Completely wrong IM(not so)HO on the factual content of Twitter. Yes, there is a lot of slop but it quickly distilled to leave a core which is generally far more likely to reflect reality than the MSM which is never distilled and remains slop. Also disagree on outrage porn. It is outrage that keeps people motivated to want real change. Being outraged is tiring - removing the outrage is the cure. The alternative is pretty much what exists in the U.K. - a pathetically complacent populace, oblivious to the world around them who still think the BBC is their friend, headed for the edge of the cliff, blissfully unaware.
"It is outrage that keeps people motivated to want real change"
Agreed. It is arguable however that it is outrage and moral sentiment absent Principle that actually prevents real change. What people want just helps them be led by the nose.
If the problems are at root deeply structural, or say in the limits of allowable thought in a civilisation itself, all the outrage/desire in the world is utterly impotent. It can help suppress symptoms, maybe, for a little while anyway.
Motivation being absent without emotionality is a very noteworthy sign though. A body politic like that is deeply sick. The heart and the will are not communicating.
Daggone, I'm still laughing over Q#14, Olaf makes Angela look like Bismarck. Ain't that the truth. Kamala was a good candidate. How to converse with those that never see. I don't know. Why bother? They will never change. It's called pissing in the wind. Not a good outcome. What a great article we have here. I have to read this over again.
re: "Nobel Prizes are influenced by power, political trends, taboos, tastes and so on. This is self-evident." One of the taboos in the Noble Prize committee is "cure". The Nobel Prize in Medicine has not been awarded for a "cure" since 1945 - for penicillin. In the entire year history of the Nobel Prize, over 120 years - there has been only one award for a cure - according to the Nobel website. However, I have counted at least 10 prizes awarded for curative discoveries or technologies - but the word cure is not used in the award. CURES are taboo. The word cure is forbidden, even when the award is given to a cure. https://tracykolenchuk.substack.com/p/the-nobel-cure-problem
Don’t read Libs of TikTok, what? Ummm don’t agree with most of it.. smell a bit full of shit.. Don’t compare the complacent zombied British to freedom loving Americans.. what percent are your people vaccinated? The only thing I agree with is about immigration
To counter the gloomy inevitability of power as Schmittian decision/exceptionism, there is this from Rene Guenon via Wael B Hallaq in "Restating Orientalism" Ch3:
"Scheler argued that it is in the essence of the cosmos to exhibit an underlying ethical order, one that is the work of a transcendental deity; and it is because of the very existence of this moral character that humanity is bound by it as a doting code, an ordo amoris. It is precisely because this Schelerian code, or the Guenonian “principle”, is lacking in Western civilisation that it is “eminently unstable”, eminently without fixity."
Power as dictated by moral taste (or hysteria) with post hoc justifications as cover, are but the fallback from an absence of Principle. Power doesn't have to be this way, but so long as the West is into always doubling down and never listening to elders, it probably does.
Here is a question that I have. If human beings did not create themselves which is one thing we can come pretty close to being 100% certain of. Then who are we to say what human intelligence actually is? IQ testing is to imperfect it’s an insult to creation in a way as are most methods of defining humanity. I don’t think separation is the answer, that can be looked at from every angle. If a person doesn’t adhere well to the method is that to say a person is not intelligent? It’s a trick, it’s a lie, it’s a safe guard.
Regarding Starmer, while it is clear he has poor communications shortcomings (among many others), the crisis in Britain is getting worse and he has less time to prepare and react to opposition.
The increase of stupids in government is (a global phenomenon) worth considering. While the educational and professional cultures are clearly somewhat to blame, it could be that certain elites need stupids to perform tasks that more intelligent operatives would not.
Completely wrong IM(not so)HO on the factual content of Twitter. Yes, there is a lot of slop but it quickly distilled to leave a core which is generally far more likely to reflect reality than the MSM which is never distilled and remains slop. Also disagree on outrage porn. It is outrage that keeps people motivated to want real change. Being outraged is tiring - removing the outrage is the cure. The alternative is pretty much what exists in the U.K. - a pathetically complacent populace, oblivious to the world around them who still think the BBC is their friend, headed for the edge of the cliff, blissfully unaware.
Otherwise very interesting insights.
"It is outrage that keeps people motivated to want real change"
Agreed. It is arguable however that it is outrage and moral sentiment absent Principle that actually prevents real change. What people want just helps them be led by the nose.
Have you seen this?
https://www.eugyppius.com/p/passing-the-peak-or-the-great-correction
If the problems are at root deeply structural, or say in the limits of allowable thought in a civilisation itself, all the outrage/desire in the world is utterly impotent. It can help suppress symptoms, maybe, for a little while anyway.
Motivation being absent without emotionality is a very noteworthy sign though. A body politic like that is deeply sick. The heart and the will are not communicating.
Daggone, I'm still laughing over Q#14, Olaf makes Angela look like Bismarck. Ain't that the truth. Kamala was a good candidate. How to converse with those that never see. I don't know. Why bother? They will never change. It's called pissing in the wind. Not a good outcome. What a great article we have here. I have to read this over again.
re: "Nobel Prizes are influenced by power, political trends, taboos, tastes and so on. This is self-evident." One of the taboos in the Noble Prize committee is "cure". The Nobel Prize in Medicine has not been awarded for a "cure" since 1945 - for penicillin. In the entire year history of the Nobel Prize, over 120 years - there has been only one award for a cure - according to the Nobel website. However, I have counted at least 10 prizes awarded for curative discoveries or technologies - but the word cure is not used in the award. CURES are taboo. The word cure is forbidden, even when the award is given to a cure. https://tracykolenchuk.substack.com/p/the-nobel-cure-problem
Don’t read Libs of TikTok, what? Ummm don’t agree with most of it.. smell a bit full of shit.. Don’t compare the complacent zombied British to freedom loving Americans.. what percent are your people vaccinated? The only thing I agree with is about immigration
This is SO full of insight and I got very much out of it. Thank you! Already subscribed by the way...
To counter the gloomy inevitability of power as Schmittian decision/exceptionism, there is this from Rene Guenon via Wael B Hallaq in "Restating Orientalism" Ch3:
"Scheler argued that it is in the essence of the cosmos to exhibit an underlying ethical order, one that is the work of a transcendental deity; and it is because of the very existence of this moral character that humanity is bound by it as a doting code, an ordo amoris. It is precisely because this Schelerian code, or the Guenonian “principle”, is lacking in Western civilisation that it is “eminently unstable”, eminently without fixity."
Power as dictated by moral taste (or hysteria) with post hoc justifications as cover, are but the fallback from an absence of Principle. Power doesn't have to be this way, but so long as the West is into always doubling down and never listening to elders, it probably does.
Here is a question that I have. If human beings did not create themselves which is one thing we can come pretty close to being 100% certain of. Then who are we to say what human intelligence actually is? IQ testing is to imperfect it’s an insult to creation in a way as are most methods of defining humanity. I don’t think separation is the answer, that can be looked at from every angle. If a person doesn’t adhere well to the method is that to say a person is not intelligent? It’s a trick, it’s a lie, it’s a safe guard.
No one else is coming up with as many 'contrarian' but correct analyses as Parvini. Not even close.
Regarding Starmer, while it is clear he has poor communications shortcomings (among many others), the crisis in Britain is getting worse and he has less time to prepare and react to opposition.
The increase of stupids in government is (a global phenomenon) worth considering. While the educational and professional cultures are clearly somewhat to blame, it could be that certain elites need stupids to perform tasks that more intelligent operatives would not.
https://timothywiney.substack.com/p/ill-see-your-cbdc-and-raise-you-a
https://timothywiney.substack.com/p/pretty-faces-and-dirty-needles
https://timothywiney.substack.com/p/chatgpt-thinks-scientologists-are