have engineered yourself into a position at total odds to Moldbug, and you should think about that. I am not sure you would actually agree with the theory at all if you understood it fully, and when you guys try to use it, you end up confusing matters.
      As for Rothblatt, his caveats are nothing of the sort. His example of Christianity and Rome is fortuitous, as I poked into this a little, and it seems that a lot of historians fully acknowledge power’s role in determining the success or failure of given cults and versions of Christianity – http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=4682
      This is also the same with the role of power and the formation of modern states and their primary influence on schisms as per Cavanaugh. If you read my posts, you will note Cavanaugh is pointing the blame directly at power, and not culture.

      1. Michael Rothblatt October 12, 2016 at 6:22 am

        Who has ever claimed that Constantine the Great, and especially Theodosius the Great did not help to cement Christianity and end Hellenism and heresies (incidentally, that’s why they’re celebrated as saints)? But what about the three centuries of Roman persecution of Christianity? That is, unless you want to claim the Prog pop-history where Christianity was Roman secret invention to brainwash the masses into obedience. Your problem is that you’re autistic fascist without an understanding of history (or much of anything for that matter). You have managed to reduce Moldbug to level of Marxist dialectic. Congrats I guess!

        1. Marxist dialectic is premised on economic class and material production being the underlying structure to reality (the base) rendering everything else superstructure. This is just a weaponised (and logically sound) extrapolation of Adam Smith. You can see here how it is just a Capitalist heresy in not claiming mystical utopia for capitalism. Problem is Adam Smith was full of shit, the anthropology is fubar. Power analysis (that is the name we are giving it now) is not premised on this mess. Sovereignty is conserved, and what sovereign powers allow or do not allow, and what they promote or supress determines culture and all else.
          This is fundamentally Moldbug’s logical conclusion. Shame Hestia is subverting it with weak tea liberalism.

          1. Michael Rothblatt October 12, 2016 at 9:50 am

            You have no idea what you are talking about, are you? You are just tossing the words around.

        1. Interesting. You can see the De Jouvnal mechanism under his analysis. Trying to blame it on French philosophers misses the mark spectacularly.

          1. Michael Rothblatt October 13, 2016 at 1:34 pm

            Therein lies your problem. In Marx’s theory classes act mindlessly according to the class interest. In your theory everyone acts mindlessly according to the Power interest. I wonder how do you explain people doing things opposite of that (ruler decreasing his power, ascetic denouncing the worldly pleasures, etc.) for religion?

            Also how are you not acquainted with Quesnay and Malesherbes, both die-hard absolutists who advocated laissez-faire economics? “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”

            Anyway, Malesherbes is a very interesting guy. He and his family died for the king.

      2. It’s interesting you put up many words to avoid the point: No power is absolute, and taking notice of this fact is not (at all, even remotely) advocacy of structures/agreements that intentionally divide power.

        We do not disagree that studying spherical cows in a vacuum is helpful, but that is the not the end game of political theory.

    3. “Religious autist”? That’s the way you talk? What should I call you then? A historical autist? A provincial autist?

      I should ask for some respect. Else please stop featuring me in your posts.

      1. Pseudo-chrysostom October 12, 2016 at 9:10 am

        I have personally come to find ‘sperg’ or ‘aspergic’ to roll off the tongue much easier, i encourage everyone else to try it as well.

      2. There is a large cohort of otherwise perfectly clear thinking individuals who simply do not grok religion. Treating it like a body of doctrines designed to solve social problems that everyone in society will be forced to assent to is, I think, a failure to grok religion–a sort of seeing the surfaces without any depth. Perhaps “autist” is not the best word to describe this phenomenon, but I haven’t thought of a better one yet. I meant no disrespect.

        I suppose there are many topics which I do not understand in any depth. If I should attempt to discuss them as though I do, you are welcome to call me a “Topic X Autist”. I should not be offended in the least, but rather challenged on the truthfulness of the claim.

        1. Pseudo-chrysostom October 12, 2016 at 11:43 am

          How common a tale it is, the man who loves to wield shivs until they find they themselves on the receiving end of a short and sweet riposte, whos keen edge slices through the pretensions of man, and sticks into their tortured animal souls.

          Of course if one searches for worthy marks to skewer, he will quickly find gods green earth to be a target rich environment! One need hardly wonder then, how the popularity of tone policing so often follows inevitably. ‘Don’t be a hater bro! What you say is bad is in fact not bad at all! But you better keep subsidizing the consequences of that vice. Which doesn’t exist and anyways did you know its actually *you* whos inherently wicked and devoid of virtue? Wow i hate you so much.’

          Oh how the rationalizations flow like water! Or perhaps an oil slick. Oozing endlessly from that refinery called ego.

          Shiv on my friends, shiv on.

        2. That’s your theory, and you’re welcome to have it. I of course don’t agree and in fact think you have no clue.

          But I do find autist pretty offensive. I might not “grok” something you think it’s grokable, but my mental faculties are very healthy.
          I could call you christfag or something like that but I do have respect for religion and I’ve shown that plenty of times.

          Civility is important. I’m sure your priest would agree.

          1. No. That’s not my theory. This is my theory. Truly, I did not mean to be uncivil. I meant (indeed I used the word twice in this post and plan to use it in the future) to communicate a real failure to understand a thing on an operative level. People who look at the surface want a “religion” that has the “right doctrines”, but that is not the heart of religion. It’s structure is.

            One can find cuckiness in Christianity in 400 AD. And the autist thinks, “Aha, cuckiness is built-in to Christianity!!” Need new religion. We need a religion with zero cuckiness. This misses the fact that the Catholic Church didn’t actually get cucked until 1500 years later. What kept that putative cuckiness from cucking? The structure. So we don’t need a religion with All the Right Doctrines™. We need a religion with the right Structure, that doesn’t get so easily commandeered by its own heresies.

            What to call this failure to understand is open to debate? I’m open to suggestions. In the meantime, “religious autism” seems to fit.

            And I don’t listen to anything my priest says that doesn’t clearly conform to what the Church has always and everywhere taught.

            1. “What to call this failure to understand is open to debate? I’m open to suggestions. In the meantime, “religious autism” seems to fit.”

              Perhaps in place of “religious autism” it would be possible to speak of a “Nietzschean hypothesis” (or something), which holds that:

              -The putatively cucky aspects of Christian doctrine define its essence; everything else about it (organizational structure, theology, rites, etc.) is accidental

              -Over time, Christianity progressively both amplifies its cuckiness and sheds its accidentals, and so morphs into Leftism

              -Notwithstanding its aggressive materialism, atheism, and complete abandonment of the Church, Leftism is nonetheless not only a form of Christianity, but its very flower, the pique of its own self-perfecting teleology.

              Is that an adequate characterization of “religious autism”?

            2. There is some wisdom in looking at things from the perspective of failure modes. But I do not think one can rightly infer the essential characteristic of a thing from it’s failure modes alone. “Cuckiness” is not Christianity’s only failure mode. Intellectual stasis and morbidity is one. World-denying aesceticism (cultural/demographic suicide) is another. Why cuckiness alone, after 1500 years, is taken to be the true essence, where these others are not seems to be a little too “just so” for my admittedly skeptical tastes.

              In each case we see one who is unwilling (or quite likely unable) to perceive the nature of the thing from its inside attempting to assert the true nature of the thing (e.g., cuckiness, or body of doctrine). This strikes me a sort of autism: seeing only the surface level and taking that as the only reality, whereas the reality would never have survived in the first place, if it had only been this simple formula.

      3. We all hate progressivism.

        We all think it’s a religion.

        People who are not, by nature, religious do not (easily at any rate) understand that the problem with progressivism is not its “doctrines” (which change every 15 minutes), but it’s totalizing nature. Start with every man a priest and work it out from there.

        So then the CORRECT RELIGION is not a progressivism only with right doctrines, but one that is not totalizing. Low Church religions tend strongly to be totalizing. Even the ones that don’t develop socially pernicious doctrines (like Baptist Fundamentalists) are still totalizing. That’s how they keep from developing socially pernicious doctrines. Low Church Christianity, Low Church Islam, Low Church Judaism are all very bad candidates for a state religion… NOT because of doctrinal content (do they ban miscegenation? Do they throw bastards to the wolves??) but because they are… LOW CHURCH.

        So computation of the “Ideal New Religion” begins not with a laundry list of what we think it should “believe”… but with the structure of how whatever it is it “believes” it will keep on believing for centuries, indeed forever. The only doctrines that actually matter from the perspective of social stability, are its own internal structure.

        1. Michael Rothblatt October 12, 2016 at 2:14 pm

          +1000

          Puritans are prime example of this. When their beliefs were good they were by all accounts an immensely successful society. Alas, because of their low-churchness they were totalizing and—more importantly—unable to resist changes in doctrine. This proved a toxic combination, however, because it made them see as their duty to impose “salvation” (=current set of doctrines) upon everyone.

          Now, because Chris B is a Fascist (actual, I don’t mean it as a slur) I already know what he will say to this. But, he thinks religion don’t real and humans don’t have feelings, or their own opinions and will, so it doesn’t really matter what he has to say on this.

          1. I would probably call it totalitarianism, rather than fascism. That seems more specific.

            1. Michael Rothblatt October 12, 2016 at 3:24 pm

              Well, when we argued back in the Outside In comment sections he was very keen on [Italian] Fascism. He seemed to have really liked that Fascist quote that family and religion exist only at the suffering of the State Almighty.

          2. If you mean fascism in the liberal/marxist then sure. But everything from green frogs to Bush to blockchain is a fascist in that sense. If you mean in the Italian fascist sense, then no. I am not republican, don’t ascribe to actual idealism and don’t place law as primary.

            1. Michael Rothblatt October 12, 2016 at 11:12 pm

              So, I take it that you’ve given up on Gentile then?

        2. Define religion and define totalizing.

    4. Michael Rothblatt October 12, 2016 at 6:14 am

      Thanks Nick!

    5. As always amazing work, thanks for linkage.

    6. Thanks for the mention again Nick.

    7. Thanks again for the links, Nick!

    8. This is unreadable.

      It’s rare to have this much interesting material formatted so badly. Unfortunate.
      The presentation in this form makes even a survey overwhelming.

      Please take the effort to format it orderly. It would be immensely appreciated.

      1. Please state the nature of the formatting emergency.

        PS. Sounds like you’re the expert and you may have just volunteered. I go to war with the templates I got. I have 9 subheadings creating 10 regions, totalling 6000 words and 139 links. Within each region coverage is generally clumped by source and then chronologically. The blockquote format is the blockquote format. I quote a lot, that’s the nature of these posts. I wish I could remove the horizontal lines from the blockquotes, but I can’t. I have neither the access, nor the css kung-fu. If you look carefully, you’ll see that my text is justified which lends a very pleasant look. I used to justify the blockquotes too, but leaving them left aligned (ragged right) sets them apart just as well. They are (because of the template) already TOO set apart for my tastes. I put in pictures mostly to break up the massive wall of text. They do not always behave perfectly with the text on all devices in all magnifications and window sizes.

        If you can do a better job, then be my guest. The pay is poor, but the gratitude immense.

        But yer probably just a troll.

    Comments are closed.