Jan 24, 2020, 10:50 AM The only purpose of a political party is promotion and legitimacy the same way the IRA had a political party (Sinn Fein). It’s not because a political party can win elections. It’s because it’s a vehicle for recruiting within a non-military framework, and promoting policy. Via positiva politics, via negativa war. (Tom Kawczynski)
Source: Original Site Post
-
Yes We Will Start a Political Party
Jan 24, 2020, 10:50 AM The only purpose of a political party is promotion and legitimacy the same way the IRA had a political party (Sinn Fein). It’s not because a political party can win elections. It’s because it’s a vehicle for recruiting within a non-military framework, and promoting policy. Via positiva politics, via negativa war. (Tom Kawczynski)
-
Q:”The Trials of Achilles?”
Jan 24, 2020, 11:00 AM
—“You keep mentioning trials of Achilles but I have no idea what that’s intended to refer and I wonder if you’re not thinking of labors of Heracles?”—Martin Štěpán
The greeks invented the tragedy (nietzsche), and it was a novel technology of social order that justified sacrifice as heroism, and unity in that sacrifice and heroism. it made tragedy a positive social theme of shared debt (cost) experience. The Iliad is a tragedy, the tragedy of achilles, as he goes through multiple trials. The trials of achilles refer to each of the episodes where he prevails – only to ask, but at what cost? “Trial: a person, thing, or situation that tests a person’s endurance or forbearance.” It is easy to see why the jews tried to create an underclass Achilles. Because the tragedy had already been saturated across the greek world: “undermine from within.” The same is true for the Odyssey. if we take achilles , alexander, and odyssey we have the entire arc of tragedy. The ‘weak’ (defensive) version is Arthur and Jesus.
-
Q:”The Trials of Achilles?”
Jan 24, 2020, 11:00 AM
—“You keep mentioning trials of Achilles but I have no idea what that’s intended to refer and I wonder if you’re not thinking of labors of Heracles?”—Martin Štěpán
The greeks invented the tragedy (nietzsche), and it was a novel technology of social order that justified sacrifice as heroism, and unity in that sacrifice and heroism. it made tragedy a positive social theme of shared debt (cost) experience. The Iliad is a tragedy, the tragedy of achilles, as he goes through multiple trials. The trials of achilles refer to each of the episodes where he prevails – only to ask, but at what cost? “Trial: a person, thing, or situation that tests a person’s endurance or forbearance.” It is easy to see why the jews tried to create an underclass Achilles. Because the tragedy had already been saturated across the greek world: “undermine from within.” The same is true for the Odyssey. if we take achilles , alexander, and odyssey we have the entire arc of tragedy. The ‘weak’ (defensive) version is Arthur and Jesus.
-
A Lesson of How a Warrior Is to To Become a King: Through Nobility.
There are values to be learned from both Achilles(a King who is not yet noble) and Hector (a warrior who is noble). However, what does it say about rage, power, and forgiveness to men who would be kings? Iliad and Odyssey are two books in what is called the Epic Cycle. The “Bible” of the ancient world. There were six others that told the other parts. The other books were much shorter And one amendment to them: the Aeneid. THE EPIC CYCLE: ACT I 1. Cypria – preamble and first nine years of the war.
2. Illiad – The rage of achilles
ACT II 3. Aetheiopis – death of achilles 4. Little Illiad – building the trojan horse
5. Iliou Persis – sack of troy
ACTIII 6. Nostoi – Everyone but odysseus returns home 7. Odyssey – Odysseus’ journey home
8. Telogony – Odysseus gets killed
POSTSCRIPT 9. Aneid – The last trojan goes west. (added later). The others are largely lost. But most of the dramas (plays) take place during these stories. And there is a lot of written commentary. So we can reconstruct them. The Iliad is “A Story of Achilles Rage” or “The Rage of Achilles“. But Priam comes to Achilles and they settle the rage. He learns to forgive his enemies and abandon his rage. It is a story of aristocracy becoming through respect and forgiveness. It is a lesson of how a warrior is to to become a king: Through Nobility.
-
A Lesson of How a Warrior Is to To Become a King: Through Nobility.
There are values to be learned from both Achilles(a King who is not yet noble) and Hector (a warrior who is noble). However, what does it say about rage, power, and forgiveness to men who would be kings? Iliad and Odyssey are two books in what is called the Epic Cycle. The “Bible” of the ancient world. There were six others that told the other parts. The other books were much shorter And one amendment to them: the Aeneid. THE EPIC CYCLE: ACT I 1. Cypria – preamble and first nine years of the war.
2. Illiad – The rage of achilles
ACT II 3. Aetheiopis – death of achilles 4. Little Illiad – building the trojan horse
5. Iliou Persis – sack of troy
ACTIII 6. Nostoi – Everyone but odysseus returns home 7. Odyssey – Odysseus’ journey home
8. Telogony – Odysseus gets killed
POSTSCRIPT 9. Aneid – The last trojan goes west. (added later). The others are largely lost. But most of the dramas (plays) take place during these stories. And there is a lot of written commentary. So we can reconstruct them. The Iliad is “A Story of Achilles Rage” or “The Rage of Achilles“. But Priam comes to Achilles and they settle the rage. He learns to forgive his enemies and abandon his rage. It is a story of aristocracy becoming through respect and forgiveness. It is a lesson of how a warrior is to to become a king: Through Nobility.
-
Jan 24, 2020, 11:52 AM —“Nature is the mother of reciprocity. Cold, brutal and
Jan 24, 2020, 11:52 AM
—“Nature is the mother of reciprocity. Cold, brutal and uncompromising. Pay its price or cease existing.”—Eric Bumpus
-
Jan 24, 2020, 11:52 AM —“Nature is the mother of reciprocity. Cold, brutal and
Jan 24, 2020, 11:52 AM
—“Nature is the mother of reciprocity. Cold, brutal and uncompromising. Pay its price or cease existing.”—Eric Bumpus
-
Christian Compatibility
Jan 24, 2020, 1:38 PM Yeah, well you know, the faithful need to believe the mythos is true because men said so. We, the rational, only need to understand that Christian love, natural law of reciprocity and the physical laws are written in the structure of the universe regardless of what men said. The difference is between a personal god that they desire, and the impersonal god or nature that we observe. What we can say is that whether you are a supernatural and theological Christian first and Aristotelian second, or an Aristotelian first and scientific Christian second, that the only difference is their need to preserve the social construction of a personal deity and a life after death. Like the empathic female (christians-first), and the analytic male (aristotelians-first), women and men are also compatible – we are just not identical. I don’t know why that’s intolerable other than it leaves them on the defense in creating the social construction of a mythical reality in which they have a greater sense of control than they in fact do. But it is simply true that people who lack agency need more rigid less dynamic rules to live by. Whereas we have greater agency and are comfortable with scientific christian love, scientific natural law, and scientific physical law, because we have ourselves and others of equal agency to trust – and they don’t. So it’s understandable that they want their faith to produce the outcomes. It’s understandable that we don’t need faith in order to produce the same outcome. And it’s rather obvious that these two positions are as compatible as are the male and female.
-
Christian Compatibility
Jan 24, 2020, 1:38 PM Yeah, well you know, the faithful need to believe the mythos is true because men said so. We, the rational, only need to understand that Christian love, natural law of reciprocity and the physical laws are written in the structure of the universe regardless of what men said. The difference is between a personal god that they desire, and the impersonal god or nature that we observe. What we can say is that whether you are a supernatural and theological Christian first and Aristotelian second, or an Aristotelian first and scientific Christian second, that the only difference is their need to preserve the social construction of a personal deity and a life after death. Like the empathic female (christians-first), and the analytic male (aristotelians-first), women and men are also compatible – we are just not identical. I don’t know why that’s intolerable other than it leaves them on the defense in creating the social construction of a mythical reality in which they have a greater sense of control than they in fact do. But it is simply true that people who lack agency need more rigid less dynamic rules to live by. Whereas we have greater agency and are comfortable with scientific christian love, scientific natural law, and scientific physical law, because we have ourselves and others of equal agency to trust – and they don’t. So it’s understandable that they want their faith to produce the outcomes. It’s understandable that we don’t need faith in order to produce the same outcome. And it’s rather obvious that these two positions are as compatible as are the male and female.