Category: Traditionalism

  • Merry Christmas A.M. 7534

    Today in all calendars

    The Roman Imperium: Two Divisons Today? | Page 2 | Phora Nova

    I’ll try to reiterate and extend some comments on this topic that I’ve made before.

    I usually start (as is my habitual method) with etymological analysis.  What is Sovereignty?  (Over-kingship – who or what is above the King, even the King of the World?)  As a word, it is a very Western/Romance/Romantic one, and would be hard to translate into either Latin or Greek.  ver

    Looking back into the Roman Imperium, we see that Romanity (the set of all Roman things that is Romanitas, including all tribes loyal to Rome), has an ethnic and social structure, as I’ve mentioned before.  The Romans themselves had two large divisions of Citizenry, Quirites (Sabines) and Romani themselves.  Then of course they had a tribal structure, and within those tribes gens or Clan, and groupings of clans on the Aryan model which they shared with the Greek tribes — Phrateries.  And then, within the Clan, a very finely organised famly structure of persons related in known fact, not just in legal theory or distant antiquity, which comprised the private, domestic side of Life lived-out within Romanity.

    Finally, there was a City-State (a polis or political entity), within which there was exercised the legal notion of Imperium.  That is, Patriarchy at the domestic level, Romanity at the state level, and Orthodoxy at some higher level that needs discussion but we may call Religious or Spiritual for want of more exposition.

    In modern times, that higher level is the Nation-State, which emerged with their Catholic Majesties in Spain, and King Edward IV Plantagenet (?) in England, in the late 15th century of the West.  Like the medieval notion of ‘sovereignty’, it is a purely Western one, though with a certain relation to the conceptual framework of Romanity as used in the (then heretical) West.  In ancient times, there was likewise a notion of The Oikoumene — the ‘dwelling lands’ that were entirely conquered by Alexander the Great and his successors, including those in Palestine, which is where the connection between the Greek world (of the Hittites, Myceneans, and Kings of Tarshish, and the Sea-Peoples) mixes up with the Egypt-Mesopotamian-Iranian cauldron.  It is the context within which such terms as Episcopal (over-seer, itself related to a kind of Sovereignty), and Church (Ekklesia, a call out of men-in-arms for a city-state), as well as the notion of ‘an Ecumenical Empire’ ruled by Despotai and The Great King, comes from.  (The word Baliseus was the Greek translation of Agustus, and so we pray for the Two Vasilefsi in Greek, and doubtless the same in Russian, as their role of defending the borders of the Oikoumene — the Imperial Household — from the Barbarians at the Roles.  That is, they are Catechons.)

    We must say something proper about how the Roman Imperium — the Greek word is Politeuma, as a Res Publica — and thus Constantine founded the *Christian* Politeuma, with a universal mission to extend the Oikoumene to the Ends of the Earth (or is it the Kosmos?).

    I point out this term, Respublica Christiana because it forms the legal theory for lawful action in the West.  That is, the nation-states of Europe *understood* they were part of the Politeuma of Constantine (and why would the ‘Donation of Constantine’ matter to them, if they were not?)  This is well-discussed by Schimitt, and other 20th century scholars on the topic of the Kings Two Swords, the notion of Sovereignty in Early Modern Europe, etc, which need not detain us.  The origin and history of such notions since *derived* from the ‘Constantinian Entity’, whatever status you give that, is quite clear.

    I must be clear however that I am not talking *just* about Institutions but also Peoples and The Body of Christ.  These notions must be carefully related.  The Latin words ‘con-stitutio’ and ‘in-stitutio’ have very specific meanings related to the sort of Legislation a Great King (basileus) or Augustus, might do.  In particular, the ‘Constitutions of Justinian’ is a term of legal art.  The decrees of an Augustus are for the Whole World, not just our modern notion of Federation — a treaty between severally but mutually sovereign entities. 

    Societies, from City-States to the religious and spiritual society of the Body of Christ, persons incorporated in a single Person having the Mind of Christ (the Church), to, coming down a bit, modern Nation-States and Empires, all have *institutions*.  These institutions or arrangements are *organic*, that is they function as organs of the body, but that does not mean they don’t sometimes, die, need to be replaced by new or similarly functioning ones, or even that they are identically constituted in different parts of the same organism — one may have two kidneys, or only one, and if two they might differ in various ways, or even one can be natural, and one artificial.  Yes there must *be* such institutions, and they must function ‘for the Life of the World’, in the highest case.

    The Roman Imperium — the command of a magistrate, duly following the cursus honorem established and instituted in the Constitution of the Empire for such things, as Questor, Praetor, Consul, many such cases.  And many other duties and offices of men.  The Roman Imperium I say is the right of command of some magistrates, as has been instituted lawfully in the Res Publica Christiana, and is exercised today in the National Offices for which we pray, whether that office is filled by a heretic or an Orthodox believer, and to the extent it is not Anti-Christ, making war on God and siding with Satan, as will increasingly happen as the World (the Universe itself) Ages.

    Speaking then, of which,  When Augustus Ruled the World Alone…

    MERRY CHRISTMAS A.D. 2025 / A.M. (Etos Kosmou, In the Year of the Kosmos) 7534

  • Greer on Situationalism

    Greer on Wagner and the After Times We Live In | Page 2 | Phora Nova

    Greer is chipping away at his ‘Situationism’ theme, and finally (in the last month) has gotten to his point.  I was wondering if he would do the ‘big reveal’ — that Marxism (and indeed Liberalism and Fascism) are sorts of POLITICL ALCHEMY.  Alchemy being the materialist twin of Astrology — as above, so below.

    Indeed he is going there — there are must read, must discuss.

    In particular, after sketching the ‘Beatniks’ (parents of what we now call Redditors[1]), and 60s era Marxist follies, he gets serious about why the Situationists in the 60s *failed* to follow the pre-ww2 insights of the Surrealists — where Evola and Marxism meet, you might say.  He says, explicitly, that they do not want to, into Occultism, i.e. the sort of dabbling Greer is into, which I think, though I have not read those works of his extensively, amounts to a fairly straightforward Neo-Platonism with a practice along New Dawn lines.  I would add, perhaps the Situationists, the Inner Party of the Marxists, are reserving that for ‘inner adepts’, in the grand Straussian style…

    I have reprinted the final paragraphs of the first piece for us to see ‘where this is going’.

    [1]:

    +

    https://tunisbayclub.com/index.php?threads/reddit-man-anthropology.3167/#post-32289

    —–

    Situationism: Where Domination Ends – Ecosophia

    Situationism: The Road from Raswashingsputin – Ecosophia

    That transmutation runs all through Vaneigem’s book, and through Situationism as a whole. When Marx wrote of alienation, for example, he had in mind the removal of control over the means of production from the laboring classes by a succession of governing classes. When Vaneigem and his fellow Situationists wrote about the same theme, they refocused the discussion on the concrete personal experience of alienation, of the inner state of the individual who feels cut off from his or her own sources of meaning, value, and power. Look closely at every other central concept of the avant-garde Marxism of the time as it appears in Situationist literature, and you’ll find the same alchemy at work.

    That was the great achievement of the Situationists, but it also endangered their status as loyal beta-Marxists serving the bureaucratic system against which they claimed to rebel. Recognize the subjective dimension of alienation and you open the door to responses that can actually affect the situation: responses that have the potential to move past the point at which domination falters and freedom comes within reach of the individual. Once these responses are understood and the necessary skills have been developed, the bureaucratic system has no effective defenses against them. The downside of this subjective approach is that these steps can only be taken by the individual for himself or herself. Nothing is more futile, or more certain to end in exploitation and defeat, than waiting for someone else to do it for you.

    Furthermore, there are sharp limits to how much help you can give anyone, even if they want to follow your lead. Situationism, interestingly enough, included several of the core methods that can be used to assist that process. In future posts here, I’ll talk about the crafting of situations, the art of the derivé, and the practical tactics of détournement, which provide a good solid toolkit both for the individual pursuing autonomy and for the experienced practitioner hoping to show the way to novices. Even so, the original impetus and the follow-through both have to come from the individual. Thus the movement toward freedom can never really be a mass movement. It can only be a movement of individuals in opposition to the mass.

    I’m pretty sure the Situationists themselves were aware of this. The way that certain patterns of Marxist rhetoric repeat in their writings like so many nervous tics suggests, at least to me, a sustained effort to back away from the implications of core Situationist concepts, and hide from the challenge of individual liberation behind the old failed dream of mass revolution followed by sentimental fantasies of utopia. More revealing still, though, is the extraordinarily ambivalent attitude the Situationists displayed toward the Surrealists, who in many ways were their most important predecessors. While some of the core Situationist writings acknowledged their debt to Surrealism, those same writings also rejected Surrealism root and branch.

    That rejection was no accident. Some of the Surrealists, in their own ways, reached some of the same insights before the Second World War that the Situationists grasped after that war, but many of the leading figures in the earlier movement followed those insights into territory where the Situationists would not follow. For a significant number of them, their quest for the place where domination ends led them to occultism. We’ll follow them there in due time.

    – 30 –

    My reaction:  well said, though I don’t think Marx is a foil for ‘Political Alchemy’ nor is Lenin, of Occult Materialism or dare we say DIALECTICAL Materialism.  They were both practitioners of the highest order.

  • St Theodore’s Institute Index

    sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/llms.txt

    sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/A-archives-reference-generalities.md.txt

    • https://sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/B-Philosophy-Paideia-Logic-Religion.md.txt
    • https://sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/C-Orthodox-Christianity.md.txt
    • https://sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/D-Ecclesiastical-History.md.txt
    • https://sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/E-Biography.md.txt
    • https://sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/-History.md.txt
    • https://sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/G-Geography.md.txt
    • https://sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/H-Demotics-Society-Social-Science.md.txt
    • https://sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/J-Politics-Gowernance.md.txt
    • https://sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/k-legislation-law-women-societies.txt
    • https://sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/L-Science-Arts.md.txt
    • https://sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/M-Natural-History-Biology.md.txt
    • https://sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/N-Botany.md.txt
    • https://sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/O-Zoology-Anthropology-Ethnology.md.txt
    • https://sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/Q-Medicine-Health.md.txt
    • https://sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/R-Useful-Arts-Technics.md.txt
    • https://sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/U-Art-of-War.md.txt
    • https://sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/V-Recreative-Sports-Games.md.txt
    • https://sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/W-Fine-Arts.md.txt
    • https://sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/X-English.md.txt
    • https://sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/Y-Language-Philology.md.txt
    • https://sti.kitsaplabs.com/index/Z-Literature.md.txt
  • Groupthink Chess

    Groupthink Chess | Phora Nova

    1. Groupthink chess is similar to formalistic chess, only it can be played by any number of persons with access to the forum, including passersby and trolls.  Players may come and go, say they are quitting but rejoin later etc., unless otherwise restricted or disabled by lawful future application of rule 4.

    2. Green and Red must alternate moves, but any player may switch sides at any time and make the next move, with the restriction that in the absence of further rulemaking to the contrary, no one may (at least at first), make a move and then switch sides to immediately to make a responding move.

    3. Notwithstanding the variations from formalistic chess introduced by the first two rules, the result must still be a ‘legal game of chess’, with green making the first move, when written down formally, and the green and red roles alternating.

    Explanatory Comment: the initial goal of the game is to find a compelling narrative for playing the game at all, but that is intentionally vague to the point of being meaningless.  The purpose of the game is an emergent phenomenon known to none of the players in advance, but only to the group as a whole entity, and unfolding over time.  The Game is intentionally Holistic.

    Players can and should form alliances or teams, to be both cooperative and competitive in any potentially useful way, and as a group decide such things as victory conditions or strategies, explain their past moves with or without deceit and dissimulation, message each other, and generally conduct diplomacy.

    4. Additional rules may be made, having the status of treaties binding on all players in future moves, **by majority vote of the last 5 distinct players** (who are called ‘the collegium’), which may address any topic whatsoever but *must* be consistent with all previous rules, including these five, except as noted.  The Collegium may or may not find it convenient to consult other players, a subset of them, or of the set of potential players, before ratifying a treaty (rule making).  There is no requirement that the game be played in an adversarial manner, or with any other (unlegislated) style, or with only two sides and not some other number such as 0, 1, or multipolar; or that the game advance or not, by any particular time, be terminable, or have any properties other than those given in the Original Ruleset or its subsequent modifications, or that it have any particular purpose, at least initially.

    The immutability of rule-making is intended to force convergence of the game purpose in a way consistent with the will and actions of the players.

    With a sense of nihilism and futility, Green moves `1 P-K4 (e5)` 

    ## Some observations.

    Non-binding interpretation:  the commitment to the formalism of the Chess is not, in the absence of any specific rule-making, a legislative guarantee of anyone having any *rights* to make this or that legal chess move, nor of the equality of players (so that some players may be legislated to have ‘civil disabilities’ on the legal moves they may make.  Moving legally is prohibition against moving illegally, not a natural freedom to so move.  Nor does legislation (at least initially) guarantee that the game history is immutable (but if the past is changed, it must still be a legal past).  Rule-making is, however, immutable for the duration of the game.  Rules may provide for amendment procedures and some things may be made immutable in perpetuity, or incorporate probabilistic elements.

    (Players will note the possible fiction that the last five players may legislate the game to have ended and that a new game with such and such rules and such and such past history shall be deemed to have begun.  The ‘sovereignty of the Parliament’ may not in practice be legislated so as to be binding on the Parliament in the future.  And Revolutions cannot be easily legislated away either.)

    (The primary rule is that at any moment, formal past history must be explainable as a member of L, the set of all constructible chess games.  But the grue paradox is not so easily solvable)

    NOTE: thinking about Rawl’s ‘Original Position’ may be useful at any point in the game.  Also, the entire point of Rule #4 is to allow the players to consider and legislate for edge cases that were unforeseen in the original game design.

    Thread related: https://tunisbayclub.com/index.php?threads/groupthink-chess.3162/

  • Dugin: War is Ahead of Us

    Alexander Dugin warns that the new multipolar world order is not set in stone and is unlikely to be peacefully accepted, but rather is bound to be shaped through escalated conflict, recalling how historic shifts are decided through the unpredictable unfolding of war. 

    War is Ahead of Us – by Alexander Dugin and Arktos Journal

    A shift in world order usually occurs through war. Very rarely are those who wield global power willing to relinquish it voluntarily. They hold on until the very end, until they are destroyed and reduced to ruins. The same is undoubtedly true today.

    Different twists and turns happen in history, of course. Therefore, one could only hypothetically expect, hope, or at least wish that Western leaders will voluntarily relinquish their hegemony. But something tells me that this is unlikely to happen. And if it does not happen, then there will be war. This war is already underway: the war in Ukraine, the wars in the Middle East. But it is not yet in full force. So far, it is only a harbinger of the huge, fundamental war that will be fought over the redistribution of real sovereignty between the forces that are being demarcated today.

    (more…)
  • From Fanged Noumenon to Conservative Revolution: Land and Dugin in Dialogue this Sunday

    By Alexander Dugin
    Awaiting the conversation with Nick Land through the mediation of Auron McIntyre I revisit NRx data. The label “Cathedral” seems to me totally inappropriate as term “Empire” by Negri/Hardt or Soral. Great concept of “a degenerative ratchet” is better to call “Republic”.

    Republic is a system of irreversible corruption. Cathedral or Empire can always escape to the Heaven, hide in the spirit, eternity.Essentially immanent Republic can only rot and rot more and more. Enlightenment in no way is medieval Cathedral. Something catholic. Contrary.

    Modernity is essentially anti-Empire and anti-Cathedral. It is Cromwellian ratchet community destined to exalt its small case rationality to the pure repressive Irrationality. The essence of communism is capitalism.

    The will for Republic, the will to rot until the last consequence. The capitalism is totalitarian from very beginning. French Revolution, English Revolution, American Revolution are driven by the will to Republic.

    Republic is political expression of liberalism and democracy, as well as capitalism and socialism (they are just two sides if the same coin). Thus the highest form of “a degenerative ratchet”. I certainly like this idea. Ratchet is right notion. No way back. Fully agree.

    The invitation to unite ethno-nationalists (agent of Deep State) and Ayn Rand style ultracapitalists (libertarians) discredits whole ideology but correctly describes MAGA. They are so limited that any dialogue with them is compromised from the very beginning.

    The traditionalists (theonomists) is something different. Only they really share “a degenerative ratchet” concept. But if they really do, how can they hope for the return? They don’t hope. Consequent traditionalist is much more futuristic as you presume.

    The Eternity is much closer if we move straits ahead than if we try to get back (impossible). Eschatology is essential to traditionalism and fundamental conservatism. Conservative Revolution is the other name. Anglo-Saxons disregard European continental tradition. It is bad.

    Nick Land was very persuasive in Fanged Noumenon. Most advanced OOO thinker. I don’t see the traces of it in Xenosystems. It is pity. I hope in our conversation we could evoke Cthelll, geotrauma, Old Ones, gods-idiots and other illuminated concepts.

    – 30 –

    Nice shout-out to Christian Theonomy.

  • Crustal Thread Leaderboard for August

    AI Browser Can Hack Your Bank Account | Phora Nova

    Demographic Collapse… Country By Country | Phora Nova

    Crustr: Urbit, Fediverse, Nostr, Oh My! | Phora Nova

    Subcultures of Collapse | Phora Nova

    JRR Tolkien and his Forbidden Gnosis | Phora Nova

    Ulster and the Republic – Updates on the Emerald Isle | Phora Nova

    Brad DeLong on the Economics of the AI Boom | Phora Nova

    Second Coming of the Tears in the Rain Thread | Phora Nova (Robots)

    The End of the Optics War (2017+) | Phora Nova (White Nationalism 1.0)

    The Perpetual Whatever Happened to Ghislaine Maxwell’s Submarine Thread | Phora Nova

    J.D. Vance and the Return of the Beardly | Phora Nova

    How Meta Became Uniquely Toxic for Top AI Talent | Phora Nova

    The Perpetual Censorship Thread | Phora Nova

    Situation Awareness 2027: AI and Remote Jobs | Phora Nova

    History of the Crust | Phora Nova

    Are you White enough for Ben Franklin? | Phora Nova

    I will make know to all of you, my lineage | Phora Nova

    Brad DeLong Remembers Internet 1.0 and Rues Substack | Phora Nova

    The Earth May Not Be Flat But Management Is | TBC

    Programming as we know it will disappear this year | TBC

    If Not Malthusian, Then Why? | TBC

    Dugin Blesses the Rains Down in Africa | TBC

    The Let’s Learn Homeric Greek in 2023 Club | TBC

    Rapid-Onset Political Enlightenment | TBC

    AIs to put Classical Christian Educators out of work (just kiddng) | TBC

    GLP-1 and Life Insurance Profits | TBC

    Scientific Analysis of Nuclear Site Effects in Iran | TBC

    Every Tweet is an Index Card | TBC

    Honey, AI Capex Ate the Economy | TBC

    What is it like working at Palantir? (Oct 2024) | TBC

  • Dugin Blesses the Rains Down in Africa

    H/T @dom [on Tunis]for theme song (I’d forgotten that one but Toto was very popular when I graduated high school back in 1979, and still so in 1982 when they cut this song)

    Dugin Blesses the Rains Down in Africa

    From discussion about an online forum, a Discord (heh), being destroyed by Trump Derangement Syndrome epidemic among marginally rational leftists…
    (after quoting Bohm as above)

    (more…)