Christian Nationalism vs Pagan Nationalism: There's Both Conflict & Common Ground.

submitted by [deleted] from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Rakean93Identitarian socialist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

If the religion isn't a thing, what stops you from get an high paid job and just live the most materialist life you can get? Drugs and sex are actually fun by their own. I honestly don't get how one can be nationalist and not religious, liberalism is the best system if you accept atheism.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

That's a faulty premise which originated with the anarchistic Dostoevsky. "If god doesn't exist, everything is permitted." Nobody poses the question: Did he really mean what he said? What was his idea of god?

Taken at face value, the phrase is merely church apologism for theocracy. Crime is legally and officially sanctioned as long as it doesn't conflict with church interests. For centuries, the Church was perfectly willing to overlook wars, plunder, slavery, etc. committed under its auspices and with its blessings, instead warring against human instinct and sexuality and undermining man's biological foundations.

Rousseau rightly recommended expulsion for such people:

Anyone who ventures to say: ‘Outside the Church is no salvation’ should be driven from the state, unless the state is the Church and the prince the pope. Such a dogma is good only in a theocratic government; in any other it is fatal. The reason Henry IV is said to have had for embracing the Roman religion—namely that the Roman Catholics did, while the Protestants didn’t, say ‘Our faith is the only possible route to heaven’—ought to make every honest man leave it, especially any prince who knows how to reason.

Source: Social Contract

If the religion isn't a thing, what stops you from get an high paid job and just live the most materialist life you can get?

What stops you from taking up a job for livelihood is an enthusiasm for a hobby. What stops you from living a hedonistic life is the realization that the pleasure of drugs and sex are temporary and these are causes of societal woes (i.e. sexually transmitted disease). In other words, a sense of duty, a sense of responsibility.

[–]Rakean93Identitarian socialist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Yeah but why duty and responsibility should be compelling without an higher principles? You can say "well, for ME they are compelling because I don't like the other options", and that's just another offering in the vast range of ways of life offered by the liberal society. But we are speaking about politics, not about personal lifestyles.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah, but why should duty and responsibility be compelling without higher principles?

Who said anything about a need for compulsion?

According to Hitler, we live in a world where millions accept the principle of celibacy of their own free will, without being obliged or pledged to do so by anything except an ecclesiastical precept. (Celibacy isn't a higher principle, of course.)

Then he proposes dropping such demands and just appealing to common sense by means of reason and persuasion: "Why should it not be possible to induce people to make this sacrifice if, instead of such a precept, they were simply told that they ought to put an end to the original sin of racial corruption which is steadily being committed from one generation to another."

Duty and responsibility are not forced onto people by Nature, but rather, by artificially designed civilization. In the natural order, labour is never looked upon as burdensome and is embraced as a necessity and delighted in. If animals start to exhibit laziness, that's usually due to them being spoiled by humans.

Of course that doesn't apply if you believe in spirituality. You are then required to conform to higher principles.

Higher principles are not confined to a belief in hereafter and god, but include reverence for higher worlds, for natural territories, for laws of nature, for parents. There are many more skeptics who abide by their principles than there are religious believers and ascetics.

These latter deceive themselves into believing they conform to principles. When it's actually a matter of policy for appearance's sake (i.e. politeness, virtue signalling).

Higher principles also become corrupted from the weight of external constraints (conformity, compulsion, conventionality), in a word: dogma. That you value such constraints so highly indicates to me that you're not really acquainted with the inner life.

Even if there was no god and hereafter, instinctive striving and reason would still exist. The animals (birds excepted) know neither god nor hereafter, that doesn't prevent them from exercising restraint in their breeding.

[–]Rakean93Identitarian socialist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

In the natural order, labour is never looked upon as burdensome and is embraced as a necessity and delighted in.

We are speaking about anarcho-primitivism here? That's the plan?