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
Comments
Post a Comment