11.1.17
nationalism
I really hate to be arguing for Hegel, but nationalism makes sense in his context and only in his context. I just can't see it anywhere else in Kant or anywhere in the German idealists. But since Hegel has limitations the only way I can salvage him is with Howard Bloom and his ideas about the social meme and the super organism. That is nationalism built around the basic set of values of Judaeo-Christian Civilization. [That is revelation in the Bible and reason {Aristotle}.]
That is nationalism based on a certain social meme is justified. But nationalism based on evil is not justified. --So it would not be like Hegel. It might what Hegel was really thinking but it would not be that the "State" is the Divine ideal embodied on earth. Rather it depend on what the state is built on. Moral principles? Then fine. But if built on some false or evil meme, then No.
In other words, there is no idea here of self determination. Rather people that are savages should be set far away.
[I have no idea what the power that Hegel has over people is. I can see a lot of good. I still feel he is an important part of German idealism. I would not dismiss him so off hand like Schopenhauer did. That is to say when he says things that seem to make no sense, I would prefer to try to find what he was getting at instead of dismissing him.]
So I am really arguing for states that are based on Torah principles. For example Israel, the USA. That includes states that have a balance between church and state like Russia and England where Torah principles are embodied in the fabric of the state.
But people whose sole ambition is the destruction of Western civilization ought to be sent far away. That pretty much means any groups that are against Western civilization.
Or as someone said on the blog Amerika: When someone comes for you, you have a moral responsibility to your woman and your offspring to put their asses in the grave 1st. But before it gets there, do everything possible to maintain peace without being enslaved yourself.
I can not speak for Communists. I think they were thinking in terms of “progress” and Hegel. I just do not think that the flaws in communism were all that apparent to good hearted people. At any rate, I did notice people like Richard Epstein, and Pamela Geller that are on the right track. They seem to be are invincible when it comes to defending Western values.
That is nationalism based on a certain social meme is justified. But nationalism based on evil is not justified. --So it would not be like Hegel. It might what Hegel was really thinking but it would not be that the "State" is the Divine ideal embodied on earth. Rather it depend on what the state is built on. Moral principles? Then fine. But if built on some false or evil meme, then No.
In other words, there is no idea here of self determination. Rather people that are savages should be set far away.
[I have no idea what the power that Hegel has over people is. I can see a lot of good. I still feel he is an important part of German idealism. I would not dismiss him so off hand like Schopenhauer did. That is to say when he says things that seem to make no sense, I would prefer to try to find what he was getting at instead of dismissing him.]
So I am really arguing for states that are based on Torah principles. For example Israel, the USA. That includes states that have a balance between church and state like Russia and England where Torah principles are embodied in the fabric of the state.
But people whose sole ambition is the destruction of Western civilization ought to be sent far away. That pretty much means any groups that are against Western civilization.
Or as someone said on the blog Amerika: When someone comes for you, you have a moral responsibility to your woman and your offspring to put their asses in the grave 1st. But before it gets there, do everything possible to maintain peace without being enslaved yourself.
I can not speak for Communists. I think they were thinking in terms of “progress” and Hegel. I just do not think that the flaws in communism were all that apparent to good hearted people. At any rate, I did notice people like Richard Epstein, and Pamela Geller that are on the right track. They seem to be are invincible when it comes to defending Western values.
a mark of the spiritually deceived
As a principle a kind of spiritual deception is a accompanied by a material, passionate warmth ; the behavior of religious fanatics embraced by deception, has always been ecstatic, by reason of this extraordinary material, passionate warmth. This warmth, a mark of the spiritually deceived, is to be
distinguished from true attachment with God.
These people are merely reacting to the
presence of an invading spirit, [a result of the Intermediate Zone]. Thinking to find God in consoling feelings, they are seeking not God but themselves, that is, their own feelings of a spiritual "high", while they avoid the path of authentic learning and keeping Torah. To give several examples of such physical accompaniments of spiritual deception: one person trembled and made strange sounds, and identified these signs as the a sign of spiritual awakening ; another as a result of his ecstatic method of prayer felt such heat in his body that he needed no warm clothing in winter, and this heat could even be felt by others.
{I suspect that this kind of deceiving spiritual high got to be accepted as a sign of true spirituality in the religious Jewish world because of being affected by the Charismatic revival where it is considered an essential aspect of spirituality.}
Such phenomena of the experience of a spiritual high are undoubtedly provoked by an attitude of extreme spiritual expectation, maybe of remorse, or fear of hell, accompanied by a repetitive, yet inspiring singing, by the cadence of the teacher's words, and by the general ambiance and atmosphere of spiritual expectation in the crowd. This is merely a universal pseudo-religious experience. Such things can be observed happening all over the world, in quite distinct circumstances. The nature of such events, both then and now, would from all appearances seem to be identical. This is true whether we are discussing Samadhi of Hindu Yoga or the so called "fire baptism" of Protestant charismatics or the so called "stirring of the Spirit" or "rekindling of the Spirit" of the present day Catholic Charismatic theologians. Such happenings bear little or no
resemblance to the true and sanctifying presence of the God, anymore than do the almost identical manifestations among the Kundalini yogis of Hinduism, or those of cult Adi Da or Muslim cults.
Still I do not want to negate any and all manifestations of God. My basic approach is that of Kant that God is the area of the dinge an sich or as Schopenhauer puts it the "Ding an Sich." Thus I am aware of true and an authentic attachment with God.
distinguished from true attachment with God.
These people are merely reacting to the
presence of an invading spirit, [a result of the Intermediate Zone]. Thinking to find God in consoling feelings, they are seeking not God but themselves, that is, their own feelings of a spiritual "high", while they avoid the path of authentic learning and keeping Torah. To give several examples of such physical accompaniments of spiritual deception: one person trembled and made strange sounds, and identified these signs as the a sign of spiritual awakening ; another as a result of his ecstatic method of prayer felt such heat in his body that he needed no warm clothing in winter, and this heat could even be felt by others.
{I suspect that this kind of deceiving spiritual high got to be accepted as a sign of true spirituality in the religious Jewish world because of being affected by the Charismatic revival where it is considered an essential aspect of spirituality.}
Such phenomena of the experience of a spiritual high are undoubtedly provoked by an attitude of extreme spiritual expectation, maybe of remorse, or fear of hell, accompanied by a repetitive, yet inspiring singing, by the cadence of the teacher's words, and by the general ambiance and atmosphere of spiritual expectation in the crowd. This is merely a universal pseudo-religious experience. Such things can be observed happening all over the world, in quite distinct circumstances. The nature of such events, both then and now, would from all appearances seem to be identical. This is true whether we are discussing Samadhi of Hindu Yoga or the so called "fire baptism" of Protestant charismatics or the so called "stirring of the Spirit" or "rekindling of the Spirit" of the present day Catholic Charismatic theologians. Such happenings bear little or no
resemblance to the true and sanctifying presence of the God, anymore than do the almost identical manifestations among the Kundalini yogis of Hinduism, or those of cult Adi Da or Muslim cults.
Still I do not want to negate any and all manifestations of God. My basic approach is that of Kant that God is the area of the dinge an sich or as Schopenhauer puts it the "Ding an Sich." Thus I am aware of true and an authentic attachment with God.
10.1.17
Maybe the fall of Rome I think is a good example of total collapse. I learned in history that that is the reason for the rise of the Feudal system of the Middle Ages that I think deserves a lot more study that it gets. Even on this blog the emphasis seems to be on kings but the Feudal system was certainly not Monarchy. Rather a very complex system of balances between princes kings and the church.
Many on the Alt right think Western Civilization is on the verge of collapse. While I am encouraged by some good signs, I still think it is important to learn survival skills and to be prepared.
Many on the Alt right think Western Civilization is on the verge of collapse. While I am encouraged by some good signs, I still think it is important to learn survival skills and to be prepared.
I think the American system was mainly meant for Wasps. I mean to say from the beginning with Hobbes and John Locke I think all their thought was based on the idea that their system would be for people that accepted the Old Testament and the New. Maybe not openly but I think that underscores everything they wrote as an unconscious assumption. The trouble with some blacks I have noted is they do not accept that basic moral system. Many seem to believe it is their moral obligation to bring down the USA.
The Constitution simply was not designed to protect against a population intent on its destruction. That seems to be the main problem with blacks and Muslims.
The Constitution simply was not designed to protect against a population intent on its destruction. That seems to be the main problem with blacks and Muslims.
There is a need to define a specific set of writings as being fundamental Torah. Most of the set is well known.The Old Testament. The Two Talmuds. The Rishonim (medieval scholars).
It is just for the record I wanted to write here the basic achronim [later authorities] that are considered a fundamental part of Torah and are important to learn. R. Akiva Eiger, the Pnei Yehoshua, the Kezot HaChoshen, and the school stemming from Reb Chaim Soloveitchik that forms a commentary on the Rambam: Reb Chaim, Shimon Shkop, Baruch Ber, Naphtali Troup, Rav Shach.
The best of this last list is the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach which one can more or less learn straight. It is a very deep book but it is self contained. In fact it is so well done that I wonder if perhaps I could make the two books that God granted to me to write on the Talmud a little bit more self contained also.
You can see that there is some way to do this even with the kind of comments I did on the Talmud. for Rav Yaakov Abuchatzeira also wrote a book of learning on the Talmud that also you can simply pick up and read straight without having to look up anything. [I used to read it in Israel. but no longer have it.]
[This list should not be needed except for the fact that outside of the Yeshiva world it is virtually unknown. Also I have seen an enormous amount of confusion about this very issue so it seems like a good idea to make it known to the general public.]
It is just for the record I wanted to write here the basic achronim [later authorities] that are considered a fundamental part of Torah and are important to learn. R. Akiva Eiger, the Pnei Yehoshua, the Kezot HaChoshen, and the school stemming from Reb Chaim Soloveitchik that forms a commentary on the Rambam: Reb Chaim, Shimon Shkop, Baruch Ber, Naphtali Troup, Rav Shach.
The best of this last list is the Avi Ezri of Rav Shach which one can more or less learn straight. It is a very deep book but it is self contained. In fact it is so well done that I wonder if perhaps I could make the two books that God granted to me to write on the Talmud a little bit more self contained also.
You can see that there is some way to do this even with the kind of comments I did on the Talmud. for Rav Yaakov Abuchatzeira also wrote a book of learning on the Talmud that also you can simply pick up and read straight without having to look up anything. [I used to read it in Israel. but no longer have it.]
[This list should not be needed except for the fact that outside of the Yeshiva world it is virtually unknown. Also I have seen an enormous amount of confusion about this very issue so it seems like a good idea to make it known to the general public.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)