LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺

I gave not up the Arya name to Dasyu foes.

Analytic Phenomenology = Fascho-Positivism = Romantic Realism.

[LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺 @LogonZoon]

The left radical remains mired in the puerile, wishful Law of the Heart;

The bourgeois remains repressed, in bad conscience;

Only the fascist is a whole man.

[LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺 @LogonZoon]

@CCrowley100 How funny to see egalitarianism described as ‘noble’. Egalitarianism is precisely the ideology of ignobleness.

[LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺 @LogonZoon]

@OG_Anaya_ @grok Once upon a time, some literate poster wrote ‘warp this…’. People imitated him. Shortly, someone made a careless typo and wrote ‘wrap this…’. Semi-literate people imitated him en masse, completely innocent of any suspicion of bad English.

[LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺 @LogonZoon]

It would have been a smoother course for the dialectic if we’d delayed splitting until after Farage became pm. But that’s history for you. The course of true history never runs smooth.

Farage being pm means the end of the old 2 party system, and the collapse of the old center. It would be momentous, and it would open a vacuum on the right.

If Restore split the right along the red wall, they might give us Labour as the biggest party in a hung parliament.

Yet I trust things will work out in the end. One way or another, the meaning of the 21st century must be the triumph of ethno-nationalist corporatism. Logic demands it.

[LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺 @LogonZoon]

I guess our disagreement is really about the nature of Restore. That disagreement is understandable because you are right that much of Restore’s membership are radicals; yet I am right that the leadership and official philosophy is boomer-Thatcherite. Something will have to give. At some point there will have to be either new leadership, or secession and the forming of an eth-nat corporatist party. Restore’s leadership and official philosophy too are only ‘slightly to the right of the Tories’.

Does the establishment fear Restore, or is Labour rubbing its hands gleefully over the split on the right ? Labour needs the right to split precisely along the red wall and in the north where Green is weak, such that the leftist vote is not so severely split.

Given that something will have to give with respect to Restore, you and I will probably be in the same party a decade from now. I’m waiting for that party.

[LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺 @LogonZoon]

Of course I don’t disagree with you about Reform.

My argument is that we need a Reform government in order to redefine centrism, and create a vacuum on the right. The collapse of the old center will open a new discursive space.

You and I agree I think that the only authentic rightist opposition to Thatcherism is ethno-nationalist corporatism. I think the current membership of Restore are in large part the kernel of that authentic opposition, but they’re straight-jacketed by Thatcherite leadership.

I think we need a Farage government to open that new discursive space. Splitting now is premature and counter-productive. It could even save the old centrism.

The moment Restore becomes avowedly ethno-nat corporatist, I will support it fully. If Restore’s current membership at some point break with Restore and form an avowedly ethno-nat corporatist party, I will support them fully. I think that would be more productively done after the old centre is destroyed. Destroying the old center requires tolerating boomer Thatcherism for now, and the splitting of boomer-Thatcherism is not helpful.

You make an important point about Reform giving the electorate a false sense of security. Any Thatcherite government would. My hope is that it will unavoidably become apparent in the Farage years that boomer Thatcherism is ‘weak sauce’, and simply does not solve our problems, such that that Overton will keep shifting right, under pressure from the right that crystallizes in that vacuum formed by the collapse of the old centrism.

[LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺 @LogonZoon]

I’m glad you’ve conceded that change of leadership would be necessary for Restore to become an authentic opposition to Reform. Of course that really comes down to change of philosophy. It’s the political philosophy of the leadership that is the problem. Lowe will need to be replaced only because his ideas are wrong. Lowe doesn’t have much choice about who he accepts in the party. He has to posture rhetorically in such a way as to attract those to the right of Reform, since his only available strategy is to outflank Reform. He would have no support at all if his rhetoric was moderated. Yet we know his politics are boomer-Thatcherite, and we understand the logic of boomer-Thatcherism implies replacement, negating nationalism in favor of an ethnically-indifferent politics of class.

[LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺 @LogonZoon]

Insofar as he remains a Thatcherite, he remains committed to free movement of labour. His in-group is not the British people, it is the economically servile and useful. Hence, he is not a nationalist. He will not deport non-whites, he will deport whomever he can of those not useful to capital. Under him, non-whites will continue to immigrate legally, as well, no doubt, as illegally, and non-whites will continue to outbreed us. We still get replaced. Even the rate won’t slow down, since he’ll only deport the illegals he can lay his hands on, primarily criminal illegals. It’s legal replacement that’s the real threat.

[LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺 @LogonZoon]

I cannot for the life of me understand why so many fell for Lowe. His boomer-Thatcherite politics are barely distinguishable from Reform’s. It’s all rhetoric. We need a Reform government in order to redefine centrism, creating a vacuum on the right into which an authentic rightist opposition can move. Restore are only obstructing that process. They are the savior of old centrism, if anything at all. We do not benefit from the splitting of boomer-Thatcherism. We do not benefit from there existing two boomer-Thatcherite outfits.

[LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺 @LogonZoon]

I swear if this guy pops up again just after the by-election, we bloody well know what happened.

[LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺 @LogonZoon]

What happened to @WorldbyWolf ? I’m a bit uncomfortable about the fact that the most effective critic of Lowe and Restore just suddenly disappeared.

[LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺 @LogonZoon]

@FromKulak @SydSteyerhart Read the bloody Greek !

[LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺 @LogonZoon]

@JFGariepy His commitment to content. She’s gold.

[LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺 @LogonZoon]

Greek αυγή (light of sun, beam, ray) and Gothic augo (eye) derive from the same Aryan root.

In Greek literature, (e.g the Homeric hymn to Hermes) αυγή is sometimes still used for eye.

Οφθαλμός appears to have been borrowed from the substrate.

The poetic uses of αυγή as eye might be argued to be purely metaphorical, but they could just as well show that the word long retained a deep traditional usage as eye.

The deep semantic connections of eye, light, beam, ray, sun, sun as eye, eye as beam go back to the steppe, and forth to early modernity. @Tom_Rowsell

[LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺 @LogonZoon]

@whitesocksclips ‘The boyim’ is so funny 😆

[LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺 @LogonZoon]

@AngloFash01 Pragmatism means you’re going to have to do something about your leader at some point. Something will have to give.

[LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺 @LogonZoon]

@RupertLowe10 Sshh Rupert you’ll alienate half your base. You’re supposed to be pretending not to be a liberal, remember ?

[LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺 @LogonZoon]

@NadineDorries Vote Reform, get Labour anyway, by the latest poll. You’ve completely bungled the campaign.

[LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺 @LogonZoon]

Consider this contrast : ‘x is a woman implies x is a sexual object’ (p), as opposed to ‘x is a rabbit implies x is a lagomorph’’.

It is very easy to imagine a community that knows rabbits, but constructs no class of lagomorphs; it is harder to imagine a community which knows women, while being unaware of them as sexual objects.

Of course I’m aware of the Trobrianders, who were apparently innocent of any predicate equivalent to ‘is a sexual object’ in any sense like the one I used above, involving some knowledge of biological mechanisms.

As such, it is necessary to distinguish that cognitive-biological sense of being a sexual object from a phenomenological sense, as ‘object of sexual desire’. Even the Trobrianders were not innocent of that. Yet on that definition, the case for p being synthetic à priori perhaps becomes stronger, since sexual desire is transcendental (belongs to the analytic of Dasein).

I would still want to stress that the Trobrianders are exceptional, such that p is generally understood, even if somewhat pre-thematically, by most human communities. That’s why p as originally understood seems like a stronger candidate for a proposition of essence than other cases of class inclusion.

[LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺 @LogonZoon]

Because sex is a true binary,

‘x is a woman implies x is a sexual object’ (hereafter p)

is a strong example for those who believe in essences.

‘x is an object’ means x can be the value of a variable, such that things can be predicated of x; ‘x is sexual’ means x can reproduce by combining genetic material with a member of the opposite sex.

‘x has a heart implies x has kidneys’ admits counter-examples at boundary cases; p does not.

‘x is human implies x is mortal’ is an inductive generalization; p is not.

Intersex conditions give no counter-example, since you can either deny that the sufferer is a woman, irrespective of whether he is a sexual object, or admit that he is a woman, and maintain that she is a sexual object. Either way, the conditional p holds.

Unattractive women give no counter-example, since, qua woman, x is still defined as a sexual being, irrespective of her lack of appeal relative to other women.

p is true not merely by virtue of meaning, but because real, biological sex is binary.

p is comparable to ‘x is blue implies x is colored’.

I’m inclined to think p is analytic à priori in spite of being more than merely conventional. We construct our class of women, construct our classes of females of other species, and note analytically that all these classes are subsets of a now constructed class of sexual objects.

Hence there must be analytic propositions that are more than merely conventional; hence there must be essences.

Some might argue p is synthetic à priori, since p is knowable à priori, (say to some monk who’s never seen a woman but knows what one is), yet p is not merely linguistically trivial or conventional, like ‘x is a bachelor implies x is unmarried’. p gives real information about a real class of objects. I think synthetic à prioricity is best rejected if possible, and I think it is possible to reject it.

I’m not afraid of essences. I even quite like them.

[LogonZoon 🇬🇧 🇷🇺 @LogonZoon]

Fascism is the authentic repressed antithesis to liberal democracy. The synthesis of despotism and capitalism. The resurrection of the father we killed. The restoration of paternalist realist rationalism : the logos-phallus.