R.Сам 🦋🐏 Profile picture
Nov 30, 2018 16 tweets 3 min read Read on X
When a theist asks "where do you get your morality from?" to a liberal, they generally never concede that whatever ethic they subscribe to is cladistically derived from Western Christianity. They believe they derived it themselves, uninfluenced, except by "pure logic."
I point this out to Liberals all the time, at which point they generally admit that this is necessarily the case, but that they have "evolved" past Christianity (or, are "more Christian" than Christianity). This is when customized meme-Jesuses appear in discourse.
When they're upset by ppo calling America / The West a "Christian nation/civilization" they are upset because they don't say "MORE than a Christian nation." Christianity has been surpassed they say, God is dead, God is but the dream of good governance which we can now fulfill etc
The Enlightenment is merely a renegade form of Christian thinking- in which the Logos becomes, not a revelatory miracle, but a routine faculty of the mind. It corresponds to the era of Western Literary "realism" - in which "real life" ostensibly unmediated by the divine, is art.
This is of course nonsense, as every work of literary "realism" is shaped by the imagination (not by "pure reason") & is structured mythologically. Anna Karenina is a "realist" novel, but it is molded by Christian symbolism.
Reporting "just the facts" is never a complete possibility, as it assumes that we can enter a discourse immune from the "superstitious logic" of the human imagination- that this faculty can be silenced, letting "pure reason" sing in its absence. Nonsense.
Christians "sound dumb" to liberals, as they "talk like children" by deploying a symbolic discourse as opposed to one based on abstract "realist" philisophotheologies in which cosmogonies of "reason," "utility," "the public," etc- are deployed in a "realist" narrative/mythology.
Whenever they are caught in the web of their enlightenment kabbalah, they gesture toward the supremacy of the "complexity" of their rhetoric, as if their admission of being lost is synonymous with being found.
I remember what it was like to be on the opposite side, as an edgelord teenage atheist. I considered the realms of "mythology" & the realms of "real thinking" to be separate. When I no longer believed that to be the case, I began to realize how wrong I had been.
It actually genuinely amazes me how profound some of the "dumbest sounding" Christian points are in this light- their simplicity seems "too simple" until one recognizes how much there is to unpack hermenuticallly before the point can be properly understood.
William Blake went after the Deists as hard as he did (as Hamann & Jacobi did Spinozists, who are proto-deists really)- because they were encroaching on more fundamental grounds, on Imagination itself, by denying the conditions of metaphorical discourse in favor of "pure reason."
To say "Jesus is Man & God" is to speak in poetic, metaphorical/analogical terms- just as the "3=1" of the Trinity is beyond rational accounting (shoo thomists). Deism & Unitarian "rational monotheism" are the real roots of liberal theology.
Their short sightedness is based on the very grounds of their discussion- language, which is nothing BUT layers of analogy. This is why Wittgenstein & the linguistic turn marks the exhaustion of enlightenment thinking (he read his hamann...)
Even the psychological turn of Western thinking is a return to mythology & symbolism, informed by studies like Frazer's Golden Bough. Freudianism, Jungianism, Lacannianism et al- are based upon intepretations of mythology, not from "pure reason."
I think we are actually in a potentially good position looking forward when it comes to this issue. The problem is the lack of education in these fields (though people hunger for it! So many pop-culture mythological hermeneutical essays are youtube hits).
The Human Imagination is not an endlessly complex unknowable phenomenon which must be considered always as "subconscious" or "hiding." There is such a thing as Revelation. We knew this once & we'll know it again.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with R.Сам 🦋🐏

R.Сам 🦋🐏 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Logo_Daedalus

May 13
The basis of Marxism is very simple common sense stuff that pretty much everyone has already intuited considering we live more than a century later & his ideas have diffused through the entire world such that there are no states in the world that are not "marxist" to some degree. The basis of Marxism is this: "There is a fundamental conflict between the class of people who own everything & the class of people who own nothing."
Do you want to know who would agree with this? The Intelligence Agencies of the Anglsophere. The CIA would say "thanks to Marxist theory, we are aware of our role in managing & mediating this class conflict such that society remains stable & there is no revolution"-- in fact, the criticism of the Soviet Union offered by Langley & so on, even back in the 1950s, was that the USSR was engaged in "Social Imperialism" -- this is to say that the "Marxist Critique of the Soviet Union" was developed in Western Intelligence Agencies.

["Communist Principles & Tactics..."; November 1952; for J Edgar Hoover's FBI]Image
"The Western Left" is when the CIA is the vanguard party of the international revolution looking out for the interests of "subjugated populations" underneath the "Social Imperialism" of "Nominally Communist States"-- hecking Xinjiang y'all! Uyghurs!
Read 8 tweets
May 13
My message to 20-somethings is that your 20s milieu is an anarchy server & when everyone hits 30 the great sort occurs & people who are most invested in their 20something identity get completely owned by time & the rest become normal.
If you’re 30something & you are on Discord you have lost the plot. It’s forgivable to be an internet retard cybergoon in your 20s— in your 30s such a person is basically invisible & only exists as a ghostly warning to 20somethings— like the super senior at the high school party
How much should you value the opinion of someone in their 20s & younger? Not at all. You should say “I remember being young” & smile wistfully. No debate required. Time accomplishes all.
Read 4 tweets
May 8
Something that I've learned about America is that having grown up in New England, it's easier for me to be extremely cynical about "progressivism" than it is for someone raised a fundamentalist evangelical christian who then "becomes progressive" in college or whatever.
For me, the dream world of the fundamentalist evangelical kid who just wants to be punk rock & do drugs & listen to secular music & even *ghasp* evil pagan metal music-- this is just the world I grew up in, it has no "edginess" to me at all.
I try to be forgiving of the late-comers, to the "progressive converts" who like convert Catholics are far more zealous than the cradle progressives. As with anything, you have to live with it for a while before the flaws become apparent.
Read 24 tweets
May 5
Arguably the wealth polarization of the present is worse than in the Gilded Age because back then if you got rich enough you’d run out of things to buy & you couldn’t just give your money to be managed by “civil society” in the form of NGOs & charities yet, so often times you’d give a ton of money to the construction of public infrastructure with the proviso that something or other gets named after you. Even if Zuckerberg or someone else now donates enough to get the hospital named after them, the hospital is not actually public infrastructure in the way that every library Andrew Carnegie built is to this day.
Back then you’d have these heiresses sitting on millions of dollars & instead of donating to some charity at a charity gala, they’d give their money to the city or state with the promise it would build some public good that would get named after them. Andrew Carnegie personally paid for the construction of 2,509 libraries.
In my daily life I still benefit from this fact. Elon Musk ain’t building libraries for my kids. Image
Image
Image
Image
Read 8 tweets
May 2
Leftists don’t understand that Rightists are Rightists not out of “sentiment” but usually out of deference to what they believe to be the truth about reality. They literally don’t have a theory of mind for MAGA people & it’s making them as counterproductive as possible.
I remember talking to “socialists” about this— that the normie MAGA guy who calls himself a “capitalist” is generally suggesting that capitalism *outperforms* socialism in terms of providing for the common good. Obviously, this isn’t true, but they *believe* it is true— it’s not like they’re saying “I have no concern for the good of anyone & only want to be greedy because I’m evil”
It’s like— here’s the basic right wing proposition these days “there are two genders and two sexes, men & women”— “why would someone believe that to be true?!?! Are they so evil they are grifting on that made up bullshit?”
Read 5 tweets
May 2
The thing is, this is why the Elite of the Anti-Semites are also Zionists-- it makes perfect sense-- they go "Yeah, we don't like them, which is why we want them to all go over there, & we also don't like the people there, racially, so fuck 'em too, & we can send them money & shit who cares they just buy our weapons anyway, just fuck off with the jewish culture stuff blah blah"-- you can support Israel very deeply out of a sense of profound anti-semitism too lol that's why Herzl wrote in his diaries: "the anti-Semites will become our most dependable friends, the anti-Semitic countries our allies." -- why wouldn't they be? If you hate Jews so much, then put them all over there, & make some money off that arrangement. It's not like the Nazis paid room & board for the Jews in the concentration camps-- they were enslaved & had to produce goods on their behalf. The existence of Israel is "making good use of the Jews" for the elite Anti-semite-- hell, even in the urban mythology of "the Illuminati" -- the Illuminati only produces Israel in order to usher in the end of all Abrahamic religions & the institution of Global Luciferianism (which is, ultimately, American Financial Imperialism). Like in that fictitious Albert Pike letter to Mazini about "the Three World Wars" (nobody to my knowledge has ever found the primary source of this, the British Library denies that it exists in their holdings, or even where it was first forged & published). The Elite Antisemite of the Illuminati would necessarily support Israel's existence vehemently, as it was ostensibly created by them in their ostensible plot to abolish all abrahamic religions & usher in a return to some sort of mystical paganism by producing three world wars in succession etc. There is a real difference between let's say BAP or Richard Spencer, elite "antisemites" who love Israel, & the lower rungs of "white nationalists" who do not have that sort of Illuminated Bohemianism, to appreciate "Jewish Ethnonationalism" as a model for their own struggle etc. Notably, the "white nationalists" are usually "Christian White Nationalists" -- & the "Elite Antisemites" are usually Mystical Irrationalists & more interested in Occultism & Vitalism etc & not fans of Christianity at all, except where it is "Pagan" in some way.
Landshark here is actually a "Chestertonian Orthodox Anglophile" (he's an anglophile, why would a Belarussian be on the English part of the internet writing in English?) -- he loves Chesterton-- Chesterton was also fairly antisemitic by today's standards. Chesterton was a "Judeobolshevik" type of guy in his time. He depicts Communism as fundamentally "jewish" etc-- he has to invent his own sort of "Christian Socialism" in Distributism-- which is actually the same sort of "Syndicalism" favored by most of the leftoid "woke" anarchists in the anglosphere anyway-- they just want one with rainbows & others want it with crucifixes. Isn't that funny?
Landshark used to DM me quite a lot back in the day-- his whole screenshot of the Evola Theosophy thing was really more friendly shit talking & banter between us that people who hated me lifted to their own uses-- & he backed them up instead of having them go after him too-- but I've always found him a funny character for rightoids to be so attached to. Landshark was a big Peat promoter-- you know-- Ray Peat, the Marxist Leninist who loves William Blake-- Chesterton loved Blake too y'know, even though he didn't take him seriously & described him as a "mad man" etc... it's just funny
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(