"Climax" year of each turning

[Blazkovitz]

(06-04-2020, 01:26 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: Isoko ha ha. There has never been a "center-right awakening," and there won't be one this time. How ignorant of history he is.

Yes, either a Dionysian awakening (leading to what I call Inclusivism) or an Apollonian one (leading to Theocracy)

[Isoko]

(06-04-2020, 01:26 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: Isoko ha ha. There has never been a "center-right awakening," and there won't be one this time. How ignorant of history he is.

This is coming from a man who compares himself to the old prophets in the Bible and actually believes literally he is a prophet. Go and see a doctor like I last suggested as I don't feel comfortable talking to a mentally ill person.

And you are mentally ill.

Blazkovitz,

People are fed up with the left. The inclusivity mindset you talk about is actually dying out. Go on twitter and read what people are saying. You have two camps. Those who are fanatical about diversity (the low IQ followers) and the people critical of the current system and think it is driving society into the ground (the higher IQs). If the critics are right wing, then naturally the next Awakening is going to be more right wing.

This is why I say centre right because no one wants to go full nazi tard but they are fed up with globalisation, mass immigration, the fanatical LGBTQ culture and other aspects of it. If the silent majority want it, chances are the kids will probably start to push back against the dominant status quo in about 20 years or so.

And the thing is - just how much more left can you go? Towards the right to sacrifice newborns on an altar because it is a choice? The right to go and kill someone because you feel butthurt? There is just no more left you can actually go without going into Sodom and Gomorrah territory.

Hence why the next awakening is going to be more right wing in nature. At least in the West.

Also for those who do not believe in right wing Awakenings - I would happily point out historical occurrences that were in nature right wing. The entire great awakening episode in the West, particularly in America, were right wing. All that getting back to God and fighting sin is, in its nature, right wing.

The Catholic fight back against Protestantism and the counter reformation was right wing. An awakening it was to see masses of people converted to the Protestant cause, only to get them back into the fold. It worked well as we can see former hot beds of resistance such as the Czech lands, Hungary, France and elsewhere falling back into the Catholic fold.

Of course people on here will disagree with me because politically speaking they are attached to the left and believe heavily in the myth of progress as some sort of established doctrine to the incoming left wing kingdom of heaven. They use Strauss and Howe like the Bible to attempt to vindicate themselves, which I view as rather sad and wrong.

[Blazkovitz]

(06-04-2020, 05:24 AM)Isoko Wrote: Blazkovitz,

People are fed up with the left. The inclusivity mindset you talk about is actually dying out. Go on twitter and read what people are saying. You have two camps. Those who are fanatical about diversity (the low IQ followers) and the people critical of the current system and think it is driving society into the ground (the higher IQs). If the critics are right wing, then naturally the next Awakening is going to be more right wing.

This is why I say centre right because no one wants to go full nazi tard but they are fed up with globalisation, mass immigration, the fanatical LGBTQ culture and other aspects of it. If the silent majority want it, chances are the kids will probably start to push back against the dominant status quo in about 20 years or so.

You always think in terms of Brown sector, Nationalism and even Nazism as archetypes of the right. Yet Nationalism is attractive primarily to the Civic archetype. Your favourite alt-lite is also a Civic camp, and won't be relevant for the Awakening. An awakening will be more likely based on the Theocratic blue sector. IQ, migration, ethnic identity, etc. are civic concerns. Prophets are more likely to be upset about spiritual emptiness of both Nationalism and Inclusivism, and this will drive some of them back to Christ. The Neo-Puritans could be more like a Christian counterpart of the Taliban, they wouldn't like Hitler, Dugin or Bannon.

[Isoko]

Blazkovitz,

Sorry but I'm not buying. I think that we need to look more closely into the history of the Soviet Union to see how a real awakening actually takes shape. 

During the 1980s, amongst the Soviet youth there were three groups. Those who were fanatically loyal to Communism. Those who were starting to lose faith in the system but still believed that the Soviet system would endure. It had to pull through, right? Then you had the dissidents who were the minority. They were mainly underground and supported views such as Western democracy and what have you.

When the system collapsed, the first two groups started to yearn again for that strong Soviet system that had protected them and they found this with Putin. The idea of being big and strong and feared again played very well. Even today in Putin's Russia, you can see the echoes of the Soviet Union still reminiscent. Many of those fantatics went into the Orthodox Church, could you not believe it.

The third group, the dissidents, they lost out initially to the aftermath of the collapse but their ideas started to heavily influence the next Awakening generation who cannot remember the Soviet Union and do not have any fondness for it.

Now if we look at the West, we see the same situation. We have our fanatics who are heavily into political correctness and diversity and are currently burning up American cities as we speak. Then we have the vast majority of millennials who are slowly starting to become disillusioned but still believe the system will endure and that it is the correct way of doing things.

Then we have the dissidents. Guess who the dissidents are today? That's right. The dissident right. So my belief is that if the West does start to heavily decline, the only way to put it back together is with more right wing ideas. Naturally the next awakening will lead more to this and it'll be the dissidents who help lead the charge with that.

Don't get me wrong, it won't be a huge full turn to right hence why I call it the centre right awakening. I'll write more abour my thoughts on how this awakening will take place and what it will be about. 

But all I know is - you can only keep going left for so long until eventually the next pendulum has to swing back to the right in order to correct the problems associated with it.

[Bob Butler 54]

(06-04-2020, 08:25 AM)Isoko Wrote: But all I know is - you can only keep going left for so long until eventually the next pendulum has to swing back to the right in order to correct the problems associated with it.

From my perspective, the progressive era ran from FDR to LBJ. The conservative era ran from Nixon to hopefully Trump. The US has swung right for too long, and has to swing left to correct the problems. The core of it is the belief in political fantasies. If you don't want the government to get bigger, your taxes to go up, you just yell hoax or fake news. The notion that policy makers have to respect the science is at center.

Now you are obviously interested in other things, but you seem to have it backward.

[Eric the Green]

(06-04-2020, 04:48 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote:

(06-04-2020, 01:26 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: Isoko ha ha. There has never been a "center-right awakening," and there won't be one this time. How ignorant of history he is.

Yes, either a Dionysian awakening (leading to what I call Inclusivism) or an Apollonian one (leading to Theocracy)

There's always some of both in all awakenings.

[Isoko]

Bob,

I think that your argument mainly rests on the American perspective. I am thinking more along the lines of a 'Western Prospective' which I will confess mainly focuses on Europe. 

Now in response, when it comes to America, it is a different kettle of fish altogether. You guys have been battling between progressivism and conservatism since the first pilgrims arrived on America's shores. If I am to be honest, I think America will keep this fight going until eventually both sides run out of steam and synthesise into some sort of new United Centrism based on values from both wings, respectively. 

You are of course right, more needs to be done but it isn't time yet for it. America needs to downsize before attempting anymore progressive economic reforms. But when it comes to social, it does need to swing back to the right as it is getting too crazy there. Once again, that centrist balance.

As for Europe, well Europe is basically the history of extremes. It goes extreme left one minute and extreme right on the other, as is the nature of its Faustian existence. So give it the start of this decade and into the next and we will see Europe swinging back into identitarism again. 

That said, what is the centre right Awakening I talk about? It is basically family values. Why is the West dying today? Why is the world quickly succumbing to problems associated with the West? The answer is family values. They are pretty much dead in the water. Therefore the next awakening is probably going to be based on preserving marriages, having bigger families and changing the way we live and work on more family friendly conservative values.

I expect dissident right ideas such as men's rights, respect for all groups (not just one group or the other) along with harsher measures for crime, limited immigration and even fostering more national ideas in a world going back into protectionism to be of a key value.

Of course people will squeal on here and say it's against the generational theory, it cannot be done, it's crazy, etc, etc but then where else can you go from here? Especially in Europe's case? The new ideas are now in the right and not the left. The left is bankrupt on ideas. So I naturally expect in this century more rightist values to start to seep into the mainstream culture.

[Blazkovitz]

(06-04-2020, 08:25 AM)Isoko Wrote: During the 1980s, amongst the Soviet youth there were three groups. Those who were fanatically loyal to Communism. Those who were starting to lose faith in the system but still believed that the Soviet system would endure. It had to pull through, right? Then you had the dissidents who were the minority. They were mainly underground and supported views such as Western democracy and what have you.

Like during the American awakening there were many "square" youths who supported GI ideals, loved big cars and suburban villas and supported the Vietnam War. Hippies and New Agers were the minority in the 60s, but their ideals were mainstreamed during the 3T, just as S&H theory wants.

Quote:But all I know is - you can only keep going left for so long until eventually the next pendulum has to swing back to the right in order to correct the problems associated with it.

To correct the present system we need to restore the ethical dimension of sanctity/purity (best exemplified by Christian conservatives) to balance the Millennial saeculum's ethics of care. The ethics of care have gone too far. This is the root of PC. You cannot say things that will make some sensitive minority member cry. No harsh truth allowed. But ethics of sanctity ceased to exist. People see nothing wrong with getting stoned, or having 100 sexual partners a year, if nobody gets harmed. But if you believe that (as Christians say) we are all temples of the Holy Spirit or (as Stapledon said) vessels of the cosmic mind, you don't think it's OK for a human being to be degraded this way. Christian extremism is not likely to be very popular during the 2T, but some will show and its revulsion against Millennial techno-hedonism will certainly influence the mainstream.

You want family values. I want them too, and think they will be restored in due time. During a 2T there is always some dislike for children and parenting, but an Apollonian Prophetic generation can go from ascetic celibacy during the 2T to exalting marriage during the 3T and 4T.

[Eric the Green]

(06-05-2020, 02:42 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote:

(06-04-2020, 08:25 AM)Isoko Wrote: During the 1980s, amongst the Soviet youth there were three groups. Those who were fanatically loyal to Communism. Those who were starting to lose faith in the system but still believed that the Soviet system would endure. It had to pull through, right? Then you had the dissidents who were the minority. They were mainly underground and supported views such as Western democracy and what have you.

Like during the American awakening there were many "square" youths who supported GI ideals, loved big cars and suburban villas and supported the Vietnam War. Hippies and New Agers were the minority in the 60s, but their ideals were mainstreamed during the 3T, just as S&H theory wants.

Quote:But all I know is - you can only keep going left for so long until eventually the next pendulum has to swing back to the right in order to correct the problems associated with it.

To correct the present system we need to restore the ethical dimension of sanctity/purity (best exemplified by Christian conservatives) to balance the Millennial saeculum's ethics of care. The ethics of care have gone too far. This is the root of PC. You cannot say things that will make some sensitive minority member cry. No harsh truth allowed. But ethics of sanctity ceased to exist. People see nothing wrong with getting stoned, or having 100 sexual partners a year, if nobody gets harmed. But if you believe that (as Christians say) we are all temples of the Holy Spirit or (as Stapledon said) vessels of the cosmic mind, you don't think it's OK for a human being to be degraded this way. Christian extremism is not likely to be very popular during the 2T, but some will show and its revulsion against Millennial techno-hedonism will certainly influence the mainstream.

You want family values. I want them too, and think they will be restored in due time. During a 2T there is always some dislike for children and parenting, but an Apollonian Prophetic generation can go from ascetic celibacy during the 2T to exalting marriage during the 3T and 4T.

Myself, I don't care about the ethics of sanctity too much, as you define it. Being stoned may not be degrading in many cases, and may release anxiety. It is a matter of personal responsibility and moderation; self-care if you will. Why not have multiple sex partners if that's what you want? I don't care too much for family values, since family to me was just a suburban method of isolating and confining people. It's way too narrow as a type of human connection. But, I realize others value it, so it's a matter of to each his own, rather than "famla valyas" shoved down our throats by fundie-dementalists. 

Christian conservatives are not good exemplars of anything whatsoever. Most of them don't even conceive of the Holy Spirit as pouring through vessels of the cosmic mind; their notion of religion is nothing more than obedience, EXclusivism, and superstition, plus right-wing politics of the worst sort that gave us Bush and Trumpturd.

PC can get tiresome. That's not a great evil, though. But caring for yourself and others is always good. It's just the golden rule. Sanctity is good too, but not as you define it. To hold something sacred is not much different from caring for it. It is to see something or someone's inherent value as being a manifestation and expression of God. To me, great religious art sanctifies religious experience, and that's a high value indeed.

It's a clever distinction, if you came up with it, so I salute you for that. Some of your predictions may not be off the mark too. Isoko's statement that implies we have gone too far left is ridiculous in the extreme. Laughable and deplorable.

The older notion that seems to me worthy of revival is not conservative Christianity, but virtue. Traditional Christianity and Renaissance humanism alike taught and propagated that notion, and it's embodied in esoteric philosophy and eastern philosophy too. The virtues are universal. The 7 main virtues are key stations on the spiritual hero's journey, and can be contacted in the 7 chakras within us. You can explore them through Bach's Toccata and the Tarot.
http://philosopherswheel.com/toccata.htm

[Isoko]

Blazkovitz,

I'd say you have a very good point with the boomers. They were mainly split 50/50 between those who preferred the previous civic model and those who wanted radical change on a leftist scale. However one thing united the boomers and that was the love of the new forms of entertainment becoming available such as pop music and TV entertainment.

In essence compared to the Soviet Union, I'd say that the hippies were more of a majority on one side of the spectrum and started to really win out with their view points after the Vietnam War ended.

Woodstock was a pretty big deal and if you look at all those concerts at the time, it was filled with thousands of hippies, something that just never took root elsewhere.

Onto the second paragraph,

You know, I do agree with you and what you describe is pretty much the centre right awakening I am talking about. That is the reintroduction of sanctity and purity as you describe. The thing is though only the right wing can pull this off as it is something the left have no interest in (it restricts freedom). I call it centre right because no one is going to go for radical right measures.

That said, the alt lite and some dissident right thought will be used to help bring this new awakening about and it is inevitable. If you look at the boomers for example, particularly in the UK, alot of them were heavily influenced by Communism, particularly Trotskyism that was strongly evident in the British Labour Party. Of course, the mainstream didn't want full blown Communism as it was just too radical for them so many ideas were watered down into what we see as the establishment of today's dominant thought.

I think that the same will apply to the new right in the coming decades. Mainly in Western societies. As for a Christian Taliban, it exists but mainly in the U.S. I know that Theonomy and the writings of Rushdoony were pretty big in the 1990s but have died out since. However, something along those lines could start to take shape there again in the coming decades. 

As for Europe? No, Europe never did Christian Extremism. I think Identitarism with a more cultural Christian twist is going to take root in Europe. No idea about the UK though as the UK as a rule never does extremism. 
 
As for Eric I just ignore him these days. He gets very unpleasant if you don't agree with him as other members attest to. Which is a shame because if he moderated his points of view and stopped declaring himself the next prophet, we could probably get along ok.

[Blazkovitz]

The alt-lite are hardly followers of ethics of sanctity or traditional concept of virtue. Their in-your-face masculinity and ethnic pride are quite typical of barbarian societies. For example they endorse the PUA (pick up artist) culture. Some of them called Harvey Weinstein's victims "whores" just to annoy feminism. Some feminists, those who oppose so-called raunch culture are closer to the ethics of sanctity than the alt-lite can imagine. Google "filianism" to find about a feminist religious movement which endorses an ethos of sanctity. They call it "purifying the image sphere". This sort of thing will probably gain prominence during the 2T.

Maybe this article explains it best:
https://happyinnocentmusumesenshi.wordpr...t-forever/

No, Eric, I'm not that smart ;P The distinction between ethics of care and sanctity was invented by Jonathan Haidt,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt

[Bob Butler 54]

(06-06-2020, 02:35 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote: No, Eric, I'm not that smart ;P The distinction between ethics of care and sanctity was invented by Jonathan Haidt,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt

Well, it is not all that new. A long time ago, I was into evolutionary biology. It went into how man's basic drives evolved in our hunter gatherer years, and how they shaped modern societies. Some authors got into a distinction between the role of the tribal chief in making day to day decisions, and the role of the shaman in maintaining long term ethics. They fell out of favor after stepping on some feminists and the feminists stepped back. Too much emphasis on the male hunters, too little on the female gatherers. Still, they were correct that you had to understand the structure of ancient hunter gatherer societies if you expect to understand how modern society works.

Haidt seems to have reinvented all that without too much mention of how it evolved?

[Eric the Green]

(06-06-2020, 02:35 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote: The alt-lite are hardly followers of ethics of sanctity or traditional concept of virtue. Their in-your-face masculinity and ethnic pride are quite typical of barbarian societies. For example they endorse the PUA (pick up artist) culture. Some of them called Harvey Weinstein's victims "whores" just to annoy feminism. Some feminists, those who oppose so-called raunch culture are closer to the ethics of sanctity than the alt-lite can imagine. Google "filianism" to find about a feminist religious movement which endorses an ethos of sanctity. They call it "purifying the image sphere". This sort of thing will probably gain prominence during the 2T.

Maybe this article explains it best:
https://happyinnocentmusumesenshi.wordpr...t-forever/

No, Eric, I'm not that smart ;P The distinction between ethics of care and sanctity was invented by Jonathan Haidt,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt

Yes, I know his work. I didn't remember that he used those words. I don't approve of those who follow his ethics of sanctity. They are right-wing, and I disagree with them. That kind of ethics does not need to be revived; it needs to die if it can't transform into a new-age version of itself.

As you know I am not so informed about internet culture within very young groups. I don't know what the alt-lite is, or what it has to with the previous 2T, or whether it has any great size or influence. Obviously it doesn't sound attractive, to say the least.

[Remy Renault]

I don't see how a restoration of Christian values and fighting racism and police brutality would be diametrically opposed to one another, seeing as after all, plenty of Latinos and African-Americans are practicing Christians.

[David Horn]

(06-07-2020, 07:02 AM)Remy Renault Wrote: I don't see how a restoration of Christian values and fighting racism and police brutality would be diametrically opposed to one another, seeing as after all, plenty of Latinos and African-Americans are practicing Christians.

That they are seen as opposing values is one of the issues I have with Evangelicalism.  It's been too easily swayed by the very people it's pledged to oppose.  If there is an Antichrist, he's a live and well, preaching every Sunday and Wednesday at his Megachurch somewhere in the Bible Belt.

[Isoko]

Blazkovitz,


I concur that the Alt Lite is not exactly about values of sanctity but as with all sort of revolutionary ideas against the mainstream, they always start out as extreme to begin with before modernising and mainstreaming themselves. We saw this as I mentioned earlier with the leftists who became the modern guardians of PC culture and I expect that the right will start to follow suit. Already, even in the mainstream conservative culture, those basic alt right ideas have been adopted by Trump or Johnson and will continue to do so by the Populists in Europe.

Remy,

The fight against racism, in my eyes, was a genuine 1960s movement that had the right values in mind. The right for black people to attend university, ending apartheid, etc. Today's so called "fight' is nothing more then blatant religious belief and defending ghetto culture. I've got issues with it because I see nothing noble in killing people and burning down cities over the death of a man who was quite frankly a very bad criminal.

[Bob Butler 54]

(06-07-2020, 11:03 AM)Isoko Wrote: The fight against racism, in my eyes, was a genuine 1960s movement that had the right values in mind. The right for black people to attend university, ending apartheid, etc. Today's so called "fight' is nothing more then blatant religious belief and defending ghetto culture. I've got issues with it because I see nothing noble in killing people and burning down cities over the death of a man who was quite frankly a very bad criminal.

I disagree very strongly on the recent events.  The racist cops should not appoint themselves as judge, jury and executioner.  There should be equal justice under law, and the blacks have never been granted it.  Many conservatives are pushing the violent racist position.  Many do not distinguish between those protestors correctly assembling to protest for the redress of grievances and the looters.  

Still, such people are apt to find themselves on the wrong side of history.

[Isoko]

Bob,


I'm not saying I agree with the police on this one. But what I am saying is George Floyd himself was no Saint as people are making him out to be and the demonstrations as a majority mainly ended up in anti-fascist styled looting. That is not about being on the wrong side of history - it's about criticising what is clearly a wrong.

Also I would like to point out that the statistics point out that unfortunately, black people in the U.S, mainly from the ghetto culture, are more likely to be involved in violent crime, particularly against the police. I know a lot of police there get shot at by blacks.

If you want to have equality before the law regarding blacks in America, then you have to address heavily the problem of criminality in this group otherwise these unfortunate events of burnt out cops going crazy and becoming a law unto themselves is going to keep happening.

I know one thing though. None of this would be tolerated in the Russian Federation. I'll give you the example of the Uzbeki migrant workers here. They always get stopped and checked by the police for their documents and to make sure they are in the country legally. Any crimes against the local populace is handled very quickly. There is no problems. They work hard and no one is complaining about racism. They end up going back to Uzbekistan with a lot of money.

There is also a small black community in Russia but they are very well behaved, they usually study at the university, there is no racist attacks against them and they usually go home with the skills they have learned in Russia. The police never usually bother them either.

So no idea what is going on in America but it seems to be you have racist cops on the one hand and a criminally prone community on the other. How can you effectively squash both problems in order to prevent this from happening again?

[Blazkovitz]

(06-07-2020, 07:02 AM)Remy Renault Wrote: I don't see how a restoration of Christian values and fighting racism and police brutality would be diametrically opposed to one another, seeing as after all, plenty of Latinos and African-Americans are practicing Christians.

Actually, serious Christianity and the ethics of sanctity are more prevalent among people of colour than among Whites. Whites mostly follow Hollywood values nowadays, and this includes many neoreactionaries as well.

The Filianists I mentioned, follow a syncretic ideology which combines some elements of Christianity, feminism and astrology. Their theology features a Divine Daughter, though Christ is believed to be a male incarnation of hers. Many of the believers appear to be Japanese. The issue I have with their ideology is the demonisation of masculinity. Not all men with strong warrior personalities are like Demon Trump.

Eric the Green Wrote:As you know I am not so informed about internet culture within very young groups. I don't know what the alt-lite is, or what it has to with the previous 2T, or whether it has any great size or influence. Obviously it doesn't sound attractive, to say the least.

Alt-lite is a watered down form of neoreaction, which accepts democracy as long as it's not "liberal democracy".

[Isoko]

Blazkovitz,

I agree in essence that non-white people are usually more religious then white people are these days. However it's usually the ones from Africa and South America that tend to be. The ones who grow up in Western society take on the Hollywood values that you describe after a generation. I found in the UK, only the older generation of blacks went to church as much as the older generation of whites.

As for Russia, despite there being this Orthodox revival, it tends to be more political in nature and not at all a social inspiration. The legacy of Communism and socialist based materialism still rings high. However, it's not just the Christians but also the Muslims too that follow this trend. With the exception of the Caucus people, the Tartars, Uzbekis and Tajiks, despite being Muslim, are largely just as secular as the main Russian population. In terms of behaviour, I find all of the groups largely behave quite similar.