Sentences (#34)

Christensen against tribal vulgarity:

nationalism becomes an enemy of civilization when it believes that Shakespeare is great because he was English, rather than that England is great because it produced Shakespeare.

January 4, 2016admin 26 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Discriminations

TAGGED WITH :

26 Responses to this entry

  • Nicola Masciandaro Says:

    or rather, because there are no mountains in England: “Therefore, so far as nature had influence over the early training of this man, it was essential to his perfectness that the nature should be quiet. No mountain passions were to be allowed in him. Inflict upon him but one pang of the monastic conscience; cast upon him but one cloud of the mountain gloom; and his serenity had been gone for ever—his equity—his infinity. You would have made another Dante of him; and all that he would have ever uttered about poor, soiled, and frail humanity would have been the quarrel between Sinon and Adam of Brescia,—speedily retired from, as not worthy a man’s hearing, nay, not to be heard without heavy fault. All your Falstaffs, Slenders, Quicklys, Sir Tobys, Lances, Touchstones, and Quinces would have been lost in that. Shakespere could be allowed no mountains; nay, not even any supreme natural beauty” (John Ruskin) http://www.gutenberg.org/files/31623/31623-h/31623-h.htm

    [Reply]

    Exfernal Reply:

    Ludicrous.

    [Reply]

    Posted on January 4th, 2016 at 2:14 pm Reply | Quote
  • Sentences (#34) | Neoreactive Says:

    […] Sentences (#34) […]

    Posted on January 4th, 2016 at 2:30 pm Reply | Quote
  • grey enlightenment Says:

    hmmm…never thought of it that way before

    but the HBD argument is that genes produce geniuses, not nations. Maybe it so happen that a collection of auspicious genes are concentrated in certain geographical regions

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    On rare occasions?

    [Reply]

    grey enlightenment Reply:

    I tend to think of success as individualistic rather then collective – that individuals succeed or fail based on their intrinsic or innate talents or lack thereof, as well as hard work and determination (which may also be genetic, too).

    [Reply]

    Jefferson Reply:

    Isn’t the hbd argument that environmental selection pressures encourage traits? Geniuses come from populations selected for intelligence and creativity, right? England’s system encouraged these pressures (and probably moor importantly, it did not discourage them), and ought be lauded for that. If your success is individual, that implies it is the result of spontaneous mutations.

    grey enlightenment Reply:

    Genius can arise from any population, even low-IQ ones, but obviously genius is more likely among higher IQ populations. Tens of thousands of years ago, perhaps the cold or some other environmental factor in Europe favored clever people, who replaced the less intelligent ones, as some sort of natural selection on an accelerated scale, which boosted the IQ of Europe compared to the rest of the world. Then phase two kicks in, which is that these higher IQ regions gives rise to the infrastructure that is conducive to geniuses living to their full potential. But the genius must still be born. No amount of infrastructure can turn a person with an IQ of 90 into a genius.

    Posted on January 4th, 2016 at 3:04 pm Reply | Quote
  • Mark Citadel Says:

    Good find. I definitely agree

    [Reply]

    Posted on January 4th, 2016 at 4:06 pm Reply | Quote
  • SVErshov Says:

    in both variants greatnes of Shakespeare and England is not questioned, as such both statements a bit nationalistic. how about : Shakespeare was great destite the fact that he was English.

    [Reply]

    Posted on January 4th, 2016 at 4:43 pm Reply | Quote
  • Bettega Says:

    England is great because it was produced by people such as Shakespeare.

    [Reply]

    SVErshov Reply:

    that is the best version !

    [Reply]

    Posted on January 4th, 2016 at 5:54 pm Reply | Quote
  • Brett Stevens Says:

    The question of nationalism is not greatness, but what makes for the best possible society. Every society has an ordering principle; under nationalism, it is the family and genetic similarity as an extended family.

    [Reply]

    Posted on January 4th, 2016 at 5:56 pm Reply | Quote
  • Sentences (#34) | Reaction Times Says:

    […] Source: Outside In […]

    Posted on January 4th, 2016 at 7:03 pm Reply | Quote
  • Alex Says:

    Shakespeare great. Koko like.

    [Reply]

    Posted on January 4th, 2016 at 7:47 pm Reply | Quote
  • Kwisatz Haderach Says:

    Shakespeare lived in a time and place where the idea of nationalism was so widely adopted that the concept didn’t need a name or a defender. Moreover, I don’t think it would have hurt his prose in the slightest if many of his admirers had loved him because he was English more than because he was Shakespeare, and I am sure there have been many such.

    Meanwhile, non-nationalism becomes an enemy of civilization when it precipitates instability.

    [Reply]

    Posted on January 4th, 2016 at 11:29 pm Reply | Quote
  • Nicola Masciandaro Says:

    @

    Again one hits upon the problem of individuation and the need for a pronoun system (to improve upon science’s senseless ‘we’) that can address the individual from an evolutionary perspective. Not only species evolve, but individuals, whence from the traditional perspective (e.g. Scotus) the individual is the the primary intention of creation. Species-evolution serves the production of individuals, that which gives highest meaning to the sense of *species* itself. The genius is born not made, i.e. made :https://twitter.com/Nicolam777/status/684174876891082752

    [Reply]

    Brett Stevens Reply:

    Are these Graveland lyrics?

    [Reply]

    Posted on January 5th, 2016 at 12:51 am Reply | Quote
  • SVErshov Says:

    but what can be used to mesure greatness of society … number of produced Shakespeares?
    there is such thing called nation caltural out put. for example Dafen village in China exporting 5 mil hand mabe oil paintings per year. that is quite an output.

    how about messuring greatness in units of delay of perception of reality. if delay is significant all what you can engage will be your past.

    [Reply]

    Grotesque Body Reply:

    “but what can be used to mesure greatness of society”

    Greatness is not measured, it measures.

    [Reply]

    SVErshov Reply:

    well, lets put it another way, what units greatness use to measure

    [Reply]

    Posted on January 5th, 2016 at 3:23 am Reply | Quote
  • asian dude Says:

    ” it is the family and genetic similarity as an extended family.”

    You are asking for clannishness, not nationalism involving states of hundred millions. Nationalism was a “universalism” that had somewhat worked relative to what came before.

    [Reply]

    Posted on January 5th, 2016 at 5:03 am Reply | Quote
  • Gentile Ben Says:

    I used to think admin couldn’t quite let himself take that extra step into HBD heresy, and I would have interpreted a post like this as evidence of quasi-PC tendencies. Now I know better.

    Gnon is a jealous God. “Ye shall make you no idols …”

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    Biorealism, as I understand it, is the insight that a ‘people’ only has positive value as a legacy of harsh selection.

    [Reply]

    Gentile Ben Reply:

    Receiving signal from Outside is rare and terrible and most prefer a warmer climate. Not “it takes a village,” but rather “it takes a butcher’s yard.”

    [Reply]

    michael Reply:

    A “people” are intrinsically a product of particular harsh selection, if that selection environment still exists then some value remains and to the degree its likely conditions will remain or be controlled by said people a value remains.Thats not the only value to “a people”. First you need to think about value to who/what, its a value to the evolutionary plan to have “failed peoples” who might get lucky if circumstances change. [its only sometimes necessary to wipe out the other species to survive] To that people and its individuals belonging to a failed people has value.You wouldnt disband or homogenize the patchwork as soon as a particular patch exceeded the others. while from a gnon eyed perspective values might be more easily ranked the system can not function if a critical mass of any given patch/ people do not keep the faith in themselves as themselves as different from others enough to continue the struggle for survival on an independent track.In humans who have reached a point where we create a large part of the environment that shapes us this means maintaining a culture civilization and ethnic orientation, its really doubtful the larger evolutionary picture aside whether we any one of us “peoples” can survive long without this differentiated orientation. At the very least it makes life worth living and if enough of us no longer feel like living the thing falls apart.Leftists think they can create a uniculture that will sufficiently nurture the evolutionary workers and control the environment so well that its safe to have all mankind in one basket, HBD is the recognition this is not so.The difficulty some in DE/NRX have with “nationalists” is legacy uncomfortableness with racism. Theyre not upset with chinese nationalism, not worried about Tutsi aspirations,its survivor guilt they simply are pretty sure they got this environment thing licked for good and can afford to fuck around a bit, Its the same cocky stupidity of the Cathedral want to make Gnon laugh? Tell him your plans.

    [Reply]

    Posted on January 5th, 2016 at 2:06 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment