Western civilization is under attack. He was regularly betrayed from within
by the fifth column degrading in calling imperialist, oppressive,
hypocritical, and so on. When seeing only the top, the uppermost crust of
leftists, we may be tempted to identify instinctively: they broke the whole
social fabric for decades, while the Conservatives, see complex flower,
delicate humanity was the West, tried to save it.
Problems arise when we dive deeper into the subject. If the West was purely
geographical, there would be almost nothing to defend that we are free to
go abroad. If civilization was synonymous with material goods and
technology, we could start all over again and grow without rancor. We
identify with the West, but the West is a mess. So let me clarify the
question a bit.
vocabulary questions
"Civilization" comes from the Latin root civis, which referred to a group
of people sleeping under the same roof, and to the members of the same city
& # 8212; & # 8212 citizens or subjects of the same rule. The word boomed
during the eighteenth century, when intellectuals opposed to the increase,
he savagery and barbarism. Leftists love hate that they always accuse
the "dead white men" of the time to have disrespected the sacred Other.
However, beyond their obvious caricature otherwise complex intellectual
figures, they tend to forget two important things.
First, philosophers non-European tribes or barbarians considered political
entities were often really. Even the most hardened glasses wearer problem
will dare defend human sacrifices, cannibalism or Arab culture of slavery.
(They tend to sweep these inconvenient facts under the carpet instead.)
The Jewish anthropologist Claude Levi-Strauss said that famous "barbarian
is one who believes in barbarism" leftists like to use something to suggest
that manufacturers are more gentle temperament "barbaric" that nomadic
Stone Age tribes who regularly kill one another . But Levi-Strauss felt
awkward facing the Muslim violence and sectarianism.
Second, the philosophers were much less concerned by the Aztecs and
Africans as the evilizing their domestic opponents. They blamed the Middle
Ages and Christianity as "less civilized", "superstitious", "fanatic" & #
8212; they are not meant to defend the West but to inaugurating their own
version of the West.
Since then, many talking heads with the notion asked. Some equate the West
with modernization. So, as everyone on Earth into global capitalism, bought
a smartphone knows Hollywood movies, everyone is "westernized" and the West
is everywhere. Of course, if the West is just that everyone is equal (not),
there is no merit or special genius behind our ancestors very complex and
demanding achievements, no identity: only a set of artifacts we would
be "privileged" to receive.
Others see the "civilization" as a burden: the more complex, more
difficult, the more frail. Here Lothrop Stoddard joined Nassim Taleb & #
8212; if civilization means bureaucracy and central planning, it is doomed
to failure. In both cases, the word was quietly reduced equated with very
particular, non-obvious views. Should identify the cult of technology or
shuffling paper?
Traditionalists authors such as René Guénon and Julius Evola oppose modern
civilization with the traditional. non-Western civilizations, as well as
the Roman Empire and Christian Europe, sprung peoples characters and
different needs but all had a sacred core, truly spiritual, unlike
the "materialist" civilization of modernity without God, anomic.
The traditionalist school of thought or pérennialiste is extremely
inspiring, but suffers from a major flaw: it collects too much contempt on
post-Western Middle Ages. So, it is too easily scammed by Muslims not very
bright condemning what they could never do today and receive freely.
Traditionalism in dire need of updating it more would fit our needs.
(Needless to add, traditionalism has appeared in the West and elsewhere.)
The cultural issue
When the "West" is too inclusive
The ambiguity is that too many IDs and strong value judgments (or too
large) were thrown into the concept of Western civilization. A much less
ambiguous talk think of a civilization as a sustainable
ethno-social-cultural unit. As said Evola, a particular civilization has a
unique morphology that students of history generally recognize.
But morphologies move and change. When do we move from one civilization to
another? (I do not ask this rhetoric: many traditionalists of the twentieth
century are struggling to reconcile the Western identity with a
non-Christian spiritual path, and Russia literally endured centuries of
debate whether Slavic or European identity is "Asian ".)
A civilization, in this sense, can be subverted from within. The Roman
Empire was in the early clashes between followers of a holy fire men,
jovian and promoters of a "civilization of the Mother" (the expression of
Evola) feminized the Earth becomes the chief god, which of course
completely changes everything.
Today physiques tend to be subverted by globalism, financial capitalism,
the flood of tinder and you-go-girlism in cultures that still high
traditional girls, and individual initiative. Does our leadership of
civilization to ruin his concept?
What should we defend then? Combines interest are subordinate non identity
and culturally and spiritually vacuo. I absolutely refuse to let my
identity shrink to a single network, a business partnership, or my own
individuality. Yet the system & # 8212; which is a product of the modern
West & # 8212; simply that: social atomization, in the name of modern
humanitarian values.
Philosopher Alasdair McIntyre pinpointed as "classic", the traditional
political values were incompatible with each other, and it gets worse
with multiculturalism. Like the late Roman Empire, the West has too many
civilizations in it. And as Plato could see such an unbalanced state can
only lead to tyranny is or collapse.
Who are we then? As for me: meeting with Iranian guy in an Arab country, I
could tell they were different intuitively Bedouin owners, and part of the
same identity as me in a way Bedouins are not. I felt the same when I
discovered the Kalash People Indo-Aryan: they are not Westerners, but we
are and we are a goatf * quants way will never be.
When I particularly traditionalist René Guénon, I thought that whites
should perhaps not quite identify the West to find the source of Eastern
youth. But it would be a betrayal of a glorious epic everyone longs
benefit. No anti-white never refused an iPhone. No criticism of the West
rejected the IT without which we could never communicate through the Earth
or investing in Bitcoin.
Overall, we must sharpen our intuition of what the West is or should be, so
we can not identify all the parts applied degeneration and the masses still
identify with. Neomasculinity, associated with basic acceptance that there
are native Westerners too, should help us to do the job. We arrived to find
that we are so we can become again.
Read more: The Amish Show us what the West could he
No comments:
Post a Comment