Phyletism: An Unconvincing Heresy?

Having recently been reminded that this idea of phyletism exists, and that it was condemned at or near the time when the revolutionary virus had become widespread, I have begun to wonder if this supposedly great evil is somewhat less evil than is supposed. Perhaps this is another 'evil' in the sense that it is a bureaucratic nightmare if the people stop seeing this or that bureaucrat as a legitimate one because he doesn't happen to be of the people.

I seem to remember somewhere in the Shahnameh some mention of Christians, complete with their bishops, showing up on the field of battle. I definitely know Erasmus had an unkind word or two to say about such things too. But it seems to me 'thou shalt not kill' and Christ's blessing of the peacemakers would be enough to condemn this.

There are a range of insults a modern person could suppose might happen in a phyletist church, but to an ancient christian, these insults would be sins against hospitality, and have little to nothing to do with any sort of institutional racism.

From Wikipedia:

The term phyletism was coined at the Holy and Great pan-Orthodox Synod that met in Istanbul (then Constantinople) in 1872. The meeting was prompted by the creation of a separate bishopric by the Bulgarian community of Istanbul for parishes only open to Bulgarians. It was the first time in Church history that a separate diocese was established based on ethnic identity rather than principles of Orthodoxy and territory.[2]

On 10 August 1872 the Synod issued an official condemnation of ecclesiastical racism, or “ethno-phyletism,” as well as its theological argumentation

We renounce, censure and condemn racism, that is racial discrimination, ethnic feuds, hatreds and dissensions within the Church of Christ, as contrary to the teaching of the Gospel and the holy canons of our blessed fathers which “support the holy Church and the entire Christian world, embellish it and lead it to divine godliness.”

The importance of the old standards have, undoubtedly, been subsumed by the new anti-racist standard. In the West, churches of every denomination have been badly effected by the revolutionary movement and the subsequent dysgenic effects on IQ over the years. It is doubtful the East is immune, though I do believe the relative anarchy largely kept doctrine and liturgy untouched.

I have a dim view of modern nationalism. I believe Bismarck basically destroyed Germany in order to create the modern German state. There are, however nations, and the Bulgarians may have been responding in self-defense more than anything else. I don't know. Google searches on this are a bit frustrating.

People of today tend to have a disordered view, and it can be seen in the lack of family formation, misguided evangelization adventures, and the tendency to assume European civilization can run just as well if you just plug a bunch of other warm bodies into it. If there is no Christendom, there is no place to live as a Christian.

Mutually Assured Destruction Requires Intelligence

Given my view that IQ has been dropping in the West since Victorian times, and that various people in D.C. tend to say stupid things, I have been worrying that the general intelligence of those in charge of pushing the buttons may drop to the point where some idiot may actually push the button.

This would be an interesting addition to the hypotheses that various people have about humanity rising to a certain level of technology over and over, only to sink back down into abject, global poverty over and over again. Seems nutty, but so did a Trump presidency just a little while ago. Now a Trump presidency looks like the best of a bad lot.

M.A.D requires people in charge who are intelligent enough to think through actions and consequences. Do we see much of this in D.C.?

The False Allure Of the Unprincipled

Principles do not sell well with the unprincipled. People can get confused about this, for the unprincipled do not have poor reactions to what they perceive as new things, while the principled will fight tooth and nail if they think a principle new to them interferes with one they picked up earlier. I think libertines often give libertarians an initial positive response- especially if the libertarian limits his remarks. But the libertine wants to maintain his current edge upon the rest of the world. He wants his costs externalized as much as possible, and he (and most definitely she: notice that abortion, birth control, etc... are all called 'health care' by these narcissists) shall insist on government for that reason.

The principled, meanwhile, come with all sorts of principles, and all sorts of priorities.

If a principle is to be adhered to widely, you must figure out how to get principled people to add it to their collection.

A vast amount of resources are wasted in this world attempting to get the unprincipled to adopt one. This is, usually, deeply unfair to the principle, because they have no earthly idea how to properly care for it. It is also unfair to the principled, because they- through slow growth and having a proper position in society can actually manage some semblance of a principled culture even among the unprincipled, assuming we are allowed proper governance rather than the obscenity we have now.

Normalization of Deviancy Continues

Well, the long march continues. Meanwhile, most Christians continue a long march of their own- a false evangelism. An exercise in futility.



Can any of you really continue to be so delusional, and think you are helping? If you were effecting the culture in any positive way, this wouldn't be happening.

Thanks to Tex for the link to this rather solid primer on this great sadness.

Couldn't The Kessler Syndrome Be A Weapon?

Charles Stross is worried about the effects of the commercial development of space:

Kessler Syndrome, or collisional cascading, is a nightmare scenario for space activity. Proposed by NASA scientist Donald Kessler in 1978, it proposes that at a certain critical density, orbiting debris shed by satellites and launch vehicles will begin to impact on and shatter other satellites, producing a cascade of more debris, so that the probability of any given satellite being hit rises, leading to a chain reaction that effectively renders access to low earth orbit unacceptably hazardous.

And, of course, Stross asks a question most interesting to me:

So, suppose that with the exception of already-on-orbit GPS clusters and high altitude comsats, we can't launch anything else for a century. What effect does it have on society and geopolitics when the sky goes dark?

Let me add another supposition: What if someone, tired of the current American hegemony, decides to hasten the Kessler Syndrome? Could a payload of ball bearings, for instance, be delivered to start the cascade, and potentially even take out the existing GPS & comsats? How much debris is needed?

This has the potential to significantly shift power, while, presumably, not causing death like a nuclear detonation would. Some folks may even take the view that it could be the moral choice, as it can be viewed as defense of sovereignty and/or in some cases, even private property.

Much depends on how fed up people are with the current system, versus how much they like the convenience of what the satellites provide.

Family vs Nation

We can see now a sort of pernicious, exploitative aspect of governmental and corporate activities such that they tend to lure men and women away from creating families and towards various hobbies, entertainment, etc...
I think this exploitation began with nationalism. Seems rather transparent that nationalists began a program of militarization and war, and sacrificed the people to it.

What is needed is for the family to once again become more important than the bureaucrat. This is true even for the supposed nationalist wishing for a strong nation, because a strong nation is a byproduct of strong families, and not the by-product of, say, Bismarck. The nationalist project led rather directly to war, and war is dysgenic, especially in our era of modern weapons. Additionally, subsequent levels of entitlements and/or government programs are dysgenic as well.

So, if you can somehow return some of these functions that the government has appropriated back to families and extended families, the people will begin to make better choices.

At the very basic family unit level, this would mean more families and less otaku.

At an abstract, societal level, this would mean the eventual adoption of a currency that held value and/or appreciated in value. It is the bureaucrat's incentive to use as much as he can now, while he has some access to funds, but it is to the families' incentive to save and improve what the family has.

This is why there is a fundamental, though often overlooked, difference between the facist mode of government and the monarchist one. Admittedly, those who dabbled in absolutist philosophies did come nearer the fascist mark, and set up the conditions for the rise of bureaucracy, but for most of history monarchy can be viewed as a family business, with the family claiming some sort of property right over a particular realm.

Tradition is helpful, but I cannot advocate for any sort of direct approach 'back' because I know it wouldn't work. Often people think they are reaching for tradition, but they are instead reaching for last year's 'progress'. Additionally, current generations are hopelessly mired in misinformation. They often think what is bad for them is good for them and vice versa.

White Nationalist Logo, From the Future

My source for progressive propaganda dressed up as Science! has provided me with the new open borders logo:



If it weren't for the words, it could be a white nationalist logo. Maybe it is a white nationalist logo, from the future, when everyone from the global South has moved north, whites are a minority and at risk. Well, considering South Africa, shouldn't it say 'no murder'? Oh, wait, that circle is a target, isn't it? It doesn't have cross hairs, but it does contain, rather poignantly, what is being methodically destroyed.

Derision, thou dost deserve it so.