The Dork Enlightenment has one meaning: Phallus


nickLandPhallus1421951444012

There are a lot of neoreactionaries who claim to be Christians.

I wonder if they are acquainted with Nick Land’s theistic doctrines.

nickLandEntryistScreenshot

nickLandScreenshot

To put the above images in context, consider why 8chan was sneering at the Dork Enlightenment to begin with.

8chan started out by describing the Dork Enlightenment as entryism, and James Donald as a philo-semite:

8chanScreenshot


I had been intending to get into a deep study of what (if anything) philo-semitism might entail, but of course I got distracted with Nick Land’s “phallus” interpretation.

Source:

http://8ch.net/pol/res/997058.html


I had been meaning to write a criticism of James Donald’s post at:

http://blog.jim.com/culture/forget-about-cultural-marxism/

J.D. had written:

Today’s left is, in substantial part Cultural Marxism from the Frankfurt School. Should you conclude that the Frankfurt School is really really important?

If you conclude that Cultural Marxism is really really important and rules the world, it follows that Jews rule the world. Hard to prove they don’t. It also follows that leftism was just fine and democracy was just fine all the way up to and including the New Deal, and if we could revive the New Deal coalition and get rid of the Jews everything would be lovely.

If you believe that the Cultural Marxism is the problem rather than a problem, it follows that getting rid of Jews would solve the problem. Hard to prove that getting rid of Jews would not solve the problem. In the course of my many arguments with my Jewish commenter B, I have endorsed pretty much everything that /pol/ and Steve Sailer says about Jews, other than that they rule the world and are responsible for every bad thing everywhere that ever happened anywhere.

James Donald claims that he agrees with almost everything /pol/ says about Jews.

However, the screenshots from 8chan show that 8chan’s /pol/ says a lot of unpleasant things about James Donald, with which James Donald probably does not agree.

I was surprised to see that Mark Yuray (or someone claiming to be him) waded into the fray with the following:

aramaxima.wordpress.com Mark Yuray / Ara Maxima 01/23/15 (Fri) 05:39:21 5ecbb1 No.1001807>>1001883 >>1001922
– NRx is not a bunch of NEETs. We are mostly students or working people. We count several married men among us, including more than a few with large families of their own.

– NRx is not Jewish. Moldbug, who provided a catalyst for the movement with his prolific writing, is an irreligious half-Jew. Current NRx is overwhelmingly Catholic or WASP. Strangely enough, the most overrepresented ethnic group among us is South Slavs.

– The only difference between the NRx and NatSoc position on Jews is that NRx thinks Jews are just a symptom of a deeper problem, leftism. We spend our time trying to track, analyse and describe Leftism so we may protect ourselves against it.

Mark Yuray / Ara Maxima 01/23/15 (Fri) 05:49:14 5ecbb1 No.1001911
>>1001883

What I term leftism can be described as sin, Jewishness, entropy, effeminacy, degeneracy and decadence depending on what intellectual idiom you are using.

Mixed in with the phalluses and Nick Land quotes are digressions on surprising bits of history, e.g.:

The word “libertarian” itself, of course, was something anarcho-capitalists appropriated from the rest of the anarchist movement, again twisting its meaning completely. American libertarians put private property above everything, European libertarians wanted to abolish private property. American libertarians say taxation is theft, European libertarians said property is theft, and so on.

The thread also links to a lot of other blogs, such as:

https://dieturmgesellschaf.wordpress.com/2015/01/17/blasphemy-secular-and-religious/

and

https://frenchdissidents.wordpress.com/2014/09/21/the-great-jewish-anti-zionist-swindle/

This entry was posted in philosophy. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to The Dork Enlightenment has one meaning: Phallus

  1. caprizchka says:

    “I had been intending to get into a deep study of what (if anything) philo-semitism might entail, but of course I got distracted with Nick Land’s “phallus” interpretation.” Yeah. Me too. 🙂 Those things are so distracting!

    It would be nice to have a concrete sense of God or Good and a concrete sense of Devil or Evil. Unfortunately, all such human constructs have flaws and besides there’s the evolving time element and the pyramid structure of all social constructs, a.k.a. “class”.

    I accept that the single greatest indicator of intelligence is tolerance for change, wobble, and mutation of truth and values. Pea brains, on the other hand, demand absolutes. Thus is the puzzle of how to maintain utopia, with each class dutifully remaining in their birth position while deluded with the possibility for advancement in exchange for obeisance to the top’s notion of values.

    It would appear that the Judaism pyramid is more successful than most but that could well be due to a built-in tolerance for wobble. Similarly, older surviving religions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Shinto, and Tao provide allowance for balance and correction when the “good” overdevelops into some sort of cancer.

    In a mutli-peaked dystopia it is tempting to pick on one pyramid or another as the “evil” one, that if we were to eradicate it, we would then have a perfect utopia. However, it is not always apparent to the human eye whether a relationship between two organisms is parasitic or symbiotic and therefore eradication of the “evil” could well mean the death of the “host”, which, of course, would be poetic justice.

    By the way, I’m not partial to circumcised or uncircumcised phalli but rather tend to prefer those ruled by a balance of brain, heart, and stomach rather than the other way around.

    • >
      I accept that the single greatest indicator of intelligence is tolerance for change, wobble, and mutation of truth and values.

      By “tolerance” do we mean “ability to adapt by changing the outside world” or “ability to endure without changing the outside world”?

      If my eyes work well in the dark, and someone shines a light on my face until I walk over, punch them, and turn out the light, that’s the first type of “tolerance” – I adapted and avoided injury, so I tolerated the attack. If I just sit there, accepting the painful light and waiting for my eyes to stop hurting, that the second kind of tolerance.

      • caprizchka says:

        LOL. By “tolerance” I mean the ability to keep from cracking up or self-destructing in the face of change. Sometimes that means reacting and defending and other times that means going with the flow. Knowing which is which is bound to be evolutionary.

comments with fewer than 4 links should be auto-approved if everything works properly...

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.