Right Wing Discussion Thread X: Pol's closed

[The Parkus Empire]

I find it strange how someone can extol individualism while condemning abortion. The right in America has been doing this since Buckley

[Conserative Morality]

I find it strange how someone can extol individualism while condemning abortion. The right in America has been doing this since Buckley

By conceptualizing the fetus as an individual.

[The Parkus Empire]

Because it isn't right to express sympathy toward someone who does not want it.

...Very well. Assume if you want. Why not ask her? Then again, I guess you know her better than you do.

I told her I cared about her and she said don't piss down her back and tell her it's raining.

[The Parkus Empire]

I find it strange how someone can extol individualism while condemning abortion. The right in America has been doing this since Buckley

By conceptualizing the fetus as an individual.

Which makes no difference unless you refuse to believe the mother is one.

[Conserative Morality]

Which makes no difference unless you refuse to believe the mother is one.

>> women
>> individuals

Choose one.

There are some who are consistent insofar as in if one person became reliant on another through some fucked up accident using their body to keep themselves alive they wouldn't allow the mostly-healthy individual to detach the individual reliant on them.

[War Gears]

I find it strange how someone can extol individualism while condemning abortion. The right in America has been doing this since Buckley

Not really, if you consider the fetus to be an individual (or potential individual) who has a right to life like anyone else. Though I'm not as strongly pro-life as I used to be, mainly because I can see some benefit to abortion if it's done to accomplish what I consider my goals.

[FelrikTheDeleted]

In no particular order.

44 Days by Michael Veitch
On Christian Teachings by Saint Augustine
The Culture of the Teutons by Vilhelm Grønbech

It's really small, but I only got back into reading recently. I'd also add the Bible, the New Testament specifically, since I'm reading through that.

St Augustine is really good. If you want a good Christian philosophical work, "Confessions" is a great one by him, readily available in English.

Thank you for the suggestion.

[War Gears]

To be honest, the humanism which has invaded Buddhist sects that came into contact with the West is rather disconcerting to me. It's a trend that has continued for some years and results in bizarre oxymoronic combinations (Christian Buddhism, atheist Buddhism, etc.) as well as reducing the profoundity of the religion to some feel good secular slogans. It seems to have infected everyone from Vajrayana to Theravada, the latter of all sects making the laughable claim that the Buddha was just a man and shouldn't be regarded as supernatural (which, if you're a non-believer, makes sense, not so much if you're the standard bearer of a 2,500 tradition).

[FelrikTheDeleted]

[...] It's a trend that has continued for some years and results in bizarre oxymoronic combinations (Christian Buddhism, atheist Buddhism, etc.) as well as reducing the profoundity of the religion to some feel good secular slogans. [...]

I mean, I ain't a Buddhist, but that sucks.

feelsbadman.jpg

[Grand Britannia]

I dunno how my accent sounds like.

Anime accent.

I can live with this.

[Conserative Morality]

To be honest, the humanism which has invaded Buddhist sects that came into contact with the West is rather disconcerting to me. It's a trend that has continued for some years and results in bizarre oxymoronic combinations (Christian Buddhism, atheist Buddhism, etc.) as well as reducing the profoundity of the religion to some feel good secular slogans. It seems to have infected everyone from Vajrayana to Theravada, the latter of all sects making the laughable claim that the Buddha was just a man and shouldn't be regarded as supernatural (which, if you're a non-believer, makes sense, not so much if you're the standard bearer of a 2,500 tradition).

The West will pick apart your religion until it is nothing but a series of commodified aspects applied piecemeal to whatever the fashion of the moment is.

[War Gears]

To be honest, the humanism which has invaded Buddhist sects that came into contact with the West is rather disconcerting to me. It's a trend that has continued for some years and results in bizarre oxymoronic combinations (Christian Buddhism, atheist Buddhism, etc.) as well as reducing the profoundity of the religion to some feel good secular slogans. It seems to have infected everyone from Vajrayana to Theravada, the latter of all sects making the laughable claim that the Buddha was just a man and shouldn't be regarded as supernatural (which, if you're a non-believer, makes sense, not so much if you're the standard bearer of a 2,500 tradition).

The West will pick apart your religion until it is nothing but a series of commodified aspects applied piecemeal to whatever the fashion of the moment is.

Yeah, yeah. It's happened infinite times and will happen infinite more times.

[The Parkus Empire]

I find it strange how someone can extol individualism while condemning abortion. The right in America has been doing this since Buckley

Not really, if you consider the fetus to be an individual (or potential individual) who has a right to life like anyone else. Though I'm not as strongly pro-life as I used to be, mainly because I can see some benefit to abortion if it's done to accomplish what I consider my goals.

But right to life doesn't obligate the mother. And individualists believe the individual is autonomous and are not subject to any duties save those they clearly agree to prior.

[War Gears]

Not really, if you consider the fetus to be an individual (or potential individual) who has a right to life like anyone else. Though I'm not as strongly pro-life as I used to be, mainly because I can see some benefit to abortion if it's done to accomplish what I consider my goals.

But right to life doesn't obligate the mother. And individualists believe the individual is autonomous and are not subject to any duties save those they clearly agree to prior.

No, individualism is centered around the moral worth of the individual, it doesn't mean that one should be able to kill another at their convenience. You're conflating Stirner with all individualism.

[The Parkus Empire]

But right to life doesn't obligate the mother. And individualists believe the individual is autonomous and are not subject to any duties save those they clearly agree to prior.

No, individualism is centered around the moral worth of the individual, it doesn't mean that one should be able to kill another at their convenience. You're conflating Stirner with all individualism.

It's not killing a regular individual but rather one which draws and depends on the mother's body.

Striner is basically a fanatical individualist.

[Conserative Morality]

It's not killing a regular individual but rather one which draws and depends on the mother's body.

Striner is basically a fanatical individualist.

In the same sense that Abbot Amalric was basically a fanatical Christian.

[The Parkus Empire]

Which makes no difference unless you refuse to believe the mother is one.

>> women
>> individuals

Choose one.

There are some who are consistent insofar as in if one person became reliant on another through some fucked up accident using their body to keep themselves alive they wouldn't allow the mostly-healthy individual to detach the individual reliant on them.

I find it hard to believe that individualist right wingers would object to such a detachment.

[Conserative Morality]

I find it hard to believe individualist right wingers would object to such a detachment.

It varies, tbh, at least when presented as a hypothetical. They're usually cognizant enough of the parallels to abortion that they adopt a logically consistent position but how sincere it is is debatable.

[The Parkus Empire]

It's not killing a regular individual but rather one which draws and depends on the mother's body.

Striner is basically a fanatical individualist.

In the same sense that Abbot Amalric was basically a fanatical Christian.

He believed in doing all for and according to Christ without any other consideration?

[Conserative Morality]

He believed in doing all for and according to Christ without any other consideration?

His interpretation of Christ, sure.

[The Parkus Empire]

I find it hard to believe individualist right wingers would object to such a detachment.

It varies, tbh, at least when presented as a hypothetical. They're usually cognizant enough of the parallels to abortion that they adopt a logically consistent position but how sincere it is is debatable.

I don't think many individualist conservatives would accept that here.

[The East Marches II]

Post your libraries, /pol/! I'll go first

History and Theology first:
>Fall of the Roman Empire, a New History of Rome and the Barbarians; Peter Heather
>Livy's History of Rome , books 1-5
>Twelve Caesar's, Suetonius
>Roman Lives, Plutarch
>Ammianus Marcellinus' history of the Late Roman Empire
>Orthodox Christianity, Volume I, History and Canonical Structure, Metropolitan Hilarion Alfeyev
>Two Thousand years of Coptic Christianity, Otto F.A. Meinardus
>History of the Catholic Church, From the Apostolic Age to the Third Millenium, James Hitchcock
>Major Problems in the History of Imperial Russia, collected by James Cracraft
>Russia: People and Empire, Geoffrey Hosking
>Emperor Qianlong, Son of Heaven, Man of the World; Mark C. Elliot
>Many Thousands Gone, Ira Berlin
>Orthodox Dogmatic Theology (it's not in the room, so I don't recall the author)
>On the Incarnation, Athanasius the Great
>On Marriage and Family Life, John Chrysostom
>The Enemy At His Pleasure, S. Ansky
>Nicholas and Alexandra, Robert Massie
>12 Years at the Russain Court, Pierre Guilliard

There's also a few Marxist books from back in my Leninist days:
>State and Revolution, Lenin
>Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, Lenin
>Foundations of Leninism, Stalin
>Dialectical and Historical Materialism, Stalin

And some I intend to order

>Byzantine Army, 284-1081, Treadgold
>Warfare in Late Roman Europe, Elton
>Late Roman Empire, A.H.M. Jones
>Saddam Hussein, a Political Biography, Ephraim Karsh (I don't agree with the author ideologically)
>Debriefing the President: The Interrogation of Saddam Hussein, John Nixon

TEM's I liked it enough to buy a physical copy for my desk edition

>"Meine Sendung im Finland und im Baltikum" - General Rudinger von der Goltz
>"Poilu - Louis Barthas"
>"General Gordon's Private Diary of His Exploits in China" - Amplified by Samuel Mossman ... with Portraits and Map
>"Reflections in Palestine. 1883" - General Charles Gordon
>"General Gordon's Letters from the Crimea, the Danube, and Armenia" - General Gordon
>"Events in the Taeping Rebellion" - General Gordon
>"ABC's of Reloading" - C. Rodney James
>"In Darkest Africa Volumes 1 & 2" - H.M. Stanley
>"The Last Hero" - Peter Forbath
>"The Jungle is Neutral" - F.S. Chapman
>"King James Bible"

[War Gears]

I find it hard to believe individualist right wingers would object to such a detachment.

It varies, tbh, at least when presented as a hypothetical. They're usually cognizant enough of the parallels to abortion that they adopt a logically consistent position but how sincere it is is debatable.

Most of them are really quite vicious hypocrites. They will insist a mother brings a child into the world, but then angrily assert that they will not pay for a bunch of "welfare leeches," as well as continually shame single mothers.

[The Parkus Empire]

Although that is not entirely an apt parallel since the mother (along with the father) is responsible for the pregnancy, apart from rape.

[War Gears]

I've not read the whole text, but Evola's The Doctrine of Awakening is actually a good book on Buddhism, think Jochi brought it up a few days ago before he got DoSed (RIP). Though it suffers from flaws, such as his unwillingness to want to accept the concept of altruistic compassion, and instead asserts that Buddhism advocates compassion in an almost Randian manner, because it brings benefits to oneself. He just can't accept that humanitarianism and vegetarianism which he identifies with an inferior maternal spirituality.

He also made this assertion:

From a book in which a Buddhist chaplain describes the days of the Japanese put to death by the Americans[6] we see how these men died without conversions or repentance, in a perfect state of Buddhist grace; men who if they were not “war criminals” as the victors claimed, were as generals, officials and politicians certainly not delicate shy flowers of the field.

Which is amusing because Tojo's renewed interest in Buddhism mirrored an evangelists' teary-eyed conversion, to a banal degree. He believed that the goddess Kannon had manifested herself as a hankerchief for him to wipe his eyes because it had the English word "cannon" on it.