NOT SO MUCH ANTI-HUMANE AS ANTI-HUMANIST, I.E. HUMAN-CENTERED

INDIVIDUALIST EVEN

PEOPLE WHO READ EVOLA WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING THE PHILOSOPHICAL BACKGROUND ALWAYS COME UP WITH A BULLSHIT RELIGION

THEY THEN BERATE THE REST OF US FOR NOT FOLLOWING THEIR IDIOTIC FUNDIE VISION

WHEN REALLY, THEY ARE STRUGGLING WITH THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE NO CLUE WHAT IS GOING ON, SO HAVE SEIZED ON THE MOST TANGIBLE THING THERE

AGAIN, WE NEED A CASTE SYSTEM

SOME JUST DO NOT GET IT

MOST PEOPLE ARE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THESE: https://www.reddit.com/r/askaconservative/wiki/introductory_reading

HOWEVER, IF YOU WANT TO UNDERSTAND A CONSERVATIVE PHILOSOPHY, IT HELPS

ALSO TO CONSIDER THE CONTEXT OF A CLASSICAL EDUCATION

IF YOU ARE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE CLASSICAL TEXTS

Serious in the sense that any occult philosophy is serious about creating a tradition that backdates to Atlantis or what have you.

IT WILL MAKE NO SENSE

STREAMS FROM THE HEAVENS

ATLANTIS IS KENNING

Hell the civil war is kenning to the degree that you can have two people argue whether it was about slavery, trade, competing economic models etc

AT SOME POINT, THAT ARGUMENT SIMPLY REVEALS ALIGNMENT

AT ANOTHER, ABILITY TO SEE HISTORY AS MORE THAN A SINGLE TRIGGER EVENT

SOME ARE MEDIA SHEEP

OTHERS ARE ANALYTICAL

EARLY MRA: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zt3GM2AzwSE

In my experience it less reveals alignment than depth of knowledge. Not knowing a bunch of information is fine as long as that is paired with humility. Honestly the thing that keeps people loud, annoying, ignorant and the like isn't the media per se, it's that everyone has easily digestible over-generalized abstractions taken as truth that are tossed around in leiu of actually having real conversations.

The different between media and analytical in this arena is basically degrees of deftness.

I DISAGREE

THE MEDIA SHEEP ARE LOOKING AT OBJECTS IN A SINGLE DIMENSION

BASED ON THEIR SOCIAL RELATIONSHIP TO THE INDIVIDUAL

SOMEONE WHO THINKS THE CIVIL WAR IS ABOUT SLAVERY IS MISTAKING POLITICAL SYMBOLISM FOR REALITY, FOR EXAMPLE

SAME WAY SOMEONE WHO CARES TOO MUCH ABOUT FORD VS CHEVY

Slavery became symbolic but it wasn't merely a symbol

IN THE CONTEXT OF THE WAR, IT WAS A SYMBOL

THE ACTUAL MOTIVATION WAS ELSEWHERE

AS THE MORE NUANCED, COMPLEX HISTORY SHOWS

Cool, I get reddit "muh logical fallacy" response (in caps), then you passive aggressively talk about me to vigilance when I'm not here.

You're a faggot.

The latter isn't in dispute. The former, well, slavery as a force of moral rhetoric that carried practical consequences certainly functions better at building momentum than, I dunno, whether to federally enact trade barriers or free trade.

SLAVERY WAS ALREADY DOOMED

THE QUESTION WAS WHETHER TO LET THE MARKET DO IT OR NOT

WITH THE RISE OF LABOR SAVING DEVICES, IT WAS EASY TO SIMPLY HIRE PEOPLE

That isn't important

NO PENSIONS

IT IS VITAL