@CharlesSynyard@bae.st avatar

CharlesSynyard

@CharlesSynyard@bae.st

"I avoid a critical attitude because all critical activity rests upon a method, and the possibility of obtaining this method itself by criticism is only apparent." - Francis Parker Yockey

Always eagerly seeking kindred spirits and burning souls.

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

CharlesSynyard, to random
@CharlesSynyard@bae.st avatar

Began yesterday. Can tell this exciting book will be a fast read. As well written as it is dumbed down and (forgiveably?) naive.
Had not read Jack London in many years. Became interested in The Iron Heel on reading that it inspired The Turner Diaries, and the resemblance, “editor’s Foreword” on, is abundantly clear (and also in wrestling with a way to conceptualize the system of the anti-life powers that be in the United States, for which ”the Iron Heel” seems a good metaphor).
Three chapters in, the romantic element is much better here than in Pierce’s book, with London speaking through a woman diarist-narrator. One humorous thing the reader will notice, which might have been harder to pick up in 1907, is that the narrator and editor (who provides explanatory footnotes throughout), supposedly separated by seven centuries, both clearly share the exact same wide-eyed early 20th century progressive view. Like in Edward Bellamy’s Looking Backward (which I have read about but not read), London facilely associates projected economic developments with socialism, on the seeming assumption that central planning was necessary to increase efficiency; it comes across as “product placement” of socialism. One thing that can be funny is that the hero, Ernest Everhard, confidently dismisses “metaphysics” in favor of science, facts, and reason, which supposedly directly ground his socialist worldview (the other dinner guests, a gaggle of ministers, mostly can’t answer him. Probably the best response—the kind you usually think of after you’ve gone home—would be that the first socialist utopias were imagined by metaphysician “dreamers” like Plato, so those trying to make their brainchildren real are in their debt). His manner of speaking strongly reminded me of John Galt: yet the two arrive at opposite belief systems. One wishes they could be locked in a parlor for an hour, and have at it about how a scientific worldview ineluctably leads to seeing the truth of, which? Socialism or capitalism.
Additionally, the editor‘s notes suggest that, centuries later, mankind is free from selfishness and theft is essentially unknown; no word yet on whether there’ll be any clue on how that happened, other than a promise of wiser economic planning eliminating conflicts. London did not live to see the failure of the Soviet Union to create a worker‘s paradise, with the state merely replacing industrialists as the owner of capital. He definitely has the socialist‘s certainty that there can be a fairer distribution of the profits without change in economic structure (tell me, do Marxists today really believe there is going to be some idealistic equity in a service economy where the default jobs are stocking the shelves at Walmart or driving for Uber?) Finally, London expects what every student of history knows did not pan out, an international labor uprising of the sort whose failure to appear in 1914 prompted many socialists to rehash their ideologies.
These are mostly criticisms, but again, I am enjoying the virile yet romantic and idealistic writing. I should note that while this edition is presented as anticipating fascism (we will see), Jack London is hardly an author the radical Right doesn’t appreciate. Ten years ago David Duke put out his own edition of London’s 1914 The Mutiny of the Elsinore. https://daviddukeonline.com/product/the-mutiny-of-the-elsinore/ Less than a decade after The Iron Heel, London had cooled toward the socialist movement, and apparently begun to understand the role Jewish agitators played in it to further their own interests. London also displays degrees of racial awareness at many points in his works; in The Iron Heel, though in the future nativism is looked down upon, Ernest Everhard is a muscular founding stock working class man.
IMG_9336.jpeg

CharlesSynyard, to random
@CharlesSynyard@bae.st avatar

Saw Ghost in the Shell. This 1995 classic is one of those “they don’t make them like this anymore“ anime flicks. The plot and world didn’t interest me as much as Akira, but there are immense helpings of fanservice and cyberpunk violence set to primeval-sounding music, and even a few verses of Scripture.
The 2004 sequel, Innocence, is screening in many places tomorrow, but my hopes are down. Only rated PG-13, so maybe no nipples, about which see.
IMG_9275.png
IMG_9332.jpeg

IMG_9332.jpeg

graf, to random
@graf@poa.st avatar

netyahoo bros its so over the middle east has fallen

RT: https://hell.twtr.plus/objects/0672b52a-9296-41da-bc85-b2f9524f7c76

CharlesSynyard,
@CharlesSynyard@bae.st avatar

@Hoss @spectatorindex @matty @graf Thank you Shlomo if true.

CharlesSynyard, to random
@CharlesSynyard@bae.st avatar

Daily Lum, saying goodbye?
IMG_9688.png

synapsid, to random
@synapsid@nicecrew.digital avatar

If you support polygamy you are a nigger. No 'but it's based bro', you are spiritually African and you should go to Somalia to be with your fellow 'based' polygamists.

CharlesSynyard,
@CharlesSynyard@bae.st avatar

@MeBigbrain @synapsid No, if you can become one flesh with a prostitute too, then a husband can easily be one flesh with several wives in turn. Jesus would have said clearly that polygamy was no longer okay if that was what He meant.

CharlesSynyard,
@CharlesSynyard@bae.st avatar

@wgiwf That can be a confusing point, which I didn’t realize until recently was throwing myself and others off. Marriage is always a covenant between the man and the woman; polygamy can strike the observer as a kind of group marriage and so clearly wrong. However, the sister-wives, while enjoying a special relationship, are not married to one another. Fundamentally, polygyny isn’t different than a single marriage, just the same thing repeated over. The clearest descriptions are therefore plural marriage (because more of the same), or even more precisely, concurrent marriages—though that doesn’t have the euharmonic quality of plural marriage.

On that second point, it might be nice were it that way, but Akshually, see I Corinthians 6:15-17. “Shall I take the members of Christ and unite them to a prostitute?” I would not utter the words, which makes it sound like some kind of gross, and blasphemous MMF threesome, but that is how St. Paul describes the significance of seeing a prostitute. Point being, the words of the Lord in Genesis and Christ in the Gospel are significant and poetic, but should not be taken over-literally, in order to contravene polygyny, which the body was clearly designed for, and was practiced and accepted by our forefathers for as long as metalworking and musical instruments have been around.

Ronnie21093, to random
@Ronnie21093@varishangout.net avatar
CharlesSynyard,
@CharlesSynyard@bae.st avatar

@lewdthewides @Ronnie21093 Yeah, Miyako Gotokuji (Bubbles).
IMG_5605.png
IMG_5703.png

IMG_5703.png

CharlesSynyard, to random
@CharlesSynyard@bae.st avatar


IMG_6208.png

CharlesSynyard, to random
@CharlesSynyard@bae.st avatar

Daily Lum.
IMG_9645.png

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • Hentai
  • doujinshi
  • announcements
  • general
  • All magazines
    •