5 Comments
User's avatar
HandsomeHilterian's avatar

Salient points to ponder. One could say the early fraternities and “lodges” worked to establish the type of elite preferences needed once again. To use the language of “revolution” is tricky but alas that is what’s needed. 1776 part deux

Expand full comment
Ignacio Escribano's avatar

Yes!

Great organisations are always born from a kernel of ruthless, capable men, of brothers with a mission. Apostles, Corleones, startup founders, generals… clean and noble radical men, aristocrats of the souls.

That’s always the core from everything stems and greatness comes, and then entitlement and putrefaction and finally a new rising.

Like with the samurai mentioned, there is always a double set of laws: one for the general public and one for my friends and family.

As we say in Spain:

“A mis enemigos, por el culo.

Por mis amigos, el culo.

Y al indiferente, el código vigente.”

Expand full comment
TD55's avatar

Send to Nick Land. A believer that we need to respect Christianity because “it won”

Expand full comment
Metatron’s Secretary's avatar

I really feel like there needs to be clarification in regards to the type of strength and ‘aristocratic’ spirit you speak of.

Lee Kuan Yew is admirable, yes, but he is not the same type person as Diomedes or Achilles. To be blunt he is just as much a bureaucrat and administrator as anyone in the WEF.

In a modern context what does it mean to be a warrior or nietzschean or aristocratic? Is it merely social Darwinism and a belief in eugenics? Is it merely willpower and strong work ethic?

Expand full comment
Dumb Pollock's avatar

How do you keep your army from leaving you at the Hyphasis River?

Expand full comment