how about this ?

Rum, beer, women, movies, nice websites, gaming, etc., without interrupting the flow of martial threads.

Re: how about this ?

Postby oragami_itto on Thu Apr 04, 2019 2:08 pm

Interesting. Is Gordon White a proponent of the theory of the looming threat of cultural Marxism? I'm still not really clear what you mean by that.
Last edited by oragami_itto on Thu Apr 04, 2019 2:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"My own knowledge is shallow and I await corrections from the intelligent."
-Hermit of Jade Well
User avatar
oragami_itto
Wuji
 
Posts: 1800
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:11 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: how about this ?

Postby Steve James on Thu Apr 04, 2019 2:29 pm

3. They are strict materialists. This is how you get interpretations of the pyramids as being used as burial monuments. When in reality they were designed as magical-meditative constructs for ritual magic based upon planetary and celestial systems.


Yes, any Marxist analysis will be materialistic; the material will be labor. Of course, capitalist analysis will also be materialistic, except the material is capital. "The Rise of the English Novel and the Middle Class, would be one example. There's been lots of works written about the various forms of cultural (literary, musical, artistic) theories. People who are into that stuff go to graduate school. :)

Afa the pyramids, they were undoubtedly spiritually based. It was a spiritual vehicle for a very special person, whom they did hope would intercede for them when he took his place on the other side. The average Egyptian didn't use the pyramid for that. They used it as a reference point for the material world that depended on the spiritual one. If the Nile didn't rise, if the crops are planted at a certain time, the society would cease to exist.

Anyway, my main point is that the Egyptians did not separate their world into oppositions of mind and body, or body and spirit the way Cartesians do. Some "rationalists" (like Jaynes, "Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind") suggests that the Egyptians, for example, could not distinguish between their rational thoughts and their imagination. So, they (and many earlier humans) really thought that God spoke to them. Iirc, he argues that the Greeks (philosophers) who were the first to recognize the difference and become more rational. Needless to say, the Greeks still talked to their gods through oracles. But, the seed was planted there.

Um, I doubt his premise about the human brain, though there had to be some point where it (we) could conceive or imagine a God or spirituality in the first place. I would say that the Greeks were among the first to theorize about it. I doubt that any early Egyptian around the time of the pyramid's construction would have distinguished between the physical and spiritual meaning or use of the building. That speculation is left to people who don't know.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 18157
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: how about this ?

Postby Peacedog on Thu Apr 04, 2019 5:03 pm

Ori Ito,

I don't think so. As a practitioner he is irritated by the outright lying involving the archeological research and the hacks involved.

The book discusses this with a clarity and detail that is astounding. I had been aware of many aspects of this for quite some time, but Gordan really put it all together and backed it with extensive research. Wonderful book.

I'm about 3/4 of the way through to the part where he talks about how Aleister Crowley pulled off a documented feat of phosphormancy inside one of the Great Pyramids. He got the normally invisible sigils inside one of the greater rooms to light up and glow.

One way to look at cultural Marxism is that it is a group of people who operate off of the philosophical underpinnings of human nature as espoused by Marxism with/without an attachment to their economic views of society.


Steve,

Exactly.

Historically for much of human history no split between materialism and the spiritual side of the world existed. Pythagoras is often referred to as a "mathemagician" for this reason. In addition to being a top notch mathematician for his time, by many he is also considered the founder of what would go on to be considered Raja Yoga in the East. Again, in that time period no delineation existed between technology and magic. They were considered one and the same.
Peacedog
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 5:22 am
Location: Standing right next to your girl....

Re: how about this ?

Postby oragami_itto on Thu Apr 04, 2019 5:52 pm

Peacedog wrote:One way to look at cultural Marxism is that it is a group of people who operate off of the philosophical underpinnings of human nature as espoused by Marxism with/without an attachment to their economic views of society.

But who are these people?
"My own knowledge is shallow and I await corrections from the intelligent."
-Hermit of Jade Well
User avatar
oragami_itto
Wuji
 
Posts: 1800
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:11 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: how about this ?

Postby Trick on Thu Apr 04, 2019 6:57 pm

oragami_itto wrote:
Peacedog wrote:One way to look at cultural Marxism is that it is a group of people who operate off of the philosophical underpinnings of human nature as espoused by Marxism with/without an attachment to their economic views of society.

But who are these people?

they are the enlightened ones and want to keep it so. to some they shine so bright its blindingly, for most they let us lurk in the dark. either way they stay unseen 8-)
Trick
Wuji
 
Posts: 2380
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2016 1:30 am

Re: how about this ?

Postby Ian C. Kuzushi on Fri Apr 05, 2019 9:41 pm

Cultural Marxism is not just complete bullshit, it is an antisemitic conspiracy theory first drummed up by politically involved Chrisitan conservatives but these days has been adopted by the Alt-right as a talking point. Jordan Peterson talks about it and tries to conflate it with postmodernism, too.

These weird claims about archaeologists are just...well, weird.

Wiki doesn't answer everything, but the citations to this subsection are useful.

In contemporary usage, the term Cultural Marxism refers to an antisemitic conspiracy theory which claims that the Frankfurt School is part of a continual academic and intellectual effort to undermine and destroy Western culture.[49] According to the conspiracy theory, which emerged in the late 1990s, the Frankfurt School and other Marxist theorists were part of a conspiracy to attack Western society by undermining traditionalist conservatism using the 1960s counterculture, multiculturalism, progressive politics and political correctness.[50][51][52]

This conspiracy theory is associated with American religious paleoconservatives such as William S. Lind, Pat Buchanan, and Paul Weyrich; but also holds currency among the alt-right, white nationalist groups, and the neo-reactionary movement.[53] Weyrich first laid out the conspiracy theory in a 1998 speech to the Civitas Institute's Conservative Leadership Conference, later repeating it in his widely syndicated "culture war letter".[54] At Weyrich's request, William S. Lind wrote a short history of his conception of Cultural Marxism for the Free Congress Foundation; in it Lind identifies the presence of openly gay people on television as proof of Cultural Marxist control over the mass media and claims that Herbert Marcuse considered a coalition of "blacks, students, feminist women, and homosexuals" as a vanguard of cultural revolution.[50][51][55] A year later, Lind began writing Victoria: A Novel of 4th Generation Warfare (published in 2014) about a societal apocalypse in which Cultural Marxism deposed traditionalist conservatism as the culture of the Western world; ultimately, a Christian military victory re-establishes traditionalist socio-economic order using the Victorian morality of Britain in the late 19th century.[56][57]

The anti–Marxism of Lind and Weyrich advocates political confrontation and intellectual opposition to Cultural Marxism with "a vibrant cultural conservatism" composed of "retro-culture fashions", a return to railroads as public transport, and an agrarian culture of self-reliance, modeled after that of the Amish.[58] In the Dialectic of Counter-Enlightenment: The Frankfurt School as Scapegoat of the Lunatic Fringe (2011), the historian Martin Jay said that Lind's documentary of conservative counter-culture, Political Correctness: The Frankfurt School (1999), was effective propaganda, because it:

... spawned a number of condensed textual versions, which were reproduced on a number of radical, right-wing sites. These, in turn, led to a welter of new videos, now available on YouTube, which feature an odd cast of pseudo-experts regurgitating exactly the same line. The message is numbingly simplistic: “All the ills of modern American culture, from feminism, affirmative action, sexual liberation and gay rights to the decay of traditional education, and even environmentalism, are ultimately attributable to the insidious [intellectual] influence of the members of the Institute for Social Research who came to America in the 1930s.”[59]

Heidi Beirich likewise holds that the conspiracy theory is used to demonize various conservative "bêtes noires" including "feminists, homosexuals, secular humanists, multiculturalists, sex educators, environmentalists, immigrants, and black nationalists".[60]

According to Chip Berlet, who specializes in the study of far-right movements, the Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory found a place within the Tea Party movement of 2009, with contributions published in the American Thinker and WorldNetDaily highlighted by some Tea Party websites.[61][62]

The Southern Poverty Law Center has reported that William S. Lind in 2002 gave a speech at a Holocaust denial conference on the topic of Cultural Marxism. In this speech Lind noted that all the members of The Frankfurt School were "to a man, Jewish", but it is reported that Lind claims not to question whether the Holocaust occurred and suggests he was present in an official capacity for the Free Congress Foundation "to work with a wide variety of groups on an issue-by-issue basis".[63][64]

Although the theory became more widespread in the late 1990s and through the 2000s, the modern iteration of the theory originated in Michael Minnicino's 1992 essay "New Dark Age: Frankfurt School and 'Political Correctness'", published in Fidelio Magazine by the Schiller Institute.[59][65][66] The Schiller Institute, a branch of the LaRouche movement, further promoted the idea in 1994.[67] The Minnicino article charges that the Frankfurt School promoted Modernism in the arts as a form of cultural pessimism and shaped the counterculture of the 1960s (such as the British pop band The Beatles) after the Wandervogel movements of the Ascona commune.[65] According to Samuel Moyn, the fear of "cultural Marxism” is originally "an American contribution to the phantasmagoria of the alt-right", while the theory is "a crude slander, referring to something that does not exist".[68]

More recently, the Norwegian terrorist Anders Behring Breivik included the term in his document "2083: A European Declaration of Independence", which—along with The Free Congress Foundation's Political Correctness: A Short History of an Ideology—was e-mailed to 1,003 addresses approximately 90 minutes before the 2011 bomb blast in Oslo for which Breivik was responsible.[69][70][71] Segments of William S. Lind's writings on Cultural Marxism have been found within Breivik's manifesto.[72]

In July 2017, Rich Higgins was removed by US National Security Advisor H. R. McMaster from the United States National Security Council following the discovery of a seven-page memorandum he had authored, describing a conspiracy theory concerning a plot to destroy the presidency of Donald Trump by Cultural Marxists, as well as Islamists, globalists, bankers, the media, and members of the Republican and Democratic parties.[73][74][75]

In July 2018, the Twitter account of Ron Paul posted and then deleted a cartoon about Cultural Marxism which depicted racial stereotypes. Paul later claimed that he had not posted it personally.[76][77][78]

In "The Origins of Political Correctness" (2000), William S. Lind established the ideologic lineage of Cultural Marxism; that: "If we look at it analytically, if we look at it historically, we quickly find out exactly what it is. Political Correctness is cultural Marxism. It is Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms. It is an effort that goes back not to the 1960s and the Hippies and the peace movement, but back to World War I [to Kulturbolshewismus]. If we compare the basic tenets of Political Correctness with [the basic tenets of] classical Marxism, the parallels are very obvious."[64] Such an historical lineage demonstrated that the ideology of "The Alt-right’s Favorite Meme is 100 Years Old" (2018), in which Samuel Moyn reported that fear of Cultural Marxism is "an American contribution to the phantasmagoria of the alt-right"; while the conspiracy theory, itself, is "a crude slander, referring to Judeo-Bolshevism, something that does not exist".[79]

Philosopher and political science lecturer Jérôme Jamin has stated that "[n]ext to the global dimension of the Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory, there is its innovative and original dimension, which lets its authors avoid racist discourses and pretend to be defenders of democracy".[80]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt ... acy_theory
Last edited by Ian C. Kuzushi on Fri Apr 05, 2019 9:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
文武両道。

Lord Li requires one hundred gold coins per day!
User avatar
Ian C. Kuzushi
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: how about this ?

Postby oragami_itto on Fri Apr 05, 2019 9:53 pm

Ian C. Kuzushi wrote:Cultural Marxism is not just complete bullshit, it is an antisemitic conspiracy theory first drummed up by politically involved Chrisitan conservatives but these days has been adopted by the Alt-right as a talking point. Jordan Peterson talks about it and tries to conflate it with postmodernism, too.

These weird claims about archaeologists are just...well, weird.


Well I know what people say about it, but I (intentionally) don't often talk to people who actually believe in it, so I was curious what he believed.
"My own knowledge is shallow and I await corrections from the intelligent."
-Hermit of Jade Well
User avatar
oragami_itto
Wuji
 
Posts: 1800
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:11 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: how about this ?

Postby Steve James on Fri Apr 05, 2019 10:48 pm

Ah, thanks, so it has nothing to do with Marxism at all. It's just a label that can be used as an epithet to rationalize political and social beliefs, actions, or inaction. There simply are no "tenets" of "Political Correctness." It is defined by whatever those who use the term claim "it" opposes.

William S. Lind established the ideologic lineage of Cultural Marxism; that: "If we look at it analytically, if we look at it historically, we quickly find out exactly what it is. Political Correctness is cultural Marxism.
... It is an effort that goes back not to the 1960s and the Hippies and the peace movement, but back to World War I [to Kulturbolshewismus]. If we compare the basic tenets of Political Correctness with [the basic tenets of] classical Marxism, the parallels are very obvious."


Wow! Interesting, "cultural bolshevism" [Kulturbolshewismus] was coined by the Nazis to decry modernist art (music, literature, sculpture). To them, the Bolsheviks were the Jews. That's still the basic conspiracy presented about the mainstream media; that it's controlled by the Jews. However, it is certainly true that the communists were anti-Nazi. Um, actually, the communists played the biggest role in defeating the Nazis. So, using his definition, it's possible to say that "Cultural Marxism" is "anti-nazism." Now, whether it's bad to be anti-Nazi is another thing.

More recently, the Norwegian terrorist Anders Behring Breivik included the term in his document "2083: A European Declaration of Independence", which—along with The Free Congress Foundation's Political Correctness: A Short History of an Ideology—was e-mailed to 1,003 addresses approximately 90 minutes before the 2011 bomb blast in Oslo for which Breivik was responsible.[69][70][71] Segments of William S. Lind's writings on Cultural Marxism have been found within Breivik's manifesto.[72]


Yeah, I bet there are people running to get these books now. I should have used Google 'cause I'd never heard of this. It's a good reason to allow freedom of expression. This way we can see recognize what is truly dangerous. I mean, guys who believe this stuff commit mass murders because of these beliefs. If the argument is that Brevik, et al, are crazy, that simply means there are a lot of crazy people. Otoh, he's not crazy or disturbed. He's a fanatic --regardless of what he's fanatical about.

These types remind me of Nazis and Muslim terrorists because they're always ready and willing to eat their own. I mean, Goebbels and his wife poisoned their 6 children when they lost the war. If they'll do that to their kids, what do you think they'd do to someone else's? The same with Brevik. He murdered 70+ plus Norwegian kids --because they weren't against immigration.

Damn. I hate to find out that nobody sent me a memo about the this 20 years ago. But, it keeps the brain working.

Btw, re: political correctness.
In the early-to-mid 20th century, the phrase "politically correct" was used to describe strict adherence to a range of ideological orthodoxies. In 1934, The New York Times reported that Nazi Germany was granting reporting permits "only to pure 'Aryans' whose opinions are politically correct."[2]

As Marxist-Leninist movements gained political power, the phrase came to be associated with accusations of dogmatic application of doctrine, in debates between American Communists and American Socialists. This usage referred to the Communist party line which, in the eyes of the Socialists, provided "correct" positions on all political matters. According to American educator Herbert Kohl, writing about debates in New York in the late 1940s and early 1950s,

The term "politically correct" was used disparagingly, to refer to someone whose loyalty to the CP line overrode compassion, and led to bad politics. It was used by Socialists against Communists, and was meant to separate out Socialists who believed in egalitarian moral ideas from dogmatic Communists who would advocate and defend party positions regardless of their moral substance.

— "Uncommon Differences", The Lion and the Unicorn[3]


Like all terms, there's a before and after. What was "politically correct" before 1970 in the US? What "will be" politically correct in the future? It's not like there won't be. And, if the argument is that it will be the opposite of what it is today, spell it out. Imo, I would rather judge things on the basis of whether they were right or wrong, not whether they could be described as politically correct. Currently, it is politically correct not to beat one's wife. At one time, it was almost expected --and not that long ago. Some call them the good old days. Ymmv.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 18157
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: how about this ?

Postby Trick on Fri Apr 05, 2019 10:52 pm

ive heard about the frankfurt school but never looked into it. here is a snip from the wiki [quoteThe term Frankfurt School informally describes the works of scholarship and the intellectuals who were the Institute for Social Research (Institut für Sozialforschung), an adjunct organization at Goethe University Frankfurt, founded in 1923, by Carl Grünberg, a Marxist professor of law at the University of Vienna.[9] As such, the Frankfurt School was the first Marxist research center at a German university,/quote]
Trick
Wuji
 
Posts: 2380
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2016 1:30 am

Re: how about this ?

Postby Trick on Fri Apr 05, 2019 11:06 pm

reading that wiki page it sure seem that alumnus of that school are trained to change. as for example change BKTS into an boxing cross 8-)
Trick
Wuji
 
Posts: 2380
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2016 1:30 am

Re: how about this ?

Postby oragami_itto on Sat Apr 06, 2019 8:02 am

Trick wrote:reading that wiki page it sure seem that alumnus of that school are trained to change. as for example change BKTS into an boxing cross 8-)


This is clear evidence that taijiquan has been invaded by cultural Marxists
"My own knowledge is shallow and I await corrections from the intelligent."
-Hermit of Jade Well
User avatar
oragami_itto
Wuji
 
Posts: 1800
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:11 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: how about this ?

Postby Appledog on Sat Apr 06, 2019 1:34 pm

Steve James wrote:The diagram is a representation of a particular (non-Cartesian) way of looking at the world/universe. But, how do they know that the potteries c. 2600 BCE were used to represent the yin yang principle? Could it have been part of a oral, pre-literary culture that used it to represent a principle, or just a popular design?



Have you ever looked up at the sky and though, wow, that cloud looks like (a boat, a dog, a mountain, etc)?
Appledog
Huajing
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 9:39 pm

Re: how about this ?

Postby Steve James on Sat Apr 06, 2019 1:47 pm

Have you ever looked up at the sky and though, wow, that cloud looks like (a boat, a dog, a mountain, etc)?


Sure. I've compared them to things I knew already. I.e., they "looked like" something I had to know already. I've thought some clouds looked like spaceships :).
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 18157
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: how about this ?

Postby Trick on Sat Apr 06, 2019 5:36 pm

Appledog wrote:
Steve James wrote:The diagram is a representation of a particular (non-Cartesian) way of looking at the world/universe. But, how do they know that the potteries c. 2600 BCE were used to represent the yin yang principle? Could it have been part of a oral, pre-literary culture that used it to represent a principle, or just a popular design?



Have you ever looked up at the sky and though, wow, that cloud looks like (a boat, a dog, a mountain, etc)?

yes i was thinking about those potterie images, what are they? are they discs with a "swoosh" painted on them meant to create some visual "trick" if spun ?(a toy) Or is it clay jars with tiny mouths pictured from above(with swooshes painted on).....or are they pizza-pans(italians again 8-) ...or mayby pan-pizza is an amercan thing?)
Trick
Wuji
 
Posts: 2380
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2016 1:30 am

Re: how about this ?

Postby Appledog on Sun Apr 07, 2019 5:17 am

Steve James wrote:
Have you ever looked up at the sky and though, wow, that cloud looks like (a boat, a dog, a mountain, etc)?


Sure. I've compared them to things I knew already. I.e., they "looked like" something I had to know already. I've thought some clouds looked like spaceships :).


I would venture the guess that making a similar observation would be expected from those familiar with the relevant practices. Whatever the origin it would quickly have found a use -- even a use that it was not originally intended for. It's just too convenient a diagram for explaining things like balance, reciprocation, opposites, unity, timing, tit-for-tat, etc.
Appledog
Huajing
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 9:39 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Off the Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest