Tfw you realise that conservatism is a form of modernism

The whole left and right dichotomy is a product of enlightenment.

Attached: B865727D-CC40-4F60-8CEC-1E89FDA10AE4.jpg (750x534, 76K)

can the material conditions of modernity ever be reversed? can we undo the alienation of the western mind? can we reclaim our roots? can we ascend to a truly post-modern tradition??

Attached: weil g & g.jpg (340x499, 33K)

it's not even the Enlightenment, it's the hubris of technology, of the command we have won over the chaos of nature that has now become its own chaos. it runs on its own and is poisoning the planet and the only thing we can hope for is its collapse

>the foundations of the modern age ... appear with particular clarity in the thought of Francis Bacon. That a new era emerged—through the discovery of America and the new technical achievements that had made this development possible—is undeniable. But what is the basis of this new era? It is the new correlation of experiment and method that enables man to arrive at an interpretation of nature in conformity with its laws and thus finally to achieve “the triumph of art over nature” (victoria cursus artis super naturam). The novelty—according to Bacon's vision—lies in a new correlation between science and praxis. This is also given a theological application: the new correlation between science and praxis would mean that the dominion over creation —given to man by God and lost through original sin—would be reestablished
>anyone who reads and reflects on these statements attentively will recognize that a disturbing step has been taken: up to that time, the recovery of what man had lost through the expulsion from Paradise was expected from faith in Jesus Christ: herein lay “redemption”. Now, this “redemption”, the restoration of the lost “Paradise” is no longer expected from faith, but from the newly discovered link between science and praxis. It is not that faith is simply denied; rather it is displaced onto another level—that of purely private and other-worldly affairs—and at the same time it becomes somehow irrelevant for the world. This programmatic vision has determined the trajectory of modern times and it also shapes the present-day crisis of faith which is essentially a crisis of Christian hope. Thus hope too, in Bacon, acquires a new form. Now it is called: faith in progress. For Bacon, it is clear that the recent spate of discoveries and inventions is just the beginning; through the interplay of science and praxis, totally new discoveries will follow, a totally new world will emerge, the kingdom of man. He even put forward a vision of foreseeable inventions—including the aeroplane and the submarine. As the ideology of progress developed further, joy at visible advances in human potential remained a continuing confirmation of faith in progress as such.
>Francis Bacon and those who followed in the intellectual current of modernity that he inspired were wrong to believe that man would be redeemed through science. Such an expectation asks too much of science; this kind of hope is deceptive. Science can contribute greatly to making the world and mankind more human. Yet it can also destroy mankind and the world unless it is steered by forces that lie outside it.

Attached: AyzAiymD_400x400.jpg (400x400, 39K)

Modernism and Modernity are two different things.

based book in pic. rel.

i know that

modernity is the material conditions that result in uprootedness and flux

modernism is the intellectual "movement" (although it is too heterogeneous to be called one movement) that has attempted to grapple with this nightmare

pic related is it -- we were never meant to control our own destiny, now we have become victims of our own design

Attached: 300px-Pieter_Bruegel_the_Elder_-_The_Tower_of_Babel_(Vienna)_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg (300x220, 26K)

There was a world before judeo Christian bullshit beliefs you know?

the idea of reclaiming roots is postmodernist

postmodernism isn't even bad .. its just a liberal secularists that want you to think it is so you dont transcend their system

>There was a world before judeo Christian bullshit beliefs
not really

super cringe reply

super cringe reply

super cringe reply

catholicism is modernism, a slave morality religion that has been poisoning the true pagan culture of the west for two millenia. all the dogmas of progressivism, the inherent worth of muh individual and the dysgenic human life as an end in itself, to the cult of weakness and disease, and the hatred of the strong can be traced back to christian dogma, there is no getting away from the fact that jesus christ was the original SJW. I am a national socialist, national socialism is not modernist, but represents the true faustian essence of the west cleansed from all semitic contamination, the drive that led the west to conquer the world, that led to the great scientific discoveries which you deplore, because you hate everything that displays greatness and strenght, meek christian sheep that you are. Christians and leftists and liberals alike want to contain the darwinian forces of natural selection, if you see where this ideologies originate it is with racial aliens that have a biological, evolutionary stake in the genetic annihilation of our people. I see myself as a fully consistent atheist and a fully consistent materialist, you can't make darwin go away, just like you can't make gravity go away. I'm just advancing a rational group evolutionary strategy for my kin. We must take control over our racial destiny through eugenics.

Attached: Screen Shot 2019-05-28 at 1.51.45 PM.png (429x336, 179K)

cultural marxism is a subset of cultural christianity

Attached: Screen Shot 2019-05-28 at 2.07.15 PM.png (482x393, 244K)

Cultural Marxism is just Cultural Capitalism, specifically a spooky diversion from it.

>true pagan culture
YIKES

I agree with some marxist criticisms of capitalism, but the philosophy as a whole is fatally flawed because it ignores biological reality by reducing everything to economics, just like chemistry is based on physics, society is based on biology, why is it so hard to understand? Why is it that most marxist thinkers have belonged to this specific ethnic group? could it be that unconsciously their ideology reflects the evolutionary interests of their race? what if universalism and egalitarianism are wrong and its all really a darwinian struggle between selfish genes? all the evidence seems to suggest so. Leftists have contributed to this culture of propaganda were mass immigration is encouraged, the third world is kept from natural malthusian collapse through foreign aid, all the while reproduction is discouraged and people are actively brainwashed to think of themselves as individuals rather than representatives of a genetic lineage. Christians and leftists may disagree about some points like homosexuality and abortion, but they agree in promoting dysgenics.

think of it from a gene's perspective. There are certain behaviours and memetic complexes are objectively dysgenic.

>a Kali Yugan
>believes in Darwinism
>thinks he's not a modernist
YIKES

Attached: 1524526587231.jpg (300x168, 9K)

>biological reality
>dude just boil everything down to the economics of beasts instead
Why is the NuRight so stupid?

>tfw you realise that Christianity is the very cause of this

Attached: 1504580324647.jpg (1280x720, 153K)

>Why, yes, I am in fact the Head of the Department of Eugenics, how did you know?

Attached: Heinrich-Himmler.jpg (615x409, 35K)

Darwin was projecting his liberal views on to nature, we must reject darwinism for a Catholic natural theology based aristotle and Father Athanasius Kirchner

...

big cringe from me desu senpai

>tfw you realize nationalism is a liberal ideology

Attached: Screen Shot 2017-10-10 at 12.28.59 PM.png (466x332, 263K)

>I identify as national socialist
Burger spotted. Not even entirely wrong, but definitely ate too much from the ideological dustbin.

True conservatism isnt. I dont know how conservatism just became classical liberalism. It used to mean anti-democratic, anti-capitalist, anti-modern

Based Evola dropped repills on Nationalism.

>It is necessary to distinguish between nationality and nationalism. The Middle Ages knew nationalities but not nationalisms. Nationality is a natural factor that encompasses a certain group of common elementary characteristics that are retained both in the hierarchical differentiation and in the hierarchical participation, which they do not oppose. Therefore, during the Middle Ages, castes, social bodies, and orders were articulated within various nationalities, and while the types of the warrior, noble, merchant, and artisan conformed to the characteristics of this or of that nation, these articulations represented at the same time wider, international units. Hence, the possibility for the members of the same caste who came from different nations to understand each other better than the members of different castes within the same nation.

>Modern nationalism represents, with regard to this, a movement in the opposite direction. Modern nationalism is not based on a natural unity, but on an artificial and centralizing one. The need for this type of unity was increasingly felt at the same time as the natural and healthy sense of nationality was lost and as individuals approached the state of pure quantity, of being merely the masses, after every authentic tradition and qualitative articulation was destroyed. Nationalism acts upon these masses through myths and suggestions that are likely to galvanize them, awaken elementary instincts in them, flatter them with the perspectives and fancies of supremacy, exclusivism, and power. Regardless of its myths, the substance of modern nationalism is not anethnos buta demos, and its prototype always remains the plebeian one produced by the French Revolution.

>This is why nationalism has a double face. It accentuates and elevates to the state of absolute value a particularistic principle; therefore, the possibilities of mutual understanding and cooperation between nations are reduced to a bare minimum, without even considering the forms of leveling guaranteed by modem civilization. What seems to continue here is the same tendency through which the arising of national states corresponded to the disintegration of the European ecumene.

>Even when nationalism speaks of "tradition," it has nothing to do with what used to go by that name in ancient civilizations; it is rather a myth or fictitious continuity based on a minimum common denominator that consists in the mere belonging to a given group. Through the concept of "tradition," nationalism aims at consolidating a collective dimension by placing behind the individual the mythical, deified, and collectivized unity of all those who preceded him. In this sense, Chesterton was right to call this type of tradition "the democracy of the dead." Here the dimension of transcendence, or of what is superior to history, is totally lacking.

Damn I never consciously made the connection between nationalism and the massification/plastification of man (a le Ellul), but that is exactly what it is on the level fo personal identity.

FASCIST CORPORATIST MONARCHISM NOW

Attached: 1EF704EA0CB84D95AE79AE2991D77E7D.gif (466x350, 1.68M)

>catholicism
That's a funny way of spelling protestantism.

progressivism is an inherently judeo-christian world lens

A man of the early 20th century wouldn't be able to hold true conservatism, the world being too far removed, no matter how he tries he is stuck in the framework of modernity. He'd have to spend his whole life picking off bits and pieces to shift the entire logic of how he thinks and perceives, in so doing completely alienating himself as to do it successfully others wouldn't be able to comprehend him, really an alien. Now take a man of today, it's hopeless no matter how well-intentioned. And worse yet if you even dip into false conservatism you will be attacked and forcibly brought into the ideological fold of the mainstream, never mind true conservatism.

>what is the conservative revolution

A failure.
Name one thing conservatives have conserved.

butthurt

>Why, yes, mye fellowe man, I uerily do belieuee that monarchie and the Constitutional Righte of Kings shall henceforthe remedee all which whomst'd've bvried our Great Nation's traditiones without proper rites and successiue processe.

Attached: Louis_XIV_of_France.jpg (1390x1975, 880K)

by what exactly?

>Conservatves are simply revolutionaries by means of complacency and conciliation.

Attached: sadoconservatism.jpg (2048x1536, 442K)

You said a man of the early 20th century wouldn't be able to hold true conservatism, meanwhile that literally happened
Dont shift the goalposts cuck

A contradiction

>origressuvusm is wat i tink t is
retard