/pol/ - Politically Incorrect

Politics, News, History

Posting Mode: Reply Return

Max message length: 5000


(used to delete files and postings)


  • Supported file types: GIF, JPG, PNG, WebM, OGG, and more
  • Max files: 5
  • Max file size: 50.00 MB
  • Read the global rules before you post, as well as the board rules found in the sticky.

02/27/20 IRC/Matrix/and Discord servers are now available, join here.
02/09/20 /ausneets/ has been added!
11/23/19 Donations can now be made via PayPal, thank you for all of your support!
11/21/19 We have successfully migrated to LynxChan 2.3.0, to see all of the changes to 16chan, click here.

[Index] [Catalog] [Archive] [Bottom] [Refresh]

(149.29 KB 1015x1200 Enlightenment.jpg)
Enlightenment Anonymous 12/18/2019 (Wed) 08:55:17 ID:fe17c8 No. 18585
I wonder what does /pol/ think about it, was it based or not. I would say it was in many ways based, especially Voltaire and his philosophy regarding morality, religion and other things such as Freedom of Speech.
>>18923 >There were already suspicions about William the Conqueror/mamzer. Kikes have a tendency to insert themselves in history even if they have nothing to do with it,so i would take that claim with a grain of salt some kikes also claim to have been ancient Spartans and that they were Phoenecians. And for the 1/5 population jewish in Normandy that sounds as legitimate as them being 1/5 of the population of Spain before the Inquisition.
>>19057 The fucker got tons of kikes following him to Albion and most likely mounted his forces with their shekels. Whether he had a (((mother))) or (((father))) is something to clarify.
>>18585 Keep in mind that even Voltaire, who very much believed in free speech, was still banished by the king, and it basically broke him.
>>18585 Used to hate it but now have come to accept it as a net positive.
>>18671 >Roy Campbell The South African poet?
>>19098 >Voltaire He also wrote this about the Jews: >All of the other people have committed crimes, the Jews are the only ones who have boasted about committing them. They are, all of them, born with raging fanaticism in their hearts, just as the Bretons and the Germans are born with blond hair. I would not be in the least bit surprised if these people would not some day become deadly to the human race. >Lettres de Memmius a Cicéron (1771)
>>18710 >Nor do I like the idea of a bunch of masonic, pedophile priests stealing the food that I grow and then selling it back to me while they diddle my son in church. The masons were the ones pushing democracy you ignorant faggot.
>>20046 He actually cites a much older letter (1st c. BC). Which tells a lot about this, some people were quite aware of the JQ. Cicero definitely was but by his time it was already difficult for Romans to recover enough power out of Jewish hands (who were, around this era, already accused of hoarding gold). https://semiticcontroversies.blogspot.com/2012/07/cicero-on-jews.html >Cicero's reference in 'Pro Flacco' to the happiness of the gods at the defeat of the jews is reinforced by his point that his friend; Pompey the Great, had not touched the jewish temple or been infected by the ideas of Judaism as they were at odds with everything that the Roman Empire stood for and believed in. As Goodman observes this was quite correct: (7) as Judaism was the most extreme of all current barbarous faiths to the Romans with the only historical comparison being the vicious religion of Carthage. So dangerous were jews and Judaism considered that they were outlawed from becoming citizens during Cicero's time and for a while afterwards: (8) a view that Tacitus suggests was due to their wholly alien nature and religious intransigence. (9) >In essence Cicero was saying; in relation to Pompey, that any possible positive association with the jews was a significantly negative thing as the jews were classed as the lowest of the low by the Romans (ergo his comment about the jews being a 'nation of slaves'). >This is both due to the fact that large numbers of jews had recently been sold in Rome as slaves and also because it was Cicero's own view. We know this because Cicero refers to the jews as active agents attacking senatorial and republican interests in Rome rather than just pawns of larger and more powerful interests. This is interestingly supported by Suetonius' assertion that the jews were very supportive of Julius Caesar (10) who Cicero was ideologically opposed to and regarded as a tyrant. >That Cicero saw the jews as a powerful interest group is suggested in 'Pro Flacco' when he asserts that the area chosen for the trial of Flaccus by the prosecution was chosen specifically so as to allow large demonstration by mobs of jews. (11) The problem with suggesting that this is a rhetorical trick is that in order for Cicero to have made the assertion: it had to be credible as otherwise its use was pointless. If the assertion was credible then there would have to be significant numbers of jews in Rome who were able (i.e. not slaves) to actively oppose a trial of this kind. Jews during the 1st c. BC. >Further to this Cicero makes clear that he is making two points not one here: in so far as he states that the jews export gold out of Italy (and other provinces) to Jerusalem every year to pay their tithe to the temple in Jerusalem (i.e. enriching themselves at the cost of Rome). In doing so Cicero is telling us that jews had enough money to be able to do this (i.e. they were not slaves or among the poor) and there was a community of jews who were free and active proponents of their religion. The surest way to hurt a Jew is to take his money away from him and force him to use a shovel instead. He may therefore encounter death because of such unjust torment. >This then makes sense of Cicero's assertion (as it tells us why he mentioned it and also why it was plausible to the listeners) as well as his known strongly pejorative comments against the jews in so far as Cicero even went as far in 'Pro Flacco' as to call the jews: 'our enemies'. Or put more simply: the eternal enemies of the Roman people. >We may further note that Cicero's teacher was the anti-jewish Greek thinker Apollonius Molon: who wrote a whole treatise; which has sadly been lost, attacking the jews and had had a lot of experience with them on his home island of Rhodes. If we understand that Molon almost certainly taught the young Cicero about the jews and then Cicero; in the course of his public life and pro-republican advocacy, came into contact with jews doing precisely the same things his old teacher had described then his reaction would have been both as strong and as brutal as it seems to have been. >In essence Cicero took no prisoners when it came to jews and took every reasonable opportunity to attack the jews when chance presented itself and his anti-jewish comments in 'Pro Flacco' should not read as a purely rhetorical exercise, but rather as an expression of fundamental beliefs that Cicero held about jews. >Or put simply: Cicero didn't like the jews or Judaism one bit.
>>20051 They were doing what Greeks had been victim of two millennia before: a form of degeneracy with secular reason and feminization of values. This phenomenon seems to have at its time been spreading from India to Greece. One wonders why... The Enlightenment's Reason wasn't doing any better, repeating the same issue. After the French Revolution, the reaction to centuries of seclusive confiscation of true spiritual knowledge replaced by a terrible god-fearing routine in lieu of true illumination, paved the way to the enthronement of Reason against all possible beliefs and superstitions. Therefore the intellectual "bourgeois" atheism of old was renewed.
>>18896 >You're wrong! >Read this book/watch this 10 hour video >No, I'm not going to formulate an argument. What do you take me for?
The lesson is never surrender your nation's money powers to private banking.
>>18855 Hey fucking retard, Christianity created the modern university system and turned western philosophical thought away from Aristotle with St Aquinus, claiming it’s was Christianitiy’s duty to explore the natural world and find its natural laws, and that’s exactly what Christians did. All of the major branches of modern science and studies today were founded by Christians. In fact the Enlightenment was the rejection of the power of Christianity. Christianity created and justified the divine right of Kong’s given by god. The French Revolution explicitly challenged and ended that with the ideas of human equality. They torn down the power of the church and ended religious power in France. Marxism was the rejection of Christianity and when they got in power killed millions of Christians and destroyed cathedrals and the religious rule. Jesus is not a Jew. He was a Semite, but not a Jew. Jews today are the people that rejected Christ and then killed him. Fucking dumb retard Christianity gave use the family unity, high birth rates, no degeneracy, loyal and monogamous woman etc. the Christians are the ones who banned porn and pornographic images in movies. It was jews who overturned that. Jews hate Christianity
>>20643 all the achievements of europe were due to europeans. the introduction of a desert religion matters far less than the genetic stock. look at nonwhite areas with huge christian influence and, surprise, they’re still shitholes
>>20643 Christians in the US really need to stop being zionist faggots. Literally nobody supports jews and Israel now more than White Christian Americans. Fuck the 1600s, how about banning porn today? Nah, too many pornmakers are Jewish people and only evil inbred nazis go after Jewish people. Time to focus on Islam in 3, 2...
>>20643 >Christianity created the modern university system No. Europeans did. White men would have sought the truth of the universe regardless of which invisible gods they worshiped. See this >>20644 > the Enlightenment was the rejection of the power of Christianity. The Enlightenment also saw the advancement of the very things you just accredited to Christianity. Thus refuting your original point. >Jesus is not a Jew. He was a Semite, but not a Jew. This is cope since Jesus was absolutely a kike. But even if he was magically not a kike despite having two jewish parents, his non-European origin makes him a shitty character to base a cult around. Arabs, kikes, and other semites can worship him if they like. I don't care what non-Whites do in their own lands. But there is no fucking reason at all why White people should worship anyone who is not White. End of story.
>>20643 >Christianity created the modern university system and turned western philosophical thought away from Aristotle with St Aquinus, claiming it’s was Christianitiy’s duty to explore the natural world and find its natural laws Anything a sane Aryan society would have done outside of the cult of Yeshua, with the added advantage that true Natural Laws would have been understood because approached outside of the Christian burden. What Christianity added to this vast endeavor was its own academical weight, its concentrated financial and political power, allowing certain projects to happen faster and in a more organized way than if they had been realized locally, with more limited local means. Yet, none of which an Aryan empire would have not managed, quite the contrary, since it would have happened free of strange Christian ideals and fears of a Middle Eastern god made Creator of all. Christianity is in a way an acrid tale. It is akin to White today working in Hollywood; just imagine what would have happened if all these talented Whites had instead been working for an Aryan industry producing valuable works of art. It is easy to understand how a Christian, a sane and traditionalist one, can find pride and delight in such an institution, considering its power, age and claimed purpose. But its flaws and poisonous nature shall not be ignored. It will have to be replaced nevertheless. >All of the major branches of modern science and studies today were founded by Christians. Maybe but it's often forgotten that Christianity didn't instantly spread all over Europe. It is also disingenuous to claim these are Christian achievements when Christianity was forced on Europeans by a corrupt empire with influential strangers at its core.
It was a mistake, I can't think of a postive aspect other than the breakdown of Christanity. It's a good lesson on why you shouldn't tie your moral code to a relgion. People questioned the religion and then assumed the morality was bunk as well. Leading to plauges like "Individualism" and Liberalism.
>>20832 With a proper religion you actually can tie your morals to it. You make the mistake of using Christianity as the only frame of reference.
>>20863 What's the point of "tying" my morality to a religion. The gods in it don't exist so what's the point? And it will make it harder to convert people as again the gods don't exist. And when people are converted; Making their belief in God the only reason they follow National Socialism. They won't truly follow it and will be lead astray. We don't need this cultism in our movement, National Socialism can be a religion in of itself but it doesn't need to be tied to a religion. That can only weaken it. Maybe we can reform Paganism as people can't be seperated from religion. But while it can re-enforce the truth it should always be at an arms length away from the state. To prevent that mystic bullshit from seeping into the ruling party. We can instead enforce our moral system through the state and educate people through logic and groups like Hitler's Youth. Because at the end of the day our movement is based on nothing but truth. We don't need a religion based on lies to push it through.
If anything religion should be destroyed as it's a lie and secular National Socialism pushed instead. We don't get stronger by watering our truth down with a lie, we get weaker.
>>20866 >>20868 >Thinking NatSoc was atheistic. Again, you make the mistake of using Christianity as the only frame of reference.
>>20866 Esoteric vs Exoteric Orders, anon. Esoteric for the philosophically mature intelligent people, and Exoteric for the legions of superficial people who aren't suited. You should really read some philosophy and get around these superficial and basic concepts of the numinous.
>>21018 Esoteric does not mean religious. Even Hitler warned about cultism in the movement. It's really only Hess and maybe Hans Frank who were cultists and were the only ones who were actual member of the Thule society. Alfred Rosenberg was invited to speak but that's about it. Hitler would later sever ties with the Thule Society after reforming the DAP into the NSDAP. And had "...little time for the esoteric" even. Read/Watch Hitler's Nuremberg Speech of 6 of September 1938 where he speaks out against occultism. tl;dr: Hitler didn't approve of the occult in the Party
>>18624 >The middle ages were the height of natural hierarchy and christendom. Odd since we were more scientifically advanced during the Roman Empire.
(158.02 KB 461x949 1514663427683.jpg)
>>21108 >Even Hitler warned about cultism in the movement. That he did. pic related


no cookies?