The modern Left seems to have solved the dichotomy between its Dionysian and Apollonian aspects by applying the logic of technocracy to enabling and normalising the base impulses which drive for example, the queer movement, the push for racial and gender diversity and of course the Green movement.
The Dionysian and Apollonian essences need not be so at odds with each other. A man must have both if they are to be a true man, and the best men, the philosopher king ideal of Plato, have both essences in balance. He is neither deprived of the necessary brutal and forceful recklessness of Dionysus, but also is he possessed of the light reason of Apollo. But such men in whom these essences are balanced are rare, and in such men is aristocracy inculcated.
I had dismissed Rand too readily in my youth as a libertarian. She was prescient that the left would use 'thunderously vague threats of a global cataclysm, threats which cannot be checked, verified or proved'. I wonder if she could have imagined the extent to which corporate interests, the partners of the Apollo mission in a previous age, would gladly enforce ESG/DEI compliance with such threats.
She didn't just imagine it, she explained quite thoroughly. She explained it clearly, that the connection and partnership of business and government would become what it has become and is becoming more and more. The merger of government and corporations is the economic blueprint of fascism
I'm not so sure that passion or emotions were absent forces amongst the men who got to the moon. They weren't robots, something drove them, and as well they worked together for a common cause, though great individual efforts often lead the group. A synthesis of Apollo and Dionysus seems ideal
It's funny that Jacques Ellul responds to that very argument. It is utter stupidity to believe that technicians are granting the wishes of mankind. «Let us leave aside the delirious talk about the "trip to the moon" supposedly "making the dreams of mankind come true.” It is downright absurd to believe that the technicians who worked on airplanes did it because they wanted to realize the myth of Icarus! True, there has, occasionally, been a vague sentiment (crossing the oceans, flying, going to the moon); but can we claim that some dream was at the origin of radio, printing, gun powder? This rationale is a poetic addendum, taken on by technicians with a literary background. But one cannot seriously view it as the driving finality of technological growth! [...] The scientists and technicians, for their part, are utterly incapable of this reflection (an analysis of man). When they advance along this road, their visions are rather silly and full of lovely sentiments and antiquated humanism (like Einstein's). Or else they are unsettling because what they project as the type of human being to be achieved is that which technology allows them to achieve. Here (and only here) we are approaching the robot ideal-how very frightening the possibility of altering man by chemical techniques without ultimately knowing what we are after.» -JE, The Technological System
The REAL inconvenient truth. Trying to strike that balance one day at a time. Watching a Russell Walter video on my iPhone is a good start. Happy to see a Michael Caine cameo.
Marcuse may be the single most influential person in Western leftist thought. And I mean this in the worst way possible. Marcuse was both anti-industrial AND anti-traditional.
He was an anti-social punk under the guise of a scholar.He preached intolerance in the face of pluralism and the dictatorship of disruptive minorities over social and national coherence.
No. Ayn Rand holds that distinction. She is the darling of the billionaires. “Greed is good! Selfishness is good” that’s her “philosophy” in a nutshell.
All your videos are SO GOOD! I can't get enough. I noticed during this video that while watching your videos I have no tendency to fidget or scroll on my phone. The content and the inquiry is so captivating that I am transfixed in a focus of simultaneous or quickly alternating attention and contemplation. I am stilled and invigorated at once. Your videos are a real gift to the psyche and I am very grateful!
You ought to do an interview with Jason Reza Jorjani about the Technological Singularity in its relationship to how it will change what we perceive to be the Human Essence.
Having read Guilluame Faye, yes, although his storytelling aims aren’t as concrete in guidelines, you can grok it from the blueprint, both praising tradition and playing with the fire of technology, for him it was throwing a Hail Mary satellite a thousand years into the future for when civilization returns, but I also believe that building a bulwark now is as important. The off-grid roughnecks who also don’t shun off technology are as inspirational and prescient as ever, especially with the media flirting with telling people in Europe and soon, America that blackouts will be a “thing”, lest we find ourselves at the feet of the summing of what Matthew Raphael Johnson defined as a “Dead Society.” And some may well not make it, but we should try, everyone of us with the will to outlive this clown world.
Adam Smith: capitalism is morally evil, but it produces a general improvement. Russell Walter: capitalism is evil, but it is too late, you can't try anything better because another nation will beat you up. Nice. I guess the insights of Ayn Rand fell on deaf ears. To others: I suggest you read Ayn Rand and judge for yourself.
Clearly the savage man is adherent to a higher ideal than the civilised pansy. If both exist in a finite environment independently from one another, the civilised folk will exhaust their resources, consume all that is beautiful and eventually fall. Whereas the savage will go on indefinitely, in tune with nature, never depleting it, adhering to the traditions of his people, their customs, in the process venerating his ancestors and continuing their ancient line of predecessor and progeny. Never weakening, never declining, always sustaining strong vitalism and spiritedness. The savage accepts and welcomes death, the civil man fears it. The savage Is tried and tested by his surroundings, making him strong. The civil man is sheltered from it, isolated and atomised.
As Sun Tzu confronted the idea of preparing for War in Peace, there should also be the ideal for the Civilized to prepare to live as Savage men. Comfort is a slow death.
Idiotic comment. A simple real life example is the US vs Africa. A civilized country that is light-years more advanced than the stagnant, weak nations of Africa. How completely irrational you must be to arrive at such absurd conclusions
Are you familiar with Spandrell's "IQ Shredder" thesis about urbanization? At any rate, perhaps it's off-base to think of "urbanization" this century in the same terms as during the 19th and 20th, as associated with a network of hyperdense spatial nodes of settlement. Do digital communications and automation require people to cram into megacities of 20, 40, 100 million people, or allow for a mass-return to small towns where family formation is easier and likelier?
Both him and Land developed it together. I would like to see both covered more. Very interesting thinkers. Spandrells bioleninism is also very interesting.
@@russellwalter5145 Can't post non-youtube links sadly Clossington on IQ Shredders: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-itXkYp34-5U.html Charlemagne on Bioleninism: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-qZvjNJxzevM.html ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-EmroKlAJMsM.html
It’s been awhile since I read it, but does address the fragility of it contextually if I recall, as well a Jungian-like shadow aspect of it, where it can be used for good as well as evil. I’d pontificate what I think I remember but it honestly is in no way the most memorable book I’ve read.
The only way out is through..... the problems of industrialization are likely just new problems that must be solved, through innovation of one sort or another. Great video and summary thesis at the end.
I can not post the link, but I have a recommendation for you. You should, if you don't know it already, read "Meditations on Moloch" by the blog "Slate Star Codex". I discovered the post recently and thought it was interesting, and it fits to our critique of liberal capitalism and industrial society
I wonder what your thoughts are on Ted Kaczynski take on technology and the modern world. I like to think I’m pretty left-leaning, but find great appeal in your videos.
Your final conclusion is exactly what I've been thinking of lately. Every reactionary channel I see offers really no solutions even if they have in depth analysis of the current situation. Their regressive thoughts and romanticism for long gone eras in which they would not stand a chance are too delusional, similar to marxists but on the opposite of the political spectrum. Those eras seem appealing because we don't know them in detail, we know what is left from them. My current process stands perhaps in Aristotelian "middle way" that balances nature with civilization, keeping aristocratic values that might be sustainable in the long run. Many people who sympathize with aristocracy would ruin it because they are possessed with the idea of superiority towards others, and a healthy aristocracy with only be sustainable with virtuous values that actually provide prosperity and stability, be it for individual or collective purposes. There is no Orthodox ideal that functions for a true individual and the pursuit is ever lasting until death. The individual is a process of transformation. The seeking might be the path, ever changing, as long as it follows some sort of morality and ideals of health and eudaimonia.
"Aristotelian "middle way"" cannot be achieved. Complex systems like modern, global capitalism cannot be controlled in any rational way - they go the way they go, and that's it. Only small-scale societies give opportunity to experiment.
Great video but I completely disagree with your conclusion, I strongly don’t see a way that we can just merge modernity with tradition since modernity is LITERALLY the antithesis to tradition itself. A complete and absolutely rejection of modernity and everything that comes with it (yes, including industrialization) is the only way back to some semblance of tradition
it depends on what you mean by modernity exactly, but it seems to me that the fascists for example both championed industrialization and the development of technology, while championing master morality, pro-natalism, traditional gender roles, ... Our values are not necessarily linked to modernity imo. It is true, that city life creates city values, not the other way around (multicultural cities and crammed living -> antiracism, capitalism -> both parents working, strongly interreliant society -> welfare state values) But the structure our cities DO have is not the only structure a city and wider society could be
@@aldoushuxley5953 I'm not exactly a fascist but I am fascist friendly. However, Fascism, like all other modern ideologies, fall short on one key and most essential characteristic, which is having a meta-narrative. Historically, a meta-narrative had always came in the form of religion, or some sort of a spiritual teaching, and this is something that Fascism lacks, I mean whats the point of having traditional values and traditional gender roles and supporting master morality if you don't have a metaphysical narrative to back it up and give it legitimacy and authority? It just seems futile to me and it wont be able to hold its ground in the future. Whats the point of crying about social degeneracy if you don't have God to ground morality in the first place? Now don't get me wrong, I do see the potential in Fascism, however until it can adequately address it problem with meta-narratives it not something I can get on board with just yet. Have a blessed day friend.
@@Jareers-ef8hp yes, that is certainly a valid critique (I don't consider myself fascist, and don't know enough to fully counter that argument, I think) However, I am not fully convinced that one could not have formed with more time. The other big ideologies lasted far longer after all... You are however right, that after the system of NS in Germany and fascism in italy died, it is remarkable how fast the transition was back to normal liberalism, and how few people still believed in the old ideas. That was indeed different in Japan for example... Fascism is an offspring of marxism/ syndicalism, so the whole "progression of history" narrative could be considered a meta narrative, as well as the Rousseauian "public will" narrative. (again similar to marxism) A new religion might have developed around ancestor worship and paganism, or maybe even hinduist spiritualism (with someone like Savitri Devi later) But yeah, I get what you mean. I am not proposing fascism or any modern forms of it as an alternative (though creating eusocial humans with genetic engineering does sound like fun), but I do think it proves that a society that is both modernist/ pro technology, but also maybe not conservative, but at least right wing (law and order) can exist. It is up to us to find a better alternative of that ourselves
@@Jareers-ef8hp I really like Teds vision of a post industrial world, if I could choose, I would also choose the fight club thing with "In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rock feller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighways." The problem I always had with it is, that it is necessarily temporary. You are not getting rid of tech everywhere on the planet. But it is unlikely that if you only get rid of tech in your country, you will not just get conquered 100 years later. Isn't that what happened to Japan essentially? Sure, the amish exist, but only because they have nothing we care about. But sooner or later you will have something another person wants (think about how oil was useless for most of history and then suddenly something wars were fought over) You are basically giving up all security, and all long term visions that way. A true posttechnological world can only exist globally. And I just don't see how you can achieve such a world...
@@aldoushuxley5953 Your right, I don't see how the entire world will just give up technology simultaneously, which is why we need like a nuclear holocaust and ground zero the entire world so that nobody has technology or industry. Ok that was a joke but maybe we can come up with something.
Great video but I think there is a critique that could be made. While the Japanese adopting western technology certainly saved them (at least momentarily) from colonization by the west, this adoption of western technology and institutions actively under-minded their traditions. Compulsory public education, peasant armies, etc. all contributed to the loss of traditional Japanese customs and practices. While I do agree that nations and races must adopt modern technology and practices if they want to survive in the modern world, this cannot be done while maintaining their traditions; it will have to come with an abandonment of the past and an adoption of new values and practices. What these values and practices consist in, however, is one of the most important questions we must consider.
There must be way to combine both Gods (and others!) and balance them. I'm a huge fan of the Dionysian 60's and the mass distribution of psychedelic music and giant rock concerts wouldn't have been possible without the industrial revolution. The Progressive Rock genre of the 70's in many ways combines the primitive and the technological. Im personally horrified by today's left and Wokeness, but the right and libertarians need to get over their obsession with pure reason and "traditional" moral values and be able to embrace both ancient ways of being and technology as well
"moral values and be able to embrace both ancient ways of being and technology as well" You cannot just cherry-pick what you like about modernity and leave all the rest. The Gods cannot be balanced - not in such a complicated, big system that we live in.
In my opinion, progress, especially in industrial society, depends on the individual expression of the few, and the unquestioning obedience of the many.
You should read the Sovereign Individual. That really works as your suggestion for how to look to the future and not the past. I've never been a fan of the Unibombers and Linkolites. They always feel defeatists, who want to see the world end?
