Twitter cuts (#4)

This surely deserves immortalization:

January 5, 2015admin 16 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Sentences


16 Responses to this entry

  • Chris B Says:

    Well, yeah.

    No obvious purpose merely denotes that we are currently unable to ascertain its purpose, not that it does not have a purpose. This is pretty fundamental to the Scottish Enlightenment approach embodied by Hume et al to social structures and institutions. To work on the basis that “no obvious purpose” strictly equals “no purpose” is the embodiment of western society since the French Enlightenment.


    Aeroguy Reply:

    My favorite is doctors who like removing organs with “no obvious purpose” from their patents. It really emphasizes how deep the stupid goes.


    Posted on January 5th, 2015 at 5:06 am Reply | Quote
  • Alex Says:

    One imagines Maistre would diagnose GKC’s original parable (essentially a dialogue between reformers) as fatally compromised by the assumption that puny human intellects could discern the purpose of a divinely instituted structure.


    Posted on January 5th, 2015 at 7:43 am Reply | Quote
  • Twitter cuts (#4) | Reaction Times Says:

    […] Source: Outside In […]

    Posted on January 5th, 2015 at 9:12 am Reply | Quote
  • vxxc2014 Says:

    What do reactionaries do when suddenly as a Gift from God a Wall of Bones appears?

    “A wall of bones is better than a wall of stones.” – Strongbow in Ireland.

    Well apparently indulge in Wit and Twit.

    The relevance and productivity of neo-reaction now lies in pushing Prog buttons.

    May I suggest attention of all so inclined be directed thus: Push buttons on their loss of legitimacy to open defiance in their Flagship City by America’s Flagship Police Force. I’m not seeing that yet….and I have a notion why….FEAR. Shit even begins to look real and suddenly the wit dries up, the palaver…what happened to the popcorn?

    Fear at the moment of truth never means salvation.


    Posted on January 5th, 2015 at 11:27 am Reply | Quote
  • peter connor Says:

    The notion that a fence was constructed without purpose is absurd….something was worth “walling out or walling in” to paraphrase Frost.


    Posted on January 5th, 2015 at 2:21 pm Reply | Quote
  • scientism Says:

    Imagine, comrades, a world without fences!


    Posted on January 5th, 2015 at 3:09 pm Reply | Quote
  • Lesser Bull Says:

    I call for the fence to be electrified and for guard towers with machine gun nests every 50 yards.

    Y’alls failure to join in my call shows that I am the only pure, true reactionary.


    Ademonos Reply:

    Only one fence? Doesn’t sound very safe. We need at least two of them, with a moat of acid inbetween.


    Lesser Bull Reply:

    Damn straight. Single fencers are basically maoists in rightwing drag. And don’t even get me started on the antimoaters.


    vxxc2014 Reply:

    Nothing to the Left of Fulk Nerra is less than correct.

    Only Fulk Nerra can close the Wall Gap.

    Posted on January 5th, 2015 at 3:12 pm Reply | Quote
  • SanguineEmpiricist Says:

    I demand every one acknowledge that the “Ultra-calvinist thesis” is at least John Gray’s otherwise you are all being inaccurate. Criticisms of protestantism are found in Karl Popper’s work as well.


    Garr Reply:

    Michael Walzer also presented that thesis in REVOLUTION OF THE SAINTS, written in the 1960s; it’s a very interesting book. What’s the John Gray book you’re referring to?
    I’d rather see Progressivism as an evil offshoot (like a cancer or mutant boil) of an essentially non-evil Puritanism (rather than as the accelerated main forward growth of Puritanism). It’s hard to see where the line between the Puritan trunk and the Progressive mutant side-growth is, though. The Plymouth Bay guys would have seen Roger Williams as a mutant side-growth, but Roger Williams probably would have been well to the right of Rush Limbaugh. I like red-statish, Rush-listening America, so I want to like Puritanism. What can be so bad about stern guys in black hats with lots of kids and helpful wives? With muskets, who lived in farm houses and owned bulls and fought Indians?


    nydwracu Reply:

    Yeah, Lasch wrote a book trying to argue against it.

    And Benoist says it was Christianity as a whole.


    Posted on January 5th, 2015 at 7:05 pm Reply | Quote
  • Bryce Laliberte Says:

    Walls are strategies. While some may always remain, there will always remain the necessity of revision.


    Posted on January 6th, 2015 at 4:14 am Reply | Quote
  • vxxc2014 Says:

    I see at least Henry Dampier is pushing some Libertarian buttons on the question of the Blue wall of bones.

    Said Blue Wall has just decided to step aside as regards our scum elites.

    Perhaps pushing Libertarian buttons is more valuable at this point than pushing Prog ones.


    Posted on January 6th, 2015 at 11:18 am Reply | Quote

Leave a comment