I'm straight and tired of gay pride

[Harbal]

Harbal writes: Why does a desire to understand necessarily have to come with a need to change things? Does thinking we understand something give us the right to involve ourselves in activities that affect how others are able to live their lives? "Idea-revolutions" should be treated with caution.

I think the core reason, speaking for myself, is because personal processes led me to a detailed examination of my own trajectory. I have described myself as a product of California Radicalism.

Well I describe myself as the product of Yorkshire, working class indifference, so that might go towards explaining our differences in outlook. I neither deny nor begrudge your entitlement to hold whatever opinions you like, but why on earth do you think I should find any value in them?

The influences largely but not exclusively were, as I have said, Richard Weaver, René Guénon, Robert Bork and to some degree Julius Evola. I also must mention Christopher Dawson (a Catholic historian of Europe).

After absorbing all that -and more- one has to wonder how much of the actual you remains, and whose book one is arguing with at any given point.

Change things? No, reorient myself.

You reorient yourself to your heart's content, but I won't be using you as a reference by which to recalibrate my own orientation. I doubt that California Radicalism would travel well to my part of the world.

Recover and rediscover a foundation that made sense. Radicalism is a breaking away from *sound structures*. If it does not involve the establishment of foundations it merely veers into chaos. This is why I speak of *anchors* and *moorings*.

I live less than 10 miles from where I grew up, so I think I am pretty well anchored.

So what are you doing to change the world? If you had a significant function outside of demonstrating your verbosity on the internet, I doubt you would have the spare hours that you spend here.

I am pulsing down into the world certain notes and chords, operating at such high and transformative frequencies, that all of humanity will (eventually) respond. For example one day soon you Harbal -- you! -- will wake up and start to spontaneously SING in harmony with these high high notes! Mark my words!

Despite the air of flippancy, I suspect you believe that.

You keep saying that. Why do you think it matters whether it's personal or not?

It matters in conversations of this sort. One has to separate oneself from emotional commitments to that which *informs* us in order to be able to see it (more) clearly.

It doesn't make any difference to me. If you reference me, and I decide to respond, I do it in accordance with what you say, not whether you meant it personally, or as an example of something.

We are here to think about, and arrive at conclusions, about what each of us thinks. Really, that is what *philosophy* is supposed to be unless I am very very wrong. It ultimately determines *how we choose to live*, doesn't it?

I am mainly here for entertainment, and you seem to be here to bolster your ego. Let's not get carried away about the significance of any of this.

[Alexis Jacobi]

but why on earth do you think I should find any value in them?

Hold it right there. I know you find none. So we’re on the same page.

I may transform Earth with harmonic transformation vibrations but Good Lord Harbal I know my limitations …

[Harbal]

but why on earth do you think I should find any value in them?

Hold it tight there. I know you find none. So we’re on the same page.

But you seem to think I should, for some reason.

I may transform Earth with harmonic transformation vibrations but Good Lord Harbal I know my limitations …

I think more people than you realise know your limitations.

[Alexis Jacobi]

But you seem to think I should, for some reason.

Only the hypothetical you should read Weaver. You the Yorkshire working man’s man should avoid him like a mental plague.

[Harbal]

But you seem to think I should, for some reason.

Only the hypothetical you should read Weaver.

If you want me to read 'Weaver,' the worst thing you could do is recommend him to me.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Do.not.ever.read.Weaver!

[Alexis Jacobi]

I am mainly here for entertainment, and you seem to be here to bolster your ego. Let's not get carried away about the significance of any of this.

The significance is ultra-serious.

But I respect that it is not picked up on your radar.

[Iwannaplato]

Really Iwannaplato, are there other bona fide Prophets on this forum? I ask you …

I’ll need to see credentials …

I said Narcissists. One could translate that to would be prophets, though I would say Age might be the only person in that category. Advocate and Wizard have both claimed in their own language to be the best philosophers in the world. Not quite the same as being a prophet. There are a couple of others who act, here, like Narcissists. But since they haven't quite made direct narcissistic claims about themselves, relying on implication, I'll leave them off the list. They're not prophets in their own minds, at least not spiritual ones.

[Harbal]

I am mainly here for entertainment, and you seem to be here to bolster your ego. Let's not get carried away about the significance of any of this.

The significance is ultra-serious.

But I respect that it is not picked up on your radar.

Thank you. I'll try to find something about you to respect.

[Alexis Jacobi]

When Age stripped away capitalizations, he stripped off ego-remnants and, miracle of miracles, departed that restraining chrysalis. A truer self emerged and he flutters differently I’ve noticed.

[Dubious]

I am pulsing down into the world certain notes and chords, operating at such high and transformative frequencies that only dogs can hear it. We, unfortunately not being likewise blessed, can only appreciate the influx of such morsels of doggy enlightenment when they start howling homophonically in affirmation.

Must we be forever refluxed instead of influxed by these high and transformative frequencies!! Oh woe!!

Can Richard Weaver possibly heal these black holes in the brain which consume all forms of enlightenment??

I often wondered what the rear end of a black hole looks like.

[Alexis Jacobi]

I am pulsing down into the world certain notes and chords, operating at such high and transformative frequencies that only dogs can hear it.

This is valuable work.

It has been revealed to me that millions of years hence the dominant intelligent life forms will be 1) dogs and — surprisingly — 2) pigeons!

Sounds like Providence has you just where you’re needed ….

I often wondered what the rear end of a black hole looks like.

Get with Flash on that one. He has •direct experience• with rear-ends.

[Iwannaplato]

When Age stripped away capitalizations, he stripped off ego-remnants and, miracle of miracles, departed that restraining chrysalis. A truer self emerged and he flutters differently I’ve noticed.

Yes, without the shackles of the signal to noise problems created by his typography, his inability to communicate well with humans at the time this is being writing is more obvious to others. This allows him to vent and shed even the rare taking responsibility for errors he showed earlier. The grandiosity is emerging like some beneficent viral bloom. A gay parade could be seen as a metaphor for this spectacle not involving sex and sexuality.

[FlashDangerpants]

So if your appreciation of a big pile of books is conditional on those books being ones the other guy hasn't read (so that you can pose as the master of all materials) then Harbal is well within his rights to not be terribly restless in pursuit of a revolution of antique notions about racial destinies and social purification that already lost one world war.

Your position vis-a-vis moral anti-realism is one that can be expressed in a few sentences -- and that is why I quoted Peter Holmes. It is not that it has many moving parts. Yes, you can fancy it up I guess. But it reduces to a simple statement.

If you say so. It doesn't really matter, you were unable to argue against it and relied on mere propaganda and personal slights instead, then you gave up entirely. So why are you trying to resurrect a debate where your own position is dog shit?

[Alexis Jacobi]

Naturally you won’t respond. But here is the post from which you extracted the above segment.