Are we senselessly abandoning tradition? A nostalgia debate.

[Spiritual Republic of Caryton]

I thought me turning 17 and being thrown into my senior year this May would bring me one step closer to achieving what I've never gotten before. The very phrase which reduced me to a teary mental breakdown a few posts ago in reference to me being trapped in relative toxicity while grandparent-ly people of faith were just out of reach-- never noticing me: "When will the time come for tea with Ms. Dorothy?". Pushing aside the fact that those people, from extended family to warm-hearted strangers that smiled at twelve year old me visiting a nativity play for the first of the last time, have passed on and I will never get to be in their presence-- I have never felt farther away from the ideals that I desire. I converted into the LDS church as my display of 'teenage rebellion", I've dealt with faith crises based on my sexuality, I'm unprepared for adulthood in less than 2 years with no ability to get a job in highschool and college is going to slam me in the face. I look forward to baptism and a new community, but you don't know how much it stings to not be able to be in that lutheran church of white-washed wood and christmas cookies throughout all of those years. Part of me listening to that somewhat inspirational radio broadcast that prompted this discussion is this: society is changing, and it is unforgiving. People are cruelly accepting it. They don't consider the other side, contrarians who conversely want to go back to something that feels like home, yet the entire world is out to destroy that home and keep it away for as long as possible-- such as the case with me personally.

You seem to yearn for a time capsule, no offense. It doesn’t seem like it’s about a set of values as much as a sense of loss because you have departed loved ones. We all have lost someone. I often find myself remembering going horseback riding with my late grandfather and wish I could do that again. Because I perceive that as a wholesome time in which my immediate family was still complete and alive. We can’t go back in time.

It’s one thing to obfuscate the cruel reality of now for a bit and another to wish for an idilic “past” that is no more. You have to seek to make the best of what you do have. Fears are understandable, just don’t cancel the present out of a heightened sense of nostalgia. Don’t view the past as “better”, because it more than likely wasn’t better. You can definitely be here, be now, and improve if you so wish to and abandon the idea of a past that’s, well, past.

Cherish your memories with those loved ones but don’t turn a blind eye to the now and the future because of escapism.

I wholly agree with you, but I've been through the opposite to the "set of values" I've highlighted and they're complete and utter shite, at least to me. I'm not a far-right neo or some tradwife apologist. I miss the people because I loved them, I miss the ideals because they remind me of those pieous people. If you've seen the film The Crucible, you can relate to the sense of betrayal when the elderly, godly, and widely adored Rebecca Nurse was hung for rightfully denying witchcraft despite a petition of some 70-90 people because people wanted radical change and radical change fast-- in this case the completely idiotic premise of ridding salem of witches. I feel betrayed by the people who tell me I can be anything while simultaneously saying I can't make a future to compensate for things in the past.

[Geneviev]

Losing that sense of home is hard. It's weird to feel like you belong in a different world than you are being forced to live in. Having no choice in whether you want to live in a culture that feels totally foreign can be really stressful. But something being familiar doesn't make it better or anything. I miss my old German church too (it was even Lutheran, too). But change happens. We have to adapt to it.

It's ironic and hurtful that in a society that emphasizes making something for yourself, we can't make a home for ourselves or recreate the old without rebuttal. By the time I get to meet and be with even the descendants of the people I idolized in those whitewashed buildings, things will be messed up beyond belief.

The rebuttal is coming from a position of concern. Many things in the past were extremely problematic, and people don't want to return to those times. But it is okay to miss the old people and places and what they represented to you. Just remember that things can't go back anymore. The world doesn't give us that privilege. You have to live in the world that is here now, as painful as it can be.

[Spiritual Republic of Caryton]

It's ironic and hurtful that in a society that emphasizes making something for yourself, we can't make a home for ourselves or recreate the old without rebuttal. By the time I get to meet and be with even the descendants of the people I idolized in those whitewashed buildings, things will be messed up beyond belief.

The rebuttal is coming from a position of concern. Many things in the past were extremely problematic, and people don't want to return to those times. But it is okay to miss the old people and places and what they represented to you. Just remember that things can't go back anymore. The world doesn't give us that privilege. You have to live in the world that is here now, as painful as it can be.

It's happening before my very eyes, and saying it stinks makes me a reactionary. For instance, take churches. Megachurches are despicable, the one in my city profits entirely off of having a starbucks and gift-shop despite Jesus flipping the money-changing tables. Organs, pianos, and hymnbooks are phased out for rock and roll bands. Megachurches ironically reap the most members because they claim to be non-denominational which reasonably attracts most christians. It doesn't just apply to brick and mortar christianity. The name of the spiritual guru is being tarnished by scammers of various eastern faiths-- most infamously Shoko Asahara.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

You seem to yearn for a time capsule, no offense. It doesn’t seem like it’s about a set of values as much as a sense of loss because you have departed loved ones. We all have lost someone. I often find myself remembering going horseback riding with my late grandfather and wish I could do that again. Because I perceive that as a wholesome time in which my immediate family was still complete and alive. We can’t go back in time.

It’s one thing to obfuscate the cruel reality of now for a bit and another to wish for an idilic “past” that is no more. You have to seek to make the best of what you do have. Fears are understandable, just don’t cancel the present out of a heightened sense of nostalgia. Don’t view the past as “better”, because it more than likely wasn’t better. You can definitely be here, be now, and improve if you so wish to and abandon the idea of a past that’s, well, past.

Cherish your memories with those loved ones but don’t turn a blind eye to the now and the future because of escapism.

I wholly agree with you, but I've been through the opposite to the "set of values" I've highlighted and they're complete and utter shite, at least to me. I'm not a far-right neo or some tradwife apologist. I miss the people because I loved them, I miss the ideals because they remind me of those pieous people. If you've seen the film The Crucible, you can relate to the sense of betrayal when the elderly, godly, and widely adored Rebecca Nurse was hung for rightfully denying witchcraft despite a petition of some 70-90 people because people wanted radical change and radical change fast-- in this case the completely idiotic premise of ridding salem of witches. I feel betrayed by the people who tell me I can be anything while simultaneously saying I can't make a future to compensate for things in the past.

It’s a fast paced world. Maybe that speed clashes with your perceptions of what life means. Radical changes though, do not happen in a vacuum. What you see happening right now responds to years and years of injustice. We don’t always approach the changes in the best way, I do concede that, but it’s a direct response.

I think that what bothers you is how those responses are taken and applied, or even abused. There’s also the fact that, and I don’t think you’ve said this, some traditions are worth smashing. Some traditions are not worth keeping because they contribute to certain injustices.

You’re still young (no offense intended either). Question yourself. Allow that to happen. Just reason with the actual reason (redundant i am) for why you feel this way. Is it because nostalgia or legitimate? You don’t need to answer that. Just ponder it.

[Geneviev]

The rebuttal is coming from a position of concern. Many things in the past were extremely problematic, and people don't want to return to those times. But it is okay to miss the old people and places and what they represented to you. Just remember that things can't go back anymore. The world doesn't give us that privilege. You have to live in the world that is here now, as painful as it can be.

It's happening before my very eyes, and saying it stinks makes me a reactionary. For instance, take churches. Megachurches are despicable, the one in my city profits entirely off of having a starbucks and gift-shop despite Jesus flipping the money-changing tables. Organs, pianos, and hymnbooks are phased out for rock and roll bands. Megachurches ironically reap the most members because they claim to be non-denominational which reasonably attracts most christians. It doesn't just apply to brick and mortar christianity. The name of the spiritual guru is being tarnished by scammers of various eastern faiths-- most infamously Shoko Asahara.

I 100% agree with you on the megachurches. My current church is smaller, but it's modern like that and I don't see any connection to real Christianity in that. No church should ever look for profit, and protesting that is a good thing. But if you criticize all of modern society and not those specific examples, people will have to think you're a reactionary. Even if watching your world disappear is hard, most people haven't experienced that feeling.

[Spiritual Republic of Caryton]

It's happening before my very eyes, and saying it stinks makes me a reactionary. For instance, take churches. Megachurches are despicable, the one in my city profits entirely off of having a starbucks and gift-shop despite Jesus flipping the money-changing tables. Organs, pianos, and hymnbooks are phased out for rock and roll bands. Megachurches ironically reap the most members because they claim to be non-denominational which reasonably attracts most christians. It doesn't just apply to brick and mortar christianity. The name of the spiritual guru is being tarnished by scammers of various eastern faiths-- most infamously Shoko Asahara.

I 100% agree with you on the megachurches. My current church is smaller, but it's modern like that and I don't see any connection to real Christianity in that. No church should ever look for profit, and protesting that is a good thing. But if you criticize all of modern society and not those specific examples, people will have to think you're a reactionary. Even if watching your world disappear is hard, most people haven't experienced that feeling.

It's hard to relate to others when experiences are so different. I support prohibition of alcohol, drugs, and pornography because they've either directly affected me or my family. I support traditional families (sexuality aside) because I know what it feels like to be broken. Ironically, I am against most of society so the title of reactionary should fit with me, but I do not use nostalgia to be an apologist for deplorable ideals, and I even wish for a middle ground rather than complete eradication of a set belief.

[Geneviev]

I 100% agree with you on the megachurches. My current church is smaller, but it's modern like that and I don't see any connection to real Christianity in that. No church should ever look for profit, and protesting that is a good thing. But if you criticize all of modern society and not those specific examples, people will have to think you're a reactionary. Even if watching your world disappear is hard, most people haven't experienced that feeling.

It's hard to relate to others when experiences are so different. I support prohibition of alcohol, drugs, and pornography because they've either directly affected me or my family. I support traditional families (sexuality aside) because I know what it feels like to be broken. Ironically, I am against most of society so the title of reactionary should fit with me, but I do not use nostalgia to be an apologist for deplorable ideals, and I even wish for a middle ground rather than complete eradication of a set belief.

It makes sense for your personal experience to inform your beliefs. But most people have a completely different experience, and so understanding would be harder. For example, just looking at prohibition of alcohol, your experience says that it would be necessary. But in American history, it was a complete failure and made things worse. So people without the personal experience would look at that and be against prohibition. As far as I can tell, the only way to get around that disconnect is to understand the majority view. You might agree with more then, or not. But society will expect you to conform just because your world, or mine, is fiction by now.

[Albrenia]

I 100% agree with you on the megachurches. My current church is smaller, but it's modern like that and I don't see any connection to real Christianity in that. No church should ever look for profit, and protesting that is a good thing. But if you criticize all of modern society and not those specific examples, people will have to think you're a reactionary. Even if watching your world disappear is hard, most people haven't experienced that feeling.

It's hard to relate to others when experiences are so different. I support prohibition of alcohol, drugs, and pornography because they've either directly affected me or my family. I support traditional families (sexuality aside) because I know what it feels like to be broken. Ironically, I am against most of society so the title of reactionary should fit with me, but I do not use nostalgia to be an apologist for deplorable ideals, and I even wish for a middle ground rather than complete eradication of a set belief.

I am sorry if people have given you shit for the way you want to live. Aiming to have a traditional family and generally avoiding vices should most certainly be in your rights to do, and nobody should give you shit for wanting to live like that.

[Deacarsia]

Yea, we senselessly are abandoning tradition.

[Spiritual Republic of Caryton]

It's hard to relate to others when experiences are so different. I support prohibition of alcohol, drugs, and pornography because they've either directly affected me or my family. I support traditional families (sexuality aside) because I know what it feels like to be broken. Ironically, I am against most of society so the title of reactionary should fit with me, but I do not use nostalgia to be an apologist for deplorable ideals, and I even wish for a middle ground rather than complete eradication of a set belief.

I am sorry if people have given you shit for the way you want to live. Aiming to have a traditional family and generally avoiding vices should most certainly be in your rights to do, and nobody should give you shit for wanting to live like that.

I do believe that we should be kinder and more inclusive, namely because of my sexuality being so taboo in the church. I hope that it changes and I can be sealed to who I wish, but even if it doesn't, I am prepared to commit to what I feel is right. I've seen both sides of the spectrum, and naturally I'd prefer to live an opposite life to which I've been living. I'm trying to say I understand why these values are in place, even if I disagree with them. And understanding does not permit active work against, as per our natural rights guaranteed to us. I know that the people who I desperately wanted to be raised by or even around are gone and the generation I'll be going to church with will be different to those I am used to, even if being raised without faith and kept away from organized religion. I do again feel betrayed by society trying to erase the last holdouts of what I view as pious lifestyle, but there is little I can do to change it without either making my own church or having a pipe bomb mailed to my house by ANTIFA or something because of a misconception. People rightfully say I am being overly nostalgic, my entire nation is a tribute to a dog that died more than 7-9 years ago.

[Snakeden]

Nostalgia: a sentimental longing or wistful affection for the past, typically for a period or place with happy personal associations.

You can't go home again, and you can't live in any moment but the present one. It's all right to remember the nice things with happiness and fondness, but you can't ignore all the terrible things that came along with it, and you can't let your reminiscing on old memories lock you down by the ankles and keep you looking back over your shoulder. I've met people who obsess over how much better things supposedly used to be (and it doesn't matter how old any one of them was; it's always better in the past to any one of them, even if that was someone else's unacceptable present) and they are unbearably depressing to be around. They lock up, unchanging, unable to accept any new experiences, unable to enjoy anything around them. They become dusty little vampires bent on sucking the joy out of life. Don't model yourself after them--and don't expect anyone else to follow you backward and throw away their own happiness if you do.

[Plzen]

"I want to have a certain lifestyle prohibited to everyone else because I hated living it myself and because I know what's good for other people better than they themselves do, but it's totally my side of this debate that's being oppressed and censured by society, and totally not our side doing the oppressing."

People tell me that organised monotheism isn't incompatible with a liberal democracy, that it's possible to have a society that's both religious and free, but the more I talk to people who are actually Christians or Muslims, the more I'm reaffirmed in my belief that the survival and progress of liberal democracy depends on purging religious influence from politics.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

"I want to have a certain lifestyle prohibited to everyone else because I hated living it myself and because I know what's good for other people better than they themselves do, but it's totally my side of this debate that's being oppressed and censured by society, and totally not our side doing the oppressing."

People tell me that organised monotheism isn't incompatible with a liberal democracy, that it's possible to have a society that's both religious and free, but the more I talk to people who are actually Christians or Muslims, the more I'm reaffirmed in my belief that the survival and progress of liberal democracy depends on purging religious influence from politics.

They ought to remain completely separate from each other. Absolutely.

[Spiritual Republic of Caryton]

"I want to have a certain lifestyle prohibited to everyone else because I hated living it myself and because I know what's good for other people better than they themselves do, but it's totally my side of this debate that's being oppressed and censured by society, and totally not our side doing the oppressing."

People tell me that organised monotheism isn't incompatible with a liberal democracy, that it's possible to have a society that's both religious and free, but the more I talk to people who are actually Christians or Muslims, the more I'm reaffirmed in my belief that the survival and progress of liberal democracy depends on purging religious influence from politics.

gotta hide Mitt Romney

[Sylh Alanor]

My main concern here (and I skimmed the last two pages, so sorry if this has come up) is the idea that a gay man would rather live within 1960s-era morality ideas. I just can't parse that as a lesbian, which means I'd have probably been less likely to be killed in the street than you, but still would have been targeted. The Stonewall raid and riots happened at the end of the decade, in 1969. We honour Stonewall during pride parades, but that's because it was an incredibly dangerous struggle for those who came before us and participated. Even in Canada, we only decriminalized same-sex "activities" in 1969.

God, I remember being fascinated with how badly gay people were being treated when I was a kid in the 90s, and I barely had a notion of my own sexuality yet. You and I have never had it better than we do right now. It's irresponsible to say lgbt rights are as good as established and hope to take away the decades of fighting that it's taken to get this far. The decades of fighting against the very traditions you want us to return to. And even today, in 2020, our trans brothers, sisters, and siblings are still getting murdered in the US. By people fighting for a return to tradition.

Nah, chief, this ain't it. While a discussion could be had on relative morality in the modern day and what we could blend in from the past, progress in this instance is life-and-death.

[Kustonia]

No. We're sensibly abandoning tradition.

Tradition with a capital "T" is eternal. You may perhaps abandon such principles, but you can't get rid of something that's always existed.

[Spiritual Republic of Caryton]

My main concern here (and I skimmed the last two pages, so sorry if this has come up) is the idea that a gay man would rather live within 1960s-era morality ideas. I just can't parse that as a lesbian, which means I'd have probably been less likely to be killed in the street than you, but still would have been targeted. The Stonewall raid and riots happened at the end of the decade, in 1969. We honour Stonewall during pride parades, but that's because it was an incredibly dangerous struggle for those who came before us and participated. Even in Canada, we only decriminalized same-sex "activities" in 1969.

God, I remember being fascinated with how badly gay people were being treated when I was a kid in the 90s, and I barely had a notion of my own sexuality yet. You and I have never had it better than we do right now. It's irresponsible to say lgbt rights are as good as established and hope to take away the decades of fighting that it's taken to get this far. The decades of fighting against the very traditions you want us to return to. And even today, in 2020, our trans brothers, sisters, and siblings are still getting murdered in the US. By people fighting for a return to tradition.

Nah, chief, this ain't it. While a discussion could be had on relative morality in the modern day and what we could blend in from the past, progress in this instance is life-and-death.

I don't blindly support things like that, ie the racism and discrimination. In fact, I'd like to see people like us incorporated into tradition rather than stomped out of it. I'm not a self-hating cynic. I'm very comfortable with who I am, and I would never wish suffering on another person like that, especially after we've just gotten (barely) recognized. Morality to me is order, (inclusive) godliness, and a general return to simpler things without the darkness behind it. Religion and sexuality to me are equally important now, so I am in no right to dictate how others are to love each other.

I'd like to return this yikes back to the factory.

[Kustonia]

People tell me that organised monotheism isn't incompatible with a liberal democracy, that it's possible to have a society that's both religious and free, but the more I talk to people who are actually Christians or Muslims, the more I'm reaffirmed in my belief that the survival and progress of liberal democracy depends on purging religious influence from politics.

Most major world religions reject materialism and the unlimited and unrepentant consumerist freedom that comes with it. I'm glad that you finally see that. There is one major problem in your analysis, however. You think that liberal democracy has offered "progress" when in reality it has limited our ability to think beyond the realm of our own physical desires and what satisfies us in the short-term.

[Atheris]

No. We're sensibly abandoning tradition.

Tradition with a capital "T" is eternal. You may perhaps abandon such principles, but you can't get rid of something that's always existed.

I beg to differ. Tradition is not a proper noun. Tradition is more or less a feeling, rather than an actual fact. When did tradition first begin? When humanity was first created on the plains of East Africa some 60,000 years ago? When Macedon conquered Persia, when the Qin were first founded, when the Romans engulfed the Mediterranean? When Napoleon conquered Europe, laying the foundations for modern ideology? When Hitler invaded Europe, directly killing 11 million people and laying down the foundations to stop modern racism and genocide? After 9/11, when the American psyche was irreversibly changed and the War on Terror truly begun?

You can't nail down tradition to a set starting point.

[Atheris]

People tell me that organised monotheism isn't incompatible with a liberal democracy, that it's possible to have a society that's both religious and free, but the more I talk to people who are actually Christians or Muslims, the more I'm reaffirmed in my belief that the survival and progress of liberal democracy depends on purging religious influence from politics.

Oh, no, it's entirely possible to have a free and religious society at the same time. See the United States, Germany, France, and Britain.

[Spiritual Republic of Caryton]

People tell me that organised monotheism isn't incompatible with a liberal democracy, that it's possible to have a society that's both religious and free, but the more I talk to people who are actually Christians or Muslims, the more I'm reaffirmed in my belief that the survival and progress of liberal democracy depends on purging religious influence from politics.

Oh, no, it's entirely possible to have a free and religious society at the same time. See the United States, Germany, France, and Britain.

I believe he means more classical America where anglo-saxons had the majority and protestantism was the hip thing.

[Kustonia]

Tradition with a capital "T" is eternal. You may perhaps abandon such principles, but you can't get rid of something that's always existed.

I beg to differ. Tradition is not a proper noun. Tradition is more or less a feeling, rather than an actual fact. When did tradition first begin? When humanity was first created on the plains of East Africa some 60,000 years ago? When Macedon conquered Persia, when the Qin were first founded, when the Romans engulfed the Mediterranean?...

You can't nail down tradition to a set starting point.

You're thinking in materialistic terms. Human beings don't decide when Tradition starts and ends. It's always been part of our instincts to continue the legacies and the lessons we take from them into the future. Tradition is basically time immemorial.

[Yaawaa]

Hm... this is really interesting.

I more fear that censorship goes insane, as in that jokes about race in anyway, even damn minor ones may get censored.
Is that a loss of tradition? Some things I do fear strangely. Loss of jokes, then violence in anyway gets censored, and then minor percentage innequality is censored,
Too much censorship?

[Spiritual Republic of Caryton]

I beg to differ. Tradition is not a proper noun. Tradition is more or less a feeling, rather than an actual fact. When did tradition first begin? When humanity was first created on the plains of East Africa some 60,000 years ago? When Macedon conquered Persia, when the Qin were first founded, when the Romans engulfed the Mediterranean?...

You can't nail down tradition to a set starting point.

You're thinking in materialistic terms. Human beings don't decide when Tradition starts and ends. It's always been part of our instincts to continue the legacies and the lessons we take from them into the future.

So about the future... when can we start the Manson-Mason Revolutionary National Pol-Potist Agrarian Death State?

[Cisairse]

Quite the opposite actually

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/07/opin ... dence.html

Also, please click the link in my signature if you're seriously going to try and defend nuclear families