Survival is the most important concept of Spinoza. For him, it is associated with duration and life, as the ability to preserve one’s identity for a certain period. Ability = strength. Further, Deleuze, reflecting on Nietzsche, force = life. Survival is persistence in durability, perseverance. The will to last. Survivalism is a lifestyle aimed at only one thing – survival, which means, life for the sake of life, strength for the sake of strength.
For Americans outside the Beltway, understanding national politics is often challenging if not impossible.
In the modern world, a multipolar model is clearly taking shape – almost taking shape. It replaced the unipolarity that was marked after the collapse of the Warsaw Pact and especially the USSR. And the unipolar world, in turn, replaced the bipolar one, in which the Soviet camp geopolitically and ideologically opposed the capitalist West. These transitions between different types of world order did not take place overnight. Some aspects changed, but some remained the same by inertia.
Modern civilization is rather in a state of deep decline. This is a bitter confession, but it is not the same as despair. If everything went wrong – and everything really went wrong – let’s return to fullness and health, let's restore everything as it was -- in the state that existed before it went bad. Moreover, the rejection of progress by no means prohibits the recognition of the improvement of certain aspects of life. But it just doesn’t make it binding law.
The modern structure of knowledge, whose principles were laid down at the beginning of the Modernity, is focused on a consistent rejection of the hierarchy. This is most clearly seen in nominalism, which overturns the ontological taxonomy that goes back to Aristotle (individual, species, genus – individuum, specie, genus ), in favor of a plane equalization among themselves of all things taken under the modus hicceitas, “thisness” (Duns Scott). From here it is already a stone’s throw to the logical positivism of Bertrand Russell and early Wittgenstein.
The word ‘freedom’ has a powerful hold on the hearts of folks in the States. Invoking it has caused very intense and sometimes contradictory reactions over the years.
This radical revolutionary Freemasonry rejected God and became the main ideological and political enemy of the whole traditional order in Europe. The Third Estate under the Masonic leadership and guidance destroyed the Church, overthrew the Monarchy and still more enslaved the peasants. The materialistic science of the Encyclopedists all directly connected with Masonry and inspired by it replaced sublime idealism of the Christian Middle Ages.
True Europe fought a desperate battle in the Vendée, where the priesthood, the aristocracy loyal to the monarch, and the peasantry – all three classical functions of Indo-European society (according to G.Dumezil) united against bloody Masonic terrorism, the vanguard of liberal-capitalist materialist civilization, which was advancing on Europe. And, in the end, conquered it.
Historical chronicles report that Galileo renounced the heliocentric picture of the world on 22 June 1633. Urban folklore adds that Galileo muttered to himself "and so it goes round and round". This moment is usually thought of as the drama of “a progressive scientific worldview in the struggle against medieval backwardness”. In fact it was one episode in an act of God-killing that stretched over several centuries of Western European history. When in the XIX century Nietzsche proclaimed "God is dead, you killed him - you and me!", he was only stating a fait accompli. He has heroically taken the blame upon himself, trying to live, think, and create with this unbearable knowledge of the Western nihilistic abyss. If there is no God, there is nothing. If the earth is round, material and revolves around the same material sun in infinite - and again - purely material! - space, then there is no God. And there is no world, His world.
Phenomenology studies things as they are in our mind, in the structure of the intentional act (according to Brentano) or as existential (according to Heidegger – Existentiale not Existentielle).
Beginning with our neo-structuralist approach, we recognize nationalism as a complex structure, a framework of intersubjective relations which is of a particular post-formative essence, thus, we do not share the thesis of Gellner (1997) and Guaresti (2000) that identify nationalism with a particular foundational essence, that precedes y gives shape to Nations and States, meaning that – according to these authors– first there would be Nationalism, and then the Nation and then the State, to which we prefix and join to the critique of John Hall (2000), who in his book «The State of The Nation», analyzes Gellner’s theory, concluding that, effectively, not every society is a nation. Thus we conclude that first, the concepts of State and Nation (cultural and politico-juridical) emerge, and finally, that of Nationalism as an exaltation of this latter two.
©2024
