Simply amazing: "The psychology of the “fag hag” is another topic that probably merits discussion"-- I didn't know this was the term but I agree with everything being conveyed in the sentence, what a good name for them!
This discourse is something very much lost on most people (on our side or otherwise) and if anything warrants recurring reaffirmation to remind ourselves. The purple haired barista is not a 'General' she's just some 'normal' person living her life regardless of the extreme opinions, on say gender, she may hold. Thank you for drafting such a coherent piece!
Also didn't know you were in the Marines, I'm still grinding with the AF, God Bless!
I am new to your Substack as well. I think your point on how Jesus is the only religious figure that the system allows its full wrath and ridicule to be poured upon is apt. The only way I could fully escape the educational conditioning of the system was through a Christian worldview and a belief in Jesus as Christ and Lord. He himself declares that he is not of this world. In terms of turning the cheek, it requires the believer to face the man who has just struck him and not to back down. It was also given in a limited context at a particular moment in his ministry and likely was a warning against taking too much offense at insults. The disciples themselves carried swords, which Jesus never forbid (only telling Peter not to continue his attack in the garden). In terms of reaching the masses, a simpler and direct method is echoed in the words of John the Baptist who simply told people to “repent. Of him, Jesus declared that no one was greater than John the Baptist among those born of women. There is a place for complex theory and there is a place for clear, simple messaging.
I like how CS Lewis expresses the idea that all Truth is God’s Truth by using the construct of the Tao. Paul says what can be known of God has been revealed to all people through Creation and the fact that we are made in His image. It is not surprising to see that certain teachings of every religion and philosophy resonate as being True and reflecting what we actually observe. The difference is that God offers a remedy for sin through the payment made by Jesus, a gift of grace.
Jesus taught his followers to turn the other cheek when we are insulted for our faith in Him. He did not teach us to be passive in the face of injustice or violence. We must be wise and prudential.
As far as I can see, Jesus was teaching his own understanding of natural law through parables and good reasoning skills, but Paul turned this into a salvationist religion. It's easier for me to believe the first story much more than the second one.
Jun 28, 2023·edited Jun 28, 2023Liked by William Maize
A thoughtful piece.
For Christianity and pacifism as St. Cyril said: As individuals we forgive, but as a community we lay down our lives for one another. For you seek to enslave us not only physically, but spiritually as well. This, therefore, is justified.
Edited because autocomplete changed Cyril to Cyrillic
That's a great quote. It reminds me of a corollary in the Vedic tradition. The entire context of the Gita was Krishna compelling Arjuna to fulfill his duty and fight a battle to defend his Kingdom. This is despite the yogic principle of non-violence.
I was referring more to the form of the left-hand path that is espoused by neo-Occultists, and forwarded by theosophists. It's a bastardization of yogic practices, but the essence is the breaking of taboos and individualism. In contrast, the Right Hand Path originates from Bhakti, or Devotional yoga, and is focused on unity with God.
Since, the "Left Hand Path" terminology has been used by all manner of occultists and Satanists. Madame Blavatsky adopted it when founding "Theosophy", which is a very suspect belief structure mired in occultism and questionable ritual.
You'll see the left hand path everywhere amongst our opponents, but also amongst "our guys". I'm not a full-throated supporter of Evola (I haven't read enough of him to know, yet), and I didn't intend this to be a promotion of the man's ideas. I simply am too ignorant of him to know him in depth enough to make that claim, but he seems to espouse a form of the left-hand path.
What I'm cautioning against here is leaning too far into the left hand path. It's a dangerous weapon. Like poison, it can be effective, but can also target the user if he's not careful. There is another Way, and I believe the Right is far superior to the Left. I think the same traps exist for people on the right side of the political spectrum as those on the left, and if we let nihilism, pure self-interest and hatred drive us, we'll end up in a very similar place to where we are now.
To me, at least, the Right Hand Path is what I'm interested in. Buddhists will say that he was trying for a "Middle Way". The problem with the Left Hand Path is that, I believe, it leads to the kind of soullessness we see today. It's a focus on the material and rationality. It's the kind of thing that will excuse murder or rape or even pedophilia depending on the practitioner. I absolutely believe that a good number of elites practice this, and yes, it does seem to give them power, at least in this world.
But there's more to this world, and to me, despite the power the left hand path seems to allow, it's nothing compared to being in the Light. It's seductive. We want to win, but what would we inherit and what would we lose in the process?
Simply amazing: "The psychology of the “fag hag” is another topic that probably merits discussion"-- I didn't know this was the term but I agree with everything being conveyed in the sentence, what a good name for them!
Haha. The term has been around for quite some time, but has been driven underground due to newspeak.
This discourse is something very much lost on most people (on our side or otherwise) and if anything warrants recurring reaffirmation to remind ourselves. The purple haired barista is not a 'General' she's just some 'normal' person living her life regardless of the extreme opinions, on say gender, she may hold. Thank you for drafting such a coherent piece!
Also didn't know you were in the Marines, I'm still grinding with the AF, God Bless!
I am new to your Substack as well. I think your point on how Jesus is the only religious figure that the system allows its full wrath and ridicule to be poured upon is apt. The only way I could fully escape the educational conditioning of the system was through a Christian worldview and a belief in Jesus as Christ and Lord. He himself declares that he is not of this world. In terms of turning the cheek, it requires the believer to face the man who has just struck him and not to back down. It was also given in a limited context at a particular moment in his ministry and likely was a warning against taking too much offense at insults. The disciples themselves carried swords, which Jesus never forbid (only telling Peter not to continue his attack in the garden). In terms of reaching the masses, a simpler and direct method is echoed in the words of John the Baptist who simply told people to “repent. Of him, Jesus declared that no one was greater than John the Baptist among those born of women. There is a place for complex theory and there is a place for clear, simple messaging.
I’m new here by way of John Carter.
I like how CS Lewis expresses the idea that all Truth is God’s Truth by using the construct of the Tao. Paul says what can be known of God has been revealed to all people through Creation and the fact that we are made in His image. It is not surprising to see that certain teachings of every religion and philosophy resonate as being True and reflecting what we actually observe. The difference is that God offers a remedy for sin through the payment made by Jesus, a gift of grace.
Jesus taught his followers to turn the other cheek when we are insulted for our faith in Him. He did not teach us to be passive in the face of injustice or violence. We must be wise and prudential.
Well said. Thanks for reading!
As far as I can see, Jesus was teaching his own understanding of natural law through parables and good reasoning skills, but Paul turned this into a salvationist religion. It's easier for me to believe the first story much more than the second one.
A thoughtful piece.
For Christianity and pacifism as St. Cyril said: As individuals we forgive, but as a community we lay down our lives for one another. For you seek to enslave us not only physically, but spiritually as well. This, therefore, is justified.
Edited because autocomplete changed Cyril to Cyrillic
That's a great quote. It reminds me of a corollary in the Vedic tradition. The entire context of the Gita was Krishna compelling Arjuna to fulfill his duty and fight a battle to defend his Kingdom. This is despite the yogic principle of non-violence.
Thank you for comments, it's a good article.
Could you recommend a good primer text on what the RHP entails? Perhaps Evola if translated?
Sure, here's a starter, concerning mainly the left-hand path.
https://pdfcoffee.com/julius-evola-on-the-left-hand-path-pdf-free.html
I was referring more to the form of the left-hand path that is espoused by neo-Occultists, and forwarded by theosophists. It's a bastardization of yogic practices, but the essence is the breaking of taboos and individualism. In contrast, the Right Hand Path originates from Bhakti, or Devotional yoga, and is focused on unity with God.
Since, the "Left Hand Path" terminology has been used by all manner of occultists and Satanists. Madame Blavatsky adopted it when founding "Theosophy", which is a very suspect belief structure mired in occultism and questionable ritual.
You'll see the left hand path everywhere amongst our opponents, but also amongst "our guys". I'm not a full-throated supporter of Evola (I haven't read enough of him to know, yet), and I didn't intend this to be a promotion of the man's ideas. I simply am too ignorant of him to know him in depth enough to make that claim, but he seems to espouse a form of the left-hand path.
What I'm cautioning against here is leaning too far into the left hand path. It's a dangerous weapon. Like poison, it can be effective, but can also target the user if he's not careful. There is another Way, and I believe the Right is far superior to the Left. I think the same traps exist for people on the right side of the political spectrum as those on the left, and if we let nihilism, pure self-interest and hatred drive us, we'll end up in a very similar place to where we are now.
To me, at least, the Right Hand Path is what I'm interested in. Buddhists will say that he was trying for a "Middle Way". The problem with the Left Hand Path is that, I believe, it leads to the kind of soullessness we see today. It's a focus on the material and rationality. It's the kind of thing that will excuse murder or rape or even pedophilia depending on the practitioner. I absolutely believe that a good number of elites practice this, and yes, it does seem to give them power, at least in this world.
But there's more to this world, and to me, despite the power the left hand path seems to allow, it's nothing compared to being in the Light. It's seductive. We want to win, but what would we inherit and what would we lose in the process?