At 12:22 I'd like to clarify that the pagan view is not the hero cannot strive to overcome or enhance his nature. The pagan view is that nature and human nature cannot be controlled, *negated* or fundamentally transformed into something entirely different. You can strive to go beyond man in a Nietzschean sense, but only through enhancing what is already there- and the individual can never escape his nature/fate
Isnt that what culture in its purest form does? To cultivate a fire and putting it into a oven or in form of a candle? To cultivate plants for being edible? To cultivate a wolf into a dog? To cultivate stones into houses? To cultivate human into übermensch? Isnt that what humans are? Beings that cultivate things, like god is cultivating the world? Always bringing new forms to light and life? Mixing them in a manner, which is beautiful in the end?
This note of yours is exactly what "A Clockwork Orange" was about if you ask me. But I think we need to take a mental step back here. You're speaking in the video as if left & right wings exist. Does electing liberal candidates cause liberal assembly lines that spew liberal policies to become installed in the basement of the White House? The thing is in adulthood we look for things we can Look Up To. One of those things is a surrogate for the father's role of making us feel as if the world is safe, & the person who makes it so is someone we have a Deep Personal Relationship With & cares for Us Personally. & this is where your confusion stems from. You think that _one_ of these wings *must* be it. & neither one actually exists. They're literally Just Opinions about opinions. Right of what? Who decides where the centre is or that there even _is_ one? & these are all the wrong questions. These questions themselves attempt to give definition to opinions. Opinions change All The Time. & they have zero effect on politics outside of rhetoric which, while that seems to be The Main Aspect of politics, this again is a delusion: the same words said by Biden would never be taken the same way as if spoken by Kim Jong-un, ever. So, in order to actually have this discussion, you would need to drop the illusion that 'politics' even exists. It's really just people in decision-making power that you all mistakenly look up to. If you don't want to believe _or_ like this, I'll make it very simple for you. How do you reconcile what happened to Maddie de Garay with left, right or centrist anything & not the direct end result of mere corruption by people in decision-making power? Did capitalism _cause_ it? Would communism have *prevented* it? Or do ists & isms not enter into it?
I'll make a 2nd reply instead of editing. If I seem to be ignoring the spiritual stuff, it's because while it's well-written & true, it doesn't apply to today. No one elevates Joe Biden because of a sense of sacrifice & the beauty of life. It's all mindless worship now that leads to people allowing 'politicians' to get away with a ton of stuff like the example I pointed to in my first comment here. I like the historical POV but it has its place, & that place to _me_ at least is a lower priority than getting society to where it no longer accepts all the hypocrisy it now does. Hope that clarifies a bit.
Yuri Bezmenov describes the differences between left and right really well. He has a 2 hour presentation on why the KGB stimulated left wing politics in countries that USSR wanted to thwart and the KGB succeeded most of the time. He states that the people his organization placed into the countries were eliminated after they overthrew the authority. Effectively, USSR wanted a hierarchy of soviet states lead by a mostly right-wing government because right-wing governments are highly stabilized. To do this, they needed to destabilize an existing government which acted independently of USSR. Thus introducing left-wing, nonsensical politics into the nation's youth and subsequently creating a crisis.
The Romans literally made death masks everytime their family member died, they memorized all of their ancestor's accomplishments and exploits. I think we could use some of that.
Well, RUclips decided it didn't like the Havamal 😂 I was saying, that's excellent! Much like the stanza from the Havamal: Cattle perish Kinsmen perish You yourself must perish But glory never perishes For the man you can achieve it
"No one will hurl me to my death against my fate. And fate? I tell you, no man, courageous or coward, has ever escaped it. We are born with it the day that we were born." - Hector, Iliad book 2
You've made an error in the first minute. In France's National Assembly those on the Left were Liberals in the mould of Rousseau, but those on the Right were Liberals in the mould of Locke and/or Hobbes. The Right were in favour of Monarchy, not in the sense of France's traditional Absolutism, but rather in the style of Britain's limited Constitutional Monarchy. The fallout between Left and Right was that the Left wanted absolute power to lie within the National Assembly whilst the Right wanted checks and balances and a division of power between Executive, Leglistative and Judiciary. If that sounds familiar to Americans, it should do. The Right were Classical Liberals, they saw themselves as Revolutionaries and looked to Britain's recent history for inspiration, namely our Civil War, experiment with Republicanism, The Restoration, the Glorious Revolution and the political philosophy of Liberalism which sought to rationalise it. "The Rest is History" podcast did a deep dive on rge French Revolution you should check out, especially re the political philosophies of those sitting in the National Assembly. Spoiler Alert, there weren't many (if any) Conservatives elected into it. Those on the Right had the same philosophy as the British Parliamentary faction we call Whigs, later officially called the Liberal Party. The Left/Right dichotomy has always been a dichotomy of Liberalism, which is why it makes no sense when you start trying to work out where people who reject the world view Liberalism fit. It's also compounded by the fact that Americans often use the term Liberal to describe only the Liberals who subscribe to Rousseau's world view, typically radicals in the Democrat Party.
Additionally, the French revolutionary left-right divide was abandoned the moment king was decapitated. The divide we use was recreation of that revolutionary sentiment appropriated by socialist movement (mainly marxist branch), where they put themselves on the left wing and anyone opposing their orthodoxy was therefore on the right, with condition that the more you opposed marxist orthodoxy, the more on the right you were. Thats why we somehow ended up with Fascism (a creation of lifelong radical socialists Mussolini and Gentile) as "far-right", because it at one point strongly opposed some Marxist theorems (not fundamentally), basically like a heretic schism.
I remember reading something that might add to this conversation. There was a native American found out in the woods in the early 20th century. He was literally the last of his tribe and had been living alone for many years. They eventually figured out how to translate his language. They turned on a recorder and asked him who he is. He started talking and did not stop for over 6 hours. He went all the way back to creation and spoke of ever generation and their deeds all the way up to him. I guess that's the only way he knew to describe who he was. I think his name was "ishi." Spoke for six hours when asked who he is......
@@meh.7640The Scalds in ancient Scandinavia we're very similar. They passed on their history and stories through oral tradition in the form of songs and the sagas.
@ no. He was being asked by someone with a very different culture. He would not have to do that with people who shared the myths. The point is, he could not explain who he was to someone who knew nothing about him without describing himself as a link in a long chain, and how he relates to his peoples view of their history and history of the world as they viewed it. They have it recorded. It isn’t a fairytale.
@ people tended to memorize a whole lot of stories passed down to them before they had written language. Even with written language, there are some Muslims who can basically recite the whole Koran. And it was also very important that they memorized the stories and told them correctly, as it was their history and how they kept knowledge of their identity and culture. In todays world a lot of people do not even know who their dads are, let alone great great grandparents. How does someone like that interpret the world vs someone a thousand years ago who knew their ancestry back many generations, and things about their lives, all their shared myths, etc?
Strength & beauty. There are things which increase life but the life itself is pathetic. There's more "life" in the insect world than all of the jungle, but the tiger & lion are without a doubt more noble than the ant. In fact, it seems to be the ideal of the bugman; maximize life, minimize strength. A world of fragile techno-immortals who live in a sterilized domain. Life without might is a net-negative.
@LordCasterwell What I think Nykandros was talking about was r/K selection theory. The sociobiological reproductive survival strategy theory established in 1967 by ecologists Edward O. Wilson and Robert MacArthur. "Sociobiology: The New Synthesis" by E. O. Wilson demonstrated that ant colonies represent the extreme 'r' end of the r/K-selection spectrum, while humans are at the extreme opposite 'K' end. Despite cultural or tribal variations, all humans are at the same far 'K' end of the spectrum compared to ants. The "r/K selection theory" identifies two reproductive strategies: quantity over quality (r) and quality over quantity (K), with species focusing on different ends of the spectrum. A species' focus on quantity of offspring decreases its focus on quality, and vice versa. Quality is not about Eugenics vs Dysgenics, but rather the degree to which members nurture their young before releasing them into the wild. Nurturing meaning caring for, protecting, training, and teaching offspring. Quantity refers to the number of offspring produced, not necessarily the indiscriminate selection of as many mates as possible in order to reproduce more. Most species are somewhere in the middle.
@LordCasterwellYou do know the innovation of technology is not necessarily weak and disgusting but the intent is rather the issue. For example the technology of Phillip producing the sarissa is a beautiful innovation to overcome one’s enemies. Now the technology of only fans is disturbing and disgusting a hell scape of weakness and decay. Life affirming vs, life denying.. nobody said plumbing is wrong.
Christianity wasn't individualist until Liberalism. Christianity was Corporatist. Book of Romans & Corinthians talk about the Body of Christ. Your ancestors are the martyrs/saints/venerated/Patriarchs Now we focus on going to heaven, but the church was more focus on bringing the kingdom here as Christ spoken more on, Coming of the Kingdom. Protestantism embraced individualism while Catholics/Orthodox sees the 1000s of years of Israelites - Now as apart of us Even with interpreting scripture we lean on our ancestors Our King was actualized through tradition pre birth-post death We affirm our what is true teaching/tradition through the body, through our ancestors
It was not Liberalism that started it. Liberalism, was not really a thing until John Locke around 1650's. Protestantism (who I will agree embraces individualism) came about in 1500's. And was inspired by people at least 100 years earlier. And, if you read Viking Myths or Greek Myths, they are not stories about groups, but about individualism. It has been part of Europe, as long as we have had stories,, maybe longer. As for Christianity, as far as I can read, it was individual from the start. You do not go to heaven, based on who your family is. You yourself have to embrace Jesus to be saved.
@@haraldbredsdorff2699 Personal salvation doesn’t equate to individualism. Christianity is rooted in community, not isolation. Jesus calls us to honor our parents, love our neighbors, and serve others - the very essence of bearing one another’s burdens, as the New Testament repeatedly emphasizes. If anything, the rise of liberalism wasn’t born from Christianity itself but from the rejection of the one holy and apostolic Church during the Reformation. Fragmenting the body of Christ didn’t reflect the faith’s core teachings - it reflected the consequences of stepping away from them.
What about protestantism was ever individualist? from the birth of lutheranism through to the Prussian imperium, they've persecuted true christians & other fellow heresies(anabaptists/calvinist, etc).
Generations upon generations of my ancestors fought , killed and died so that i could be here. Continuing the blood line is the least amount of respect you coul show them.
And nature can take it from you in the blink of an eye lmao if it’s your fate to have children you will have children, if not then no worry all things will come to an end at some point
But then the question is, how does one define quality? I would argue that the Greek idea of aristos rests on certain presuppositions about ancestry and fate...
@@HeroicIdeal I agree with the video, but whatever quality is defined as it's at least some sort of quality, in comparison to leftism and leftists that can't stand any higher quality and want to equalize everything to the lowest denominator basically.
@@HeroicIdealI agree to an extent but at the same time I’m from a humble lower-class working family on my mom’s side( Irish-English descent) & a middle-class working family on my dad’s side (100% Anglo-Saxon descent) & yet I’ve somehow managed to attain spiritual wisdom and demonstrate supernatural feats in both perception and ability during my early 20s so I believe it’s somehow also related to nutrition as I consumed large amounts of dairy and meat during my adolescence alongside my Shinto/Shugendo & Vedic occult practices and that’s when my personality began to exhibit huge changes and transformations took place both internally and externally. Then again I’m also much taller than both my younger and older brother, and I’m the only one who was born with blonde hair, the other two boys were both born with brown hair and are both absolute normies haha!
I think associating the right wing with the traditional pagan view on collectivism and the left with Christian style individualism is an oversimplification at best, especially when a lot of modern leftists are collectivist and into non-abrahamic religions while right wing conservatives want to conserve the relatively new individualistic ideas of Christianity and capitalism and are more likely to be Christians.
Collectivism and individualism don't enter the picture! The ideas are the ancestral "chain of being" and whether nature and human nature can and should be radically transformed (fate, hubris, heroism)
@ hmm, I do think that collectivism vs individualism can play a role, but even if we just take the specific ideas you mentioned, the right often want to conserve the Christian ideas about being a separate soul that was radical just 2000 years ago and did transform the world. On the other hand, even with the ancestral chain of being, change is inevitable, even if it is gradual. You can argue that it is fated, no matter how much the right wants to fight it. People who identify as left wing generally recognize this and usually tend to be less rigid as a result. My point is that you’ll find desires to preserve one thing and transform another on both sides; they just happen to want to conserve or change different things, so arguing that the right wing is more ancestral and the left is not doesn’t really make sense. And even though you’ll find pagans and Christians identifying with both sides of political spectrum, it’s especially funny to make this simplification when the loudest conservatives are Christian and there are arguably more pagans (at least neopagans) on the left than the right (I don’t want to count followers of the mustache man who have appropriated Norse mythology and they are thankfully smaller in number). At least at face value, that proposition appears to be the opposite of what we see in the political arena.
@@HeroicIdealChristianity isn't merely about the individual, it's about a personal relationship with Jesus, and making a generational impact, creating a family, establishing a legacy, remembering your history, leaving an inheritance for your children's children, building and creating things that glorify God for generations to come. Calling Christianity left wing is misplaced at best.
@@janimation7018Yes left wing is far too liberal to be Christian. Christianity is not about unbridled liberty. It’s very restrictive and disciplined. It tells very clearly what you should NOT do which leftists hate and call bigoted
Sharp thoughts but I believe that at the core you have described progressivism and conservatism. Not right and left. Conservative is preserving and progressive is moulding and changing. But there is also right-wing progressive and left-wing conservative. In my opinion, the difference between right and left is that the left assumes that all beings are a product of their environment and that there are no fundamental differences between peoples, genders, and so on. Accordingly, the ultimate goal is to eliminate all differences. The right recognises the differences between people and the ultimate goal is to find a good way of dealing with these differences That's my observation, I'm open to discussion :)
One of the most telling symptoms today, of what you're saying about the potential futility of trying to alter the nature of man, are economic downturns. No matter what economic system we employ, the power and wealth centralizes to a few powerful men. No matter how much we think and fight, we seem to just reorganize ourselves into our natural state of hierarchy.
You are looking at things backward No one returns to the hierarchy, as primitive humans, if you want to talk about nature, were collectivists, hierarchies are imposed upon us by those who accumulate any measure of power, be it wealth, land, or influence over masses, they corrupt themselves, turning individualistic, using their initial non-absolute power to consolidate it into absolute power Individualism is a sickness of the soul
the hierarchical organization we see in wealth is a bastardized version of hierarchical organization more natural human organization (hunter/gatherer, no societal structures but small groups of people who lived in the wilderness)
Love your work. I’ve been reading Nietzsche for many years, and have formulated thoughts similar to this you express. You are a brilliant fellow. You have gained a new supporter. 😆
"Honor thy mother and father" - one of the top 5 Commandments in the 10 Commandments. I see your points here but its obviously topical, as it doesn't really touch on the theological teachings of Christianity. The main objective of Christianity isn't to 'seek out happiness,' it's to center Christ in your life and deny yourself when you have urges to sin. Christianity can be applied to traditionalist views of the world. It's just a matter of if your family is going to center Christ in its legacy or not. Overall though, this was a fantastic watch and its an incredibly important topic. Thank you for your efforts, please keep them up
Thanks! Paul says that when you become a Christian, you join the tribe of Abraham, which means you give up an identity based on your own ancestry and genealogy But you might enjoy my recent pagan Christianity video which sidesteps this issue
@@SteelMaceNationPodcast when in truth, these political forces aren't even separate entities. it's all progressive one way or another. the path to true freedom lies not left or right or in between. it lies in the opposite direction.
A great quote from Aristotle that everyone should remember, “It is requisite that those should be joined together whose species cannot exist without each other, as the male and female for the business of propagation; and this is not through choice but by that natural impulse which acts both upon plants and animals for the purpose Of their leaving behind them others like themselves”
I like to hold a little of both of those worldviews. I’ll have to further explore and see if there are any incompatible beliefs or contradictions I might be holding. I feel like I’m always updating my worldview based on new information, but I understand there is a fundamental framework I’m building upon. I guess this will give me more reason to examine it all a little deeper
6:17 how does Persephone / hymn to Demeter reference ancestry as a chain of being? You are SO close - it’s not that myth which references ancestry as a chain of being - it’s zagreaus , Persephone son, who’s death created humans, and it’s from the human lineage that Dionysus would eventually be reborn- that is literally an identity being reborn through human generations .
I had somehow not heard of this story before but it is extremely powerful as I first read it, it's very difficult not to see the story of Zagreus/Dionysus as a proto-Christ
I enjoyed many of your newer videos recently because you are comfortable with your natural voice and tonality. This allows for better flow, authenticity, and dynamism.
I’m Catholic and I agree with a lot of the views pointed out in your argument. Although I wouldn’t say Christian as a whole could be claimed as an individualistic ideology because your salvation isn’t up to how you live your life it’s how you adhere to the bigger whole. The Bible goes to great lengths, several books even, to harp on the importance of genealogy and respect to those who came before us like the gospels even open up with Jesus’ genealogy going back to King David through both The blessed Virgin Mary and his Surrogate father st Joseph. I also believe a lot of the views of virtue and family are at their foundation very Judeo-Christian beliefs. For example God himself goes out of the way to bless Jacob(aka Israel’s) descendants after he wrestled with him a very heroic feat in my opinion. Just wanted to point that out but good work I’ll definitely be watching more of your stuff.
Thanks! The Bible definitely focuses on genealogy, and if you become a Christian, according to Paul, you join the spiritual tribe of Abraham. However, this means giving up an identity based on your own ancestry-again, the quote by Redbad- which is the important point
Excellent video, thanks for this piece of content you created, I can't express enough how easily you summarized concepts of history, religion, anthropology, evolutionary psychology etc... You brought order and structure to a bunch of concepts I think most of your audience, the western man, has been hearing a lot this days and you summarized the issue of how the conflict affects us in modernity... #studies #ancient #wisdom
Hi! I highly recommend that one reads the writings of famed sociologist Phillip Reiff. Reiff speaks of not two cultures but three, first, second and third culture: pagan, Judeo-Christian and post modern.
This video being uploaded on my birthday and presenting a view of life I've long been drawn to finally convinced me: I'm a pagan, if not in terms of customs then in mindset. Thank you for this.
An unexpectedly perfect description and take in general. Shows how much Christianity, despite helping shape (or distort) European culture, was never actually based on ours values.
The progressivism and Hubris section was really great. Finally someone who gets Nietzsche, not sure about the paganism though. Overall great essay, I'm going to be an avid viewer from now on.
You make some good points, but one on which I partially disagree is the idea that Christianity is entirely individualistic. Over and over again throughout the New Testament we find admonitions with regard to "One another" The commandments to love one another is impossible as an individualist. Acts 2 makes it abundantly clear that everybody shared everything (but without being forced to do so like Socialism or Communism) Having said that, so much of the modern Church has become so individualistic (particularly in America) that it is easy to recognise how and why an outsider might come to the conclusion that this is foundational to Christian belief. However, this is antithetical to the commands contained in the New Testament and demonstrates a level of ignorance on both sides of the equation.
“There is nothing outside of yourself that can ever enable you to get better, stronger, richer, quicker, or smarter. Everything is within. Everything exists. Seek nothing outside of yourself.” ~ Miyamoto Musashi
Right wingers aren’t usually such thorough traditionalists, they are conservative, which is a very different thing. Left wingers are far from individualist, they praise their traditional aesthetic lineage to build upon it and project it to new heights. Of course their are “right wingers” who are as thoroughly educated as you are, and of course their are left wingers who do indeed only fight for our temporary happiness. But we both know that those “leftists” are what the Americans call: liberals. A true leftist is all about embracing tradition and fighting against the alienation of modernity, to indeed make the world better, but better for our lineage. Just look at every big modern art movement, perfect examples of how they know and understand their tradition, to build on it something new and stronger, continuing the chain. On a side-note; your analysis of paganism does indeed form a deeper understanding of Nietzsche! Well done there!
This is a great video. Your concept on how Christianity negates an ancestrial worldview is an idea I've been contemplating for a long time. I would recommend you read the Cosmotheist Trilogy by Dr. William Pierce. I think you would find it interesting.
The ancestors that I honour are those men and women who rose up against the poll tax in the 14th century and the Diggers and Levellers in the 17th century who tried to reclaim the land for ordinairy people. These and other great traditions of my pagan folk. The fatalists I oppose are those who say the current economic situation is inevitable and cannot be resisted.
@@Vendéen32 yeah, but the statement OP made just doesn't make sense. "we are saved together". how? if we are saved together, does that mean that if just one person isn't saved, then none of us are? and it's safe to assume based on the requirements of Christian teachings that there's at least one person in the world who isn't saved. then it must be the case that for any of the Christians to be saved, it must be done so on an individual level because your salvation cannot be dependent on the actions of other people.
I’m not a Neopagan but I like Homer, I just reread the Odyssey and are now half way through the Iliad. I don’t know if pagan mythology is a left or right wing thing but it is very interesting.
I would argue that Jesus doesn’t call us to separate ourselves from ancestry but to return to it. Paul calls Jesus the 2nd Adam, he’s the Adam 2.0, the Original Man done over and that returning to him and giving our genetic material to change to him we will become gods ourselves. Psalms 82:6 says “I have said you are gods and all of you are children of the most High.” Jesus came so we can relive his glory in us through our everyday lives. “You are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.” Matthew 5:14. Make that your mission.
@@anazumbalia I would say that he was in fact against Jews... For Jews he was a traitor because he said that The Kingdom of God is Not in this planet... This means that Israel wasn't the city of God... That means that the enlightenment is in a transcendental path higher than this material reality (the one created by the demiurge)
@ if you truly read the bible and understand what’s behind Christianity, it’s actually judaism for gentiles. If you don’t want to see that’s your call… “Keep believing”
@@anazumbalia I'm not even Christian and I don't believe in it... I analyze it as an esoteric teaching, as I do with all religions and myths... Also if you study the background of Christianity you will see it was manipulated by different people in the beginning of it (they burned all the books portraying Jesus in other ways as killing those who tried to keep that wisdom). So if you believe what christians says about Jesus that's your problem.
it would be interesting to get your take on Marcus Aurelius, stoicism, and his work, Meditations. Aurelius surely is a pagan thinker and it would nice to get your take on him because right now, everything about stoicism or Aurelius is by "self-help" gurus who are not thinking about this stuff in the same way or depth that you are.
I am a Christian who has this world view though its a sort of varied, human nature is corrupt and can be bettered, but not by us, the world is fallen and can be healed and transformed into a Utopia, but not by us only God can do that and because of that for the purpose of life i hold the traditionalist/pagan worldview as you described it, all in all this is a great video and you got youself a bew subscriber.
@@HeroicIdealthe Christo-pagan one? Yeah I watched it good stuff, I'm kind of odd since I was raised already believing in most pagan gods and other mythological and folklore beings but with the difference that I don't believe/wasn't raised believing that they are gods but rather just other beings of power that God created, the term God only applying to God because of his overwhelming and completely unmatchable level of power, but I was also raised to venerate the specific pagan pantheons of my heritage in a similar manner to how one venerates the saints, so I'm already in a pretty interesting/good middle ground between being a Catholic and a Pagan
Right wing/conservatives highly value the individual! It has been our society‘s tradition to honor the sanctity of the individual for at least 250 years! Therefore it is a conservative viewpoint to maintain that the individual is of the highest value.
I like the perspective that you bring from this video, but I think your understanding of “neither Greek or Jew” is lacking (5:59) Paul is not saying that the individual does not have an obligation to their linage here (that interpretation would directly contradict 1 Timothy 5:8, Acts 17:26-27, as well as Romans 9:3 where Paul states he would “go to hell” for the sake of his kinsmen (I.E. Jews) as well the book of Romans 13 where Paul states that you should “render to all their due… customs where customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor”) But rather he is speaking of the promise of the new covenant which is found is Jesus Christ, which extends to all nations. The context being that many early Judean Christians attempted to force Mosaic dietary laws and circumcision on non-Judean Christians, so this was Paul rebuking them. St. Augustine notes in his commentary on Galatians that “Difference of race or condition or sex… remains imbedded in our mortal interactions, and in the journey of this life the apostles themselves teach that it is to be respected, and they even proposed living in accord with the racial differences between Jews and Greeks as a wholesome rule.” This is also consistent with the biblical mandate to “baptize all the nations” and that the nations will exist in heaven around the throne of God. This in my opinion puts everything in the bible in proper context, a Christian should desire to continue both their linage and to pass on their legacy to their descendants
Thar is why I disagree with neopagans. You can find universalist values as democracy in Greece and individualistic values in Christianity as precisely represented in saints that fought for their ideas. The idea of "pagan values" is also too general because there were many pagan values and gods that had different values, sometimes contradictory.
Well said. It's distressing how many neopagan types seem to respect their ancestors on paper but don't grasp why their changing faith actually made sense to them as a fulfillment of faith. Granted, there's a massive problem in many modern churches that seek to dissolve the boundaries that God created. I think that's why the Orthodox are seeing such a surge among some demographics, they don't seem to have such an interest in devolving everything into a homogenous blob like some subverted churches do. They have a more biblically correct view on that subject.
Joining the spiritual tribe of Israel, and the new covenant, which Paul talks about later, necessarily means giving up your inherited tribe-even if not literally, then spiritually. This is exactly what Redbad regused to do because it goes against the Pagan worldview. He would rather be damned to an eternity in hell than betray his ancestors and be personally saved
@@josephang9927when I say pagan I use it as it was first used, and is now most commonly used, to denote European Paganism. The heroic societies of pre-Christian Europe all shared the same worldview- ideas about fate , ancestry, heroism, kinship, etc. You can can see this by reading Homer and the Norse Sagas, removed from each other by geography and time, but sharing almost identical worldviews
@@HeroicIdeal The Old Testament states that all of the Nations of the world are determined by the “sons of El” I.E. Angels in heaven. When you enter the New Covenant you don’t literally become an Israelite, rather you partake in communion with the God man who defeated death. Your display of “pagan Christian values” really is not far from how early Christians viewed Christianity. The “seed of Abraham” is Christ, not the Jews. Scripture clearly shows that all of the nations ect are preserved in Christ, not forgotten. When Paul speaks to the Greeks in Acts 17, he not only states that the boundaries of the nations are designated by God, but that the “Unknown God” in Hellenism could be understood as being Christ
I personally believe a Christian version of the idea of intergenerational connection, we have a obligation to hand down good tradtions and the embracing the good parts of human nature is vital for overcoming the bad.
Side note. If I am ever fortunate enough for a boy, Arminius would be his middle name. But when this channel said something about how peterson was talking about a middle eastern religion like europe had origin roots from it, i could never go back.
I am not 100% sure I agree, but do find your thinking interesting and has some similarities to observations made by Thomas Sowel. You should consider picking up his book, "A Conflict of Visions" or otherwise researching discussions of its content. He hits on the same point that visions are distinct from interests and work in far more profound ways to shape our alignments. He focuses in on the idea of constrained versus unconstrained visions of man - the idea that humanity is fundamentally limited and can't be changed vs the idea that core human potential can be developed and perfected into something incomprehensibly superior (at its most polar extreme).
RUclips terminated the Asha Logos channel just this week. If you know his work your heart must be just as broken as mine. If anyone has any of his material please keep it safe, but repost if possible. "There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root" - Thoreau Asha Logos was the one.
The more I'm reading on traditional ethnic religions and worldviews across the world, the more I'm realizing that this ancestor-centric and bloodline-centric worldview is not just a "European" or "Indo-European" ancient view but is present across races, across continents. The African shamans, Australian aborgines, East & South East Asian pre-Buddhists as well as Dravidians of India also have shared exactly the same raw understanding of ancestors, descendants and fate... with minor variations ofcourse. Infact pantheism, animism/nature worship and polytheism is also rooted in ancestor worship. All the "spirits" of trees, rocks, rivers, mountains, celestian bodies etc are considered as "distant ancestors" from whom the human ancestors descended, from whom we descend. The world would be a better place if this meta-ancestral wordview is embraced by all and book-centered organized religion is rejected.
This is a good video but I think what you are describing is the belief system of the warrior nobility and not commoners. Luigi Mangione has demonstrated that what people really want is a new aristocracy with the values you describe. They want leaders who will kill and die for them, and send their own children to the front (we've only seen parodies of aristocracy throughout modernity). The immediate forgiveness of Luigi demonstrates that the job of the nobility is to wield death and everyone will forgive them for deposing these overpowered middle class tyrants that rule the West currently.
These are good abstractions but I think on the day to day political world we live in the terms left and right have become obsolete as things have become more complex. I think each idea should stand on itsl own merit and not the tribalism of right versus left. As far as both basic underpinnings of the two basic philosophies described here I think not have their truths and falsehoods. I do think we can make a better world but it can never be perfect in the utopian sense unless we're transformed into something we're not, as one described it we would have to ", become like trees in the woods" with no real emotional interaction with one another. It would take me a book to fully explain 🤣 but the very fire within us that makes the world imperfect is the same fire that makes life worth living. The best we can do then to actually live and not merely exist is to control and navigate it when we can. But all this can go into an even deeper topic of what actually is a "perfect world" anyway? But again another book 🤣.
"Ancestry is not important in Christianity", yet Gospels start with and the whole Bible is obsessed with proving that Jesus comes from Abraham's bloodline (while supposedly being God's son). Buddhism, which appeared 400 years earlier, rejects ancestors thing too. So, even if true, that is not unique to Christianity as the video makes it sound like. Christian concepts of destiny, God's plan and God's will are not any different in practice than the pagan versions either. Pagan king waited for his death? It is very easy for a Christian to come up with a similar logic to justify inaction too. "Jesus has the wheel" Left-Right is fundamentally about ownership. Who owns what? Are resources owned communally or individually. Everything else stems from here. Equality vs hierarchy is another approach but hierarchy is born out of ownership. You may use ancestry to justify ownership, "my ancestors owned it, so now I own it." but at the end of the day it is about ownership of resources and ancestor part is just the justification and not the root cause of who owns what, since if they have the means, people just take what they want, irrespective of who's ancestors owned it. There is no pagan who came and said, "I could kill you all, take your wives and enslave your children, and take your land, but because your ancestors left it to you and my ancestors didn't own it, I'm not going to do that." No. If they have the means, they just take it. Ancestry is just the excuse to justify why the current king, deserves to be the king.
European ancestry is not important in christianity and it subverts original european ancestry by placing christians on the joowish family tree, so what are you talking about?
@@trad_m4839 Wow! such a deep explenation. Now tell me: How does the second person of trinity explain the virgin birth while still having a bloodline? The whole point here is that ancestry doesn't matter in Christianity, yet apparently it does, since Bible is obsessed with trying to prove Jesus coming from royal bloodline? He has a genealogy, connecting him to actual kings, while being born out of a virgin (but married ???)These two are contradictory!!! Which is it? Second person of trinity does nothing to resolve this. How does Matthew start? Let me remind you: "1 This is the genealogy[a] of Jesus the Messiah[b] the son of David, the son of Abraham: 2 Abraham was the father of Isaac, Isaac the father of Jacob, Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers, 3 Judah the father of Perez and Zerah, whose mother was Tamar, Perez the father of Hezron, Hezron the father of Ram, 4 Ram the father of Amminadab, Amminadab the father of Nahshon, Nahshon the father of Salmon, 5 Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab, Boaz the father of Obed, whose mother was Ruth, Obed the father of Jesse, 6 and Jesse the father of King David. David was the father of Solomon, whose mother had been Uriah’s wife, 7 Solomon the father of Rehoboam, Rehoboam the father of Abijah, Abijah the father of Asa, 8 Asa the father of Jehoshaphat, Jehoshaphat the father of Jehoram, Jehoram the father of Uzziah, 9 Uzziah the father of Jotham, Jotham the father of Ahaz, Ahaz the father of Hezekiah, 10 Hezekiah the father of Manasseh, Manasseh the father of Amon, Amon the father of Josiah, 11 and Josiah the father of Jeconiah[c] and his brothers at the time of the exile to Babylon. 12 After the exile to Babylon: Jeconiah was the father of Shealtiel, Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel, 13 Zerubbabel the father of Abihud, Abihud the father of Eliakim, Eliakim the father of Azor, 14 Azor the father of Zadok, Zadok the father of Akim, Akim the father of Elihud, 15 Elihud the father of Eleazar, Eleazar the father of Matthan, Matthan the father of Jacob, 16 and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah. 17 Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Messiah." All this shouldn't have mattered if he was born out of a virgin. Do you even understand the point being made here? The point IS: Ancestry apparently did matter for Christians.
Hello, I’m Brazilian and a pagan Asatru. Here in Brazil, people’s understanding of paganism is very low, not only from Christians but also from other pagans who seem like cosplayers or think it’s about hugging trees and having orgies in the forest, in a sort of neo-Wiccan, very feminine and adolescent vibe. I’m starting a RUclips channel, and I couldn’t express myself about paganism better than you, even if I tried. I’d like to know if I can download your videos, translate the speech into Portuguese, and post them with proper credits?
New sub here. Just what im looking for This stuff is the zeitgeist. This is the cress of the wave. Gonna be a great few year's for the European mind. And im excited to catch up on your work.
Interesting take. But modern politics is such a mishmash - Christians consider themselves right-wing, meanwhile there is left-wing nationalism (nationalism on the Balkans or even in France), collectivism has always been considered left-wing, but it is typical of a pagan worldview as well (which you relate to the right). On top of that, "right" and "left" no longer even stand for what they used to in the 20th century. For instance, the MAGA movement is talking against big corporations the same way communists and socialists did it in the 20s and 30s. I think we should altogether transcend both right and left and discover a new, third worldview, because we're getting nowhere...
The third worldview is centrism. A persons mind is free when it can form opinions on its own, not influenced by a perticular group. Then you see that all this left vs. right is only for deviding the people while power-hungry people run the world how they see fit. The reason left and right definitions are constantly changing is because people in power change it acording to their newest wishes and ways to make money.
Julias Evola offered such a solution. Both the left and the right are liberals. Together they have nearly succeeded in putting the world in a mess that might be impossible to work our way out of.
I shouldn't tell you this but there was a Third Way... Now I think it is better to talk about a Fourth Way because even if both Communist and Capitalists tried to kill this other way it never died and when both paradigms will fall a new dawn will rise
You mean third positionist. That is Fascism or national socialism and it’s in the middle of the spectrum. Fascism or national socialism is against communism and capitalism. In my opinion, makes the most sense as a form of government.
@@Shlomo_Shekelstein Well, yeah, but fascism and national socialism ultimately failed. They tried to be a third position, but ended up being socialism + some capitalism. Julius Evola and Alexander Dugin have written good criticisms against them.
Politics is complicated and on a world scale, there’s really no such thing as left and right. But in the most generic terms, leftists believe community > individuals, and right wingers believe individuals > community. Centrists believe there’s room for both to coexist.
Heil Wotan Brother! I think you did really well on the Uberboyo debate, but I still wonder how he did the sleight of hand of making the pagan perspective look bleak and depressing? ...when christianity literally is about your old self dying(so your life experience is meaningless), then later you dying and in the end the world dying, while forcing you to submit and draining every life force out of you in service of the ideology. Wear black, keep your head down, if you want a beautiful wife you are shallow, better yet become a monk and live a bleak existance, your kin means nothing it is all meaningless. The world is fallen, matter is evil and ruled by the devil, on the other side you have literal thoughtcrime from 1984, just read the catechism, in there it also states, that the only meaning of life is to be saved, because we are divine souls trapped in a corrupt body. I even had people I knew in real life say to me, that you should rather die as soon as possible because that way the devil has less opportunity to corrupt you... ...also things of similar caliber. This was something I got as an answer for the question if 70 years wasn't a bit short a time frame to govern the rest of your eternity. Then later on it is a highly unspecific paradise "you'll be walking with god". You tell me if paganism really looks that bleak in comparison... Boyo might have been one of the first ways into paganism for me, but you really strengthend my determination to go all in, you really care about paganism, he just seems to for the thought - experiment side of things. I wonder though, what low IQ comments was he refering to specifically when he talked about pagan arguments in the pagan vs. christian debate?
Pessimistic realism in a Nietzschean sense (which I think is how he meant it) is positive, and the opposite of the nihilistic view! Embracing the harshness of life as well as the good is what allows for the heroic ideal, and the celebration of all that is beautiful His point about factory farming was especially poignant: animal sacrifice, which celebrates death, is much more beautiful and humane than factory farming, which seeks to conceal the horrific reality of the process
@@HeroicIdeal Alright, yes I also agree with that view, maybe I misunderstood him then, maybe he meant "depressing pagans" facetiously... He probably wanted to probe your debating chops and your arguments a bit, to see how airtight they are.
Matter is not evil, that is gnostic nonsense; also, literally everything you know about muh “based and redpilled" paganism is because Christians monks you denigrate and despise recorded the sagas/epics.
@@jaykojoker Dude the few that did write about them in a neutral or even good light did so because they saw value in those stories or out of historical interest, not because they were christian. That in turn doesn't make christianity good, even islam recorded a few historical things, should we see it as good because of that then? Lenin made some good observations about reality, does that mean we should be communists now? Second, if the world is evil because of the fall, how is matter not evil then as a result? Just because this particular detail isn't directly stated, doesn't mean, that what I listed was wrong. btw. if we get bogged down in details, I didn't put down monks, I put down the worldview that sees becoming monk as some highest virtue... But now I am going to talk bad about monks, because these c#nts did a lot of the converting in western europe, so nice that amongst all the bad they did, there is something redeeming about them huh? Because there wouldn't have been a need for them to write these stories down, of they hadn't tried to get rid of paganism in the first place.
Both sides obviously see themselves as better. They could easily turn this video on its head, "for such is the way of abstractions, they are used and abused by peoples whims, which they pretend to be higher causes, when in reality, there is no higher cause then your own, and the feeling or needing to search for something higher is just the feeling of inadequacy" "There is strenght in seeing yourself as an individual, but atleast you have control rather then being part of a chain of individuals that all merge into a singular collectivist mass." "trying to 'wage war' on the supposed corruption and uglyness, is no better or worse then to wage war for honour or the good, its still the same need dressed up in abstractions to feel better about ones base desires". its all a game of ideals, the best people in history where those who where unique and special and diffren't from the times and the world they found themselves in. Diogenes and Alexanders meeting is the key event in human history. :^) that my value and im sticking to it, thats how easy it is to do.
For me it's about nationalism above all. I get sick of hearing a boomer Christian world view, everyone is equal and as long as people go through assimilation process, I'm so sick of that junk. Many of my views would be considered "left wing" caring for animals, the environment, a living wage but I hate non western immigrants in the west. I don't want them here. Those American capitalist types who scream maga need to to be assisted with waking up regards to nationalism
It has nothing to do with either lol. Right-Wingism is neither concerned with tribe, nation or family; it's purely concerned with hierarchy itself. When one man kills his brother because his brother is weak, he honors the core essence of Right-Wingism just as much as someone who kills a member of an "out-group". Rome was founded on two brothers killing each other, most European myths feature tales of sons killing their fathers in a selfish bid for power. Nationalism, tribe, family etc. are just the blankets which most RW'ers hide under bc they instinctively know that if the right wing was stripped to its TRUE core essence.. The War of All Against All.... in such a world, they know they wouldn't "make the cut"
It has nothing to do with either lol. Right-Wingism is neither concerned with tribe, nation or family; it's purely concerned with hierarchy itself. When one man kills his brother because his brother is a weakling, he honors the core essence of Right-Wingism just as much as someone who kills a member of an "out-group". Rome was founded on two brothers killing each other, most Indo-European myths feature tales of sons killing their fathers in a selfish bid for power.
It has nothing to do with either lol. Right-Wingism is neither concerned with tribe, nation or family; it's purely concerned with hierarchy itself. When one man erases his brother because his brother is frail & meek, he honors the core essence of Right-Wingism just as much as someone who erases a member of an "out-group". Rome was founded on two brothers killing each other, most European myths feature tales of sons killing their fathers in a selfish bid for power.
It has nothing to do with either lol. RW belief is neither concerned with tribe, nation or family; it's purely concerned with hierarchy itself. When one man murders his brother, he honors the core essence of the RW just as much as someone who murders a member of an "out-group". Rome was founded on two brothers slaughtering each other, most Indo-European myths feature tales of sons murdering their fathers in a selfish bid for power.
Hate is a great motivator. But it is not something with which one can build a foundation. I was motivated by hate and entered that underworld. There, I discovered hatred is an unquenchable fire and is all consuming. However, I did discover something more powerful and sustainable to build on. It'll sound corny, but it is LOVE. Not unconditional universal love, but love what is precious to you. We must be willing to rank and assign a heirrarchy to what we value. Man is reducing himself to an algorithm so that systems may understand him and therefore guide him to something. Nature tells us, "The most precious possession you have in this world is your own people." All ppl groups understand this and act upon this. It shapes their behavior and culture. We as a ppl have lost sight of this, perhaps we instinctively always understood this and the death of God and Institutislination of Freudian psychology as the replacement for Christianity made us view this instinct as barbaric and something that needed to be done away with. The rest of the quote is, " And for this people, and for the sake of this people, we will struggle and fight, and never slacken, never tire, never lose courage, and never lose faith." We must fight. Imagine you're on a battlefield. In front of you is the enemy. You've been told to hate the enemy. Behind you is your family. You instinctively love your family. If you kill the enemy to protect your family you are correct even if the enemy should not have been hated. Our modern battlefield is love your enemy and hate your family. Embrace your instincts. And for those that feel they are too far gone that appear domesticated to ppl who assign a greater importance to their own. "The great epochs of our life are the occasions when we gain the courage to rebaptize our evil qualities as our best qualities" To prefer a ppl other than your own is cowardice. Will you not speak up against cowards of your own group?
In America there is a disconnect from history and family heritage for many, even most. As the nuclear family has been attacked and degraded you’re lucky to even grow up with your biological parents in the same house, America has always been about freedom and rugged individualism within the American culture and national. It’s a duality just as the Church is. We are all individuals members of the same body.
At 12:22 I'd like to clarify that the pagan view is not the hero cannot strive to overcome or enhance his nature. The pagan view is that nature and human nature cannot be controlled, *negated* or fundamentally transformed into something entirely different. You can strive to go beyond man in a Nietzschean sense, but only through enhancing what is already there- and the individual can never escape his nature/fate
Isnt that what culture in its purest form does?
To cultivate a fire and putting it into a oven or in form of a candle?
To cultivate plants for being edible?
To cultivate a wolf into a dog?
To cultivate stones into houses?
To cultivate human into übermensch?
Isnt that what humans are?
Beings that cultivate things, like god is cultivating the world?
Always bringing new forms to light and life?
Mixing them in a manner, which is beautiful in the end?
This note of yours is exactly what "A Clockwork Orange" was about if you ask me. But I think we need to take a mental step back here. You're speaking in the video as if left & right wings exist. Does electing liberal candidates cause liberal assembly lines that spew liberal policies to become installed in the basement of the White House?
The thing is in adulthood we look for things we can Look Up To. One of those things is a surrogate for the father's role of making us feel as if the world is safe, & the person who makes it so is someone we have a Deep Personal Relationship With & cares for Us Personally.
& this is where your confusion stems from. You think that _one_ of these wings *must* be it. & neither one actually exists. They're literally Just Opinions about opinions. Right of what? Who decides where the centre is or that there even _is_ one?
& these are all the wrong questions.
These questions themselves attempt to give definition to opinions. Opinions change All The Time. & they have zero effect on politics outside of rhetoric which, while that seems to be The Main Aspect of politics, this again is a delusion: the same words said by Biden would never be taken the same way as if spoken by Kim Jong-un, ever.
So, in order to actually have this discussion, you would need to drop the illusion that 'politics' even exists. It's really just people in decision-making power that you all mistakenly look up to.
If you don't want to believe _or_ like this, I'll make it very simple for you. How do you reconcile what happened to Maddie de Garay with left, right or centrist anything & not the direct end result of mere corruption by people in decision-making power? Did capitalism _cause_ it? Would communism have *prevented* it?
Or do ists & isms not enter into it?
I'll make a 2nd reply instead of editing. If I seem to be ignoring the spiritual stuff, it's because while it's well-written & true, it doesn't apply to today. No one elevates Joe Biden because of a sense of sacrifice & the beauty of life.
It's all mindless worship now that leads to people allowing 'politicians' to get away with a ton of stuff like the example I pointed to in my first comment here. I like the historical POV but it has its place, & that place to _me_ at least is a lower priority than getting society to where it no longer accepts all the hypocrisy it now does.
Hope that clarifies a bit.
We are in a battle of good vs evil and right vs wrong. Christian reality is reality.
Yuri Bezmenov describes the differences between left and right really well. He has a 2 hour presentation on why the KGB stimulated left wing politics in countries that USSR wanted to thwart and the KGB succeeded most of the time. He states that the people his organization placed into the countries were eliminated after they overthrew the authority. Effectively, USSR wanted a hierarchy of soviet states lead by a mostly right-wing government because right-wing governments are highly stabilized. To do this, they needed to destabilize an existing government which acted independently of USSR. Thus introducing left-wing, nonsensical politics into the nation's youth and subsequently creating a crisis.
The Romans literally made death masks everytime their family member died, they memorized all of their ancestor's accomplishments and exploits. I think we could use some of that.
Yes! I'm trying to learn more about my own ancestry, which at some point would get back to the Romans, though I doubt I'll get that far
Dunmer did this to some extent.
@@303machineSkyrim belongs to the Nords
@@monkeyglocks We're watching you nwah. Vvardenfell forever!
There's nothing to be accomplished, you will not be remembered for anything
In Serbian heroic traditions, we have a saying that goes well with this video. “Everyone is born to die once, honor and disgrace live forever”
Well, RUclips decided it didn't like the Havamal 😂
I was saying, that's excellent! Much like the stanza from the Havamal:
Cattle perish
Kinsmen perish
You yourself must perish
But glory never perishes
For the man you can achieve it
Hi serbia from Eire ❤
Nisam cuo da to govorite
Well, what Serbia did in WW1 was a disgrace.
@@Zodroo_Tint serbian all in all is a disgrace
Fear not Death, for the hour of one's fate is fixed, and none may avoid it. - Old Norse Saying
"No one will hurl me to my death against my fate. And fate? I tell you, no man, courageous or coward, has ever escaped it. We are born with it the day that we were born." - Hector, Iliad book 2
Yet Fate spares the undoomed, if their courage be good.
I am my ancestors and my sons will be me.
Beautiful!
Not your daughters I guess
@@MonochromaticBlues correct
Not if this BBC gets to them
And what are you gonna do when they say no?
I remember an extended relative once told me. A thousand years of suffering and sacrifice flow in our veins. That’s how we know we can endure.
Try thousand(s)
Beautiful!
You've made an error in the first minute.
In France's National Assembly those on the Left were Liberals in the mould of Rousseau, but those on the Right were Liberals in the mould of Locke and/or Hobbes.
The Right were in favour of Monarchy, not in the sense of France's traditional Absolutism, but rather in the style of Britain's limited Constitutional Monarchy.
The fallout between Left and Right was that the Left wanted absolute power to lie within the National Assembly whilst the Right wanted checks and balances and a division of power between Executive, Leglistative and Judiciary.
If that sounds familiar to Americans, it should do.
The Right were Classical Liberals, they saw themselves as Revolutionaries and looked to Britain's recent history for inspiration, namely our Civil War, experiment with Republicanism, The Restoration, the Glorious Revolution and the political philosophy of Liberalism which sought to rationalise it.
"The Rest is History" podcast did a deep dive on rge French Revolution you should check out, especially re the political philosophies of those sitting in the National Assembly. Spoiler Alert, there weren't many (if any) Conservatives elected into it.
Those on the Right had the same philosophy as the British Parliamentary faction we call Whigs, later officially called the Liberal Party.
The Left/Right dichotomy has always been a dichotomy of Liberalism, which is why it makes no sense when you start trying to work out where people who reject the world view Liberalism fit.
It's also compounded by the fact that Americans often use the term Liberal to describe only the Liberals who subscribe to Rousseau's world view, typically radicals in the Democrat Party.
Additionally, the French revolutionary left-right divide was abandoned the moment king was decapitated. The divide we use was recreation of that revolutionary sentiment appropriated by socialist movement (mainly marxist branch), where they put themselves on the left wing and anyone opposing their orthodoxy was therefore on the right, with condition that the more you opposed marxist orthodoxy, the more on the right you were. Thats why we somehow ended up with Fascism (a creation of lifelong radical socialists Mussolini and Gentile) as "far-right", because it at one point strongly opposed some Marxist theorems (not fundamentally), basically like a heretic schism.
I remember reading something that might add to this conversation. There was a native American found out in the woods in the early 20th century. He was literally the last of his tribe and had been living alone for many years. They eventually figured out how to translate his language. They turned on a recorder and asked him who he is. He started talking and did not stop for over 6 hours. He went all the way back to creation and spoke of ever generation and their deeds all the way up to him. I guess that's the only way he knew to describe who he was. I think his name was "ishi." Spoke for six hours when asked who he is......
that's powerful. a seemingly simple question that requires all of your people's history to be told.
@@meh.7640The Scalds in ancient Scandinavia we're very similar. They passed on their history and stories through oral tradition in the form of songs and the sagas.
So when two of them met, it would take 12 hours for them to introduce themselves? Yeah right smh. Total fairytale..
@ no. He was being asked by someone with a very different culture. He would not have to do that with people who shared the myths. The point is, he could not explain who he was to someone who knew nothing about him without describing himself as a link in a long chain, and how he relates to his peoples view of their history and history of the world as they viewed it.
They have it recorded. It isn’t a fairytale.
@ people tended to memorize a whole lot of stories passed down to them before they had written language. Even with written language, there are some Muslims who can basically recite the whole Koran. And it was also very important that they memorized the stories and told them correctly, as it was their history and how they kept knowledge of their identity and culture.
In todays world a lot of people do not even know who their dads are, let alone great great grandparents. How does someone like that interpret the world vs someone a thousand years ago who knew their ancestry back many generations, and things about their lives, all their shared myths, etc?
Life and beauty are the highest virtues. Everything that increases these things, is good
😌🌅
Strength & beauty. There are things which increase life but the life itself is pathetic. There's more "life" in the insect world than all of the jungle, but the tiger & lion are without a doubt more noble than the ant.
In fact, it seems to be the ideal of the bugman; maximize life, minimize strength. A world of fragile techno-immortals who live in a sterilized domain. Life without might is a net-negative.
@LordCasterwell What I think Nykandros was talking about was r/K selection theory. The sociobiological reproductive survival strategy theory established in 1967 by ecologists Edward O. Wilson and Robert MacArthur.
"Sociobiology: The New Synthesis" by E. O. Wilson demonstrated that ant colonies represent the extreme 'r' end of the r/K-selection spectrum, while humans are at the extreme opposite 'K' end. Despite cultural or tribal variations, all humans are at the same far 'K' end of the spectrum compared to ants.
The "r/K selection theory" identifies two reproductive strategies: quantity over quality (r) and quality over quantity (K), with species focusing on different ends of the spectrum. A species' focus on quantity of offspring decreases its focus on quality, and vice versa.
Quality is not about Eugenics vs Dysgenics, but rather the degree to which members nurture their young before releasing them into the wild. Nurturing meaning caring for, protecting, training, and teaching offspring.
Quantity refers to the number of offspring produced, not necessarily the indiscriminate selection of as many mates as possible in order to reproduce more. Most species are somewhere in the middle.
@LordCasterwellYou do know the innovation of technology is not necessarily weak and disgusting but the intent is rather the issue. For example the technology of Phillip producing the sarissa is a beautiful innovation to overcome one’s enemies. Now the technology of only fans is disturbing and disgusting a hell scape of weakness and decay. Life affirming vs, life denying.. nobody said plumbing is wrong.
Absolutely. The one’s who promote the opposite are easy to identify.
Uberboyo let you free? How many potatoes did he force you to eat?
At least 200 😩
🤣🤣@@HeroicIdeal
@@HeroicIdeal did you turn them into gnocchi at least?
@@caseygrow5951he made me eat them uncooked
@@HeroicIdealUberboyo, the Raw Potato Nationalist
Christianity wasn't individualist until Liberalism.
Christianity was Corporatist. Book of Romans & Corinthians talk about the Body of Christ.
Your ancestors are the martyrs/saints/venerated/Patriarchs
Now we focus on going to heaven, but the church was more focus on bringing the kingdom here as Christ spoken more on, Coming of the Kingdom.
Protestantism embraced individualism while Catholics/Orthodox sees the 1000s of years of Israelites - Now as apart of us
Even with interpreting scripture we lean on our ancestors
Our King was actualized through tradition pre birth-post death
We affirm our what is true teaching/tradition through the body, through our ancestors
It was not Liberalism that started it.
Liberalism, was not really a thing until John Locke around 1650's.
Protestantism (who I will agree embraces individualism) came about in 1500's. And was inspired by people at least 100 years earlier.
And, if you read Viking Myths or Greek Myths, they are not stories about groups, but about individualism.
It has been part of Europe, as long as we have had stories,, maybe longer.
As for Christianity, as far as I can read, it was individual from the start.
You do not go to heaven, based on who your family is. You yourself have to embrace Jesus to be saved.
@@haraldbredsdorff2699 Personal salvation doesn’t equate to individualism. Christianity is rooted in community, not isolation. Jesus calls us to honor our parents, love our neighbors, and serve others - the very essence of bearing one another’s burdens, as the New Testament repeatedly emphasizes.
If anything, the rise of liberalism wasn’t born from Christianity itself but from the rejection of the one holy and apostolic Church during the Reformation. Fragmenting the body of Christ didn’t reflect the faith’s core teachings - it reflected the consequences of stepping away from them.
@@haraldbredsdorff2699 if you believe He is the son of god and get baptized then you will go to heaven if I am correct
@@haraldbredsdorff2699 Its up to you yourself to go fight and go to valhalla. Its similar, dont try to change that both arent semi indevidualistic.
What about protestantism was ever individualist? from the birth of lutheranism through to the Prussian imperium, they've persecuted true christians & other fellow heresies(anabaptists/calvinist, etc).
Generations upon generations of my ancestors fought , killed and died so that i could be here. Continuing the blood line is the least amount of respect you coul show them.
Indeed! ⚔️🌞
And nature can take it from you in the blink of an eye lmao if it’s your fate to have children you will have children, if not then no worry all things will come to an end at some point
You share the same Y Chromosome with your father (if you are male).
Only over generations it is transformed.
your ancestors died for israel and are continuing to die for israel lol
@comlain2513 ain't none of my ancestors fighting for America's dirty wars lmao you have me confused for a WASP LAWL
As a frisian, i appreciate the redbad quote! Another famous frisian quote is "rather be dead than a slave"
I was surprised at how late you guys converted! And I'm sure Pagan practice continued long after the official date
Friezen zijn een goed volk, op zijn minst heeft iemand in ons land de christenisatie proberen te voorkomen.
Left = Equality
Right = Quality
But then the question is, how does one define quality? I would argue that the Greek idea of aristos rests on certain presuppositions about ancestry and fate...
@@HeroicIdeal I agree with the video, but whatever quality is defined as it's at least some sort of quality, in comparison to leftism and leftists that can't stand any higher quality and want to equalize everything to the lowest denominator basically.
@@HeroicIdealI agree to an extent but at the same time I’m from a humble lower-class working family on my mom’s side( Irish-English descent) & a middle-class working family on my dad’s side (100% Anglo-Saxon descent) & yet I’ve somehow managed to attain spiritual wisdom and demonstrate supernatural feats in both perception and ability during my early 20s so I believe it’s somehow also related to nutrition as I consumed large amounts of dairy and meat during my adolescence alongside my Shinto/Shugendo & Vedic occult practices and that’s when my personality began to exhibit huge changes and transformations took place both internally and externally. Then again I’m also much taller than both my younger and older brother, and I’m the only one who was born with blonde hair, the other two boys were both born with brown hair and are both absolute normies haha!
@@HeroicIdealQuality=High standards ( Education, Values, Character)
Equality &community are part of quality too.
I think associating the right wing with the traditional pagan view on collectivism and the left with Christian style individualism is an oversimplification at best, especially when a lot of modern leftists are collectivist and into non-abrahamic religions while right wing conservatives want to conserve the relatively new individualistic ideas of Christianity and capitalism and are more likely to be Christians.
Collectivism and individualism don't enter the picture! The ideas are the ancestral "chain of being" and whether nature and human nature can and should be radically transformed (fate, hubris, heroism)
@ hmm, I do think that collectivism vs individualism can play a role, but even if we just take the specific ideas you mentioned, the right often want to conserve the Christian ideas about being a separate soul that was radical just 2000 years ago and did transform the world. On the other hand, even with the ancestral chain of being, change is inevitable, even if it is gradual. You can argue that it is fated, no matter how much the right wants to fight it. People who identify as left wing generally recognize this and usually tend to be less rigid as a result. My point is that you’ll find desires to preserve one thing and transform another on both sides; they just happen to want to conserve or change different things, so arguing that the right wing is more ancestral and the left is not doesn’t really make sense. And even though you’ll find pagans and Christians identifying with both sides of political spectrum, it’s especially funny to make this simplification when the loudest conservatives are Christian and there are arguably more pagans (at least neopagans) on the left than the right (I don’t want to count followers of the mustache man who have appropriated Norse mythology and they are thankfully smaller in number). At least at face value, that proposition appears to be the opposite of what we see in the political arena.
Leftists support collectivism for non-Christians and non-Western people and use individualism to control Christians and Western people.
@@HeroicIdealChristianity isn't merely about the individual, it's about a personal relationship with Jesus, and making a generational impact, creating a family, establishing a legacy, remembering your history, leaving an inheritance for your children's children, building and creating things that glorify God for generations to come. Calling Christianity left wing is misplaced at best.
@@janimation7018Yes left wing is far too liberal to be Christian. Christianity is not about unbridled liberty. It’s very restrictive and disciplined. It tells very clearly what you should NOT do which leftists hate and call bigoted
Sharp thoughts but I believe that at the core you have described progressivism and conservatism. Not right and left. Conservative is preserving and progressive is moulding and changing. But there is also right-wing progressive and left-wing conservative.
In my opinion, the difference between right and left is that the left assumes that all beings are a product of their environment and that there are no fundamental differences between peoples, genders, and so on. Accordingly, the ultimate goal is to eliminate all differences. The right recognises the differences between people and the ultimate goal is to find a good way of dealing with these differences
That's my observation, I'm open to discussion :)
One of the most telling symptoms today, of what you're saying about the potential futility of trying to alter the nature of man, are economic downturns. No matter what economic system we employ, the power and wealth centralizes to a few powerful men. No matter how much we think and fight, we seem to just reorganize ourselves into our natural state of hierarchy.
You are looking at things backward
No one returns to the hierarchy, as primitive humans, if you want to talk about nature, were collectivists, hierarchies are imposed upon us by those who accumulate any measure of power, be it wealth, land, or influence over masses, they corrupt themselves, turning individualistic, using their initial non-absolute power to consolidate it into absolute power
Individualism is a sickness of the soul
the hierarchical organization we see in wealth is a bastardized version of hierarchical organization more natural human organization (hunter/gatherer, no societal structures but small groups of people who lived in the wilderness)
In modern American Parlance. Left = Authoritarian Collectivism, Right = Small government and individualism.
Found you thanks to uberboyo. Great videos!
Thanks! Glad to have you
Love your work. I’ve been reading Nietzsche for many years, and have formulated thoughts similar to this you express. You are a brilliant fellow. You have gained a new supporter. 😆
Thank you! High praise 🙏🏻
Forget about Right Wing and Left Wing! It’s Us vs Them!
"Honor thy mother and father" - one of the top 5 Commandments in the 10 Commandments.
I see your points here but its obviously topical, as it doesn't really touch on the theological teachings of Christianity. The main objective of Christianity isn't to 'seek out happiness,' it's to center Christ in your life and deny yourself when you have urges to sin. Christianity can be applied to traditionalist views of the world. It's just a matter of if your family is going to center Christ in its legacy or not.
Overall though, this was a fantastic watch and its an incredibly important topic. Thank you for your efforts, please keep them up
Thanks!
Paul says that when you become a Christian, you join the tribe of Abraham, which means you give up an identity based on your own ancestry and genealogy
But you might enjoy my recent pagan Christianity video which sidesteps this issue
Consider this, the right and left have no intention of facing each other, they both squeeze the centrists to a new point of view.
Right. Most people will settle into the middle path but the powers pull us off the middle either left or right to keep us divided so we have no power
@@SteelMaceNationPodcast when in truth, these political forces aren't even separate entities. it's all progressive one way or another.
the path to true freedom lies not left or right or in between. it lies in the opposite direction.
A great quote from Aristotle that everyone should remember, “It is requisite that those should be joined together whose species cannot exist without each other, as the male and female for the business of propagation; and this is not through choice but by that natural impulse which acts both upon plants and animals for the purpose Of their leaving behind them others like themselves”
I like to hold a little of both of those worldviews. I’ll have to further explore and see if there are any incompatible beliefs or contradictions I might be holding. I feel like I’m always updating my worldview based on new information, but I understand there is a fundamental framework I’m building upon. I guess this will give me more reason to examine it all a little deeper
6:17 how does Persephone / hymn to Demeter reference ancestry as a chain of being? You are SO close - it’s not that myth which references ancestry as a chain of being - it’s zagreaus , Persephone son, who’s death created humans, and it’s from the human lineage that Dionysus would eventually be reborn- that is literally an identity being reborn through human generations .
I had somehow not heard of this story before but it is extremely powerful as I first read it, it's very difficult not to see the story of Zagreus/Dionysus as a proto-Christ
I enjoyed many of your newer videos recently because you are comfortable with your natural voice and tonality. This allows for better flow, authenticity, and dynamism.
I’m Catholic and I agree with a lot of the views pointed out in your argument. Although I wouldn’t say Christian as a whole could be claimed as an individualistic ideology because your salvation isn’t up to how you live your life it’s how you adhere to the bigger whole. The Bible goes to great lengths, several books even, to harp on the importance of genealogy and respect to those who came before us like the gospels even open up with Jesus’ genealogy going back to King David through both The blessed Virgin Mary and his Surrogate father st Joseph. I also believe a lot of the views of virtue and family are at their foundation very Judeo-Christian beliefs. For example God himself goes out of the way to bless Jacob(aka Israel’s) descendants after he wrestled with him a very heroic feat in my opinion. Just wanted to point that out but good work I’ll definitely be watching more of your stuff.
Thanks! The Bible definitely focuses on genealogy, and if you become a Christian, according to Paul, you join the spiritual tribe of Abraham. However, this means giving up an identity based on your own ancestry-again, the quote by Redbad- which is the important point
Another fantastic video. Gotta say, you’ve become my favorite content creator by far. Amor Fati, brother
Thanks brother! Amor fati ❤️🔥⚡️
Great video. Well done.
Thanks!
Here's to the Vikings, the Celts, the Angles and the Saxons!
❤️🔥
Amazing video, very well produced
Thank you!
Excellent video, thanks for this piece of content you created, I can't express enough how easily you summarized concepts of history, religion, anthropology, evolutionary psychology etc...
You brought order and structure to a bunch of concepts I think most of your audience, the western man, has been hearing a lot this days and you summarized the issue of how the conflict
affects us in modernity... #studies #ancient #wisdom
Hello brother, great appearance on Boyo. Love you guys.
Thanks! It was fun
I feel like you have a fundamental misunderstanding of Christianity that is limiting your understanding on its role in the right wing
Another superb presentation by @HeroicIdeal
Thank you!
Literally no one. Almost everyone I've talked to about politics is quite uneducated on the topic
Hi! I highly recommend that one reads the writings of famed sociologist Phillip Reiff. Reiff speaks of not two cultures but three, first, second and third culture: pagan, Judeo-Christian and post modern.
Interesting!
@ My Fellow Teachers is a good place to start!
"Judeo" should not be put in front of the word Christian. They have completely different value systems. The talmud is not the torah
Wow this was amazing, I've literally never heard this world view explained but it makes so much sense!
Well you’re in the right place!
This video being uploaded on my birthday and presenting a view of life I've long been drawn to finally convinced me:
I'm a pagan, if not in terms of customs then in mindset.
Thank you for this.
I'm honored to hear it! Happy birthday ⚔️🌞
An unexpectedly perfect description and take in general.
Shows how much Christianity, despite helping shape (or distort) European culture, was never actually based on ours values.
The progressivism and Hubris section was really great. Finally someone who gets Nietzsche, not sure about the paganism though. Overall great essay, I'm going to be an avid viewer from now on.
You make some good points, but one on which I partially disagree is the idea that Christianity is entirely individualistic. Over and over again throughout the New Testament we find admonitions with regard to "One another" The commandments to love one another is impossible as an individualist. Acts 2 makes it abundantly clear that everybody shared everything (but without being forced to do so like Socialism or Communism)
Having said that, so much of the modern Church has become so individualistic (particularly in America) that it is easy to recognise how and why an outsider might come to the conclusion that this is foundational to Christian belief. However, this is antithetical to the commands contained in the New Testament and demonstrates a level of ignorance on both sides of the equation.
I've been looking for this kind of video for my worldbuilding project. Perfect time to post this. Thank you
Good to see the ark has more content for us to enjoy, educate us, teacher.
Much of the horrors of history were committed by people who failed to see people as individuals.
“There is nothing outside of yourself that can ever enable you to get better, stronger, richer, quicker, or smarter. Everything is within. Everything exists. Seek nothing outside of yourself.”
~ Miyamoto Musashi
I know people on the left and right that could be found in either one of those world view camps...
The pagan 'Northern Heroic Will' is and always has been, to me, hugely inspiring and aspirational
⚔️⚡️
From roots towards branches, from the stump your seed sprung out from towards the seed bearing fruits you carry.
Right wingers aren’t usually such thorough traditionalists, they are conservative, which is a very different thing. Left wingers are far from individualist, they praise their traditional aesthetic lineage to build upon it and project it to new heights. Of course their are “right wingers” who are as thoroughly educated as you are, and of course their are left wingers who do indeed only fight for our temporary happiness. But we both know that those “leftists” are what the Americans call: liberals. A true leftist is all about embracing tradition and fighting against the alienation of modernity, to indeed make the world better, but better for our lineage. Just look at every big modern art movement, perfect examples of how they know and understand their tradition, to build on it something new and stronger, continuing the chain. On a side-note; your analysis of paganism does indeed form a deeper understanding of Nietzsche! Well done there!
This is a great video. Your concept on how Christianity negates an ancestrial worldview is an idea I've been contemplating for a long time.
I would recommend you read the Cosmotheist Trilogy by Dr. William Pierce. I think you would find it interesting.
Great channel and great videos!
I am really curious though as to who you are? You never introduce yourself or mention your name on your channel?
A fascination with fantasy, folklore, and fairytales, is for those who refuse to face the facts..
beautiful, where do you get these visuals and images from?
Most of us can't stop eating meat. Because we'd be slowly starving ourselves. And have immbalances.
1:40 yes, but explore the Is/Ought Fallacy too...
The ancestors that I honour are those men and women who rose up against the poll tax in the 14th century and the Diggers and Levellers in the 17th century who tried to reclaim the land for ordinairy people. These and other great traditions of my pagan folk. The fatalists I oppose are those who say the current economic situation is inevitable and cannot be resisted.
this is not an educated analysis of Orthodox Christian thought on salvation and "individualism". we are saved together and we die together.
What if none of your ancestors are saved?
@@HeroicIdealwe don’t know that because we are not God. That’s why we pray that God have mercy on them
@@Vendéen32 yeah, but the statement OP made just doesn't make sense. "we are saved together". how? if we are saved together, does that mean that if just one person isn't saved, then none of us are?
and it's safe to assume based on the requirements of Christian teachings that there's at least one person in the world who isn't saved.
then it must be the case that for any of the Christians to be saved, it must be done so on an individual level because your salvation cannot be dependent on the actions of other people.
I’m not a Neopagan but I like Homer, I just reread the Odyssey and are now half way through the Iliad. I don’t know if pagan mythology is a left or right wing thing but it is very interesting.
I would argue that Jesus doesn’t call us to separate ourselves from ancestry but to return to it. Paul calls Jesus the 2nd Adam, he’s the Adam 2.0, the Original Man done over and that returning to him and giving our genetic material to change to him we will become gods ourselves. Psalms 82:6 says “I have said you are gods and all of you are children of the most High.” Jesus came so we can relive his glory in us through our everyday lives. “You are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.” Matthew 5:14. Make that your mission.
😂 he is just talking to jews…
@anazumbalia Jesus says the same exact thing in John 10:34
@@anazumbalia I would say that he was in fact against Jews... For Jews he was a traitor because he said that The Kingdom of God is Not in this planet... This means that Israel wasn't the city of God... That means that the enlightenment is in a transcendental path higher than this material reality (the one created by the demiurge)
@ if you truly read the bible and understand what’s behind Christianity, it’s actually judaism for gentiles. If you don’t want to see that’s your call… “Keep believing”
@@anazumbalia I'm not even Christian and I don't believe in it... I analyze it as an esoteric teaching, as I do with all religions and myths... Also if you study the background of Christianity you will see it was manipulated by different people in the beginning of it (they burned all the books portraying Jesus in other ways as killing those who tried to keep that wisdom). So if you believe what christians says about Jesus that's your problem.
it would be interesting to get your take on Marcus Aurelius, stoicism, and his work, Meditations. Aurelius surely is a pagan thinker and it would nice to get your take on him because right now, everything about stoicism or Aurelius is by "self-help" gurus who are not thinking about this stuff in the same way or depth that you are.
I am a Christian who has this world view though its a sort of varied, human nature is corrupt and can be bettered, but not by us, the world is fallen and can be healed and transformed into a Utopia, but not by us only God can do that and because of that for the purpose of life i hold the traditionalist/pagan worldview as you described it, all in all this is a great video and you got youself a bew subscriber.
Thanks! Check out my recent "pagan Christ" video-you might enjoy it!
@@HeroicIdealthe Christo-pagan one? Yeah I watched it good stuff, I'm kind of odd since I was raised already believing in most pagan gods and other mythological and folklore beings but with the difference that I don't believe/wasn't raised believing that they are gods but rather just other beings of power that God created, the term God only applying to God because of his overwhelming and completely unmatchable level of power, but I was also raised to venerate the specific pagan pantheons of my heritage in a similar manner to how one venerates the saints, so I'm already in a pretty interesting/good middle ground between being a Catholic and a Pagan
@@HeroicIdealalso, do you have a twitter?
Right wing/conservatives highly value the individual! It has been our society‘s tradition to honor the sanctity of the individual for at least 250 years! Therefore it is a conservative viewpoint to maintain that the individual is of the highest value.
I like the perspective that you bring from this video, but I think your understanding of “neither Greek or Jew” is lacking (5:59)
Paul is not saying that the individual does not have an obligation to their linage here (that interpretation would directly contradict 1 Timothy 5:8, Acts 17:26-27, as well as Romans 9:3 where Paul states he would “go to hell” for the sake of his kinsmen (I.E. Jews) as well the book of Romans 13 where Paul states that you should “render to all their due… customs where customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor”) But rather he is speaking of the promise of the new covenant which is found is Jesus Christ, which extends to all nations. The context being that many early Judean Christians attempted to force Mosaic dietary laws and circumcision on non-Judean Christians, so this was Paul rebuking them. St. Augustine notes in his commentary on Galatians that
“Difference of race or condition or sex… remains imbedded in our mortal interactions, and in the journey of this life the apostles themselves teach that it is to be respected, and they even proposed living in accord with the racial differences between Jews and Greeks as a wholesome rule.”
This is also consistent with the biblical mandate to “baptize all the nations” and that the nations will exist in heaven around the throne of God. This in my opinion puts everything in the bible in proper context, a Christian should desire to continue both their linage and to pass on their legacy to their descendants
Thar is why I disagree with neopagans. You can find universalist values as democracy in Greece and individualistic values in Christianity as precisely represented in saints that fought for their ideas. The idea of "pagan values" is also too general because there were many pagan values and gods that had different values, sometimes contradictory.
Well said. It's distressing how many neopagan types seem to respect their ancestors on paper but don't grasp why their changing faith actually made sense to them as a fulfillment of faith. Granted, there's a massive problem in many modern churches that seek to dissolve the boundaries that God created. I think that's why the Orthodox are seeing such a surge among some demographics, they don't seem to have such an interest in devolving everything into a homogenous blob like some subverted churches do. They have a more biblically correct view on that subject.
Joining the spiritual tribe of Israel, and the new covenant, which Paul talks about later, necessarily means giving up your inherited tribe-even if not literally, then spiritually. This is exactly what Redbad regused to do because it goes against the Pagan worldview. He would rather be damned to an eternity in hell than betray his ancestors and be personally saved
@@josephang9927when I say pagan I use it as it was first used, and is now most commonly used, to denote European Paganism. The heroic societies of pre-Christian Europe all shared the same worldview- ideas about fate , ancestry, heroism, kinship, etc. You can can see this by reading Homer and the Norse Sagas, removed from each other by geography and time, but sharing almost identical worldviews
@@HeroicIdeal The Old Testament states that all of the Nations of the world are determined by the “sons of El” I.E. Angels in heaven. When you enter the New Covenant you don’t literally become an Israelite, rather you partake in communion with the God man who defeated death. Your display of “pagan Christian values” really is not far from how early Christians viewed Christianity. The “seed of Abraham” is Christ, not the Jews. Scripture clearly shows that all of the nations ect are preserved in Christ, not forgotten. When Paul speaks to the Greeks in Acts 17, he not only states that the boundaries of the nations are designated by God, but that the “Unknown God” in Hellenism could be understood as being Christ
I personally believe a Christian version of the idea of intergenerational connection, we have a obligation to hand down good tradtions and the embracing the good parts of human nature is vital for overcoming the bad.
For you Jordan Peterson fans if you still haven't seen" Jordan Peterson dismantled", what are you waiting for?. You've been tricked again.
Side note. If I am ever fortunate enough for a boy, Arminius would be his middle name. But when this channel said something about how peterson was talking about a middle eastern religion like europe had origin roots from it, i could never go back.
@tlarson5422 wonderful. The Jordan Peterson mission is worse than you could imagine. I highly recommend you watch the documentary.
He's a pressure release valve for young men moving to the right
All abrhamaic faiths rely on tricking people and subversion. They are catchers of men.
@Volkish.Birdman yes ! at best.
I am not 100% sure I agree, but do find your thinking interesting and has some similarities to observations made by Thomas Sowel.
You should consider picking up his book, "A Conflict of Visions" or otherwise researching discussions of its content. He hits on the same point that visions are distinct from interests and work in far more profound ways to shape our alignments.
He focuses in on the idea of constrained versus unconstrained visions of man - the idea that humanity is fundamentally limited and can't be changed vs the idea that core human potential can be developed and perfected into something incomprehensibly superior (at its most polar extreme).
RUclips terminated the Asha Logos channel just this week. If you know his work your heart must be just as broken as mine.
If anyone has any of his material please keep it safe, but repost if possible.
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root" - Thoreau
Asha Logos was the one.
Thank you for coming on Mr. President!
Very interesting, thank you! I have been thinking similar things.
Thanks! Glad to hear it
The more I'm reading on traditional ethnic religions and worldviews across the world, the more I'm realizing that this ancestor-centric and bloodline-centric worldview is not just a "European" or "Indo-European" ancient view but is present across races, across continents. The African shamans, Australian aborgines, East & South East Asian pre-Buddhists as well as Dravidians of India also have shared exactly the same raw understanding of ancestors, descendants and fate... with minor variations ofcourse. Infact pantheism, animism/nature worship and polytheism is also rooted in ancestor worship. All the "spirits" of trees, rocks, rivers, mountains, celestian bodies etc are considered as "distant ancestors" from whom the human ancestors descended, from whom we descend.
The world would be a better place if this meta-ancestral wordview is embraced by all and book-centered organized religion is rejected.
This is a good video but I think what you are describing is the belief system of the warrior nobility and not commoners. Luigi Mangione has demonstrated that what people really want is a new aristocracy with the values you describe. They want leaders who will kill and die for them, and send their own children to the front (we've only seen parodies of aristocracy throughout modernity). The immediate forgiveness of Luigi demonstrates that the job of the nobility is to wield death and everyone will forgive them for deposing these overpowered middle class tyrants that rule the West currently.
Masterful!
Thank you my friend!
These are good abstractions but I think on the day to day political world we live in the terms left and right have become obsolete as things have become more complex. I think each idea should stand on itsl own merit and not the tribalism of right versus left.
As far as both basic underpinnings of the two basic philosophies described here I think not have their truths and falsehoods. I do think we can make a better world but it can never be perfect in the utopian sense unless we're transformed into something we're not, as one described it we would have to ", become like trees in the woods" with no real emotional interaction with one another. It would take me a book to fully explain 🤣 but the very fire within us that makes the world imperfect is the same fire that makes life worth living. The best we can do then to actually live and not merely exist is to control and navigate it when we can. But all this can go into an even deeper topic of what actually is a "perfect world" anyway? But again another book 🤣.
"Ancestry is not important in Christianity", yet Gospels start with and the whole Bible is obsessed with proving that Jesus comes from Abraham's bloodline (while supposedly being God's son). Buddhism, which appeared 400 years earlier, rejects ancestors thing too. So, even if true, that is not unique to Christianity as the video makes it sound like.
Christian concepts of destiny, God's plan and God's will are not any different in practice than the pagan versions either. Pagan king waited for his death? It is very easy for a Christian to come up with a similar logic to justify inaction too. "Jesus has the wheel"
Left-Right is fundamentally about ownership. Who owns what? Are resources owned communally or individually. Everything else stems from here. Equality vs hierarchy is another approach but hierarchy is born out of ownership. You may use ancestry to justify ownership, "my ancestors owned it, so now I own it." but at the end of the day it is about ownership of resources and ancestor part is just the justification and not the root cause of who owns what, since if they have the means, people just take what they want, irrespective of who's ancestors owned it. There is no pagan who came and said, "I could kill you all, take your wives and enslave your children, and take your land, but because your ancestors left it to you and my ancestors didn't own it, I'm not going to do that." No. If they have the means, they just take it. Ancestry is just the excuse to justify why the current king, deserves to be the king.
European ancestry is not important in christianity and it subverts original european ancestry by placing christians on the joowish family tree, so what are you talking about?
By the beggining of your comment you definetelly dont know what beeing the "son of God" means
@trad_m4839 please enlighten me. what does it mean?
@@senerzen second person of the trinity
@@trad_m4839 Wow! such a deep explenation.
Now tell me: How does the second person of trinity explain the virgin birth while still having a bloodline? The whole point here is that ancestry doesn't matter in Christianity, yet apparently it does, since Bible is obsessed with trying to prove Jesus coming from royal bloodline? He has a genealogy, connecting him to actual kings, while being born out of a virgin (but married ???)These two are contradictory!!! Which is it? Second person of trinity does nothing to resolve this.
How does Matthew start? Let me remind you:
"1 This is the genealogy[a] of Jesus the Messiah[b] the son of David, the son of Abraham:
2 Abraham was the father of Isaac,
Isaac the father of Jacob,
Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers,
3 Judah the father of Perez and Zerah, whose mother was Tamar,
Perez the father of Hezron,
Hezron the father of Ram,
4 Ram the father of Amminadab,
Amminadab the father of Nahshon,
Nahshon the father of Salmon,
5 Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab,
Boaz the father of Obed, whose mother was Ruth,
Obed the father of Jesse,
6 and Jesse the father of King David.
David was the father of Solomon, whose mother had been Uriah’s wife,
7 Solomon the father of Rehoboam,
Rehoboam the father of Abijah,
Abijah the father of Asa,
8 Asa the father of Jehoshaphat,
Jehoshaphat the father of Jehoram,
Jehoram the father of Uzziah,
9 Uzziah the father of Jotham,
Jotham the father of Ahaz,
Ahaz the father of Hezekiah,
10 Hezekiah the father of Manasseh,
Manasseh the father of Amon,
Amon the father of Josiah,
11 and Josiah the father of Jeconiah[c] and his brothers at the time of the exile to Babylon.
12 After the exile to Babylon:
Jeconiah was the father of Shealtiel,
Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel,
13 Zerubbabel the father of Abihud,
Abihud the father of Eliakim,
Eliakim the father of Azor,
14 Azor the father of Zadok,
Zadok the father of Akim,
Akim the father of Elihud,
15 Elihud the father of Eleazar,
Eleazar the father of Matthan,
Matthan the father of Jacob,
16 and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah.
17 Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Messiah."
All this shouldn't have mattered if he was born out of a virgin. Do you even understand the point being made here? The point IS: Ancestry apparently did matter for Christians.
Hello, I’m Brazilian and a pagan Asatru. Here in Brazil, people’s understanding of paganism is very low, not only from Christians but also from other pagans who seem like cosplayers or think it’s about hugging trees and having orgies in the forest, in a sort of neo-Wiccan, very feminine and adolescent vibe. I’m starting a RUclips channel, and I couldn’t express myself about paganism better than you, even if I tried. I’d like to know if I can download your videos, translate the speech into Portuguese, and post them with proper credits?
New sub here.
Just what im looking for
This stuff is the zeitgeist.
This is the cress of the wave.
Gonna be a great few year's for the European mind.
And im excited to catch up on your work.
You've described something beautiful in the middle of the video.
👏👏👏. If you can see me, I'd be standing at my feet, praising you
Very good, excellent content. Please continue your lectures.
Thank you 🙏🏻 Much more to come!
What are some good books that helped to shape your world view? I’m trying to learn more about this world view?
ChatGPT will get you as far as this guy got, as he is clearly confused
Love your videos
Appreciate it, coming from a Spartan
There's a reason education ought to be top priority of mankind, and a reason most in power seek to restrict availability and quality of it.
We are in a generation where illiteracy is actually increasing despite access to Taxpayer Covered (state funded) education. Think about that.
These two things are far more similar than you think. If only you understood !!
Interesting take. But modern politics is such a mishmash - Christians consider themselves right-wing, meanwhile there is left-wing nationalism (nationalism on the Balkans or even in France), collectivism has always been considered left-wing, but it is typical of a pagan worldview as well (which you relate to the right). On top of that, "right" and "left" no longer even stand for what they used to in the 20th century. For instance, the MAGA movement is talking against big corporations the same way communists and socialists did it in the 20s and 30s. I think we should altogether transcend both right and left and discover a new, third worldview, because we're getting nowhere...
The third worldview is centrism. A persons mind is free when it can form opinions on its own, not influenced by a perticular group. Then you see that all this left vs. right is only for deviding the people while power-hungry people run the world how they see fit. The reason left and right definitions are constantly changing is because people in power change it acording to their newest wishes and ways to make money.
Julias Evola offered such a solution. Both the left and the right are liberals. Together they have nearly succeeded in putting the world in a mess that might be impossible to work our way out of.
I shouldn't tell you this but there was a Third Way... Now I think it is better to talk about a Fourth Way because even if both Communist and Capitalists tried to kill this other way it never died and when both paradigms will fall a new dawn will rise
You mean third positionist. That is Fascism or national socialism and it’s in the middle of the spectrum. Fascism or national socialism is against communism and capitalism. In my opinion, makes the most sense as a form of government.
@@Shlomo_Shekelstein Well, yeah, but fascism and national socialism ultimately failed. They tried to be a third position, but ended up being socialism + some capitalism. Julius Evola and Alexander Dugin have written good criticisms against them.
Politics is complicated and on a world scale, there’s really no such thing as left and right. But in the most generic terms, leftists believe community > individuals, and right wingers believe individuals > community. Centrists believe there’s room for both to coexist.
If not for their sacrifices, we would not be here today. That to me is far more important than some invisible guy from israel.
Thank you for this.
Yet both are important for the progression of our society.
Let’s go!
\o
Great video
Thanks!
The Estates General have nothing to do with the French Revolution. The aristocracy and the clergy sat on the right. The bourgeoisie sat on the left.
I fuck with this grandiose stuff man. I love it, gets people really thinking.
It’s so over vs we’re so back.
Hehe
Heil Wotan Brother!
I think you did really well on the Uberboyo debate, but I still wonder how he did the sleight of hand of making the pagan perspective look bleak and depressing?
...when christianity literally is about your old self dying(so your life experience is meaningless), then later you dying and in the end the world dying, while forcing you to submit and draining every life force out of you in service of the ideology. Wear black, keep your head down, if you want a beautiful wife you are shallow, better yet become a monk and live a bleak existance, your kin means nothing it is all meaningless. The world is fallen, matter is evil and ruled by the devil, on the other side you have literal thoughtcrime from 1984, just read the catechism, in there it also states, that the only meaning of life is to be saved, because we are divine souls trapped in a corrupt body.
I even had people I knew in real life say to me, that you should rather die as soon as possible because that way the devil has less opportunity to corrupt you...
...also things of similar caliber. This was something I got as an answer for the question if 70 years wasn't a bit short a time frame to govern the rest of your eternity.
Then later on it is a highly unspecific paradise "you'll be walking with god".
You tell me if paganism really looks that bleak in comparison...
Boyo might have been one of the first ways into paganism for me,
but you really strengthend my determination to go all in, you really care about paganism,
he just seems to for the thought - experiment side of things.
I wonder though, what low IQ comments was he refering to specifically when he talked about pagan arguments in the pagan vs. christian debate?
Pessimistic realism in a Nietzschean sense (which I think is how he meant it) is positive, and the opposite of the nihilistic view! Embracing the harshness of life as well as the good is what allows for the heroic ideal, and the celebration of all that is beautiful
His point about factory farming was especially poignant: animal sacrifice, which celebrates death, is much more beautiful and humane than factory farming, which seeks to conceal the horrific reality of the process
@@HeroicIdeal Alright, yes I also agree with that view, maybe I misunderstood him then, maybe he meant "depressing pagans" facetiously...
He probably wanted to probe your debating chops and your arguments a bit, to see how airtight they are.
Matter is not evil, that is gnostic nonsense; also, literally everything you know about muh “based and redpilled" paganism is because Christians monks you denigrate and despise recorded the sagas/epics.
@@jaykojoker Dude the few that did write about them in a neutral or even good light did so because they saw value in those stories or out of historical interest, not because they were christian. That in turn doesn't make christianity good, even islam recorded a few historical things, should we see it as good because of that then?
Lenin made some good observations about reality, does that mean we should be communists now?
Second, if the world is evil because of the fall, how is matter not evil then as a result?
Just because this particular detail isn't directly stated, doesn't mean, that what I listed was wrong.
btw. if we get bogged down in details, I didn't put down monks, I put down the worldview that sees becoming monk as some highest virtue... But now I am going to talk bad about monks, because these c#nts did a lot of the converting in western europe, so nice that amongst all the bad they did, there is something redeeming about them huh? Because there wouldn't have been a need for them to write these stories down, of they hadn't tried to get rid of paganism in the first place.
Both sides obviously see themselves as better.
They could easily turn this video on its head, "for such is the way of abstractions, they are used and abused by peoples whims, which they pretend to be higher causes, when in reality, there is no higher cause then your own, and the feeling or needing to search for something higher is just the feeling of inadequacy"
"There is strenght in seeing yourself as an individual, but atleast you have control rather then being part of a chain of individuals that all merge into a singular collectivist mass."
"trying to 'wage war' on the supposed corruption and uglyness, is no better or worse then to wage war for honour or the good, its still the same need dressed up in abstractions to feel better about ones base desires".
its all a game of ideals, the best people in history where those who where unique and special and diffren't from the times and the world they found themselves in. Diogenes and Alexanders meeting is the key event in human history. :^) that my value and im sticking to it, thats how easy it is to do.
This is great. In every way.
Thanks! 🙏🏻
@HeroicIdeal keep up the good work! It is appreciated!
3:00 Ok im w/ u so far.
10:00 ok im following
12:34 nah i dont believe youre obligated
For me it's about nationalism above all.
I get sick of hearing a boomer Christian world view, everyone is equal and as long as people go through assimilation process,
I'm so sick of that junk.
Many of my views would be considered "left wing" caring for animals, the environment, a living wage but I hate non western immigrants in the west. I don't want them here. Those American capitalist types who scream maga need to to be assisted with waking up regards to nationalism
It has nothing to do with either lol. Right-Wingism is neither concerned with tribe, nation or family; it's purely concerned with hierarchy itself. When one man kills his brother because his brother is weak, he honors the core essence of Right-Wingism just as much as someone who kills a member of an "out-group". Rome was founded on two brothers killing each other, most European myths feature tales of sons killing their fathers in a selfish bid for power.
Nationalism, tribe, family etc. are just the blankets which most RW'ers hide under bc they instinctively know that if the right wing was stripped to its TRUE core essence.. The War of All Against All.... in such a world, they know they wouldn't "make the cut"
It has nothing to do with either lol. Right-Wingism is neither concerned with tribe, nation or family; it's purely concerned with hierarchy itself. When one man kills his brother because his brother is a weakling, he honors the core essence of Right-Wingism just as much as someone who kills a member of an "out-group". Rome was founded on two brothers killing each other, most Indo-European myths feature tales of sons killing their fathers in a selfish bid for power.
It has nothing to do with either lol. Right-Wingism is neither concerned with tribe, nation or family; it's purely concerned with hierarchy itself. When one man erases his brother because his brother is frail & meek, he honors the core essence of Right-Wingism just as much as someone who erases a member of an "out-group". Rome was founded on two brothers killing each other, most European myths feature tales of sons killing their fathers in a selfish bid for power.
It has nothing to do with either lol. RW belief is neither concerned with tribe, nation or family; it's purely concerned with hierarchy itself. When one man murders his brother, he honors the core essence of the RW just as much as someone who murders a member of an "out-group". Rome was founded on two brothers slaughtering each other, most Indo-European myths feature tales of sons murdering their fathers in a selfish bid for power.
Hate is a great motivator. But it is not something with which one can build a foundation. I was motivated by hate and entered that underworld. There, I discovered hatred is an unquenchable fire and is all consuming. However, I did discover something more powerful and sustainable to build on. It'll sound corny, but it is LOVE. Not unconditional universal love, but love what is precious to you. We must be willing to rank and assign a heirrarchy to what we value. Man is reducing himself to an algorithm so that systems may understand him and therefore guide him to something. Nature tells us, "The most precious possession you have in this world is your own people." All ppl groups understand this and act upon this. It shapes their behavior and culture. We as a ppl have lost sight of this, perhaps we instinctively always understood this and the death of God and Institutislination of Freudian psychology as the replacement for Christianity made us view this instinct as barbaric and something that needed to be done away with. The rest of the quote is, " And for this people, and for the sake of this people, we will struggle and fight, and never slacken, never tire, never lose courage, and never lose faith." We must fight. Imagine you're on a battlefield. In front of you is the enemy. You've been told to hate the enemy. Behind you is your family. You instinctively love your family. If you kill the enemy to protect your family you are correct even if the enemy should not have been hated. Our modern battlefield is love your enemy and hate your family. Embrace your instincts. And for those that feel they are too far gone that appear domesticated to ppl who assign a greater importance to their own. "The great epochs of our life are the occasions when we gain the courage to rebaptize our evil qualities as our best qualities" To prefer a ppl other than your own is cowardice. Will you not speak up against cowards of your own group?
In America there is a disconnect from history and family heritage for many, even most.
As the nuclear family has been attacked and degraded you’re lucky to even grow up with your biological parents in the same house, America has always been about freedom and rugged individualism within the American culture and national. It’s a duality just as the Church is. We are all individuals members of the same body.