Monarchy and Reactionism

[abcdavid01]

http://radishmag.wordpress.com/2013/04/ ... le-rising/

[Winston]

What is a reactionary? Someone who wants things to be like they were in the past?

[Jester]

Thanks for finding this, ABCDavid. I was unaware of this movement. I don't care for the name, but the posters rock. So does the moral clarity.

Followed a link and found this:

http://cambriawillnotyield.wordpress.co ... -of-blood/

Astounding.

[fschmidt]

http://radishmag.wordpress.com/2013/04/ ... le-rising/

Which just goes to show that modern reactionaries are idiots too. Let me make this simple. All modern people are idiots; liberals, conservatives, reactionaries, whatever. It makes no difference. On the other hand, most members of Western culture between 1700 and 1800 were reasonable; liberals, conservatives, etc. (But not radicals like the French Revolution.)

The core issue isn't politics, it's morality/religion. When religion fails, morality fails, and then it's all over.

[Winston]

Aren't we all reactionaries here in that our mentality about women, virgins, and relationships are more like people from the 18th and 19th century, and before, than people today? lol

[Jester]

Aren't we all reactionaries here in that our mentality about women, virgins, and relationships are more like people from the 18th and 19th century, and before, than people today? lol

Shit, Winston!

What the F are you saying here??

That **WE** are the good guys?? That **WE** are all God's got?

[fschmidt]

I just want to correct my previous post here. It is the NEO-reactionaries who are idiots. True reactionaries, non-NEO, are fine. And true reactionaries don't necessarily support monarchy. I don't and neither does God. When the Israelites asked for king, God replied:

-----------------------------------------------------------
Samuel told all the Lord's words to the people who were asking him for a king. He said, "These are the rights of the king who will rule over you: He will take your sons and put them to his use in his chariots, on his horses, or running in front of his chariots. He can appoint them for his use as commanders of thousands or commanders of fifties, to plow his ground or reap his harvest, or to make his weapons of war or the equipment for his chariots. He can take your daughters to become perfumers, cooks, and bakers. He can take your best fields, vineyards, and olive orchards and give them to his servants. He can take a tenth of your grain and your vineyards and give them to his officials and servants. He can take your male servants, your female servants, your best young men, and your donkeys and use them for his work. He can take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves can become his servants. When that day comes, you will cry out because of the king you've chosen for yourselves, but the Lord won't answer you on that day."
-----------------------------------------------------------
1 Samuel 8:10-18

[Winston]

@fschmidt
Can you define what a neo-reactionary is? Do you have any essays or articles about this subject? If not, maybe you can write one sometime.

[Winston]

Great memes about reactionism.











Funny memes about equality vs. liberty.

[fschmidt]

@fschmidt
Can you define what a neo-reactionary is? Do you have any essays or articles about this subject? If not, maybe you can write one sometime.

You can google it and find plenty of explanations. But basically neo-reactionaries have the values of medieval Catholicism.

[Winston]

Ok then how would you define traditional reactionaries? How do they differ?

So a neo-reactionary is a monarchist who also believes in the authority of the Pope or Church?

I thought a neo-reactionary was like Patrick Bucanan, advocating the values of the 1800's and the isolationist policy back then without any free trade with foreign nations, and gun rights for all, school prayer like in "Little House on the Prairie" and libertarian government like Thomas Jefferson wanted.

[fschmidt]

Ok then how would you define traditional reactionaries? How do they differ?

All reactionaries are traditional by definition. The question is which tradition they prefer.

So a neo-reactionary is a monarchist who also believes in the authority of the Pope or Church?

Yes

I thought a neo-reactionary was like Patrick Bucanan, advocating the values of the 1800's and the isolationist policy back then without any free trade with foreign nations, and gun rights for all, school prayer like in "Little House on the Prairie" and libertarian government like Thomas Jefferson wanted.

No, Patrick Buchanan is definitely not a neo-reactionary. Patrick Buchanan is fairly close to my views.

[Winston]

I agree with Patrick Buchanan on most things. He has a lot of good sense and is rational and sensible and has strong virtues and ideals. He's a lot like a noble man of the 1700's and early 1800's. He also stands for family values. And he knows a lot about history too, such as the fact that America was a lot more prosperous during the protectionist policies of the 1800's without free trade, before Teddy Roosevelt ruined it and reversed it.

But he believes in God. You don't right? Why are you an atheist? Wouldn't an atheist have been out of place in the 1700's? Even the founders of the Enlightenment era were deists, not atheists. So were the founders of America too.

[fschmidt]

I agree with Patrick Buchanan on most things. He has a lot of good sense and is rational and sensible and has strong virtues and ideals. He's a lot like a noble man of the 1700's and early 1800's. He also stands for family values. And he knows a lot about history too, such as the fact that America was a lot more prosperous during the protectionist policies of the 1800's without free trade, before Teddy Roosevelt ruined it and reversed it.

You managed to pick the one area where Buchanan is completely wrong.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... 016%29.png

The most prosperous times were those when tariffs were reduced.

But he believes in God. You don't right? Why are you an atheist? Wouldn't an atheist have been out of place in the 1700's? Even the founders of the Enlightenment era were deists, not atheists. So were the founders of America too.

I don't consider myself an atheist. I just define God differently than Christians do. But Muslims generally accept that I am a theist.

[Winston]

What do you mean fschmidt? Between 1800 and 1899, when there was no free trade, and Americans bought American products, the US economy boomedm. There was no inflation. The value o the dollar was the same throughout. And the US became the richest country in the world by 1900. Times were great. Optimism was at an all time high. There were plenty of manufacturing jobs for everyone. See the PBS documentary "America 1900".