Anders Behring Breivik

[Ibn Ghassan]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

[fschmidt]

Have you read this?  It is quite long.  Here is a better formatted version with a table of contents:

https://info.publicintelligence.net/AndersBehringBreivikManifesto.pdf

But "Breivik admitted in court that it was mostly other people's writings he had copied and pasted from different websites."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik#Compendium

So maybe not worth reading.

Here are some far right European writings that I like:

https://www.counter-currents.com/2012/07/interview-with-alexander-dugin/
http://katehon.com/article/rightist-critique-racial-materialism
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B009WQUMBU/

[Ibn Ghassan]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

[fschmidt]

While I am certainly against Nazism, modern Western culture in its current form is considerably worse than Nazism.  Nazism was just racist, while modern culture is pure evil, against all forms of goodness.  So I have little doubt that the authors of the books you mentioned, as members of modern culture, are more evil than Breivik.

The white nationalist movement just doesn't interest me very much because it is doomed to failure and won't be historically significant.  The interesting contest will be between traditional religions and modern culture.

[Ibn Ghassan]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

[fschmidt]

Ibn Ghassan wrote

But what will bind the traditional religions or people of faith into a strong group that rises up as one against the proponents of “modern culture” aka materialistic culture ?

That is the answer I seek.

Me too.
http://www.mikraite.org/Undepraved-tp1973.html

[Ibn Ghassan]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

[fschmidt]

Given the current weakness of all contenders, I support any that still have promise.  Obviously I personally prefer Islam to Christianity, but I am not going to criticize traditional Christians for their choice.  Christianity is fundamentally based on the concrete as I explained here.  While there are no good people left in modern culture or modern religions, I can still find examples of a good catholic and a good orthodox.

[Ibn Ghassan]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

[fschmidt]

Of course I had to look up Wittgenstein.  It seems that he went through 2 phases that were quite incompatible with each other.  You are mostly talking about the first phase while I am more sympathetic to his second phase.  I can understand why you would object to a concrete God based on Wittgenstein's phase 1.  But it seems to me that Wittgenstein's phase 2 in fact justifies a concrete God as a kind of language game.

I am playing by your rules here when in fact I simply reject all of Western philosophy as I explained in my "Truth and Alternatives" post.

Just speaking practically, I do agree that an abstract conception of God is less problematic for intelligent people.  But for stupid people, there is no question that a concrete conception of God is more effective.  A successful religion must address the full spectrum of human intelligence.  Islam does this by elevating Muhammad and the prophets.  Intelligent Muslims can think in terms of God while less intelligent Muslims can simply focus on Muhammad as a means of relating to God.

[Certified sex worker ;P]

The only religion capable of righting the West if Christianity is kaput cannot be Hinduism and Buddhism, even more alien to the West than Islam.

[Certified sex worker ;P]

Once people realise that Christianity so kaput that liberalism which replaced it is also kaput, the solution of Islam should become obvious.

[Certified sex worker ;P]

Once Westerners repent of the idolatry that is Christianity, the new religion of the West should become obvious.