This might be your best one yet, PH. Thank you from the bottom of my heart for making it. These type of videos are very much needed in our circles, indeed. Extremely useful. Cheers & God Bless. Stay frosty out there.
Watching this video after reading Chesterton‘s St. Francis biography is truly magical. I often say our world lacks Chestertons, Tolkiens, Bellocs… and you sir, you’re exactly the continuation of that tradition. Thank you!
I’ve been listening almost exclusively to Vivaldi lately, so the (mostly) baroque soundtrack is very welcome. Thanks for including the «tracklist» - saves me from asking.
Great work. I especially appreciate how well you articulated the stance of stepping over the fake left/right dichotomy in a non-boomer, non-hippy, non-civnat way. It'd be nice to pursue things like a progressive/compounding natalist tax incentive without the baggage of a third positionist label.
Would you maybe consider making a response to that K. Woods and J. Davis video about nationalism vs liberalism where they've decried the "reactionary" view on the former? I would love to hear your take on it. Thanks.
Amazing presentation. Very succint and straight forward. Have you seen the resent conversation between Joel Davis and Keith Woods about Liberalism vs Nationalism? In it they have a few criticisms of reaction while putting forward an idea of it being short-sighted and incompatible with modern times. Would be interesting to hear your thoughts.
Where can I find his works in English? I loved your video and am incredibly interested to read some of Davila, but the books seem to average 200 dollars on amazon. any recommendations?
Fantastic video Mr. Hat! I would like to ask you about the origin of your name. Is it inspired by Don Gomez Davila? I am curious because I am from Panama, and I would like to know if Don Gomez Davila had some kind of relation with my country.
@Bob X Naw friend, it's in central america. Down there underneath mexico, but above south america. It's where ships can cross back and forth between the Atlantic and the Pacific by way of the Panama canal.
Having finally encountered (at a point in my life when I'm capable of understanding (and agreeing with)) the reactionary/high IQ/Chestertonian often-online types, I most want to ask: do you think there's hope? Or do you/we accept the Hitchens (P, not C) Conclusion: it's over, abolished; politics is pointless; they wrecked it, leave?
Unfortunately, no proper English translations exist as of yet. The website 'Don Colacho's Aphorisms' has most of them, and there are pdfs floating around online. A lady called Alana Solomon undertook a good translation project 2 years ago, but I believe most of them have been paywalled for the time being.
A youtube channel called Expanding Overton has at least 3 beautifully edited compilations of his aphorisms, along with other beautifully edited compilations of material of interest to this sphere.
I am entirely familiar with Davila and paradoxically enthusiastic of his escolios even if I am not Christian. He is by far my favourite author. However, I do not think that modernity serves man.
I find this movement strange. There are some truths to this, but this movement not only seems to be based on demonstrably false view of history, formation of religion and it's role it also just flat out refuses to have discussion outside of the boundary that it chose, which is to say social bubble. This rules out any meaningful discussion on the issue with irreligious people, people of diferent religion, primitivists who believe our settled lifestyle is the actual point of downfall and so on and so forth. Lot of these groups existed long before french revolution and it seems to me that authentic reactionism simply fails to account for them. On this account I highly doubt anyone with even passing understanding of reality, by just existing, can trully subscribe to such a movement without a shred of doubt when one of the baseline idea is to shorten it 'everything that opponents have to say is not worth listening to and I should be smug about it'. And don't take me as deliberatly reading the message uncharitably. I despise overanalyzing things and more offten than not go with gut feeling on an issue. Here I simply used basic critical thinking and payed attention to words being said. There are some legitimate points here don't get me wrong, but overal it seem much like many 19th century ideas that this one fails to account for longevity of the predictions and based on false basis. Originaly may not be always the good thing, but being stuck in your ways despire factual understanding shifting isn't good either.
A major sticking point in the React movement will be Christianity and the paucity of Christianity as a religion. Reacto-people often say: "Liberalism clearly failed, because it led us to this point. Its own downfall is written into its DNA." By the same token: Christianity has failed, has led us to this point and was doomed to fail - was fatally flawed from the beginning. I grew up in Ireland at the end of a Catholic theocracy and I had contact with good religious folks; priests, Jesuits, etc. They could not answer the questions I had. Because Christianity is a false and fictional doctrine. And thus will always be doomed to court only those who are satisfied with accepting a false and evidently fictional account of reality. They're not sending their best - and this ultimately was the case for the church in Ireland. The Church became stocked with petty dogmatists, who were outclassed and outshined by those whose questions about religion could not be answered by Christianity. Christianity gets certain things right. (evidence of Intelligent Design of reality; Arguments from Causation and arguments regarding objective morality) But you simply cannot ignore that "The Problem of Suffering" [and its variants] completely dismantles Christianity. Alongside other major flaws. Others also being: the evident fictional nature of the collection of writings that survives to us - via arbitrary textual Darwinism - as "the bible". And the problems with the historicity of the Christian myth. You can try and build a future on the same rickety scaffold again and the same thing will happen. Paucity of philosophy because the philosophy is false and lacking. And attracts only philosophical (and ultimately cultural) dullards, when it comes down to it. Because it is false and lacking. So who other than a Dullard would be satisfied by it? Among other problems. A Hindu/pagan model is the best way forward. Just look at how well it functions in India. A very based and flexible religion that's tied to the land and the people. Fiercely proud of itself from top to bottom. And its philosophy contains Christian philosophy as a subset - it being both a polytheist and a monotheist religion. It's really worth a study, and you can put money on India not losing confidence in itself (or losing its spirituality) any time soon. Just look at how fiercely nationalistic [and based] their religious leaders are. Now imagine a similar monotheism/polytheism for the West. Fanciful but it has the necessary structure to succeed. Christianity doesn't because it's a proven theological and societal failure. We are living in the pudding of that now.
Wow, what a schizophrenic post. Something an extremely witty, educated person would post as a satire on the absurdity and desperation of modernist/post-modernnist framework of "traditional" thought. If that is so, I applaud you. Unfortunately, it's most likely not😥
“Originality is anathema to honesty”, is a great line.
This might be your best one yet, PH. Thank you from the bottom of my heart for making it. These type of videos are very much needed in our circles, indeed. Extremely useful.
Cheers & God Bless. Stay frosty out there.
Watching this video after reading Chesterton‘s St. Francis biography is truly magical. I often say our world lacks Chestertons, Tolkiens, Bellocs… and you sir, you’re exactly the continuation of that tradition. Thank you!
Saying "Don Nicolas" was a very classy touch, very nice.
This makes the last cigar stream alot clearer and gives me a clearer path on how to explain my position to the average joe, thankyou
Nice Rameau in the background. I love that piece.
Brilliant.
I’ve been listening almost exclusively to Vivaldi lately, so the (mostly) baroque soundtrack is very welcome. Thanks for including the «tracklist» - saves me from asking.
Great work. I especially appreciate how well you articulated the stance of stepping over the fake left/right dichotomy in a non-boomer, non-hippy, non-civnat way. It'd be nice to pursue things like a progressive/compounding natalist tax incentive without the baggage of a third positionist label.
"To be a reactionary is to understand that man is a problem without a human solution.” - Nicolás Gómez Dávila.
Saludos de Colombia.
Fantastic video essay, provides ample orientation for those coming into our circles.
Bravo
This video is so mind-numbingly based that I fully expect YT to take it down if it gains too much attention.
Would you maybe consider making a response to that K. Woods and J. Davis video about nationalism vs liberalism where they've decried the "reactionary" view on the former? I would love to hear your take on it.
Thanks.
I will watch today and write a response.
@@panamahat5973 So how's that response thingie going? Cheers, anyway.
There's a channel called Expanding Overton which contains many short aphoristic videos on thinkers. Gomez-Davilla has 4.
Great stuff Hat, I had not heard of Davila but have searched out his aphorisms. Much obliged kind sir!
Amazing presentation. Very succint and straight forward. Have you seen the resent conversation between Joel Davis and Keith Woods about Liberalism vs Nationalism? In it they have a few criticisms of reaction while putting forward an idea of it being short-sighted and incompatible with modern times. Would be interesting to hear your thoughts.
I will give it a watch today and let you know what I think.
I was wondering exactly the same thing
Ha! I just made a comment asking about this exactly. Hopefully PH will respond soon.
@@panamahat5973 Conclusion?
Great video! Very suprised that you used clips from "Der Untertan", do you speak/read German?
Only a little, but my friends and I used to watch that film when we were in school. I admire the drinking/fencing 'brotherhood'.
Interesting and accessible outline of Gómez Dávila thoughts.
I'd value a presentation aimed at lending plausibility to some of his key assertions.
Good video. I have some English translations of Davila if you would like to collaborate.
That sounds wonderful, if you have twitter find me at @VerseByHat
Interesting taking, I would love to see how you link your Video with AM stream
Where can I find his works in English? I loved your video and am incredibly interested to read some of Davila, but the books seem to average 200 dollars on amazon. any recommendations?
Fantastic video Mr. Hat! I would like to ask you about the origin of your name. Is it inspired by Don Gomez Davila? I am curious because I am from Panama, and I would like to know if Don Gomez Davila had some kind of relation with my country.
@Bob X ...you're not going to like to hear where Panama is....
@Bob X Naw friend, it's in central america. Down there underneath mexico, but above south america. It's where ships can cross back and forth between the Atlantic and the Pacific by way of the Panama canal.
Having finally encountered (at a point in my life when I'm capable of understanding (and agreeing with)) the reactionary/high IQ/Chestertonian often-online types, I most want to ask: do you think there's hope? Or do you/we accept the Hitchens (P, not C) Conclusion: it's over, abolished; politics is pointless; they wrecked it, leave?
If one were to begin reading his works where would one begin?
Unfortunately, no proper English translations exist as of yet. The website 'Don Colacho's Aphorisms' has most of them, and there are pdfs floating around online.
A lady called Alana Solomon undertook a good translation project 2 years ago, but I believe most of them have been paywalled for the time being.
A youtube channel called Expanding Overton has at least 3 beautifully edited compilations of his aphorisms, along with other beautifully edited compilations of material of interest to this sphere.
Somehow your videos don't appear in my sub feed
YT suppressing my power levels.
Are you on Twitter chap?
I am entirely familiar with Davila and paradoxically enthusiastic of his escolios even if I am not Christian. He is by far my favourite author. However, I do not think that modernity serves man.
A bit too short tbh, should have been at least an hour and 30 minutes.
nah gotta be 5 parts 10 hours each
@@xxxbigboomerxxx That'd just make it into a ERAP - Every Reactionary a Pause.
This is my politics
@Bob X A lot of material is covered in the video, but in essence these ideas can serve as a framework to ground political action
I find this movement strange.
There are some truths to this, but this movement not only seems to be based on demonstrably false view of history, formation of religion and it's role it also just flat out refuses to have discussion outside of the boundary that it chose, which is to say social bubble. This rules out any meaningful discussion on the issue with irreligious people, people of diferent religion, primitivists who believe our settled lifestyle is the actual point of downfall and so on and so forth. Lot of these groups existed long before french revolution and it seems to me that authentic reactionism simply fails to account for them. On this account I highly doubt anyone with even passing understanding of reality, by just existing, can trully subscribe to such a movement without a shred of doubt when one of the baseline idea is to shorten it 'everything that opponents have to say is not worth listening to and I should be smug about it'.
And don't take me as deliberatly reading the message uncharitably. I despise overanalyzing things and more offten than not go with gut feeling on an issue. Here I simply used basic critical thinking and payed attention to words being said.
There are some legitimate points here don't get me wrong, but overal it seem much like many 19th century ideas that this one fails to account for longevity of the predictions and based on false basis. Originaly may not be always the good thing, but being stuck in your ways despire factual understanding shifting isn't good either.
You're not wrong that this worldview is based almost entirely in the truth of Christianity and isn't very relevant without it
A major sticking point in the React movement will be Christianity and the paucity of Christianity as a religion. Reacto-people often say: "Liberalism clearly failed, because it led us to this point. Its own downfall is written into its DNA." By the same token: Christianity has failed, has led us to this point and was doomed to fail - was fatally flawed from the beginning.
I grew up in Ireland at the end of a Catholic theocracy and I had contact with good religious folks; priests, Jesuits, etc. They could not answer the questions I had. Because Christianity is a false and fictional doctrine. And thus will always be doomed to court only those who are satisfied with accepting a false and evidently fictional account of reality. They're not sending their best - and this ultimately was the case for the church in Ireland. The Church became stocked with petty dogmatists, who were outclassed and outshined by those whose questions about religion could not be answered by Christianity.
Christianity gets certain things right. (evidence of Intelligent Design of reality; Arguments from Causation and arguments regarding objective morality) But you simply cannot ignore that "The Problem of Suffering" [and its variants] completely dismantles Christianity. Alongside other major flaws. Others also being: the evident fictional nature of the collection of writings that survives to us - via arbitrary textual Darwinism - as "the bible". And the problems with the historicity of the Christian myth.
You can try and build a future on the same rickety scaffold again and the same thing will happen. Paucity of philosophy because the philosophy is false and lacking. And attracts only philosophical (and ultimately cultural) dullards, when it comes down to it. Because it is false and lacking. So who other than a Dullard would be satisfied by it?
Among other problems.
A Hindu/pagan model is the best way forward. Just look at how well it functions in India. A very based and flexible religion that's tied to the land and the people. Fiercely proud of itself from top to bottom. And its philosophy contains Christian philosophy as a subset - it being both a polytheist and a monotheist religion. It's really worth a study, and you can put money on India not losing confidence in itself (or losing its spirituality) any time soon. Just look at how fiercely nationalistic [and based] their religious leaders are.
Now imagine a similar monotheism/polytheism for the West.
Fanciful but it has the necessary structure to succeed. Christianity doesn't because it's a proven theological and societal failure. We are living in the pudding of that now.
Wow, what a schizophrenic post. Something an extremely witty, educated person would post as a satire on the absurdity and desperation of modernist/post-modernnist framework of "traditional" thought. If that is so, I applaud you. Unfortunately, it's most likely not😥