Why The West Can't Be Converted

[Winchester]

I think I still call myself a neofeudal paleolibertarian.

That's because you're pretentious.

[Nihil Obstat]

That's because you're pretentious.

It is confusing on purpose. I hate all the disclaimers I have to put on more easy to digest descriptors. :sad2:

[Winchester]

It is confusing on purpose. I hate all the disclaimers I have to put on more easy to digest descriptors. :sad2:

 

I'm afraid your problem is deeper than this one issue. But there is hope. Keep trying.

[Nihil Obstat]

The neo-feudal part is essentially how I envision a non-coercively funded government to operate.

[Apotheoun]

I was a state socialist.

 

Then a feudal monarchist (which is a minarchist, if of the medieval variety. Which I was)

 

Now I am an anarchist of the libertarian stripe. It has nothing to do with utopian beliefs that people will get along. It has to do with a rejection of aggression.

I wonder what political ideology you will be supporting in a few more years.

[Apteka]

People used to be civilised. They didn't tear people apart using straps attached to horses. They didn't raid villages, rape all the women and kill all the males old enough to piss standing up. There were no punishments that involved disembowelment, with the intestines removed, piled on the victim's face, or set afire.

 

I have to wonder just how unbelievably out of touch with history someone has to be to think these times are any different.

 

The Medieval European was more a Pagan believer in Christ than an actual Christian. I myself wonder how the Catholic Church could have condoned oppression of serfs and feudalism in general, let alone the barbaric punishments that you described. Although granted, the Church did curb so called trials by ordeal, which were vestiges of an irrational pagan past. I do have to ask though, did not God condone the punishments you regard as cruel and unusual in the Old Testament? Since you are a Roman Catholic, your objection doesn't make sense. If you believe hell awaits the impenitent sinner, and God-incarnate describes it as an unquenchable fire, what is medieval torture in comparison? Perhaps the medievals with their understanding of higher principles and proper ordering of things possessed a greater clarity and dare say even greater sanity than modern man. Consider that we live in a society that permits the obliteration of a fetus in a mother's womb, and despite its sterile technology it remains a barbaric act as anything from the medieval ages. We simply can't judge our forebears because we can't understand them.

[Winchester]

I wonder what political ideology you will be supporting in a few more years.

I don't look on this one as political, but ideological. 

 

Who knows? I've grown to accept change. All this damned information just keeps showing up.

[Winchester]

The Medieval European was more a Pagan believer in Christ than an actual Christian. I myself wonder how the Catholic Church could have condoned oppression of serfs and feudalism in general, let alone the barbaric punishments that you described. Although granted, the Church did curb so called trials by ordeal, which were vestiges of an irrational pagan past. I do have to ask though, did not God condone the punishments you regard as cruel and unusual in the Old Testament? Since you are a Roman Catholic, your objection doesn't make sense. If you believe hell awaits the impenitent sinner, and God-incarnate describes it as an unquenchable fire, what is medieval torture in comparison? Perhaps the medievals with their understanding of higher principles and proper ordering of things possessed a greater clarity and dare say even greater sanity than modern man. Consider that we live in a society that permits the obliteration of a fetus in a mother's womb, and despite its sterile technology it remains a barbaric act as anything from the medieval ages. We simply can't judge our forebears because we can't understand them.

 

 

If God exists, He's the owner. Makes the rules. Does as He likes. You want to do that stuff to me or mine, better get Him to tell me Himself.

[Apteka]

If God exists, He's the owner. Makes the rules. Does as He likes. You want to do that stuff to me or mine, better get Him to tell me Himself.

 

God doesn't need to tell you anything, how about you live and understand what it means to be a Roman Catholic. All religious and traditional philosophies (Buddhism, Hinduism, Daoism, etc) are inherently anti-modern. The all possess a sense of order (Nature / Tao / Dharma / Rta ) which the modern worldview rejects. This is fundamental in understanding why we no longer possess civilization and it's because we not longer order society according to higher principles. You hold the dignity of man supreme, so barbaric punishments are out of the question, however consider that once upon a time men actually believed in an eternal hereafter, and they did not hold to the irrational view that all people go to heaven. Hell was a very real place that needed to be avoided, and actions such as spreading heresy were among the most dangerous crimes a person could commit, and so it was handled in a serious matter. There was no concept of a right of man that outstripped the right of God. The notion that men could spread falsehood, commit blasphemy, or indulge in any perverted ideology due to a "freedom of speech" or "freedom of religion" was nonsensical. The arch heretic possessed no right to spread his heresy, and the state had every right to obliterate him into non existence. The cruel punishments you mention are testaments to the gravity of the crimes that were recognized. And again, we moderns are so far from a traditional mindset that we simply can no understand Medieval civilization. For us the most vital thing is this present life, the only sin is inhibiting the individual's personal volition, and the aim is to pursue pleasure while avoiding pain. Anything and everything is permitted, so long as it does not cause harm to another person. There is no truth and all ideas are relative, and consequently no idea is superior to another. How can we who possess this modern worldview and seek to define Catholicism and every other religion by it, ever understand the Medievals? Furthermore, how can you be sure the modern way is more advance? First you have to accept nature, then you have to recognize the reality of inequality amongst men and ideas, and then you must order them from greater to lesser. Perhaps we are not as advanced as we liken ourselves to be?

[Winchester]

God doesn't need to tell you anything, how about you live and understand what it means to be a Roman Catholic. All religious and traditional philosophies (Buddhism, Hinduism, Daoism, etc) are inherently anti-modern. The all possess a sense of order (Nature / Tao / Dharma / Rta ) which the modern worldview rejects. This is fundamental in understanding why we no longer possess civilization and it's because we not longer order society according to higher principles. You hold the dignity of man supreme, so barbaric punishments are out of the question, however consider that once upon a time men actually believed in an eternal hereafter, and they did not hold to the irrational view that all people go to heaven. Hell was a very real place that needed to be avoided, and actions such as spreading heresy were among the most dangerous crimes a person could commit, and so it was handled in a serious matter. There was no concept of a right of man that outstripped the right of God. The notion that men could spread falsehood, commit blasphemy, or indulge in any perverted ideology due to a "freedom of speech" or "freedom of religion" was nonsensical. The arch heretic possessed no right to spread his heresy, and the state had every right to obliterate him into non existence. The cruel punishments you mention are testaments to the gravity of the crimes that were recognized. And again, we moderns are so far from a traditional mindset that we simply can no understand Medieval civilization. For us the most vital thing is this present life, the only sin is inhibiting the individual's personal volition, and the aim is to pursue pleasure while avoiding pain. Anything and everything is permitted, so long as it does not cause harm to another person. There is no truth and all ideas are relative, and consequently no idea is superior to another. How can we who possess this modern worldview and seek to define Catholicism and every other religion by it, ever understand the Medievals? Furthermore, how can you be sure the modern way is more advance? First you have to accept nature, then you have to recognize the reality of inequality amongst men and ideas, and then you must order them from greater to lesser. Perhaps we are not as advanced as we liken ourselves to be?

What's with this "we" bullshit?

[Apteka]

What's with this "we" the essence of cow?

 

We are all moderns by default, we can't help the way society has shaped our thinking.

[Anastasia13]

I was a state socialist.

 

Then a feudal monarchist (which is a minarchist, if of the medieval variety. Which I was)

 

Now I am an anarchist of the libertarian stripe. It has nothing to do with utopian beliefs that people will get along. It has to do with a rejection of aggression.

 

Wow, you change your mind like a girl changes clothes

 

Ladies and Gentlemen, a beloved Catholic:

http://youtu.be/8YQgKYPWC9I

[Winchester]

Wow, you change your mind like a girl changes clothes

 

The process is quite different, I assure you. 

[Apotheoun]

Wow, you change your mind like a girl changes clothes

:winner:

[Anastasia13]

The process is quite different, I assure you. 

 

Let's see, decide you need to change because it doesn't fit the occasion/got messy/etc., strip down to the essentials, change your private ones a bit (sometimes affected by selecting the right visible set), put on some visible compilation based on what you think works, and review and complete the details to be fully put together. I'm not sure this is that different, except if you are talking putting the right leg in or taking it out first, in which case I remind you, a girl changing clothing isn't quite the same as the Hokey Pokey.