Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Someplace special, eh. TV 6's 2024 in review
Dull Academic Incessant Liturgical Yapping: Philosophical Orations on Order & Reaction
Science says it's gonna get real cold soon. I don't buy it.
Today's the day.... Just went for an hour walk with no shoes. Not even close to getting frostbite.
Daily Poor - 1
Science - 0
Daily Poor - 1
Science - 0
Dull Academic Incessant Liturgical Yapping: Philosophical Orations on Order & Reaction
Someplace special, eh. TV 6's 2024 in review
What are some of the worst archetypes in the far right online space?
I'll start with "liberal but racist."
Inb4 "poor but owns a sauna."
I'll start with "liberal but racist."
Inb4 "poor but owns a sauna."
We have actually contrived to invent a new kind of hypocrite. The old hypocrite, Tartuffe or Pecksniff, was a man whose aims were really worldly and practical, while he pretended that they were religious.The new hypocrite is one whose aims are really religious, while he pretends that they are worldly and practical.
— G.K. Chesterton
Nationalism — that great banner of the supposed right — began as pure revolutionary poison. The "nation" was invented specifically to destroy proper authority, replacing divine right and natural hierarchy with a nefarious abstraction: "the will of the people."
Consider: When revolutionaries spoke of "the nation," they meant precisely the destruction of traditional order — the elimination of proper regional distinctions, the abolition of natural social classes, the replacement of concrete loyalties with abstract citizenship. The "nation" was created explicitly to destroy the very things modern nationalists claim to defend.
The nationalists saw their kings as enemies of "the nation," and fought bloody wars to usurp them. Furthermore, even when early nationalists tolerated kings, they did so only insofar as monarchs could be reimagined as "servants of the nation" rather than divinely appointed rulers. A king's legitimacy no longer stemmed from God or dynasty or genuine authority and rulership, but from his supposed embodiment of national will — a profound demotion wrapped in superficial deference. The nation itself became the true sovereign, with the monarch reduced to a symbolic figurehead or administrative functionary. This was nationalism's twin assault on kingship: for those who resisted, the guillotine and the firing squad; for those who submitted, a more insidious death — stripped of true authority, paraded about as mere servants of an abstraction, their divine right replaced by the fickle approval of "the people." Whether through blood or humiliation, nationalism meant the death of kingship, a degradation of proper authority into revolutionary chaos, i.e., democracy, leftism.
When someone wields nationalism as a supposed right wing principle, ask them to explain why they're wielding a blade forged specifically to cut the throats of kings.
Consider: When revolutionaries spoke of "the nation," they meant precisely the destruction of traditional order — the elimination of proper regional distinctions, the abolition of natural social classes, the replacement of concrete loyalties with abstract citizenship. The "nation" was created explicitly to destroy the very things modern nationalists claim to defend.
The nationalists saw their kings as enemies of "the nation," and fought bloody wars to usurp them. Furthermore, even when early nationalists tolerated kings, they did so only insofar as monarchs could be reimagined as "servants of the nation" rather than divinely appointed rulers. A king's legitimacy no longer stemmed from God or dynasty or genuine authority and rulership, but from his supposed embodiment of national will — a profound demotion wrapped in superficial deference. The nation itself became the true sovereign, with the monarch reduced to a symbolic figurehead or administrative functionary. This was nationalism's twin assault on kingship: for those who resisted, the guillotine and the firing squad; for those who submitted, a more insidious death — stripped of true authority, paraded about as mere servants of an abstraction, their divine right replaced by the fickle approval of "the people." Whether through blood or humiliation, nationalism meant the death of kingship, a degradation of proper authority into revolutionary chaos, i.e., democracy, leftism.
When someone wields nationalism as a supposed right wing principle, ask them to explain why they're wielding a blade forged specifically to cut the throats of kings.
Forwarded from NP's Deranged Rants (NP NP)
My little man just loudly shit himself then pissed straight up into the air while screaming, screamed in my face then fell asleep.
I guess he's an average telegram commenter
I guess he's an average telegram commenter
Every attempt at "moderate" or "conservative" liberalism will fail. You cannot contain chaos. You cannot preserve "some" connection to eternal truth while accepting the logic of its destruction. The corruption always spreads until all proper order, all truth is severed and only will remains.
Forwarded from Working Men Memes (Wesla Johnkowski)
Dull Academic Incessant Liturgical Yapping: Philosophical Orations on Order & Reaction
First in person Daily Poor meetup scheduled in 20 minutes at Richie's Grocery in Dollar Bay
Phocron at Daily Poor Meetup 12.26.24
Phocron
Remembering when @Phocron led us in song at the meetup at Richie's Grocery in Dollar Bay. Good times.
A kid I'm teaching just said "erm, what the sigma." It's over. Thomas has defeated me.
You could do this all day, finding jobs (many of which are urgently hiring with no experience) near houses those jobs could easily pay for.
But there's a paralyzing fear about actually doing this, even temporarily. What would mom and dad say if you chose to become a postal clerk in small-town Iowa for a few years? What would women say on dates?
The limits of "acceptable success" appear to be so narrow as to be unobtainable, and a belief in a mythical past where our forerunners didn't have to move across the country to find their Mayberry persists in spite of all evidence showing that such a world never really existed.
It is amazing how anxiety about social status can cause people (even very intelligent people) to lose touch with reality and ignore very basic rationality. That anxiety will drive people to re-write history, and to compare themselves to whatever is on TV -- until they are miserable, anguished, and indignant.
Absolutely poisonous mentality. As soon as you shake it off, all of the sudden, everything seems possible and there are literally more fantastic opportunities out there than you can even pursue.
But there's a paralyzing fear about actually doing this, even temporarily. What would mom and dad say if you chose to become a postal clerk in small-town Iowa for a few years? What would women say on dates?
The limits of "acceptable success" appear to be so narrow as to be unobtainable, and a belief in a mythical past where our forerunners didn't have to move across the country to find their Mayberry persists in spite of all evidence showing that such a world never really existed.
It is amazing how anxiety about social status can cause people (even very intelligent people) to lose touch with reality and ignore very basic rationality. That anxiety will drive people to re-write history, and to compare themselves to whatever is on TV -- until they are miserable, anguished, and indignant.
Absolutely poisonous mentality. As soon as you shake it off, all of the sudden, everything seems possible and there are literally more fantastic opportunities out there than you can even pursue.
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
If you believe this is real, you have an IQ of less than 140.
— Bog Beef