Idiots Cast in Porcelain: On “Liberals” and Their Place in Cosmos

You may also like...

14 Responses

  1. Mihai says:

    A few thoughts to complement what you said here:

    1. The idea that good or evil is something beside the point. Whatever comes your way you just need to see how you can adapt to it. Example: transhumanism and robotization of life- doesn’t matter whether it’s good or evil and we shouldn’t think in these terms- we should think how we can adapt to these things to the best of our ability.

    2. The idea that truth does not matter, nor who is right or wrong- if it happens anyway that’s it, you could and should do nothing about it. Example: it isn’t important which side is right on the question of abortion- no one can prevent a women to do “whatever she wants with her body” .

    3. Ironically enough, these people are the first to take to the public square and yell their outrage at corrupt politicians. Apparently it does not occur to them that the politicians are just doing “their thing” as they are doing “their thing”. After all…corruption is not about good or bad. You can’t keep someone in power from abusing their privilliges. So instead of being outraged let’s just see how to best adapt to it…right?

    Of course, if someone were to point out that post-modernity alone, of all of human history, considers questions of morality and truth irrelevant, he would immediately be met with that grandfather of all arguments, irrefutable and infailible: “yes, because we have evolved”…

  2. coco says:

    Yes, that is indeed true that we evolved. We only have to see more clearly what is the point of that evolution.
    We can only find starting point by recognizing the fact that that what in the past was given or taken for granted, for whatever reason, now we are able to question with our own power of intellect.
    Though, we cannot go back or reverse the process and revive the original “innocence of being” by turning to the past and past solutions.
    The present state of or conditions, for those who want to see it, pints to certain inevitable direction.
    Roughly speaking it has to do with evolving the present intellectual habits of abstraction of everything, even matter, into the new abaility, not present in any epoch before. Similar like today’s intellectualism came on the stage relatively recent, in time of ancient Greek.

    • Malić says:

      Intellectualism, as most if not all -isms, has little or nothing to do with classical Greek philosophy. As for evolution, it is, as a principle, pure myth of extremely recent origin, far more recent than Greek philosophy. The people Mihai and I talk about here are those who shake off their identity, origins and, finally, very essence – humanity, that is – in order to be able to act as if they can create something out of nothing. What in fact is coming to pass is that they are free falling, not evolving. The only result of free fall can be hitting the bottom.

    • Mihai says:

      The idea of evolution is the most obnoxious ideology of modernity- a mental virus which shuts off the immunity system- which spiritually consists of discernment and the capacity to understand that the truth is not some final result of historicist process but it is prior and above all historical becoming.

      If I will have time, I will dedicate, maybe, an article on how questioning some of the most basic facts of our existence and the need to find arguments in their favor is not a sign of mental expansion or anything of that sort, but a degeneracy which pointing towards a losing of touch with reality.

  3. Kyle says:

    Hi Branko,
    What you speak of in this podcast, the idea of indifference, or as you accurately called it nihilism, has very little to do with American liberalism as a political system. I agree that this indifference emerged from the left, but even here in the States some of us can separate this corrosive ideology out from a political system that tries (and fails more often than it succeeds) to address the natural and devastating inequities of American finance capitalism. Many liberals are motivated by a strong sense of right and wrong, and a few are even motivated by the Traditional Christian notion of right and wrong, and willing to try to use or correct the political system to help those who need it. The person you mention in this podcast, the idiot who thinks morality is childish, is suffering from a disease of the mind that goes well beyond the concept of American political liberalism. If you mean to suggest that American democratic politics is responsible for this doofus’s mentality, I think you need to give much more detail about its origins. I would hate to think that you’re giving an a-causal explanation for a serious problem like American nihilistic indifference. I would argue, and I think you would agree, that Satan’s political tent is much larger and includes many more supporters than just indifferent nihilistic “liberals”. Anyone who forsakes mercy (like the fascists you mention) and calls evil good, and good evil, (like the idiot you mention) or even hates his brother is under the influence of the evil one. Thank God for repentance and contrition. Anyway, just a thought, God bless and keep up the good work.

    • Malić says:

      I pointed out the caveat about American use of the term “liberal” at the beginning and that I am far from comfortable with it, although I used it here for convenience sake. Unfortunately, its not always convenient to be totally precise with terminology.

    • Han Fei says:

      I concur that it is absolutely wrong, not to mention highly ignorant to reduce American politics and influence in the world to just its negative aspects, and thus to deny the right of 300 million people exist in the sphere of what can be termed as American culture.

      Completely different from this however, is to note the impression left by official spokespersons and media outlets of the established left, is that of endless piling upon trivial issues that reflect some egotistic desire for entertainment (e.g. free speech activism that is almost entirely about access to pornography and piracy”) or sexual promiscuity (anti-abortion, LGBT). I seldom even see discussion about the effective ways in which power and authority could be wielded in a democratic state to overcome massive legislative hurdles, such as for example the defense spending deadlock, financial reform, medical insurance and immediate need for vast infrastructure. The liberal (i.e. official) press does like to nag a lot, naughty right wingers or Russians. Nobody listens to naggers. This press is pressing itself dry.

  4. Boomski says:

    What is your opinion of American converts like Jay Dyer and Dr. Matt Johnson (Orthodox Nationalist)? American individualism is almost impossible to get over.

    • Malić says:

      I think this impossibility of getting over Americanism applies mostly to pseudo intellectuals, whereas common run of men tend to be at least potentially able to transcend the mentality of individualism.

      I don’t comment publicly on private persons unless they represent some idea or movement. However, I could go so far as to say that Dyer’s parents have my deepest sympathies.

      • Boomski says:

        I dont understand, but okay. That could mean approval or dissapproval.

        • Malić says:

          Sympathies were meant in the sense of feeling deeply sorry for someone. As for Americans and American individualism, I’ll reformulate: people are tend to be as good or bad as anybody else in the world. I used to meet, long before the advent of internet, Americans who were staunchly religious and their religious life was not really tainted with the mentality you spoke about. The people who treat religions like items in the supermarket where unknown to me before Internet and all of them happen to be intellectuals in the lose sense of the word.

          • Boomski says:

            Im left very confused with that cryptic sneak-diss. Im only trying to navigate the internet space of American converts, which on the traditionalist end have 2 main representatives popular on social media. So im only trying to see if theres something i may be hearing/reading thats off for example laxness on Duginism or such

          • Malić says:

            The fact of the matter is that KT has nothing to do with “internet space of American converts”, except in the context of some general critical analysis, and we don’t offer opinions and guidelines on individuals, save, again, in the context of some broader subject.

            Bringing out Jay Dyer, a class A piece of shit, nevertheless, provokes me to break this rule, and it’s neither good nor profitable for readers. There is some material evidence that would demonstrate the above claim without shadow of a doubt. Yet this comes from personal acquiantance with the specimen in question and we don’t take out personal stuff here, save in great need.

            That’s not what this site is for.

            So, if you seek opinions on such people you might be in the wrong place.

            Also, if you seek guidance on Internet based content, you’re also in the wrong place.

            I had let Mihai’s comment through, because he feels he should provide you with some guidance so you don’t get lost and in the process had explained what’s wrong with the net nodes like Dyer in more detail than I care to.

            KT’s advice: all the time in your life when you’re focused on any kind of religion related activity or state should be spent off line.

            And that’s, more or less, all you’ll get here as far as this subject is concerned.

        • Mihai says:

          @Boomski: I’ll offer my two cents on J.D.- he’s a typical representative of the category for whom book reading+ mental assimilation of dogma= knowledge of Orthodoxy.
          There is a lot to be said about him and his approach, however try to look a bit at his website: you get a melange of Hollywood movies (almost always featured with sexy pictures), conspiracy research, false flag controversies, comedy and to top it all…theology. There is something seriously wrong with a salad like this…it will most likely cause indigestion. I’m not saying that you can’t get some good insights from him- sometimes very brilliant remarks- however it all remains at an abstract level, below the level of truly transformative knowledge.
          And this is the reason I mentioned the salad which is to be found at his website: true theology requires a state of mind and spirit which is detached from the daily turmoil of the daily flow of events which is to be found in media and the like.
          Plus, this constant obsession with debates points to the fact that people like this are more concerned with being right and winning than with actually living out what they believe in.

          For Orthodoxy in America (strictly traditional) there are much better sources out there: you can check, for example, a professor called Clark Carlton- he’s got a series of podcasts for Ancient Faith, or Father Stephen Freeman. Though I would not endorse everything, especially the latter, holds, they are no doubt solid witnesses.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *