Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - AVFN

[1] 2 3
Interzone / Re: Alexander Dugin on the Fourth Political Theory
« on: November 30, 2012, 04:22:08 AM »
And embrace what?

Watch the video first, then we'll talk here on this forum about that and other questions that arise from it.


Interzone / Alexander Dugin on the Fourth Political Theory
« on: November 29, 2012, 11:24:26 AM »

Youtube video of Alexander Dugin speaking at the fourth Identitarian Ideas conference in Stockholm on the 28th of July 2012.

What did I take away from it? Reject race, reject class, reject individualism.

Interzone / Re: Drugs are for depressed people, period.
« on: November 28, 2012, 09:13:25 AM »
I don't see any reason why the different hypotheses concerning the various motivations for, and results of, drug use posited here cannot all be true.

In relation to the original post though, I have to say that one of my LSD epiphanies was that I suffer from depression.

Metal / Re: Essential ambient/drone/vibration recordings
« on: July 25, 2012, 03:02:11 AM »
Eliane Radigue.
Studied under Pierre Schaeffer and Pierre Henry, but makes music very different from theirs. The musique concrete school more or less turned its back on her. Used to compose exclusively with an ARP 2000 synthesiser and tape, but now composes for acoustic instruments. Took a few years out back in the day to study Buddhism and meditation, and since then those themes have been the subject of much of her work. My personal favourite is the 3xCD Trilogie de la Morte. Very very subtle music.


Metal / Re: Between Ildjarn and Engram....
« on: February 19, 2012, 05:22:24 AM »
did anyone hold up the flag of Black Metal with any kind of integrity other than Graveland?
For me, Hate Forest.

Metal / Re: Fenriz gives a black metal history lesson
« on: February 19, 2012, 05:20:43 AM »
Shut up, Fenriz.

Metal / Re: Darkthrone and Ildjarn lyrics translations
« on: February 10, 2012, 08:25:25 AM »
Den Norríne Rase ma Slakte den andre
nar blammen dunker for tungt pa var dír

For what its worth, Blammen probably refers to Arabs here, not African-Americans.

Blammen: http://news.softpedia.com/news/Viking-Attacks-and-the-Moorish-Spain-62632.shtml

Coupled with the fact that arabs are the ones mass immigrating, not blacks.
Just noticed this couplet has been left out of the lyrics print for the c.2004 vinyl reissue of TH on Peaceville record. Does anyone know of it features on other reissues or not?

Btw, I think 'African-American' is one of Anus's auto-corrects for a certain n-word, I don't think it was part of the original post.

Interzone / Re: Beowulf
« on: February 04, 2012, 05:52:08 PM »
What I like about Beowulf is that it has a more modern sense of narrative structure and feels more complete than a lot of other European epics, which makes it easier for the modern reader to actually read. As much as I enjoy works like the Iliad or an Táin, the structure is just so far from what we normally expect as modern readers that it can often become tiresome. For instance the repetitive formulations of the former or the clumsy narrative progression of the latter. If I was going to recommend an antique or early/high medieval European text to a beginner, it would have to be Beowulf for that reason. Beowulf also has the further stylistic advantage of some of it's original poetic features surviving the translation process, which just isn't going to happen with works writ in Latin, Ancient Greek or Old Irish etc.

Interzone / Re: Porn stars - Do you respect them?
« on: December 19, 2011, 08:22:51 AM »
Haha! No. Just no.

Metal / Re: Best metal releases of 2011
« on: December 13, 2011, 02:50:08 PM »
Shit, how could I forget; Acephalix - Interminable Night. Crusty, d-beat death metal.

They're on Southern Lord.....tell me why I shouldn't avoid this on principle? Hah.
Haha. Well, I got the 12" LP Agipunk Italy long before the Southerlord CD came out, so maybe that saves my credibility...
Oh but wait, I actually like Sunn, so I'm a lost cause anyway. ^_^

Metal / Re: Best metal releases of 2011
« on: December 13, 2011, 01:11:09 PM »
Great year for DM, shite year for BM. Any takers?

Metal / Re: Best metal releases of 2011
« on: December 13, 2011, 01:05:35 PM »
Shit, how could I forget; Acephalix - Interminable Night. Crusty, d-beat death metal.

Interzone / Re: ✠
« on: December 13, 2011, 11:31:41 AM »
Well, your analysis of Christianity is wrong. The central basis of Christianity as pointed out by St. Athanasius is theosis, which means deification, 'God became man so that man might become god.' Christianity has pagan roots in the obvious Neoplatonic influences on the early Church fathers, and the Aristotlian influences on Medieval scholasticism. The burning of heretics is the burning of the weak, in that a proper Christian recognizes irrefutably his obligation to fulfill his duty towards theosis, which means accepting the teleological nature of himself or herself and actualizing that to the greatest degree possible. Christ's death is a sacrifice meant to embody the divinization of mankind, not a story of meek surrender in order to encourage the weak. The mistake you're making is a common one made by most modern opponents of Christianity, which is to be completely unaware of its historical and philosophical dimensions. Protestantism is not Christianity, it's a heresy. Egalitarianism, refusal of diversity and tradition, anti-heirarchical revolutions, these are all Protestantism. Also, traditional Catholicism and Orthodoxy are actually experiencing a renaissance of sorts in intellectual circles today. It isn't widely visible in the mainstream media, but that's because the left has an iron-grip on the media and mainstream academia, and has historically seen the Catholic Church (and by that I mean the Roman Catholic Church of the past, but most especially the Catholic Church as in the eternal philosophy of Catholicism) as its greatest opponent.

I've met people like you before. Your concerns are understandable, because I'm against modernity too. But people such as yourself always seemed shocked when they are introduced to the actual philosophical material of the early Church fathers, such as St. Athanasius, the Philokalia, Psuedo-Dionysius, and the Cappodocian fathers, as if this was some sort of Christianity they never knew existed.

Well, you clearly have a wider theological knowledge than me, so I'm going to resist the temptation to enter an argument about my interpretation of Christianity. What I will say however, is that I am not alone in my interpretation and, as you yourself recognise, it is shared by many. Hence, I doubt very much that it is entirely invalid. Protestantism may be a heresy to you, but to the vast majority of people (i.e. everyone who is not a traditional Catholic or Orthodox Christian) it is a perfectly valid form/interpretation of Xianity. Of course, very few of this dauntingly broad category are intelligent or informed enough for their opinion to count on this matter; but enough are. For instance, my own interpretation of Xianity is, predictably, one derived from Nietzsche, Heidegger, de Benoist, Evola etc. And as long as there is even a remote possibility that the interpretations that these thinkers propose for Xianity could arise, take form, and become influential institutions of thought and culture, I cannot accept Xianity as a viable ally. I think we can agree that protestantism could never have developed from paganism.

Anyway, to bring the discussion back on course, I'd like to ask if you yourself, as a traditional Catholic, would welcome an alliance with followers of heathen philosophy? What is your personal reaction to Conservationist's suggestion?

Interzone / Re: The Pagan ideal
« on: December 12, 2011, 11:59:51 AM »
I would go as far as to say that none of us know what paganism was. First there is the problem of evidence. Most of our written sources for pre-Xian belief survive in manuscripts redacted during the Xian period and hence must be questioned (to different degrees, obviously) on their reliability and accuracy, etc. This is a problem which, as an early medieval hisorian, I face daily. Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, a belief system is intrinsically tied to the historical circumstances in which it exists. So, not only would it be impossible to correctly interpret sources for paganism without a complete awareness of their historical context, but furthermore they would be practically useless outside of said context. This is why, as I said on the Xian thread, the spiritualites of the future cannot be the same as those of the past. Hence, I feel we must allow ourselves a certain amount of reinterpretation and development. But you're right, there's a lot of fannying about out there by Wiccans and the like.

Here's a nice quote from Alain de Benoist on the matter:

A new paganism must be truly new. To surpass Xianity demands both the reactualisation of its 'before' and the appropriation of its 'after'... The 'return to before' is unworkable ... neopaganism must take into account history, whose notion has been conceptualised by Judeo-Christian monotheism, not to assign it now a sole, unique end, but to make it the ever plural result of a will that is ceaselessly reorientated in new directions. For the same reason, neo-paganism must also re-present the pagan system of values in a form that is not simply the antithesis of Judeo-Christian monotheism... The paganism of the future will be a Faustian paganism.

Interzone / Re: ✠
« on: December 12, 2011, 11:26:58 AM »
Conservationist, I get the impression that what you are suggesting is somewhere between a marriage-of-convenience and meta-political entryism. On the one hand, I'm not completely opposed to such an initiative. I'm neither an intransigent nor a dogmatist. The spiritualties of the future will not and cannot be the same as those of the past. Changes will develop, and on a practical level may be made to develop. However, I believe what you are proposing is undesirable for two reasons.

Firslty I believe that in essence the ideologies at the core of Christianity and pre-Christian European religions are incompatable. Christianity is by definition the worship of Christ. The story of Christ, as reported by the apostles, is of a man who submitted, without sturggle or fight, to suffering and death at the hands of his enemy in order to show that our existence is profane and valueless and to allow all people, regardless of their transgressions and/or incompetence, the opportunity to achieve everlasting life as long as they are subservient. Furthermore, Christ was a Jewish reformer, and Judaism, then and now, is monotheist and dualist. This means that our existence is interpreted as an undesirable and sinful tangent to the true being of a beyond which we are incapable of accessing without, again, subservience to His law. I cannot possibly imagine a doctrine further from the heroic/tragic triumphal overcoming-through-struggle that is clearly displayed in traditional European mythology from the Táin to the Iliad. If one were to conjure some form of syncretism between paganism and Christianity one of these central doctrines would eventually have to win out over the other because of their incompatibilty. How do we know this? Because history has shown us so. When Christianity came to Europe it did indeed adopt many pagan practices and aesthetics. Christianity was undoubtedly Europeanised, and I suspect that is what you have been driving at with your 'pagan roots of Xianity' comments. Indeed, the legal and administrative structure of the catholic church, along with many customs and rituals, were lifted directly from pagan Rome (or, more accurately, these structures assimilated the new religion). However, the process of Xianisation in Europe did not stop, and has not stopped. The protestant reformation, quite logically, looked at the bible and found absolutely no foundation for the pope or the catholic church's hierarchical structure or extensive canonical tradition, and consequently binned it all. Today, liberal atheists continue the reformation (albeit unconciously) by removing the 'superstition' of God and all notions of spirituality whilst upholding the core morality and ideology of egalitarianism and the profanity of our existence.

Secondly, there may come a time when an aliance of sorts is required, but this is not it. The interest in pre-Xian Europe and European values has been on the rise for more than a century now, from Nietzsche to de Benoist, from Wagner to Vikernes. Conversely, Christianity is being discredited more and more. Churches are emptying and Christians are increasingly being ridiculed in the media and popular culture. Now, I don't necessarily revel in this, for I have a respect for the religious in general, and a certain disdain for smug atheists, but to side with Xianity would be like boarding a sinking ship - we would go down with it!

Finally, as for your repeated comments about the pagan origins of Xianity, I don't really follow. Jesus was a Jewish reformer, Judaism was monotheist. The apostles basically preached Judaism for gentiles. So I don't agree that Xianity had pagan roots. I do however, as stated above, recognise that Xianity was Europeanised to a large extent after it became the offical religion of Rome, but, as I have also said, many of its most traditional European features have been the subject of reform and excision because of their incompatibility with the central ideology of the gospels.

Erosion, I disagree with you also. The burning of heretics is not burning the weak, it is burning the other because one is incapable of allowing or comprehending difference - difference which is diversity, diversity which is natural. It is indicative of the narrow, totalitarian and completely unrealistic world-view that has caused so much destruction throughout Europe's history. Nor is original sin a recognition that man needs improvement, it is a statement that man is wrong and cannot right himself. It is a statement that man is not fit to govern himself or to be in charge of his own destiny. It is a statement that I disagree with. Strongly.

[1] 2 3