@hj@shigusegubu.club
@matrix this is what military industrial complex wants you to believe
@matrix if society wouldnt reset, we would only have the good times that create bad men, and not the good men who create good times
@matrix btw I meant reset as in "breaking peace". I worded that weirdly
@matrix I should go to bed...
@mystik @igel @matrix Not just war, but also violence. Violence can have meaning disconnected from war and the other way around, but the two are linked. They also form a spiritual uplift. War and violence are a human need. To be anti-violence is to be anti-life, or at least its proper expression.
All is will to power and the battle for domination. Any life that is worth anything seeks power, and power is amoral. For many today life is breathing and digestion. For me life itself represents no value, but only life that is rich, affirmative, expressive and growing.
This world is no Nirvana, it's violent, cruel, lacking any mercy, benevolences or forgiveness. Life is a war, a battle to see who are the strong. Man is aweary, he cries out from the inside for kings and heroes. Man's need for war and death is still, and will all ways be.
This circling planet-ball is no Nirvana. This sphere speeding through space is a bloody and violence Valhalla. It is this planet-ball, this speeding sphere, this Valhalla that I love.
War and violence are in fact good. For many men the first World War was hell as seen in propaganda pieces like All Quiet on the Western Front, yet for some like Jünger it was the best time of their lives. Jünger shows us a more ancient view of war. When people look at war today they have no idea what war meant for people. Jünger in Storm of Steel never steps down from how much of a living hell war is.
Early in Storm of Steel Ernst Jünger gives this image of war which I liked, "Unmolested by any fire, I strolled along the ravaged trench. It was the short mid-morning lull that was often my only moment of respite on the battlefield." War is a storm of steel full of excitement and struggle. It's hard to read Jünger and not see a new beauty in war. Jünger writes about hell of earth and how beautiful (in its own way) it can be, but also, how cruel it can be.
Jünger's book is not just the best book on WWI, but the best book on war (second being Evola's Metaphysics of War). Jünger shows how war is a living hell, a mix of emotions, a savage and brutal landscape with it all sounding lovely. War really is as the title says a storm of steel.
Jünger gives an image of WWI which you help but love. All without backing down from how much of a living hell war is. Then Jünger gets more into this in other works, how emotions should not be judged by what emotion they are but by their intensity and their ability to move people to action.
This is one of my favorite quotes from it (it shows the emotions from war);
"These moments of nocturnal prowling leave an indelible impression. Eyes and ears are tensed to the maximum, the rustling approach of strange feet in the tall grass is an unutterably menacing thing. Your breath comes in shallow bursts; you have to force yourself to stifle any panting or wheezing. There is a little mechanical click as the safety-catch of your pistol is taken off;the sound cuts straight through your nerves. Your teeth are grinding on the fuse-pin of the hand-grenade. The encounter will be sort and murderous. You tremble with two Contradictory impulses: the heightened awareness of the huntsman, and the terror of the quarry. You are a world to yourself, saturated with the appalling aura if the savage landscape."
For many war was about nation, family, race and defending of one's own. Through war a man stops living for something lower and the live for something higher. War was seen as a historical must. People now only look at war as the act itself and ignore it's context: the other problem with how we look at war is the normal soldier is not a philosopher, and that's why we need people like Jünger and even Julius Evola to tell is the positives of war and violence.
We may also add the Italian Futurist. Futurism was an abstract art movement. Balilla Pratella put what it is best;
"Futurism, which is a rebellion of the life of intuition and feeling, a palpitating and impetuous spring-time, inevitably declares war against doctrines, individuals, or works that repeat, prolong, or praise the past at the expense of the future."
The Futurist is obsessed with progress, speed, destruction. For the Futurist youth, speed, technology and violence are the most important parts to life. For the Futurist struggle is the most important part to life. For as Marinetti put it "Except in struggle, there is no more beauty. No work without an aggressive character can be a masterpiece". The Futurist looked at any worship of the past as slavish. They wanted to destroy tradition and embrace technology. I would like to take somthing again from Marinetti;
"Speaking personally, I much prefer the bomb of a Vaillant to the cringing attitude of the bourgeois who hies away in a moment of danger, or to the loasthsome selfishness of the peasant who seliberately maims himself rather than serve his country."
If you want to learn more about and understand Futurism then get a copy of the book Futurism: An Anthology
War can make is stronger. It's as simple as imperialism. The time may be too late to be able to build a new Rome, but we can still take resources and grow. I would say we can build an imperium; a supreme with absolute dominion. The rules in this have changed, the role of war has weakened but there will all ways be an element. War only makes you weaker if you fail.
If you think this is "wrong" I show you to Nietzsche in Beyond Good and Evil;
"To refrain mutually from injury, from violence, from exploitation, and put one's will on a par with that of others: this may result in a certain rough sense in good conduct among individuals when the necessary conditions are given (namely, the actual similarity of the individuals in amount of force and degree of worth, and their co-relation within one organization). As soon, however, as one wished to take this principle more generally, and if possible even as the FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE OF SOCIETY, it would immediately disclose what it really is—namely, a Will to the DENIAL of life, a principle of dissolution and decay. Here one must think profoundly to the very basis and resist all sentimental weakness: life itself is ESSENTIALLY appropriation, injury, conquest of the strange and weak, suppression, severity, obtrusion of peculiar forms, incorporation, and at the least, putting it mildest, exploitation;—but why should one for ever use precisely these words on which for ages a disparaging purpose has been stamped? Even the organization within which, as was previously supposed, the individuals treat each other as equal — it takes place in every healthy aristocracy — must itself, if it be a living and not a dying organization, do all that towards other bodies, which the individuals within it refrain from doing to each other it will have to be the incarnated Will to Power, it will endeavour to grow, to gain ground, attract to itself and acquire ascendancy—not owing to any morality or immorality, but because it LIVES, and because life IS precisely Will to Power. On no point, however, is the ordinary consciousness of Europeans more unwilling to be corrected than on this matter, people now rave everywhere, even under the guise of science, about coming conditions of society in which 'the exploiting character' is to be absent — that sounds to my ears as if they promised to invent a mode of life which should refrain from all organic functions. 'Exploitation' does not belong to a depraved, or imperfect and primitive society it belongs to the nature of the living being as a primary organic function, it is a consequence of the intrinsic Will to Power, which is precisely the Will to Life — Granting that as a theory this is a novelty — as a reality it is the FUNDAMENTAL FACT of all history let us be so far honest towards ourselves!"
There is also the spiritual element to war. In traditional societies occult rituals would be preformed before battle, sometimes in battle (like Devotio) to ensure victory. One of the most infamous examples to the spiritual side to war is in Jihad (holy war) as it says in the Quran 4:74 "So let those fight in the cause of Allah who sell the life of this world for the Hereafter. And he who fights in the cause of Allah and is killed or achieves victory – We will bestow upon him a great reward." in this case we see war moving people from something lower to something transcendent.
We see more spiritual connection to war in the Bhagavad Gita 2:32 "O Partha, happy are the kshatriyas to whom such fighting opportunities come unsought, opening for them the doors of the heavenly planets." if warrior dies for a righteous cause on the battlefield he at once ascends to heaven, a lot like Valhöll in the Nordic tradition. War is moving people from something lower to something transcendent.
Read Jünger's Storm of Steel. Read how he describes the death of WWI. Read about how it unlocks feelings like ancient memories. Read about how spiritually uplifting war was for Jünger.
Violence is something truly human, it's inside you calling out.
One may turn back to Ernst Jünger. Here we may turn to Ernst Jünger. That is an emotion should not be viewed by what emotion it is, but rather by its intensity. Joy isn't any better the sorrow, and pleasure isn't better then pain. Liberalism lacks this understanding of emotion. Liberalism limits emotion.
Soon it will be time for you and I to die. Then die with greatness. Die a death so great the gods to put you in night sky. Dance the dance of death. Death with end all for every one, for every son of thunder. Then die as a Lion in the path. The only problem is how will you die. Will you die weak in a hospital or die boldly?
You can choose how to die. However, Thanatos is counting the days and Thanatos will not wait.
"You were so beautiful when you wanted to die. When you wanted to live, you became so ugly."-Yukio Mishima
All is will to power and the battle for domination. Any life that is worth anything seeks power, and power is amoral. For many today life is breathing and digestion. For me life itself represents no value, but only life that is rich, affirmative, expressive and growing.
This world is no Nirvana, it's violent, cruel, lacking any mercy, benevolences or forgiveness. Life is a war, a battle to see who are the strong. Man is aweary, he cries out from the inside for kings and heroes. Man's need for war and death is still, and will all ways be.
This circling planet-ball is no Nirvana. This sphere speeding through space is a bloody and violence Valhalla. It is this planet-ball, this speeding sphere, this Valhalla that I love.
War and violence are in fact good. For many men the first World War was hell as seen in propaganda pieces like All Quiet on the Western Front, yet for some like Jünger it was the best time of their lives. Jünger shows us a more ancient view of war. When people look at war today they have no idea what war meant for people. Jünger in Storm of Steel never steps down from how much of a living hell war is.
Early in Storm of Steel Ernst Jünger gives this image of war which I liked, "Unmolested by any fire, I strolled along the ravaged trench. It was the short mid-morning lull that was often my only moment of respite on the battlefield." War is a storm of steel full of excitement and struggle. It's hard to read Jünger and not see a new beauty in war. Jünger writes about hell of earth and how beautiful (in its own way) it can be, but also, how cruel it can be.
Jünger's book is not just the best book on WWI, but the best book on war (second being Evola's Metaphysics of War). Jünger shows how war is a living hell, a mix of emotions, a savage and brutal landscape with it all sounding lovely. War really is as the title says a storm of steel.
Jünger gives an image of WWI which you help but love. All without backing down from how much of a living hell war is. Then Jünger gets more into this in other works, how emotions should not be judged by what emotion they are but by their intensity and their ability to move people to action.
This is one of my favorite quotes from it (it shows the emotions from war);
"These moments of nocturnal prowling leave an indelible impression. Eyes and ears are tensed to the maximum, the rustling approach of strange feet in the tall grass is an unutterably menacing thing. Your breath comes in shallow bursts; you have to force yourself to stifle any panting or wheezing. There is a little mechanical click as the safety-catch of your pistol is taken off;the sound cuts straight through your nerves. Your teeth are grinding on the fuse-pin of the hand-grenade. The encounter will be sort and murderous. You tremble with two Contradictory impulses: the heightened awareness of the huntsman, and the terror of the quarry. You are a world to yourself, saturated with the appalling aura if the savage landscape."
For many war was about nation, family, race and defending of one's own. Through war a man stops living for something lower and the live for something higher. War was seen as a historical must. People now only look at war as the act itself and ignore it's context: the other problem with how we look at war is the normal soldier is not a philosopher, and that's why we need people like Jünger and even Julius Evola to tell is the positives of war and violence.
We may also add the Italian Futurist. Futurism was an abstract art movement. Balilla Pratella put what it is best;
"Futurism, which is a rebellion of the life of intuition and feeling, a palpitating and impetuous spring-time, inevitably declares war against doctrines, individuals, or works that repeat, prolong, or praise the past at the expense of the future."
The Futurist is obsessed with progress, speed, destruction. For the Futurist youth, speed, technology and violence are the most important parts to life. For the Futurist struggle is the most important part to life. For as Marinetti put it "Except in struggle, there is no more beauty. No work without an aggressive character can be a masterpiece". The Futurist looked at any worship of the past as slavish. They wanted to destroy tradition and embrace technology. I would like to take somthing again from Marinetti;
"Speaking personally, I much prefer the bomb of a Vaillant to the cringing attitude of the bourgeois who hies away in a moment of danger, or to the loasthsome selfishness of the peasant who seliberately maims himself rather than serve his country."
If you want to learn more about and understand Futurism then get a copy of the book Futurism: An Anthology
War can make is stronger. It's as simple as imperialism. The time may be too late to be able to build a new Rome, but we can still take resources and grow. I would say we can build an imperium; a supreme with absolute dominion. The rules in this have changed, the role of war has weakened but there will all ways be an element. War only makes you weaker if you fail.
If you think this is "wrong" I show you to Nietzsche in Beyond Good and Evil;
"To refrain mutually from injury, from violence, from exploitation, and put one's will on a par with that of others: this may result in a certain rough sense in good conduct among individuals when the necessary conditions are given (namely, the actual similarity of the individuals in amount of force and degree of worth, and their co-relation within one organization). As soon, however, as one wished to take this principle more generally, and if possible even as the FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE OF SOCIETY, it would immediately disclose what it really is—namely, a Will to the DENIAL of life, a principle of dissolution and decay. Here one must think profoundly to the very basis and resist all sentimental weakness: life itself is ESSENTIALLY appropriation, injury, conquest of the strange and weak, suppression, severity, obtrusion of peculiar forms, incorporation, and at the least, putting it mildest, exploitation;—but why should one for ever use precisely these words on which for ages a disparaging purpose has been stamped? Even the organization within which, as was previously supposed, the individuals treat each other as equal — it takes place in every healthy aristocracy — must itself, if it be a living and not a dying organization, do all that towards other bodies, which the individuals within it refrain from doing to each other it will have to be the incarnated Will to Power, it will endeavour to grow, to gain ground, attract to itself and acquire ascendancy—not owing to any morality or immorality, but because it LIVES, and because life IS precisely Will to Power. On no point, however, is the ordinary consciousness of Europeans more unwilling to be corrected than on this matter, people now rave everywhere, even under the guise of science, about coming conditions of society in which 'the exploiting character' is to be absent — that sounds to my ears as if they promised to invent a mode of life which should refrain from all organic functions. 'Exploitation' does not belong to a depraved, or imperfect and primitive society it belongs to the nature of the living being as a primary organic function, it is a consequence of the intrinsic Will to Power, which is precisely the Will to Life — Granting that as a theory this is a novelty — as a reality it is the FUNDAMENTAL FACT of all history let us be so far honest towards ourselves!"
There is also the spiritual element to war. In traditional societies occult rituals would be preformed before battle, sometimes in battle (like Devotio) to ensure victory. One of the most infamous examples to the spiritual side to war is in Jihad (holy war) as it says in the Quran 4:74 "So let those fight in the cause of Allah who sell the life of this world for the Hereafter. And he who fights in the cause of Allah and is killed or achieves victory – We will bestow upon him a great reward." in this case we see war moving people from something lower to something transcendent.
We see more spiritual connection to war in the Bhagavad Gita 2:32 "O Partha, happy are the kshatriyas to whom such fighting opportunities come unsought, opening for them the doors of the heavenly planets." if warrior dies for a righteous cause on the battlefield he at once ascends to heaven, a lot like Valhöll in the Nordic tradition. War is moving people from something lower to something transcendent.
Read Jünger's Storm of Steel. Read how he describes the death of WWI. Read about how it unlocks feelings like ancient memories. Read about how spiritually uplifting war was for Jünger.
Violence is something truly human, it's inside you calling out.
One may turn back to Ernst Jünger. Here we may turn to Ernst Jünger. That is an emotion should not be viewed by what emotion it is, but rather by its intensity. Joy isn't any better the sorrow, and pleasure isn't better then pain. Liberalism lacks this understanding of emotion. Liberalism limits emotion.
Soon it will be time for you and I to die. Then die with greatness. Die a death so great the gods to put you in night sky. Dance the dance of death. Death with end all for every one, for every son of thunder. Then die as a Lion in the path. The only problem is how will you die. Will you die weak in a hospital or die boldly?
You can choose how to die. However, Thanatos is counting the days and Thanatos will not wait.
"You were so beautiful when you wanted to die. When you wanted to live, you became so ugly."-Yukio Mishima
@lain_os @igel @matrix He was clearly caught by an evil entity on LSD. Loving war is not what we've come here to learn. Maybe a poor choice of words? Loving war related stuff, like strategy, weaponry, history, etc, that's one thing; but loving war for the sake of it... that's gay. Bush/McCain level gay.
@mystik @igel @matrix If you are illiterate here is a video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJlmfrFWVGc
@mystik @lain_os @igel @matrix
a fair question. Junger (assuming the above statements about him are true) sounds mentally retarded.
loving war and violence just in their own right is asinine. it's a necessary evil but simply loving it is the type of psychopathic view you'd expect from a drug addict
LSD just makes you swilly wonkered it's not going to birth any new civilizations.
people whose brains actually function build civilizations. not drug addicts who are tripping their balls off lol
a fair question. Junger (assuming the above statements about him are true) sounds mentally retarded.
loving war and violence just in their own right is asinine. it's a necessary evil but simply loving it is the type of psychopathic view you'd expect from a drug addict
LSD just makes you swilly wonkered it's not going to birth any new civilizations.
people whose brains actually function build civilizations. not drug addicts who are tripping their balls off lol
@meowski @mystik @igel @matrix First, I talked about war and violence I wrote a longer post. https://yggdrasil.social/notice/9zuI4UDp64oczUb3gm
Then on drugs. Drugs may have different effects on people, here I use the example of Evola and Crowley. Julius Evola indulged briefly in self-experimentation with drugs, however such experiences only aggravated his dilemma by intensifying his sense of personal disintegration and confusion to the point where all most committed suicide. I don't think I really need to talk about Crowley's drug use, it's pretty well-known.
This also moves into the view of drugs Evola gives in Ride the Tiger, Evola isn't against drugs but feels "one should substitute for them the power of attaining analogous states through one's own means". The difference in view between Crowley and Evola on drugs, may have come from their personal experience had with them.
Then drugs do play a role, most importantly in philosophy (Peter Sjostedt-H has great work on that).
Then on drugs. Drugs may have different effects on people, here I use the example of Evola and Crowley. Julius Evola indulged briefly in self-experimentation with drugs, however such experiences only aggravated his dilemma by intensifying his sense of personal disintegration and confusion to the point where all most committed suicide. I don't think I really need to talk about Crowley's drug use, it's pretty well-known.
This also moves into the view of drugs Evola gives in Ride the Tiger, Evola isn't against drugs but feels "one should substitute for them the power of attaining analogous states through one's own means". The difference in view between Crowley and Evola on drugs, may have come from their personal experience had with them.
Then drugs do play a role, most importantly in philosophy (Peter Sjostedt-H has great work on that).
@lain_os @igel @matrix @mystik
ok my point is just this. give any person a substantial dose of LSD and ask them to do the most simple task like build a brick wall out of brick and mortar
i pretty much guarantee they'll fail at that basic task. forget about building civilizations.
but dude mannn.. .acid... expands your mind
yea that's all great. there is a place for philosophy. but to say that acid is going to unlock some mystical new age of civilization building is sillyness. it's been around for a long time and it did no such thing.
ok my point is just this. give any person a substantial dose of LSD and ask them to do the most simple task like build a brick wall out of brick and mortar
i pretty much guarantee they'll fail at that basic task. forget about building civilizations.
but dude mannn.. .acid... expands your mind
yea that's all great. there is a place for philosophy. but to say that acid is going to unlock some mystical new age of civilization building is sillyness. it's been around for a long time and it did no such thing.
@mystik @igel @lain_os @matrix
>but duuuddee mannn, acid
a person can just stop meditating and work on an actual task. you can even meditate on how to best perform said task.
you can't trip about how to build a wall and can't stop a trip at will. furthermore if you take acid too much or too often you''ll suffer permanent brain damage. i've seen it happen
so this is a pretty weak argument
>but duuuddee mannn, acid
a person can just stop meditating and work on an actual task. you can even meditate on how to best perform said task.
you can't trip about how to build a wall and can't stop a trip at will. furthermore if you take acid too much or too often you''ll suffer permanent brain damage. i've seen it happen
so this is a pretty weak argument
Steven
@meowski @igel @matrix @mystik Crowley is cool in some ways. I don't really take much from him tho.
Satanism is pretty low, however there are outliers who go beyond and greater (e.g. Aleister Crowley). I think Evola had great things to say about it in The Mask And Face of Contemporary Spiritualism (however Evola gets some things wrong about Charles Manson), I really liked what he said on Crowley. Things like LaVey's Church of Satan are barley worth anything.
Satanism in general is pretty low, but it does have a use. To give an example the O9A, there is Satanism in the O9A. However, the Satanism in the O9A exist as a causal abstraction that is manifested in earlier phases of the O9A. Note: Evola didn't write about the O9A, but it is easy to imagine he would criticize it for using terms like "left-hand", and pretty easy to image other problems he would have with it.
Satanism is pretty low, however there are outliers who go beyond and greater (e.g. Aleister Crowley). I think Evola had great things to say about it in The Mask And Face of Contemporary Spiritualism (however Evola gets some things wrong about Charles Manson), I really liked what he said on Crowley. Things like LaVey's Church of Satan are barley worth anything.
Satanism in general is pretty low, but it does have a use. To give an example the O9A, there is Satanism in the O9A. However, the Satanism in the O9A exist as a causal abstraction that is manifested in earlier phases of the O9A. Note: Evola didn't write about the O9A, but it is easy to imagine he would criticize it for using terms like "left-hand", and pretty easy to image other problems he would have with it.
