@slothlikesamwise's banner p

slothlikesamwise

Subway Wizard 🔮

0 followers   follows 1 user  
joined 2022 September 05 00:13:13 UTC

				

User ID: 288

slothlikesamwise

Subway Wizard 🔮

0 followers   follows 1 user   joined 2022 September 05 00:13:13 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 288

‎
‎

So how do you want me to interact with this post other than saying "nice blog bro!"? We aren't here to be your therapist.

But yes, the detente is over and was over when the state closed churches and masses for COVID. Even when reopening occured, diktats came down as to how Churches were to administer the Eucharist, which I might remind you is the holiest and most central ritual in Christiandom.

So your father-in-law is for all intents and purposes trying to figure out if you are going to be an asset or liability in the culture war. Are you sending your children to a classical school or a public school?

National? The city police were the ones fencing off churches.

So is holding a hot iron as your hand sizzles and boils.

External forces there may be, but you need a certain mindset to move from under them.

Look- I wasn't expecting my post to be accepted with applause and universal agreement, but my thought out, nuanced, cited post gets 4 upvotes, while apologia for sexually harassing women (that dismisses out of hand what I wrote) gets 30+?

Yeah and it kinda sucks that he got 30 upvotes.

But I don't believe you don't care about only getting 4, because at the end of the day you aren't downvoted into the ground like with other echochambers.

The best achievement you can get in a place where there are serious debates happening is to go against the groupthink and come out on top, which you've done.

Jfc conventional BBSs like system remains superior to reddits.

I considered skipping posting for precisely this reason but figured it was an angle we don't tackle often. My worst fears are confirmed!

I'd be kinder if it wasn't written like a channish nastygram and had some point where I could interact that wasn't quizzing someone twice removed from your in-law's mindstate about his intent and words.

Like, what would you like to talk about? Does this represent increased activity in your life? Do you want advice about how to speak to your in-law? Do you want to talk about Christianity in the public sphere? I need some guidelines on how to help you that isn't a request to sneer at your family.

I don't have any good options here. The short answer is I don't know. I draw the line of our compromise at funding anything related to religion, and being the sole breadwinner provides me significant leverage. The public schools where I live now are unacceptable, and if I were to return to my hometown they'd be high-quality public (but my kids would be put through the same social shit I went through as a non-believer).

Of the religious school models, classical schools are extremely new and attempt to be more implicit than explicit. Religious instruction is saved for the final years of schooling in the school near me and has a different approach than the usual, many do not provide it at all. If you have the opportunity I'd recommend investigating them, the people running them are far from fundamentalist baptists in the worst case, and you might have one that isn't religious at all and may actually be a charter school.

I have good news for you then, because the sacrifice of Christ raised us from our innate sinfulness and allowed us to strive for sanctification.

As a Christian you aren't with the goal of banking enough good boy points to overcome your sins but rather you are virtuous out of your own belief in virtue.

You ignored the part of mine where I stated that the most central rituals of Christianity were being interfered with and changed by government fiat, so if you fix that we can make something work.

What "hard power"? And how would it be used, exactly, to force a hostile central power to tolerate "parallel institutions" by people they hate, rather than crushing them?

Because just like with sanctuary cities in the West Coast, the federal government relies on state and local police to enforce their edicts and those partners can just say no. It is how we got around the fugitive slave act.

And how, exactly, do you propose to do that? Because I don't see any means of doing so.

States run state colleges and hire college graduates. Conservatives own businesses. A lot of people here hire for tech companies let alone run them. Some random subreddit this ain't man.

The oldest institution in the world might be the one who built Stonehenge.

You'll find that they matter about as much as the Zoroastrian priesthood.

Everyone has a sacred right to blasphemy in a secular legal system with free speech protections.

So the United States?

So you find it more likely that they are standing at parade rest for funsies?

You know, I actually agree with this, there's a certain fairness to it. Someone charged with insurrection should, if they win a presidential election within a reasonable window (four years is fine), be acquitted on the basis that they ultimately won a rightful claim on power.

It is more a practical thing where it is particularly hard to depose someone who wins 51% of the voting public without breaking everything.

Corinna is no lamb at all. This is two wolves and a lamb deciding what's for dinner.

So if Yang is a wolf and Corinna is a wolf, who is the lamb?


In a separate vein, I suppose as a society we've aught to figure out what to do with a bunch of infertile, underdeveloped, and purposeless/telosless young people. The usual modes of hedonism I am pretty sure aren't going to an option for this class so it is likely that left alone they go to even more anti-social routes. Any ideology that picks them up is going to have people who have fire and will not age-out of it.

I hope I don't have to impress upon you how much of problem that will become...

You take control of hiring, bring in a bunch of people loyal to you over the mob, and spread them out. Use them to identify who's blocking you, and fire them for cause (i.e. insubordination). Keep going until most of the paper-pushers cave (remember, only some of them feel strongly enough to risk their jobs, but a lot more will go with the flow and/or have a chain of command going through a troublemaker; rip out the first and the second and third will mostly play ball). It's not easy, but it's possible.

So are you ready and able to knock down the laws that require merit based hiring so you can choose a Hillsdale grad over a Yale grad? There are a lot of laws that prevent a return to the spoils system of old and doing this would require getting past them.

Why makes you so sure that "we don't know" isn't an acceptable answer? Certainly beats making shit up, which is how I would frame the non-materialist position.

Because Galileo was right, but his rivals could tell you where Saturn was tomorrow and he couldn't.

If you think they were meaningfully similar to the modern white nationalists, they were also commies and ancaps and monarchists all at the same time.

But generally if you talk to them, they do reason through things similar to the worst sorts of leftists. I generally get bored with them and start using the arguments I learned here to argue for them.

It would still be speaking unclearly.

Meanwhile the US has to fight a bunch of wars in the middle east and compete with China.

And Russia doesn't have the same issue? They are in the Syrian conflict and countless brushfire conflicts in africa on the GDP of Italy.

How? Pillarization requires a relatively neutral central power that allows multiple parallel institutions to keep existing.

If I may be so bold, because they will be forced to by hard power. There need only be a small minority of the nation to do so, so long as they are geographically concentrated.

How so — assuming said school even remains open and accredited? One gives you a whole bunch of employment options and elite connections, the other is a useless piece of paper no employer will respect (for fear of getting sued, if nothing else).

By balancing those scales? That is the idea proposed.

They are distinctives within the right tho, he doesn't have to choose the left but merely not this one faction.

Personally my answer for them would be to create an explicitly opt-in secondary class of marriage that functioned like marriage did in the past. I don't know how long they'd be able to keep it up in the face of regular society, but I imagine it'd be popular enough with islamic immigrants that they'd be able to call any criticism of it racist.

So some sort of privately certified pre-nup?

Because then it turns into a prisoner's dilemma case, and everyone defects.

the nature of the Puritans' society.

That damned nonconformist John Locke was a real anti-liberal, you know.

What are your purposes for being disagreeable and why does it turn people off?

You can have your first instinct to every question be to answer "no" and still not be a dick, what it took for me is to approach the conversation differently.

And people are murdered every day.

How does that affect the legality of murder?