AWM wrote:This is an important point here. Not just with regard to this forum's resistance to the idea that race matters, but The West's resistance to it as well. Western man believes in whiteness so much that he sees it as a benevolent universal condition that all people have a right to. Western man fails to see how the benevolence of whiteness is a direct product of something grounded deeply into our Earthly existence; the blood and guts of our genetic profile. In the movie Full Metal Jacket there was a line about how "inside every gook there's an American trying to get out". This exaggerated belief in whiteness is the driving force behind The West's crusade to bring democracy to the dirt world. Or at least that's how the Jews sell it to us because they know we wouldn't go along with it if they told us it was about making more shekels for the Goldsteins and Silverbergs of the world. The arrogance of Western man is that he believes if you give a non-white a bible and a constitution they'll be just like him.
My understanding is that the supremicist anthropology is directly related to and linked with the Christian ideology. And each of these have their origin in pre-modern metaphysics. I am not making this up ;-) Here is how it functions in a nutshell: the Cosmos is divided into different realms and layers with God and Logos and Christ at the apex. Descending layers are composed of non-physical entities (angels or 'intelligences'), and then on down to the earth-realm. Further down in the earth-realm is the hell-realm. Earth --- our world --- was seen as being located more or less towards the bottom. The Earth was seen as a dangerous place, mostly haunted by demonic forces, and extremely perishable and death-ridden. This happened through the effects of the metaphysical Fall. The Fall corrupted not only man but his little perch in the Cosmos.
The revelation of Christ, the divine voyage of Christ, represented the apex reaching down into the dregs. This is certainly illustrated by Kierkegaard in his declaration about the Savior in his downward swoop drawing beings up and away with him. That is a somewhat later varient of it. The Medieval view was somewhat more crude. But this downward descent of the divine, as it pertains to Occidental anthropology is, in my view, crucial to understand. To understand it, one has to place onself inside it and see out of those Medieval eyes.
What made a Western man what he is, is his link with the Universal Church and his access to the Sacraments. The core of it is there and in no other place. He had something that no other people had: access to the salvific agent and the knowledge of it. Wherever he went he saw strange and dark rituals, and people of course, who gave no hint of access to the salvific agent. So, they were seen as agents of the diabolical powers. They had, in this state of things, a limited personhood. Personhood was more or less given to them to the direct degree that they were civilized. And baptism (no empty event) was the first step. In this way they became members of the Body of Christ. Outside of that body, death and damnation. As part of it, salvation and progress.
These ideas, in different forms, still operate nearly at 100% in our modern era. They are part-and-parcel of an established worldview which, as I suggest, is built on metaphysical foundations. Still, the Occidental man brings to the larger world surrounding him the very possibiility of progress, and the tools of progress, and the ideas that make progress possible. This is the Occidental contribution, if you will, and the revolutionary spirit of the Occident which is intimately related to the inner transformation, with all metaphysical implications, offered by essential Christianity (Christianity in its essences).
In my view, Occidental man must become conscious of his own metaphysical underpinnings, and this absolutely means to fathom and comprehend the Christian metaphysic as a model of perception and understanding of *the World*. Without it, one cannot understand, with it a Key is offered.
If there is going to be an Identity Renaissance, it will have to have a metaphysical basis. Well, that is where I presently think and what I presently understand. If Occidental man is to see himself, he has to understand himself. That is circular of course but I mean it in the sense of 'grasping causation'. What made us us.
I suggest that D D and K have very little understanding or appreciation of any part of this, and this is one of the reasons why, in my opinion, David has veered so very very far from the coherent. Obviously, I am interested in pushing all these definitions to their logical end-position, and thus I say that without these hard and sharp definitions D D and K wind up in 'femaleness'. I mean this in the Weiningerian sense and, I hope, in a true sense.
[Now, it is a tough subject, there is no doubt of that, but intelligent and prepared people, who see clearly and who can resist their biases, can make detailed statements about the Jewish presence in the Occident. There is no way to understand Europe, or modernity, without taking Jewish history (and Jewish emancipation) into account. IN my view, the best analysis that I have read is that of Hilaire Belloc ('The Jews'). Strange that he is taken as an 'antisemite' when, as I see it, he operates from a centirst position. Be that as it may. I actually think along the lines of Weininger myself: It is necessary for any Jew to convert. It is the only real step available to him or her. Judaism has to be abandoned and as long as it is not abandoned, and as long as the Tribe remains the Tribe (and remember that I grew up in it, but was not ever Bar Mitzva'd), and the Tribe remains an active agent within the Occident, its purposes are distinct and oppositional to that of the Occident. That particular conversation, the one that I broach here I hope intelligently, is a fantastically difficult one for all the obvious reasons.]