NationStates

The Parkus Empire wrote:

The East Marches II wrote:
I extend that definition to good friends in addition to blood. Not "friends" but honest men upon whom I could rely like family. They may as well count as well in addition to the normal definition.

I don't think that really works. Family is at the root a coming together of sexual mates, with outgrowth stemming from that union; but just as important is a dwelling-together. When dwelling together is absent, you can be kindred, but you are only a family in a removed sense; when a man leaves his father and mother and cleaves unto his wife, they become removed family.

I would disagree. While a coming together of sexual mates does underpin it, you are ignoring the other aspects of it and putting too much emphasis on nonsense definitions. What is an Uncle and Aunt who live in the same area? They do help watch and raise the kids, are they less family or more? How about grandparents? Or other families that you've married into which are also close to yours? What if you adopt a person into that eco system? Your small definition excludes many.

Makedonijya wrote:

The Parkus Empire wrote:I knew, that is why I started a separate thread for traditionism, but it was locked and I was told people here represented my views.

Not all Right-Wingers share that view, duh.

The fascists and ultra-nationalists don't.

Pretty much no one on the right shares views with classical conservatives, since the right is now crypto materialist apart from fascists who are idealists.

The Parkus Empire wrote:

Makedonijya wrote:Classical Conservatism=/= Right Wing

Who knew?!

I knew, that is why I started a separate thread for traditionalism, but it was locked and I was told people here represented my views.

Rather you gave the place some class and they didn't want you leaving. You should have had it.

The Parkus Empire wrote:

War Gears wrote:
What false principle?

Nationalism.

But I thought nationalism was the thing that needed the false principle to fill the void.

The East Marches II wrote:

The Parkus Empire wrote:I don't think that really works. Family is at the root a coming together of sexual mates, with outgrowth stemming from that union; but just as important is a dwelling-together. When dwelling together is absent, you can be kindred, but you are only a family in a removed sense; when a man leaves his father and mother and cleaves unto his wife, they become removed family.

I would disagree. While a coming together of sexual mates does underpin it, you are ignoring the other aspects of it and putting too much emphasis on nonsense definitions. What is an Uncle and Aunt who live in the same area? They do help watch and raise the kids, are they less family or more? How about grandparents? Or other families that you've married into which are also close to yours? What if you adopt a person into that eco system? Your small definition excludes many.

Adoption entails dwelling together, and the adoption is presumably done by sexual mates. Otherwise it is family but somewhat deformed. The home is a major distinction between family and a small nomadic tribe.

A lot the rest of what you said would be extended family.

War Gears wrote:

The Parkus Empire wrote:Nationalism.

But I thought nationalism was the thing that needed the false principle to fill the void.

No, the far right is the thing that needed.

The Parkus Empire wrote:

The East Marches II wrote:
I would disagree. While a coming together of sexual mates does underpin it, you are ignoring the other aspects of it and putting too much emphasis on nonsense definitions. What is an Uncle and Aunt who live in the same area? They do help watch and raise the kids, are they less family or more? How about grandparents? Or other families that you've married into which are also close to yours? What if you adopt a person into that eco system? Your small definition excludes many.

Adoption entails dwelling together, and the adoption is presumably done by sexual mates. Otherwise it is family but somewhat deformed. The home is a major distinction between family and a small nomadic tribe.

A lot the rest of what you said would be extended family.

Home doesn't have to be a house, it can be a large place. Extended family and family as the nuclear is just a distinction for the academic and ultimately a waste of time.

The East Marches II wrote:

The Parkus Empire wrote:I knew, that is why I started a separate thread for traditionalism, but it was locked and I was told people here represented my views.

Rather you gave the place some class and they didn't want you leaving. You should have had it.

A classless society could hardly be right wing.

The Parkus Empire wrote:I am talking about serious identification and involvement with one's community and you say this? What the hell are you even talking about?

I wonder sometimes if you've ever been a part of a small community.

The East Marches II wrote:

The Parkus Empire wrote:
Adoption entails dwelling together, and the adoption is presumably done by sexual mates. Otherwise it is family but somewhat deformed. The home is a major distinction between family and a small nomadic tribe.

A lot the rest of what you said would be extended family.

Home doesn't have to be a house, it can be a large place. Extended family and family as the nuclear is just a distinction for the academic and ultimately a waste of time.

Genesis 2:24 seems to consider it important

The Parkus Empire wrote:

The East Marches II wrote:
Rather you gave the place some class and they didn't want you leaving. You should have had it.

A classless society could hardly be right wing.

RWDT on suicide watch

The Parkus Empire wrote:Principles that aren't timeless are false.

Conveniently, all that leaves you with is God, since God is outside of time according to fucked-up theodicy.

Conserative Morality wrote:

The Parkus Empire wrote:I am talking about serious identification and involvement with one's community and you say this? What the hell are you even talking about?

I wonder sometimes if you've ever been a part of a small community.

I am part of one.

The Parkus Empire wrote:

The East Marches II wrote:
Home doesn't have to be a house, it can be a large place. Extended family and family as the nuclear is just a distinction for the academic and ultimately a waste of time.

Genesis 2:24 seems to consider it important

You are talking of becoming one being together, hence what marriage does give in treating two as one.

The Parkus Empire wrote:I am part of one.

Then you should be intimately familiar with the bullshit that goes on within them. Unless, of course, you willingly ignore such bullshit in order to keep a hagiographic view of "Small good, big bad!" that allows you to scorn the dreaded 'other' who doesn't agree with your narrow interpretation of society.

The Parkus Empire wrote:

Conserative Morality wrote:"Principles that aren't mine are false"

Wonderful. I guess it's a good thing Christianity glorifies losing, because you're getting nowhere with that.

Principles that aren't timeless are false.

Religious nationalism is a thing.

Conserative Morality wrote:

The Parkus Empire wrote:Principles that aren't timeless are false.

Conveniently, all that leaves you with is God, since God is outside of time according to fucked-up theodicy.

Timeless here means the foundation of civilization itself and perpetuated ever since. God is of course the ultimate principle but you don't have believe in him grasp timeless principles in general.

War Gears wrote:Religious nationalism is a thing.

Those aren't timeless because a nation needs a beginning and the only thing without a beginning is the Abrahamic God. On your knees, heathen.

The Parkus Empire wrote:Timeless here means the foundation of civilization itself and perpetuated ever since. God is of course the ultimate principle but you don't have believe in him grasp timeless principles in general.

Oh? Mind telling me what the foundation of civilization itself is? I'm sure my discipline will finally discover a consensus from your new insight into the subject.

The East Marches II wrote:

The Parkus Empire wrote:Genesis 2:24 seems to consider it important

You are talking of becoming one being together, hence what marriage does give in treating two as one.

I am emphasizing break with parents.

The Parkus Empire wrote:

Conserative Morality wrote:Conveniently, all that leaves you with is God, since God is outside of time according to fucked-up theodicy.

Timeless here means the foundation of civilization itself and perpetuated ever since. God is of course the ultimate principle but you don't have believe in him grasp timeless principles in general.

This is extremely vague, what are some examples of timeless principles?

The Parkus Empire wrote:

The East Marches II wrote:
You are talking of becoming one being together, hence what marriage does give in treating two as one.

I am emphasizing break with parents.

I see, I misunderstood your previous point then.

Conserative Morality wrote:

The Parkus Empire wrote:Timeless here means the foundation of civilization itself and perpetuated ever since. God is of course the ultimate principle but you don't have believe in him grasp timeless principles in general.

Oh? Mind telling me what the foundation of civilization itself is? I'm sure my discipline will discover a consensus from your new insight into the subject.

Honor, duty, sacrifice, majesty, valor, might, splendor, chastity, ceremony, grace, nobility, etc.

This argument over what constitutes a family and what is traditionalism is pointless. The nuclear family, and the connection between related nuclear families via blood ties, and upon that the shared cultural/ideological/religious ties are what form the basis of a society and a civilization.

War Gears wrote:

The Parkus Empire wrote:Timeless here means the foundation of civilization itself and perpetuated ever since. God is of course the ultimate principle but you don't have believe in him grasp timeless principles in general.

This is extremely vague, what are some examples of timeless principles?

See my post right above this.