Toward a New Barbarism, Part I

 English is not French. English is not Latin. English is a Germanic tongue at bottom, and attempts to mash Romance words into English mostly end with an unclear mess. Deutsche sind deutlich, Deutsch ist klar. One of the benefits of a tongue which borrows with a cutting eye and has strong pronunciation rules is that things are clear and smart. Simple is better.

I think the concept of Anglish is a good one, and in the future we should try to bring English back to essentially how it was around 1500-1700 – that is, a wordstock which was majority Germanic, or somewhere in the neighborhood of about 60%. Between that and reforming common English words away from spellings which preserve etymology to spellings which reflect pronunciation would do a great deal of good. The old printers’ conventions were good and have their place, but I like the way in which French or German work; if you know the pronunciation rules of Cosmopolitan French or Brandenburgish German, you can hear a word and predict the spelling with very high accuracy, higher than in English.

To this end, one should generally write simply and clearly as well. I do not try to use as many French- and Latin-derived terms anymore as I used to. A common word often works as well or better than a three dollar word for the same thing. One’s purpose, generally, is not obscurantism – it is to be read or heard by the most and most fully. Obscurantists are annoying cunts who believe in pretense above clarity, and believe in mystery above straightforwardness. Usually your readers are not initiates.

 

This is a grab bag of thoughts. The title of this short piece riffs off Rothbard’s book For A New Liberty. It’s the stream-of-consciousness take on that only it has no focus. In that sense, it’s not like Rothbard’s book. Which is fine.

The Middle as I’ve conceived it before can create a whole society from top to bottom. They are the only segment of society which is capable of this – of first generating society through first steps and hard work, which upper crust sorts cannot do, and second of continuing to manage things as well. The Middle has the capability of producing high and low aptitude of all sorts from physical to mental to social, and therefore essentially the full normal curve of humanity. We can quibble whether in some circumstances they are at the point we would like. We can ask whether they are optimized.

Nonetheless, we find that most of the time, left to fend by themselves aristocrats and plutocrats would often rather starve than work. Lumpenproles and the very lowest will usually work to some degree but cannot make a coherent society by themselves and require higher functioning people to coordinate production and do planning of any sort of complexity.

As I said before in the essay on strategy, the Middle is also a bunch of institutions that go along with this salt of the Earth mode of person. The destruction of those intergenerational and interpersonal institutions makes for temporary windfalls for the state and for plutocrats. It also ensures long-term sickness and weakness both of the civilization which undertook those measures and of the people among whom they took. One must stress that the Middle is not the power center, but folks from the Middle can be brought into the power center, either at its edges or at its heart.

 

Political legitimacy requires meeting a number of things. It requires firstly a Mandate of Heaven in the way the Orientals define it. It requires secondly managing resentments. It requires thirdly juggling various interest groups and networks.

The Mandate of Heaven is the general notion that things are onward and upward. Things are improving rather than getting worse in society. People are well-fed and generally better off than they were before, or at least not getting poorer. The borders of the kingdom are growing or at least standing strong. Most states understand this, and so consequently at least try to keep three or four major cities prosperous along with the surrounding suburbs/exurbs and countryside in those areas. This is also the reason for fake economic data and stonks; it allows for the false consciousness of the people to believe that things are generally well even if in most peoples’ lives, things are not well (and if too many people spoke to one another or – God forbid formed a gestalt – they’d notice).

Managing resentments is basically quite obvious: it amounts to nothing more than making sure that various powerful constituents are kept weak enough to avoid rebellion or else satisfied so that the risk is off-putting. This is fundamentally divide et impera. This is court or imperial governance.

Juggling networks and interest groups is also obvious. In the late empire, a shill costs X many shillings; anyone who lacks pecuniam and gusto to have their interests heard is ignored or spited. Thus those with material interests in very many endeavors get heard, while those with diffuse interests – say, in the general weal or good stewardship – are thrown by the wayside because they don’t fucking matter in the face of shills and shillings. This matter all becomes easier if one manages to convince a broad swath of people that they largely don’t have interest outside of very narrow monetary interests, and then work to subvert those as well. Ideology can serve a function, but when one is throwing away one’s natural interests in service of fake things created out of whole cloth, or which were created for some bygone era and may not capture genuine interests any longer (and the presentation of which may be perverted in the first place), ideology becomes a dangerous game.

Tribal folk naturally view interests and interpersonal relations properly: as concentric circles. Those on the outermost orbit receive very little consideration: “humanity” or “the international community.” To the extent someone’s interests are at cross purpose with yours, you should seek to avoid or thwart them. It is conceivable that management could not be anti-human bugmen cunts, but in Globohomo Clown World, management is always and forever at odds with labour.

 

Events in general should be viewed through a stochastic – or probabilistic lens. I prefer to think of things in terms of their ex ante likelihoods based on what we know and how we expect things to happen from those eventualities. Seeing things in this light allows one to think more in a branching pattern which allows one to rather naturally come up with fallback plans and the like. Even if one believes in hard determinism, knowledge problems mean that one rarely has enough information to predict something perfectly. To use an example from machining, small deviations in tool precision, material specs, and human operator error can combine to produce parts which are massively out of spec – even if no one part (or operator) was that far out of tolerances in any one step of the process.

I suspect soft determinism is the correct metaphysic. That is, the Will within bounds rather than ‘free will.’ It is obvious to anyone who looks deep within themselves that choices are constrained by all sorts of facts, from material circumstances to mental bandwidth and knowledge of possible choice. By definition, a truly free or unbounded will is God.

Man without Will is some sort of humanoid bug creature. They may lack Will because of profound stupidity or spiritual death, and the two overlap to a great degree. Hypermodernity intentionally crafted to cause spiritual rot and erode the Will. All willful, life-affirming men whether in the mode of Apollo or Dionysus must resist the crushing boot of hypermodernity. The mode of Dionysus is self-destruction, but one is better being a self-destructive but beautiful, festive, and potentially powerful soul than one hobbled by bourgeois strictures and neuroses. Bourgeois society is decaying, will soon die, and true freedom is on the margin of its confines; on the margins of the security-state, of the pretenses of the falsity of a mendacious “polite society” which is neither polite nor a society, and frankly on the margins of industrial capitalism which for most people rents all of their time for rather little in return.

 

The modernite places their agency into the hands of others far too much, and keeps for themselves only the smallest bit. I believe that when one or one’s kin are grievously harmed by others, one should hold the right to revenge. Handing over this type of agency is one of the things that over-civilized the hypermodern man into paralysis even in the face of dispossession and death. Man two hundred years ago would have had no problem gathering together to muster under arms to thwart the problems of our day.

Community defense and policing similarly should return, which is to say the actual community defending and policing itself rather than a police organization. This prevents easy access to infiltration or subversion; one of the problems we see with police departments is that because they are generally controlled by either mayors or governors, and most individual departments and staff are unwilling to jeopardize their benefits or pensions generally speaking by acting against political dictates, the police end up becoming direct enforcers of the centralized social control system even if they have (or had) a popular mandate.

Obviously this isn’t feasible in a town of over 25,000, even in a high trust area. At a certain point, mere scale will end up needing one to hand over some of those functions once held by the broad community to centralized power. This is merely because people who work full-time with police powers and functions become more useful than ten neighbors trying to wrangle the problem themselves, part-time, due to the newfound complexities of scale. To some degree, this cautions against scale if you live in an occupied society with no guarantees of rights or safety from the elites (exactly our situation). In similar situation with revocation of rights and privileges, Jews would have considered themselves expelled and fled to friendlier courts.

Make no mistake – this problems of our day cannot be voted or wished away. The social democracies are mechanisms of social control just as the press and academies are. I’m not endorsing any specific solution here, only telling you what man two hundred years ago would have done, and what we do – nothing.

 

In the days of the far future, we should have a reserve of vital men who know not cities nor settled life but pastoral life as our distant kin did. They shall be as the Scythians or Mongols of the steppe, ready to flood into the cities when decadence grows and weariness threatens the life force.

How so? I have said before that in times past, cities were not the IQ shredders they are today. There is very obvious evidence of this from surnames: Smiths, Coopers, Tailors, and so forth, all work which mostly gathered in towns. It’s important to remember that before modernity, scale was a bit smaller than we imagine; villages didn’t grow larger than something like five to ten times the Dunbar unit, and the whole function of the village was for growing food. A village could be more pastoral or more farm-based. Most villages would break apart before reaching 1500 to 2000 heads and some of the villagers would set out for towns or for less crowded places to farm.

Before 1800, it was really the towns, mid-sized cities, and thriving villages which were the eugenic grounds of Western Europe where the best and brightest bred generation after generation for quite some time. After 1880, industrialization was deeply set enough that the old eugenic patterns were falling away as various mortality pressures eased and wealth increased substantially for the average Westerner. It was also around that time that the West transitioned to what Spengler called megalopolitan Civilization away from Kultur. The megalopolitan Civilization is first concerned with mere growth, as BAP would say the yeast cycle, and then with comfort and stasis. Questions of transcendence or grand aesthetic visions or projects don’t necessarily enter into it. Kultur is the living and breathing part of a civilizational life cycle and once its potential is exhausted (as the West was by about 1900) there is no more true growth in spirit; only odd vestiges can be grafted, or tumorous growths added.

Life spent herding among tribal confederations keeps one more sound in the whole of the formulation of race – biological and spiritual. It keeps one focused on what matters in life – blood, honor, and the basic needs. It keeps one far apart from pecuniam which tends to corrupt the marrow of a folk the deeper it infiltrates. As one can see from the Western boomer archetype, it is possible to be biologically Aryan and spiritually Jewish, as is the case with broad swathes of Western boomers. 

One should note that the tribal steppe herders have no need for formal schools or some such. Most knowledge is handed down from father to son, or otherwise taught directly. The labyrinth of imperial government is gone. Yet boys there grow quickly, and by 14 or 15 are expected to begin passing into manhood, to kill game and livestock, to be willing to fight, and to fend for themselves regardless of the foe.

 

BAP spoke of Fomenko thesis. I will link page below and paper as well. I am convinced that it has at least partial truth; the chronology we believe in is constructed to appear simple and there is good reason to believe some of it is fabricated. Early Islamic history is highly problematic both because of the dearth of contemporaneous sources but also because of the lack of clear evidence, and in this case it is easy to surmise that Muhammad either did not exist or did not exist as portrayed in the Quran and Hadiths. A school of scholarly interpretation growing out of German Quranic studies posits that the book is actually mostly Syriac Bible lecture notes with random shit added to it toward the end in the theme of the local Arab Jews and Bedouin traditions.

This interpretation actually makes a great deal of sense in light of current evidence, especially the lack of early Qurans. The earliest Quran passage is found at the Dome of the Rock IIRC and the earliest complete Quran is found over 100 years after Muhammad was said to have died.

My opinion is that early Islamic history is basically a fabrication by late Umayyad and early Abbasid rulers and scholars. There was no Islam with the initial spread of Arab raiders, and it seems that they probably spread first as raiders and merchants, then as conquerors, and then finally as proselytizers. The long-standing Christian view was also that Islam and Judaism worked hand-in-glove and this appears to be true as well.

From this, we can see at least the years from 640-800 are in question in the Middle East in the official timeline in terms of being misattributed, misplaced, or fabricated. I doubt all of those years in European history are fabricated, but it would not surprise me if as many as 100 years had been fabricated whole cloth in the span from 640-950. These scholars also raised questions about the timeline of Eastern Rome in that period, which is apparently filled with odd forgeries and threadbare spots. One of the other irregularities is that the disparity between the Julian and Gregorian calendar if not properly accounted could have created 300 “phantom” years. Unfortunately, we won’t know the truth of how deeply these scholars have manipulated our timeline until we pull teeth and throw open archives, from the Vatican to London.

Addendum: I have a new take on Fomenko and his disciples, most of whom seem to be Eastern Europeans largely Russian Orthodox adherents. I believe Fomenko was possibly a product of a Soviet program to undermine the very historical grounding of Western history. His most rabid students often seem to reflect this, as many of them believe Byzantine history is more or less true as written, but that Western history particularly between 100 BC and 1000 AD is largely fabricated. This denies to the Western tradition most of Rome, as Rome becomes either a minor city in this narrative or it declined earlier than official histories purport, such that by the equivalent of the 200s (which they assert is contemporaneous with 800 AD or so) AD the imperial capital really had switched to Byzantium. Most of the so-called 'dark ages' or the [largely Germanic] successor states to Western Rome are thrown into doubt, and the first true history comes out of the Holy Roman Empire. 

This begs the question of what exactly the New Testament was describing or what was the point of physical artifacts like Trajan's Column or the various imperial palaces and temples of the period 100 BC to 300 AD. Perhaps these are all fabrications of the Holy Roman Empire and the Catholic Church after the Schism? That makes a very weird narrative, and were it true one would think the Eastern Roman Church would have been writing books about the historical dickery going on to their west. It's not like East and West were incommunicado after 1056 or whatever. Certainly intermarriage between Eastern Orthodox and Catholic nobles still happened though it became less frequent as the Schism loomed farther in the backdrop. I still think the question of fraud throughout history and fraud of the historical record are interesting questions, but I've also begun to question the motive of Fomenko and his most rabid adherents as well.

I don't like the idea of more pieces of shit dogpiling the decaying remains of Western civilization. We have enough problems as it stands without trying to prove every single point in the historical narrative, most of which is almost certainly true with some small exceptions, lies, or missing pieces.

http://egodeath.com/newchronology.htm

https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/volatile/Niemitz-1997.pdf