1021) Arminius, 13.08.2017, 01:01, 02:22, 22:06, 22:35, 23:48 (6099-6103)

Fine.

The Franks were and are Germans too. The Franks are (1) the ancestors of the current Franken who live especially in the North of Bayern (Bavaria), in the East of Württemberg (Wuerttemberg), in the Southwest of Hessen (Hesse, Hessia), and - as Nether-Franks - in Rheinland-Pfalz (Rhineland-Palatinate), in the West (Nordrhein) of Nordrhein-Westfalen (North Rhine-Westphalia), in parts of the so-called „Netherlands“ and Belgium; and they also are (2) the ancestors of the most French.

Some Franks - as well as e.g. Saxons, Angles, Frisians, Jutes et al. - stayed where they were at that said time, others moved on and conquered foreign territories others moved on and conquered foreign territories where they later founded kingdoms.

So now we can talk about „kingdom as a form of government“ (**|**).

Otto West wrote:

„Yes, I know this Arminius. I just view it as a tragedy how the last of the Alemanni succumbed to Frank Christians. I'm of the mind Europe would of been better off staying pagan as I detest Christianity. Thousands of Alemanni women, men, and children were slaughtered for not accepting the Christ god.“ **

This „Christianization“ happened to all those who were later called „Europeans“, then to almost all Black-Africans, to all native Americans, to all Australians, to many Asians; thus: to almost all humans of the world.

At last the world has become „European“:

Then the „White World Revolution“, which had already existed since the end of the 18th century, and the „Colored World Revolution“ (Oswald Spengler’s concept [„Farbige Welt-Revolution“] reacted.

Now the interim result is as follows:

The worst is yet to come. There will be hell to pay.

Hello, Dan. Nice to have you here in good life - outside the hospital - again. I hope you are in good health after the „life“ inside the hospital.

Sauwelios wrote:

„You can teach a child to think logically by teaching it that it's bad, not allowed, punishable to contradict oneself, for example. Indeed, this is how the development of logical thinking always works. At the very least one is punished with not being understood, being considered thick, mad, etc..“ **

WHAT A NONSENSE !

If you you try to teach a child, as you said, „to think logically by teaching it that it's bad, not allowed, punishable to contradict oneself“, then you are alraedy arguing logically, because in this case the child alraedy knows what „bad“ means, what „not allowed“ means, what „punishable“ means, what „contradict oneself“ means (otherwise you could not use those words in order to teach the child). So you should urgently rethink your example and search for another one. But I can guarantee you: you will never find one. Good luck!

The ONLY „argument“ you have is „Nietzsche“. But Nietzsche was not always right, as you should know.

Also: If you try to teach a child „to think logically by teaching it that it's bad, not allowed, punishable to contradict oneself“, then the child will always ask „why?“ (if not „what does that mean?“ [see above]). So without referring to logic you will always (always!) be unsuccessful, because you will not be capable of giving an answer to the child without referring to logic.

We use language in order to teach, and we use just the logical part of language in order to teach. And even more so in the case of ethics, because ethics can only be taught by using logic.

What you are saying is always the same:

Sauwelios wrote:

„Nietzsche.“

That is no argument.

Forget the last German romanticist, leave the 19th century and be welcomed in the 21st century, Sauwelios!

1022) Arminius, 14.08.2017, 02:26, 03:13, 05:07, 12:10, 13:54, 17:31, 17:36, 01:00, 01:00, 01:00; Alf, 14.08.2017, 23:59 (6104-6112)

James S. Saint wrote:

„The child matures when he stops thinking in terms of punishment and reward and begins thinking in terms of need, his own and other's. When the need is taught, the child matures more quickly.

Logic is about the need to construct thought and communicate. It is not so much about what one »should do or else«.“ **

That is right. But you need logic for understanding, explaining, using language in a coherent way etc.; thus: you also need it in order to learn and teach something about that what comes after logic, for example: ethics.

Sauwelios wrote:

„Something is not »nonsense« just because it's possible to think deeper, to elaborate on it.“ **

It is, because you have not thought deeper and not elaborated on it.

Sauwelios wrote:

„The child will indeed first have to have learned that »bad«, »not allowed« etc. mean that the kind of behaviour of which that is predicated tends to be followed by experiences that are unpleasant for the child.“ **

So you admit that logic comes before ethics. Okay.

Sauwelios wrote:

„This does mean ethics is preceded by - aesthetics ....“ **

Nobody said that here.

Sauwelios wrote:

„Arminius wrote:

»The ONLY ›argument‹ you have is ›Nietzsche‹. But Nietzsche was not always right, as you should know.« ** **

The typical dismissal of those who cannot deal with the content of my quotes.“ **

It does not matter whether it is typical or not, because you are in any case more typical than most others here (including me).

And what you are saying here has nothing to do with dealing with the „content“ of your posts. It is just that I am not always in the mood to talk about the words of your god.

Sauwelios wrote:

„I asked you to consider that passage from »On Truth and Lies«. Did you? And if so, do you not consider it most sensible?“ **

I did.

Sauwelios wrote:

„Arminius wrote:

»Also: If you try to teach a child ›to think logically by teaching it that it's bad, not allowed, punishable to contradict oneself‹, then the child will always ask ›why?‹ (if not ›what does that mean?‹ [see above]). So without referring to logic you will always (always!) be unsuccessful, because you will not be capable of giving an answer to the child without referring to logic.« ** **

If by »logic« you're referring to the logos in the sense of a (walking) stick, as I have investigated in my videos ....

»Don't do that!«
- »Why not?«
[Smack]“ **

?

Sauwelios wrote:

„Arminius wrote:

»We use language in order to teach, and we use just the logical part of language in order to teach. And even more so in the case of ethics, because ethics can only be taught by using logic.« ** **

If ethics can only be taught by using logic, how can logic be taught?“ **

Did you never learn logic?
Are you that ignorant?
Or are you just joking?

Sauwelios wrote:

„Arminius wrote:

»What you are saying is always the same:

›Sauwelios wrote:

'Nietzsche.'

That is no argument.« ** **

Forget the last German romanticist, leave the 19th century and be welcomed in the 21st century, Sauwelios!

That's grand, coming from someone who thinks Kant is the greatest philosopher. Or have you come around on that since http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?p=2531041#p2531041 (**|**)?“ **

I was referring to af fact, the fact that you are always using the quotes of your false god and some of his translators (also always the same).
Again. I am not always in the mood to talk about them. Okay?“ **

Sauwelios wrote:

„You said there that you were not a Kantian, but a historian of philosophy. But it's precisely as a historian that you are lacking. Where's your solution to the problem posed by historicism?“ **

If you had the tiniest idea of what history is could be, then you would know that history has not much to do with solutions, unless they themselves are historical objects (but this is not the case here).

Sauwelios wrote:

„»[T]he full phenomenon of a cow is for a Hindu constituted much more by the sacredness of the cow than by any other quality or aspect. This implies that one can no longer speak of our 'natural' understanding of the world; every understanding of the world is ›historical‹. Correspondingly, one must go back behind the one human reason to the multiplicity of historical, 'grown' not 'made,' languages. Accordingly there arises the philosophic task of understanding the universal structure common to all historical worlds. Yet if the insight into the historicity of all thought is to be preserved, the understanding of the universal or essential structure of all historical worlds must be accompanied and in a way guided by that insight. This means that the understanding of the essential structure of all historical worlds must be understood as essentially belonging to a specific historical context, to a specific historical period. The character of the historicist insight must correspond to the character of the period to which it belongs. The historicist insight is the final insight in the sense that it reveals all earlier thought as radically defective in the decisive respect and that there is no possibility of another legitimate change in the future which would render obsolete or as it were mediatise the historicist insight. As the absolute insight it must belong to the absolute moment in history.« (Strauss thus: Nietzsche, »Philosophy as Rigorous Science and Political Philosophy«, with my emphasis.)

Nietzsche [duh!] solved the difficulty indicated here, by his philosophy of the eternal recurrence of the world as will to power.“ **

Sauwelios, I have nothing against Nietzsche. I have something against the fact that it is not you who is talking when you are „talking“. Nietzsche was a human being that lived in the 19th century. He has done many great things and some silly things. He is important for the history of philosophy, of literature, but he is certainly not that god that you obviously see in him.

Is Yde Opn wrote:

„Arminius wrote:

»The worst is yet to come. There will be hell to pay.« ** **

I'm not sure I understand you the right way.“ **

My thought was: „Das dicke Ende kommt erst noch“, then I translated that into: „The worst is yet to come. There will be hell to pay.“

Is Yde Opn wrote:

„Like for example, would you think that colonisation and imperialism through Europeans happened because Europeans were motivated by things like the Mongolian invasion or the Muslim invasions into Europe prior to it?“ **

It depends on the reference. The modern colonisation and imperialism through the Europeans were perhaps indirectly but not directly motivated by certain foreign invasions. By „indirectly“ I mean „through their own earlier history“ when they were probably or perhaps motivated by those invasions. So, if the reference is (A) the earliest beginning of the Europeans as the Occidental Christians, then we have to talk about the change from the pagan German tribes to those Occidental Christians and the proabability that they were motivated (1.) with a very high probability by the Ancient Roman empire and invasions, (2.) with a relatively high probability by the Byzantine empire and invasions, (3.) with medium or low probability by the Arabo-Islamis empire and invasions; if the reference is the (B) earliest beginning of a self, a self-assurance, a self-consciousness of those Occidental Christians, then we do not have to talk about the Mongolian invasion, because the probaility is very low that the Mongolian invasion was such a motivation at that time, but nevertheless: it was not without any effect and may have motivated in some aspects. The main motivation for colonisation and imperialism through the Europeans as the Occidental Christians is their origin, their own being and becoming, and this is something that is not Christian - but Faustian which means e.g. dynamic, highest risk, adventure, technology, science, intelligence, striving for all this till endlessness, regardless whether this striving is possible or not (Faustians just do it).

So I do not think that the Faustians were and are real Christians, they have always conserved something that was before their Christianisation. And by the way: „Occidental Christians“ does not mean „like all other Christians“.

Sauwelios is in a dilemma. If he admits that logic is before ethics, then he also admits that Nietzsche was partly wrong, but he does not want to admit that Nietzsche was partly wrong.

The modernity of philosophy is a philosophy of ethics. Okay. But this does not prove that ethics comes before logic - the reverse is true, because it gives evidence for the developmental fact that logic comes before ethics.

So if Sauwelios admitted this, then he would have to give up his idol (false god) Nietzsche who was justifiably a famous philosopher of the modern times of philosophy. I know that this is an imposition for Sauwelios. But maybe - someday - he will learn just from Nietzsche at last, because Nietzsche at least seemed to give up his idol at last.

The historical development of the philosophical question of our current subject - „logic comes before ethics“ - can be called „modern war of philosophy“ and has a parallel in science: „modern war of science“. On the one „war front“ („left“) are fighting ethical philosophers and social scientists, and on the other „war front“ („right“) are fighting logical philosophers and natural scientists and spiritual (especially logical, mathematical) scientists. (Note: there are also „spies“, „renegates“, „defectors“, „deserters“ in that said „war“). - If the ethical-social side will „win“ that „war“, then the science as we have known it and will have known it till then will be finally „dead“.

As I already said (**|**): Faustians (Occidentals, Westerners) are no real Christians, because they have been conserving their soul and mind since their origin. They had to „work Christianity off“ after they had become Christians nominally. So deep in their soul and mind Faustians have always remained Faustians. Their real religion or soul image is Faustian (regardless which one the other sprachregelung [convention of speech] is, be it „Occidental Christian“, thus „Catholic“ and „Protestantic“ or whatever).

Said by the one who is not even capable of reaching the lowest amateur-league.

Do you (including all your suck puppets) and Sauwelios even know what logic means?

You sillily think believe that you can teach logic through ethics. How silly you are!

Try to think, you ignorant dreamer!

According to those stupid dreamers, everything must be taught through ethics, even mathematics.

Is Yde Opn wrote:

„@ Arminius

I see the reason for the collapse of the West in the weakness and demise within the West itself.“ **

We can agree on that.

Arminius wrote:

„I prefer the word »Faustians« to describe what Occidentals really are. The words »Europeans« and »Westerners« tell us more about geographical aspects than about what this people really are. Faustians have the absolute will, are absloutely dynamic (energetic), very intelligent, they are by far the best technicians, inventers, designers, scientists, geniuses, artists, poets and thinkers ... and so on; but they are all this in the negative way too, which means, for example, that they can get a very bad conscience, if correspondending circumstances are given: so, for example, in the case of decadence (nihilism) they use their absolute will, their absolute dynamics (energy), their high intelligence and all their other high features against themselves.

So the Faustians are very successful people - by far the most successful people of all times (see above) -, but they are very tragic people too. Maybe that success and tragedy correlate with each other, at least in the long run. It is very likely that the end of this tragedy will really be that the Faustians will have sacrificed themselves. ** **

What do you think about that?

VO is Vanity Occultism.

1023) Arminius, 15.08.2017, 17:04, 17:08 (6113-6114)

The main reason why it is not possible to discuss something with Nietzscheanists is that they are too fundamentalistic, just too extremely religious: they believe in Nietzsche as their god, their false god. Even a Nietzschean as the one who is not that religious like them is their enemy, their „heather“.

James S. Saint wrote:

„Fixed Cross wrote:

»What are we going to do with this obscene degree of ignorance?
Lets just let these guys troll on a bit, Sauwelios. Dit is echt te dom om los te lopen.« **

Ignorance of what exactly, or are you just too damn drugged up to know what you are saying (again)?“ **

Indeed. He (**) does not know what he is saying.

Ignorance and arrogance - the result of his drug abuse. First it was only ignorance.

James S. Saint wrote:

„Fixed Cross wrote:

»Ignorance of all you mentioned. Its too much, Im serious. I don't know who is telling you stories about drugs, I assume you're on KTS ( ** ) now. That s low even for you.

New people:

So what you will get now, if they don't scare off, is the trolls ( ** ) throwing some insults at the real posters and doing their best to obscure the fact that they are never addressing any issues, and never using a logical argument.« **

Just more of your lies and unsubstantiated BS. How pathetic can you get.“ **

His (**) first, second, third, last lesson:

=> => =>

James S. Saint wrote:

„....

Logic IS »consistency«. That is all that »logic« means - the »logged«, »docked«, »unchanging«, »consistent«.

And without consistency in thought, no one can even know what »ethics« means. much less study it.“ **

Exactly.

That is what all those Nietzscheanists will never understand (but Nietzsche or some Nietzscheans certainly would), because Nietzscheanists do not know what logic means, are too fundamentalistic, just too extremely religious ... (see above [**|**]).

It seems that they are not capable of thinking, that they are merely capable of believing, having faith in their false god. And this although their false god himself has said that faith means „not wanting to know what is true“ (translated by me). Thus they do not know what their idol wanted them to be, to do, to live for.

They are just too dumb. When I joined ILP I had sympathy for Nietzsche. Merely after three days, having had contact with Nietzscheanists on ILP, this sympathy for Nietzsche was elminated by Nietzscheanists (!). Later I started to get some sympathy for Nietzsche again, but each time when I talked to a Nietzscheanist the just gotten sympathy was blowing away again.

Nietzscheanists are not capable of missionizing either.

Thank you, idiotic trolls.
_____________________

1024) Arminius, 16.08.2017, 01:02, 01:03, 01:18, 02:16, 04:09, 13:38; Kathrina, 16.08.2017, 20:22; Arminius, 16.08.2017, 20:35, 21:21, 22:37, 22:54, 23:29, 23:34 (6115-6130)

Carleas wrote:

„In the wake of the rioting in Charlottesville, several companies have taken steps to end their relationships with certain websites that promote white supremacy. Go Daddy, and then Google, stopped providing domain registration services to the Daily Stormer site when it mocked a woman who'd been murdered by one of the white supremacists. In the lead-up to the rally, AirBnB cancelled reservations for people using the service to attend. Many have applauded these moves, and many others are now condemning the seeming lone holdout, Cloudflare.

But the people who vocally praise the phenomenon are also often those who take anti-corporate positions, who fight for things like Net Neutrality, who want regulation over Google and Facebook to prevent them from exercising just this kind of discretion. If you don't think that companies should be the arbiters of acceptable speech, if you don't think they should have the right to censor what gets said or choose what events are acceptable to attend, you should be wary of their exercise of exactly those powers here. You may agree with this censorship, but it is still censorship, it is still private companies attempting to use their market dominance to punish speech and assembly that they don't like.“ **

That is censorship. Yes.

James S. Saint wrote:

„Actually I had that same stance with Einstein. I had/have nothing against the actual Einstein papers and theories, although the Relativity ontology isn’t entirely coherent. But the worship of it all drives me to be »anti-Einsteinean« and »anti-Relativist«. The good sense within gets lost by the subsequent exaggerated nonsense.“ **

And all these worshippers are one (not the only, but nevertheless one) of the main reasons why science has become almost unable to make progress.

James S. Saint wrote:

„And I have to wonder how much of that non-progress is intentional.“ **

It is very much. The worshippers are one of the main reasons, but they are not mainly responsible (as always). Worshippers are more like followers.

James S. Saint wrote:

„Until the supreme elite authority of all life is fully irreproachable, progress must be governed and in the long run, perhaps entirely reversed.“ **

Yes. And the longer it lasts, the more must be reversed.

All this (**|**|**) tells us that there is a huge imbalance, thus a huge injustice.

Did you know that the left side of your body is „better“ than the right side of your body?

You should mention which reference to philosophy that video has, Urwrong (**). Otherwise this thread will probably be moved from this „philosophy“ subforum to the „non-philosophical chat“ subforum, formerly known as „off topic“ subforum.

I mean, that would be a shame. Wouldn't it?

Frankish is Germanic.

Wikipedia wrote:

„The Franks (Latin: Franci or gens Francorum) were a collection of Germanic peoples that originated in the lands between the Lower and Middle Rhine in the 3rd century AD and eventually formed a large empire dominating much of western and central Europe during the Middle Ages. The Frankish Empire ultimately led to the birth of modern France and Germany and thus the Franks are seen as the forebears of the French and German peoples (in addition to Austrians, the Dutch, Luxembourgers and some other European nations).“ **

In the frist century the Franks settled in the today's East-Germany.

Nice avatar you have (**). Is it a Max Stirner avatar?

Yes, it is (**).

@ Otto West.

Shouldn’t the following plastic statue (**) be changed (rebuilt) into a paper statue?

Otto West wrote:

„The republican party has been taken over by neoconservatives. What use to be the republican party doesn't exist anymore. There is little difference between communist liberal leaning democrats and neoconservatives. Both groups are controlled by globalists and internationalists. Democrats control the social and cultural narrative nationwide domestically while neoconservatives control Wallstreet along with the military industrial complex in foreign policy, both groups serve the same masters. Donald Trump is surrounded by enemies on both political parties and better be careful as he has very few friends. A man surrounded by enemies is a lonely and vulnerable one.“ **

The last president who was probably in a similar situation was Nixon after the Watergate scandal.

This statue (**|**) has outlasted the cold war. The USSR and the USA were allies. Probably they remained allies till the day when the USA became the USSR.

The lie has almost always more power than the truth, and this is because of the interests of the most powerful people. So, unfortunately, the most people do not know the most parts of the true or real history during their lifetime, and after one or two (or even more) centuries, when the true or real history will be published, they will be dead.

Often, the lie has more power than the truth, and this is because of the interests of the most powerful people. So, unfortunately, the most people do not know the most parts of the true or real history during their lifetime, and after one or two (or even more) centuries, when the true or real history will be published, they will be dead.

„Der Himmel über Berlin“ is a 1987 romantic fantasy film directed by Wim Wenders (**).

The video clip Urwrong posted here (**) belongs to that film.

Copied post.

Modern Educayshun.

Copied post.

1025) Arminius, 17.08.2017, 18:53, 18:59, 19:35; Alf, 17.08.2017, 21:04, 21:45, 22:06 (6131-6136)

Otto West wrote:

„I don’t think there is really a comparison to be made there. Entirely different situation at hand ....“ **

I did not mean the more objective situation but the more subjective situation, thus: Nixon’s emotions and Trump’s emotions. The outer situations are surely very different, but the inner are at least similar, I think.

Otto West wrote:

„I’m curious as to what the European bureaucrats are saying over the pond, any insights into that for us? What is the stance of European ANTIFA groups and other bottom feeders?“ **

Are you referring to the last occurrences in Charlottesville (Virginia) or to the USA in general?

The people of the European politics and media are talking about Trump as somebody who is an enemy of Europe or, at least, has nothing to do with Europe. Also, the people of the European politics and media are saying about the last occurrences in Charlottesville (Virginia) that the leftist are harmless and the rightists are guilty of the volence. In other words: Europe has become the new USA as the new USSR. I think, there is merely a slight difference between the Europe and the USA when it comes to politics and media. What do you think?

Otto West wrote:

„Hmm, I thought that statue was cast iron or something.“ **

Yes, you are right. I was just joking a bit.

Otto West wrote:

„Either way it signifies bigotry and needs to be removed. I'm sure all the openly communist city council people in Seattle would be thrown into a tizzy over its removal. We should create a thread of openly hostile leftist statues in the United States that needs to be removed. Fair is only fair, right?“ **

Yes, you are right again. Fair is only fair.

And this statue of an extreme left-winger, extreme terrorist, mass murderer should have never been built. But it has been built like many others of the same kind have been built, and all of them are statues of the extreme left-wingers.

Get rid of it!

But wait a bit!

Please note that all that removing will lead to more violence and more destroyed belief and trust in traditional aspects of the young nation USA, thus to the risk that the nation will be destroyed sooner than generally expected.

That is not what you are looking for, is it?

Perhaps, you (**) now know why I asked you several times already in July 2017:

Arminius wrote:

„There are examples in history and also in the present that show people who hate their country (really or not really - this is often not clear). So it is possible. And everything that is possible can become real.“ ** **

Arminius wrote:

„Do some (and if yes: how many) of the U.S. citizens hate their country, for example because of the unjustice in the world? Many haters of this kind argue in this way, I think, but I do not know for sure, and that is the reason why I want to ask an U.S. citizen, for example you (or are you not an U.S. citizen?).“ ** **

Arminius wrote:

„The question remains: »Do some (and if yes: how many) of the U.S. citizens hate their country, for example because of the unjustice in the world?« ** **

My assumption is: yes; but I don’t know the percentage. All European countries and the countries with people of European origin have such haters.“ ** **

You answered not more that this (and this was not really an answer to my question either):

„I am both, US and Hungarian citizen. Your question, is complex, and needs a lot of thought to give it justice, in a concise form. But shall get back on it.“ **

You have the dual citizenship privilege, which also means a dual nationality privilege. You are not a spy, are you?

The only safe source we know about you (**) is this:

So Leyla is possibly right: you are possibly the fifth sock puppet of the one who has no real supporters (**).

Arminius wrote:

„Modern Educayshun.“ ** **

I think that this modern educayshun becomes more and more a part of the reality or even the only reality.

What do you think?

I was only talking about the fact that we know nearly nothing about the ILP member „Faust“. Who really knows more than this about „Faust“: username, avatar, numbers of posts, registration date, post content, pm-content?

1026) Arminius, 18.08.2017, 01:22, 01:44, 02:06, 18:44, 19:02, 19:11, 19:29, 23:12 (6137-6144)

In former times, there were the dualism of nations and regions, later the dualism of nationalism and regionalism, then the dualism of internationalism and nationalism, then the dualism of globalism and regionalism that has become what it has always tended to: the dualism of globalism and nationalism. So the last dualism is the current one.

The goal of globalism is the destroying all nations, thus also all cores of the nations (families for example, especially because of the tradition, genealogy, history etc. - everything that constitutes a nation). „Antifa“ and other extremely violent organizations are of course paid by the globalists (glozis).

You (**) are diviced? „Divided“ is not the correct word, I think, because you are not really divided. You are privileged because of your dual citizenship, which still means a dual nationality. If you were divided, you would have decided for only one citizenship (nationality).

Alf wrote:

„Arminius wrote:

»Modern Educayshun.« ** **

I think that this modern educayshun becomes more and more a part of the reality or even the only reality.

What do you think?“ ** **

I can agree, but I nevertheless think that this trend will be finished or cut off by a catastrophe like a huge war or even a natural catastrophe. After that catastrophe this forgone trend will probably be the most damnable trend and those who will follow it will face the death penalty. But after that period the situation will probably change in the other way again. So the general trend will probably be similar to what is shown in that video.

By the way: I think that if ethics is seriously put first (cp. the thread „Which is First?“), then this always leads to developments and situations as you can see in that said video. So you may watch that said video again (**).

Arminius wrote:

„Try to teach a child of a certain developmental age what ethics is by using logic, and you will be successful; but try to teach achild of a certain developmental age what logic is by using ethics, and you will be unsuccessful.“ ** **

Arminius wrote:

„The historical development of the philosophical question of our current subject - »logic comes before ethics« - can be called „modern war of philosophy“ and has a parallel in science: »modern war of science«. On the one »war front« (»left«) are fighting ethical philosophers and social scientists, and on the other »war front« (»right«) are fighting logical philosophers and natural scientists and spiritual (especially logical, mathematical) scientists. (Note: there are also »spies«, »renegates«, »defectors«, »deserters« in that said »war«). - If the ethical-social side will »win« that »war«, then the science as we have known it and will have known it till then will be finally »dead«.“ ** **

Arminius wrote:

„According to ... stupid dreamers, everything must be taught through ethics, even mathematics.“ ** **

Even mathematics!

Now, watch the video again, please (**).

Intergenerational injustice is crime. So „our“ (**) debts are crime. At least they are based on criminal activity.

Is Yde Opn wrote:

„The Democrats live in their lily-white communities where the based black people can't afford to live.“ **

Is Yde Opn wrote:

„I am a true conservative, I'm not racist, I don't prefer my own people, I'm not like those liberal supremacists, I have no issue with melting in the cozy hot tub of a melting pot.“ **

Unfortunately, conservatives are more and more suspected to be nationalists, national socialists (fascists), racists, although everyone could know that that is not the truth about conservatives. It is extremely cynical to lump conservatives and extreme right-wingers together. Doing this has another reason, because it is the goal of the globalists to destroy all genealogy, origin, inheritance, traditions, national history etc.. The fight can be called „globalism versus nationalism“. So the globalists have to lump conservatives and extreme right-wingers together; otherwise they would never achieve their goal.

Globalists belong to the terrible people of modernity and are the most powerful terrorists of the present.

Those countries will never be able to „survive“ without the European Union. They depend on that „Union“. That is why that „Union“ was founded (and later the Euro as well of course, by the way). Even the Brexit will not destroy the EU. The only chance would be a German exit (Gexit), because in that case all other EU members could not benefit from it anymore.

And the Gexit is prevented by Germany's membership of the NATO and other organizations that have already become organizations of the globalists.

I also think that „this world needs more sovereign independence everywhere“ (**), as you said, but I am afraid that this will only happen after the next catastrophe.

Is Yde Opn wrote:

„The number of democrats living in their money gated predominantly White communities is shrinking, true, but so is the number of White Democrat voters in general. Btw, this was me playing the „The Democrats are the real racists“ fool. A fool because yes that's true, they are more racist but being less racist than them will not help you.

Conservatives today are not fascists and not very racist, less racist than the left, by far (before they changed the definition for themselves that you can't be racist towards White people).“ **

That is true.

Conservatives are less racist than all other political groups. But conservatives are the ENEMY of the current globalistic system we have. As I said before: the globalistic goal is to destroy ALL nations and everything that has to do with nations, nationalism, national history, traditions, origin, genealogy, biological and economical heritage, inheritance ... and so on; so globalists have to lump conservatives and extreme right-wingers together in order to achieve the globalistic goal.

Note (for the US citizens, Canadians, Australians, partly also the UK citizens and the Irsih people): The word „conservative“ does not so much refer to the meaning that it has in your countries, because it refers to the meaning that it has in Europe, especially in continental Europe.

Otto West wrote:

„Arminius wrote:

»Otto West wrote:

›I don’t think there is really a comparison to be made there. Entirely different situation at hand ....‹ **

I did not mean the more objective situation but the more subjective situation, thus: Nixon’s emotions and Trump’s emotions. The outer situations are surely very different, but the inner are at least similar, I think.«

Well, let us hope that what happened to Nixon doesn't happen to Trump. If it does it won't go down as peacefully as it did in the 1970's. Certainly the circumstances are much different.

Unfortunately Europe (European Union) is a vassal state of the United States with our military bases spread all over there along with our funding of N.A.T.O. I dream that one day Europeans will be independent again to pursue their own lives in independence without being under American yoke and influence. I dream that one day Europeans will shake off the yoke of the European Central Bank and that the Unites States will become free of the Federal Reserve.

(Both institutions work together in conjunction also.)“ **

Agreed.

Otto West wrote:

„Americans and Europeans must work together to keep the dream of independence alive in solidarity as we are fighting the same enemies. The American and European struggle are one in the same.

Also, isn't it interesting how European media takes its directives from American media? Just mind boggling.“ **

Sometimes the US media takes its directives from Europe, but mostly it is the other way around.

1027) Arminius, 19.08.2017, 01:18, 01:30, 02:11; Alf, 17.08.2017, 22:24 (6145-6148)

Meno wrote:

„That having been said, the goal being the destruction of nationhood will cause the destruction of personal identities, if nationhood is a major criteria of that.“ **

And vice versa: the destruction of personal identities (as well as family or other „core“ identities) will cause the destruction of nationhood.

Meno wrote:

„I got You. Until there is no choice, one cannot choose.

At that point of not choosing, one has to be chosen.“ **

Are you sure that you got me?

Otto West wrote:

„Democratic Missouri senator calls for Donald Trump to be assassinated.“ **

„She's a black senator, nothing will happen to her.“ **

She is a black and a female senator.
That makes two privilege points (**).

Arminius wrote:

„Alf wrote:

»Arminius wrote:

›Modern Educayshun.‹ ** **

I think that this modern educayshun becomes more and more a part of the reality or even the only reality.

What do you think?« ** **

I can agree, but I nevertheless think that this trend will be finished or cut off by a catastrophe like a huge war or even a natural catastrophe. After that catastrophe this forgone trend will probably be the most damnable trend and those who will follow it will face the death penalty. But after that period the situation will probably change in the other way again. So the general trend will probably be similar to what is shown in that video.

By the way: I think that if ethics is seriously put first (cp. the thread „Which is First?“), the this always leads to developments and situations as you can see in that said video. So you may watch that said video again (**).« ** **

Arminius wrote:

„Try to teach a child of a certain developmental age what ethics is by using logic, and you will be successful; but try to teach achild of a certain developmental age what logic is by using ethics, and you will be unsuccessful.“ ** **

Arminius wrote:

„The historical development of the philosophical question of our current subject - »logic comes before ethics« - can be called »modern war of philosophy« and has a parallel in science: »modern war of science«. On the one »war front« (»left«) are fighting ethical philosophers and social scientists, and on the other »war front« (»right«) are fighting logical philosophers and natural scientists and spiritual (especially logical, mathematical) scientists. (Note: there are also »spies«, »renegates«, »defectors«, »deserters« in that said »war«). - If the ethical-social side will »win« that »war«, then the science as we have known it and will have known it till then will be finally »dead«.“ ** **

Arminius wrote:

„According to ... stupid dreamers, everything must be taught through ethics, even mathematics.“ ** **

Arminius wrote:

„Even mathematics!

Now, watch the video again, please (**).“ ** **

I know what you mean and can agree on it.

So far, I've read about twenty threads, I guess.

Since I'm interested in the first field of philosophy, I know the thread you're talking about here. It contains what you call the „modern war of philosophy“ (**|**).

You and some others are fighting at the logical „front“ with reasonable ›weapons‹.

Another one and the very unmanly one with the many sock puppets are fighting at the ehtical „front“ with very unmanly „weapons“ like „VO“ (Vanity Occultism), thus with narcissism.

1028) Arminius, 20.08.2017, 20:05 (6149)

The most important argument against the globalistic dictatorship is freedom, especially in the sense of free thought, free speech, and autarky.

My username stands for freedom. In the year 9, Arminius decided to fight for freedom (with a bit less wealth) and against slavery (wtih a bit more wealth). The German tribes on the other side of the Rhine and (later) also of the limes had more wealth but less freedom. The German tribes of the free Germania Magna had more freedom but less wealth. So what? Who cares? The price for it was it worth. In any case: the trade between free German tribes and the Roman empire grew.

Sometimes it is just better to fight than to always look after more and more wealth - as you can also see here:

Okay, we know that humans have never been and will never be absoulutely free. But humans can and should be relatively free. This relative freedom requires a permanent fight. Are you ready for that fight?

Peter Kropotkin wrote:

„My wife and I was (! !) in London last may, year ago, and one of the dishes that was most heavily advertised was chicken tikka masala, in fact it was considered the most »English« of dishes.... as we all know, tikka masala is from India ..., travel around a city, any city in the US and you will see restaurant, many different types of restaurants, Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Mexican, French, Italian ..., Thai...ummmmmmmm, anyway, which culture and customs are we protecting when we go out to eat at these various restaurants? You seem to think that cultural is some static thing, it isn't, it changes and adapts and modifies all the time... there is no such thing as native culture and custom especially in a country like the U.S.... we are a country of immigrants and those immigrants brought their own culture and customs to the U.S. and we have adapted and modified that culture and customs into our own thing... like Chicken Tikka Masala being the most important dish in England.......is that the native culture and customs you are trying to protect?“ **

Food?

The dish in the UK is probably the worst one in the world. So what? Who cares? We do not need foreign food, poisoned food. We want our own food, produced by us, by ourselves. We want our autarky back, we want our self-sufficiency back.

A nation is the largest political, societal and economical form that is capable of guaranteeing a relatively freedom - especially free thought, free speech and autarky - of its population. A „global society“ would not be capable of guaranteeing all that. In practice, there is no „global state“, no „global society“, no „global human kind“, no „global humanity“. A „global political and societal form“ is only theory, an ideal that the globalistic dictators are using in order to get more and more control over their slaves.

1029) Arminius, 24.08.2017, 01:14, 01:23, 01:27, 01:27, 01:44, 02:34, 02:34, 04:18, 22:22 (6150-6158)

The PEW Research Center (**) is somewhat trustworthy, I guess.

So, get this too, please:

And I am sure that they will be proud of the food of Zimbabwe.

But seriously: It is true. Globalism with its side effects does not only accelerate the global warming but also (think of its other side effects like Balkanization, Brazilianization, Islamization) makes everyone dumber, everything cheaper, especially the lives of almost all humans. Then, almost all humans can be bought in a very much easier way than before. They become cheaper and cheaper, cheaper than ever before, become use-and-throw things. So at last they will be thrown away forever. The globalists will not need them anymore then.

Globalism is an era, and this era will not last forever. Either it will be the last era, or it will be replaced by an era of an old kind.

Trump has lost almost all of his base that got him elected, and he has also lost the Russian leader who helped him win the election.

He is of jewish origin.

In the following video (**), Helmuth Nyborg (**) points out the clear relationship between distance from the equator and both brain size and intelligence. At or close to the equator, the average IQ is 69, whereas at a latitude of 54 degrees the average IQ is 98. Nyborg observes that races could logically be classified as „eco-types“ (**), since their traits reflect the ecological niches in which they evolved. He also notes that unlike the North/South gradient in IQ there is no East/West gradient, virtually proving that it is the challenges of a cold climate that have forced northern peoples to evolve higher intelligence and a greater capacity for cooperation. He points out that e.g. Arabs have lower-than-expected IQs relative to the latitudes in which they evolved, probably due to the dysgenic effects of frequent cousin marriages.

Two forces could destroy the Western Civilization. One is a social system that taxes the competent to subsidize the proliferation of the incompetent. As Nyborg notes, „the welfare-state debases what created high civilization in the first place - this is the first time in history that the less fit are reproducing more than the more fit“ (**). At the same time, lower-IQ non-Europeans are pouring into the continent, bringing with them alien practices and religions. Nyborg concludes with a warning: Unless Europeans are able to reverse these two trends, „the result could be the undoing of the Enlightenment - we may be on the precipice of a new dark era“ (**).

Arminius wrote:

„According to Helmuth Nyborg and many others before him (and only few others - I am among them - after him) intelligence is mainly based on genetics and on the landscape, the environment, more exactly said: on the regional climate and some of its consequences. One can say that the northern humans (humans of regions with a moderate and especially a cold climate) are averagely much more intelligent than the southern humans (humans of regions with a warm and especially a hot climate). And indeed, this has already been proven, although some other aspects must be and have been taken in account as well.

Now, if a northern human correctly says »I am more intelligent than the southern humans«, then this northern human will immediately be called a »racist« or an »IQ racist«. But if a southern human correctly says »I am more athletic and have a larger penis than the northern humans«, then that southern human will immediately get agreement and praise from everyone, nobody will call that southern human a »racist« or/and a »sexist«.

One can state with certainty: There are huge differences when it comes to intelligence. These differences were already proven in the 19th century. But since about the second half or the third third or at least the fifth fifth of the 20th century it has been forbidden to say anything about these differences, because they are mostly caused by genetics (averagely about 70% or even 80%), biology, climate, thus only little by sociology. So our rulers are not only against intelligence differences, they are also against genetics, against biology, against climatology. Probably they are also against intelligence itself.

Who are the more real racist: those who correctly say that they are more intelligent than others, or those who incorrectly say that those who say that they are more intelligent than others are incorrect or even racists?

If there are intelligence differences (and there are huge intelligence differences for sure!), then there are also people who correctly say that they are more intelligent than others.

Why is it forbidden to be intelligent? And especially: Why is it forbidden to be more intelligent than others? And specifically: Why is it forbidden to say this?

There is a huge interest in forbidding all this.

When liberalism and egalitarianism come together »fraternally« (), they have to keep a peaceful distance between themselves: liberalism is for the few rich people, egalitarianism is for the many poor people; and if this peaceful distance is really kept by both of them, then it works like the current globalism works. What does this mean in the context of what I said above? That peaceful distance can only be kept, if there are artificially made differences (for example: »racism«, »sexism« versus »politically correctness«) in order to hide the real differences (such as intelligence differences or the difference between eugenics and dysgenics), because this is one of the means which is used in order to control all humans on this planet - according to the established method and ruling principle: divide et impera.“ ** **

„Europe and the USA will either stand together or be hanged separately“ - Samuel Huntington (cp. in the video **).

Climate zones:

„My personal fear is that we face civil war.“ - Helmuth Nyborg (cp. in the above video **).

„I personally find that our children deserve a better future than that ....“ - Helmuth Nyborg (cp. in the above video **).

You (**) know that the EU administration belongs to the globalistic system too. So the problems we „are seeing“, as you said, are the problems you are seeing too (although perhaps on a lower level, namely: the EU level).

Otto West wrote:

„Globalism is a consolidation period where all nation states are competing against each other for natural resources that are peaking across the planet. It is essentially a technological and military race to see who is left to conquer the entire world geo-politically. The end result of this madness will be a nightmare for every living human being left afterwards, these are my thoughts anyways.

Still, I am hoping that after this global ghetto project fails (which it will sooner or later) there will be opportunity to build something better afterwards from its ruins. I am hoping that remnant European survivors of this global chimera will be able to forge a new society and identity learning from our previous collective mistakes or errors. This of course assumes there will be any survivors at all from the current global calamities that plague us as total annihilation can always knock on our front at any time.“ **

Yes.

I want to add something to Nyborg’s statements in the above video (**), where Nyborg notes that e.g. „the welfare-state debases what created high civilization in the first place - this is the first time in history that the less fit are reproducing more than the more fit“ (**). We know from e.g. the schoolyard that high-IQ pupils and low-IQ pupils behave very differently. The high-IQ pupils behave in a more reasonable way and think that intelligence is the best way to get success, whereas the low-IQ pupils behave in a more violent way and think that violence is the only way to get success.

The behavior of the high-IQ pupils is very similar to the behavior of the Faustians which Nyborg, referring to Charles Murray’s book „Human accomplishment“ (2003), calls „High Civilization“ / „European Core“ / „males born in a small area of northern Europe“ (the entire area of the Germanic speaking people and the north-northwest area of the Romanic speaking people **), thus: the area where the Occidental culture (a.k.a.: Faustian culture) originated with its soul (according to Spengler: „die faustische Seele“ [„the Faustian soul“]).

Arminius wrote:

„I prefer the word »Faustians« to describe what Occidentals really are. The words »Europeans« and »Westerners« tell us more about geographical aspects than about what this people really are. Faustians have the absolute will, are absloutely dynamic (energetic), very intelligent, they are by far the best technicians, inventers, designers, scientists, geniuses, artists, poets and thinkers ... and so on; but they are all this in the negative way too, which means, for example, that they can get a very bad conscience, if correspondending circumstances are given: so, for example, in the case of decadence (nihilism) they use their absolute will, their absolute dynamics (energy), their high intelligence and all their other high features against themselves.

So the Faustians are very successful people - by far the most successful people of all times (see above) -, but they are very tragic people too. Maybe that success and tragedy correlate with each other, at least in the long run. It is very likely that the end of this tragedy will really be that the Faustians will have sacrificed themselves. ** **

What Nyborg describes is a scientifically secured version of the Faustian story / history.

Back to the schoolyard: Very often, the low-IQ pupils win against the high-IQ pupils who are, in addition to that, often called „Streber“ (German) or „nerd“/„geek“ (English). It depends on the number: if low-IQ pupils are many more than the high-IQ pupils, then the high-IQ pupils have no chance to win against the low-IQ pupils. (Then proverbs come true: „The wiser head gives in.“ „The cleverer give in.“)

Politically said: By welfare and immigration politics, the welfare states help the low-IQ people win against the high-IQ people. What Spengler predicted as „die farbige Weltrevolution“ ([**|**] „the colored world revolution“ [**|**]) has become reality since the end of the second world war or, at the latest, since the end of the cold war. Very likely, this will lead to a civil war, if not to more than a civil war.

1917. Spengler has finished his main work (magnum opus).		Spengler’s grave. ** ** **

The reason why many Faustian people are scared these days is a real threat (!) - not the foreign race of the immigrants or the sex or something like that.

1030) Arminius, 29.08.2017, 02:32, 02:59 (6159-6160)

Otto West wrote:

„I am looking forward to the collapse of the American empire at this point, it is the only thing to be hopeful for. There is no reforming or salvaging this decadent corrupt government.“ **

The ticking time bomb is the demographic development - which is negative on the White side and positive on the Non-White side.

And we know that all the immigration to Europe is kicked off and organized by the USA as the main state vassal of the globalists and by certain non-governmental organizations as the main non-state vassals of the globalists.

The enemy is Germany (again; two world wars are obviously not enough; cf.: „Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam“ - Cato the Elder), regardless whether it is a member of the same military alliance or not. They try to weaken Germany and to drive a wedge between Germany and the other EU members. The EU itself is such a wedge. The Euro too. They want the German wealth, the German money, the Germoney. This war is a huge economical war and the globalists and their US politicians do not care about the fact that Germany is a member of the NATO. Quite the contrary: Germany and Russia as a possible alliance has always been being globalists’ and their US politicians’ fear, at least according to George Friedman ([**] Note the title: „Stratfor: The US Main Interest is to Stop Alliance Between Russia and Germany“. To STOP? To stop WHAT? An „Alliance Between Russia and Germany“? There is not such an „alliance“! There is only the absolutely unfounded „fear“ of it!  –  And by the way: It would be very much more understandable if the Germans had the fear of an alliance between USA and Russia! There was such an alliance in both the first and the second world war!  –  Again: Remember what Cato the Elder [234-149] said before the third Punic war [149-146]: „Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam“ („Besides, I am of the opinion that Carthage must be destroyed“). There was no real „reason“, no „alliance“, but only the Romans’absolutely unfounded „fear“ of Carthage!  –  But then [146 B.C.] .... [**|**]).

** **

EVERYTHING GEORGE SOROS DOESN'T WANT YOU TO KNOW

„The rumor is about Antifa (** [»More proof that Antifa is a paid terrorist group, more then they are a protest group. A video tweet posted by Beverley Hills Antifa has been quoted and shows Antifa members demanding payments for their services.«] **).“ **

I have been saying it for a long time: Antifa, even the Russian Antifa, is a paid terrorist group.

And I still wonder how many ILP members are paid trolls.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Imagine that the situation in the USA has become unbearable and someone says to you: „Go back to Europe, since you can do it, because you are of European origin!“

1) Would you agree?
2) Would you go?

For comparison.

Helmuth Nyborg wrote:

„The Thermodynamic Solar Irradiance Selection (TSIS) Hypothesis:

- The latitudinal reduction in Sun Irradiation and related carrying capacity of cold eco-niches exposed the small bands of genetically quite similar prehistoric northbound migrants to still harsher selection for traits beneficial for survival.
- Among those traits are Brain Size, Intelligence, and Altruistic Sociability, as they all favor in photon-poor, nutritionally bare Northern eco-niches.
- Their heritability will leave modern-day artefacts in the form of North-South gradients in IQ, Brain Size, and Altruistic Sociability.“ **

Helmuth Nyborg wrote:

„Summary:
1.) High Civilization reflects the geo-physics of Cold Ecotypes.
2.) It accordingly will receive little support in Warm Ecotype ereas.
3.) Warm Ecotypes cannot be integrated in modern technological European and Western offshoot countries, except for the few at the high end of the normal distribution of Warm Ecotypes.“ **

If Europeans become a minority, then intelligence (high IQ’s), technology, science, wealthy, democracy, welfare become a minority too, will drop below sustainable levels. All this means stupidness, dark ages, eternal-civil-war-like situations or even the Stone Age again, in the worst case the disappearance of all humans.

==>