Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Ideal society

Ideal society
January 30, 2012, 04:59:38 AM
Just fleshing out a few ideas, but this should be part of it:

Quote
Following a strict code of behaviour resonant of Europe's imperial past, the ball is a social highlight of the Burschenschaft societies.

All male and often considered right wing and reactionary, the societies still indulge in fencing without protective clothing, and duelling scars are a symbol of honour.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/austria/9047483/Bomb-threat-as-students-dance-on-the-graves-of-Auschwitz.html

This is awesome. A culture of male honor and warlike aggression!

Re: Ideal society
January 30, 2012, 04:48:18 PM
This is actually the natural role of man.  To defend his honor and the honor of those close him (in order to preserve the advantage of good will amongst his community) and warlike agression (to protect his offspring from murder by other males and to protect resources from marauders) are aspects of man that come naturally when not outsourced to police forces. 

It not only could be, but must be, an aspect of an ideal society.

Re: Ideal society
January 30, 2012, 07:06:58 PM
Rapiers at dawn.
Golly! Best to be polite, eh?

Re: Ideal society
January 31, 2012, 11:07:42 PM
Okay, so I hate to be the one to step in as the emo-faggot-liberal here, but... do we really want this?

First, history tells us that warrior societies are, time and time again, liquidated, err, I mean, liberated, by merchant societies. Well shit. I'd much rather live in a warrior society than a merchant society, too. But I'm not about to ignore reality.

Second, do you protect your offspring from being murdered/enslaved by other males by... murdering/enslaving those other males? Sometimes. But most times, it makes more sense (both in an immediate sense, for stability, and in a cosmic sense, for evolution) to protect via social order.

I don't think that is neurotic-wimpy-liberal. A hyper violent dog-eat-dog non-culture won't ever produce great symphonies (and, almost paradoxically, won't even ever produce great warfare).

So don't get me wrong. This sounds awesome. But how would it be reintroduced to the larger culture without weakening said culture / without it itself becoming destructive?

Re: Ideal society
February 01, 2012, 12:35:03 AM
Symphonies are great, but they don't compare to living in a natural order, and I am not concerned with great warfare.  Wars are not caused by aggression in males.  They are caused by men being lazy and laying in stagnation, allowing their power to be outsourced to bank-owned war machines. 

Re: Ideal society
February 01, 2012, 04:27:07 AM
But how would it be reintroduced to the larger culture without weakening said culture / without it itself becoming destructive?

http://www.heroichomosex.com/

Obviously.

Ingredients in a society I'd like to live in:

(1) Strong central values system formed of organic culture (nationalism), some kind of religion we can all agree on (Hindu Christianity), a general values set and philosophy including metaphysics.
(2) A social system geared toward innocence, chastity, virtue, and excellence. This produces the type of place I'd want my kids to grow up in: nerdly, honest, wholesome, downright pleasant.
(3) A caste system. Rank people by IQ, and then rank them by character. Bump the thin intelligences like Bernie Madoff and Bill Clinton back down the chain. Put our brightest and noblest together and make a new aristocracy to rule behind the scenes.
(4) No tolerance for parasites. Kick the useless (white) people to the curb.
(5) A free market economy under the political/moral guidance of aristocrats.
(6) A strong CIA.
(7) Anarchy zones for people to go do drugs and die.
(8) No pluralism.
(9) No equality or democracy.
(10) Tax the shit out of entertainment and junk food and kill it off.
(11) National Death Metal Radio replaces NPR


Re: Ideal society
February 01, 2012, 06:38:36 AM
Among the many points you make, I will just take one out for consideration.  Machiavelli would say that if you tax entertainment to get rid of it, you are both stealing people's property and robbing them of something that they think they have a right to.  I have no problem with that, but you will make powerful enemies in those wealthy individuals who will gain power by providing that service for free and attempting to be an alternative to what they will call your Draconian rule.  These ideas were formulated before the enlightenment, so he is not being a populist when he says this.

The better sollution is to let people who let entertainment get in the way of their responsibilites cause them to lose their livelihood due to not being supported by society.  If you don't prop up losers, then people who accept immoral entertainment will be banished by the people for its threat to that society. 

Re: Ideal society
February 03, 2012, 01:22:43 AM
Here are a couple of alternatives for the problem of entertainment industry. First, it can be consigned to anarchy town as another diversion alongside drugs. Anarchy town would contain the only market for entertainment. Second, replace the entertainment we know with actual performing and fine arts. Have standards that separate the arts from the entertainment products. The products are fit only for anarchy town while the main society instead gets the best its people can produce.

Re: Ideal society
February 03, 2012, 02:35:34 AM
I'm not usually a fan of state funded entertainment, but I consider it a favorable compromise to this particular problem.  I suppose if the leadership were truly aristocratic, the art and entertainment it would produce would be of a decent quality. 

Re: Ideal society
February 03, 2012, 02:46:28 AM
The proles seem to respond well to higher taxes. Specifically, they don't mind draining their money through those taxes, as with cigarettes and alcohol.

Just tax entertainment and junk food on the same rate and watch usage fall -- or not. Doesn't really matter.