Sparta – VI

This specific chapter of Sparta and its Law has been moved: here.

If you want to read the book Sparta and its Law from the beginning, click: here.

15 Comments

  1. This 11 December 2007 note is interesting:

    Researchers say that the Greek myth that ancient Spartans threw their stunted and sickly newborns off a cliff has not been corroborated by archaeological digs in the area.

    Athens Faculty of Medicine Anthropologist Theodoros Pitsios says after more than five years of analysis of human remains culled from the pit, also called an apothetes, researchers found only the remains of adolescents and adults between the ages of 18 and 35.

    “There were still bones in the area, but none from newborns, according to the samples we took from the bottom of the pit” of the foothills of Mount Taygete near present-day Sparta. “It is probably a myth, the ancient sources of this so-called practice were rare, late and imprecise,” he added.

    Meant to attest to the militaristic character of the ancient Spartan people, moralistic historian Plutarch in particular spread the legend during first century AD.

    According to Pitsios, the bones studied to date came from the fifth and sixth centuries BC and come from 46 men, confirming the assertion from ancient sources that the Spartans threw prisoners, traitors or criminals into the pit.

    The discoveries shine light on an episode during the second war between Sparta and Messene, a fortified city state independent of Sparta, when Spartans defeated the Messenian hero Aristomenes and his 50 warriors, who were all thrown into the pit, he added.

    -AFP

    Source: here.

  2. That is why a powerful religion must have euthanasia, as well as eternal damnation.

    • Rubbish. The message of eternal damnation, if fully introjected by the child, destroys the mind. That’s one of the main messages of my Hojas Susurrantes.

      • What would be the difference in psychological effect between a belief in eternal damnation as a punishment by your own God for your transgressions against him, and a belief in eternal damnation as a result of the Devil laying claim to your soul through sin, which God may not negate even though he would like to?

        In other words the torment is the same, but in one case it is just and comes from your lord and in the other it is cruel and comes from your enemy. Does the source matter more than the severity?

        I would say intuitively that a child who has an extremely painful childhood, but who can clearly attribute their pain to a hostile force (an illness, poverty, a schoolyard bully), will be better off than a child who has a less technically painful childhood but is unable to clearly delineate between the source of his pain and the object of his trust (an abusive parent, an untrustworthy “friend”, etc).

        By extension, I hypothesize that the cruelty of eternal damnation is problematic not so much because it’s so fearful, but because it comes from a trusted source. I’ve never experienced such a fear though, so I’d be interested in your thoughts on the matter.

        (As a side note, the Apocryphon of John makes eternal damnation into a sort of “reverse Nirvana”, where the only way to become subjected to it is to achieve perfect enlightenment and then choose evil rather than good. Why they would do such a thing is unexplained, since surely divine enlightenment would include knowledge of one’s fate.)

      • We are talking about completely different subjects.

        My subject is parental abuse, not other sorts of abuses: an abuse that truly destroys the mind of the child once he grows up.

        See my recent posts on Nietzsche—Zweig’s, Ross’ and Janz’s biographies—to see what I am talking about: A complete destruction of the mind of one person.

        (However, I have yet to post further entries that explain how Nietzsche’s early religious upbringing is related to his adult breakdown.)

      • But how do we go from the destruction of one person’s mind to the destruction of a civilization’s mind? Do you think it’s just the aggregate of individual parent-child dysfunction? Why is it only the White descendants of Christianity who react against their culture in its entirety?

        The psychology of parent-child relations is the one thing in your “witch’s brew” that I least understand. I’ve read your article on depression stemming from an inability to confront one’s parents with grievances. I’ve also read your article on Teresa, with the hypothesis that hatred for one’s parent-culture can be another expression of unresolved parental resentment.

        If your theory is just that these are deranged individuals (in any society) who are turned (in this particular society) into hyper-leftists by Jews or Neochristianity, I guess I can understand that much.

        There’s a strange undercurrent in this blog though. You have articles about hatred for one’s father turning into self-hatred. Then you have an article praising “God the Father”, Dyaus Pitir, as the primordial god of our racial psyche. You have articles about how Christianity is a version of our racial faith poisoned by alien dogma. You have articles about how White Christians hate their own Western Civilization, taking steps that will clearly (if subconsciously) lead to its destruction. You have articles pointing out that even White Nationalists have difficulty comprehending war and suffering on a global scale. You see the abuse you suffered from your father as inherently connected to the cruelty of God’s damnation.

        I don’t mean to poke at old wounds and I certainly don’t want to put things in your mouth that you’ve never said. Nonetheless, taking your blog as a whole, this is the narrative I’m seeing:

        Just as the individual has a biological father, the race has a spiritual father, a god which created it. Our connection with god was poisoned, however, when he turned from a powerful and benevolent patron to an omnipotent “Father” who created all the suffering and evil in the world and actively acts cruelly to boot. The only way the Aryan could handle this change is by internalizing a feeling of guilt, of Original Sin as the source of evil rather than the new creator-God, and by making Jesus – the “good son” who stays loyal to his father even as he tortured him to death – the only figure who can save us “bad children” from our father’s harshest punishment.

        As time went on this became too much to bear. The Old Testament became more widely read, and God’s cruelty became more personal. Satan, the Prince of Hell who served as an alien tormenter, lost his sovereignty and was subsumed back into God. Industrialization and mass warfare brought new levels of suffering and uncertainty, while Protestantism and rationalism disabled the ability of the Church to paper things over with theology and art. People lost faith in Jesus as the favorite son of the otherwise tyrannical father, who assured us that everything would be okay in the end. Through these mechanisms the civilization as a whole began to hate itself, to desperately seek the approval of others, to make self-harming choices for the sake of nonsensical rules, and to destroy any possibility for collective introspection.

      • The psychology of parent-child relations is the one thing in your “witch’s brew” that I least understand.

        Because I have not explained it yet. The Teresa essay you read is only a tiny fraction of why I believe that extreme hatred toward traditional Spain coming from a full-blooded Spaniard explains something that the other models cannot. The loathsome for the West among some hysterical, white leftists is so extreme that something beyond the JQ must be going on in their confused minds (probably unconscious revenge of early childhood wounds).

        However, a “science of persons” is not an objective science. It’s rather similar to what Stefan Zweig wrote about Nietzsche. And even that must be complemented with something that Zweig ignored: the early dynamics between Nietzsche and his very Christian parents. (What I have been quoting from Janz and Ross.)

        Then you have an article praising “God the Father”, Dyaus Pitir, as the primordial god of our racial psyche.

        Do you mean Manu Rodríguez’s article on Zeus? But I am no theist, which means that I don’t believe in the existence a personal God.

        You see the abuse you suffered from your father as inherently connected to the cruelty of God’s damnation.

        It is connected because the specific form of abuse that I suffered is related to my father’s doctrine of eternal damnation and my intimate, and originally mutually loving, relationship with him. (It’s hilarious that a homosexual commenter from CC suggested here in WDH that I was sexually abused to understand my “homophobia” because that was not the kind of abuse perpetrated on me; I was never molested.)

        By the way, have you read my article “On Erasmus”?

        I don’t mean to poke at old wounds and I certainly don’t want to put things in your mouth that you’ve never said. Nonetheless, taking your blog as a whole, this is the narrative I’m seeing: “Just as the individual has a biological father […][…] and to destroy any possibility for collective introspection.”

        Uh, no! I think that my POV is rather different. But it is complex. That’s why I want to translate the five books of my Hojas Susurrantes to English. Remember that only the 4th book has been translated for this blog.

      • P.S.

        “I don’t mean to poke at old wounds…”

        That’s exactly what I do in my book…

  3. I’ve also read your article on Teresa, with the hypothesis that hatred for one’s parent-culture can be another expression of unresolved parental resentment.

    I don’t know if this will hold because it assumes that today’s Leftists are the children of traditional parents. But many of them are not. They are the parents of older Leftists or Left-liberals that were raised without one jot of traditionalism / Christianity / authoritarianism. The secular Left-liberal meme is basically self-replicating now.

    I was an extreme Left-Liberal before I became a libertarian then eventually to go on to race realism, etc. But my parents were only nominally Catholic. They were basically socialists though. Everyone I knew was a left-liberal even the Christians. I never met a Conservative until I was 30 years old!

    Through these mechanisms the civilization as a whole began to hate itself, to desperately seek the approval of others, to make self-harming choices for the sake of nonsensical rules, and to destroy any possibility for collective introspection.

    This is fascinating. But it doesn’t explain why the Aryan accepted Christianity in the first place. As I understand it, Christianity spread because it appealed to women and the poor / slaves. It appealed to the weak basically. Just the same way Leftism appeals to weakness today.

    Both Christianity and Leftism are weakness worshiping pity cults. My question is how did we go from the bold, proud Aryans (like the Dorian Spartans Chechar is posting on) to a bunch of humility and charity worshiping moderns? Hunter-Gatherer hardware? It dumbfounds me.

    On my darker days I think the North-East Asians are the future of humanity. They don’t have the egalitarian sickness that we do and they see themselves largely through a tribal lens that I doubt they will ever lose. (Can you imagine the Japanese ever allowing immigration?) Part of me gets very jealous at this.

    • “I don’t know if this will hold because it assumes that today’s Leftists are the children of traditional parents. But many of them are not.”

      I have never said that what I said about Teresa applies to all leftists. If you read that article you’ll see that, contrary to her, I used the opposite defense mechanism: loving the West.

  4. Do you mean Manu Rodríguez’s article on Zeus? But I am no theist, which means that I don’t believe in the existence a personal God.

    I tend to think of gods as symbols for things that aren’t expressed neatly in literal terms. In that sense it’s not about whether a god exists, but whether it conveys things well.

    I find it interesting that “God the Father” has remained a constant figure in the Aryan mind. It seems to be the form our supreme god always takes.

    It is connected because the specific form of abuse that I suffered is related to my father’s doctrine of eternal damnation and my intimate, and originally mutually loving, relationship with him.

    Fair enough, I didn’t mean to imply the association was spurious. It seems to fit quite well with the other characteristics though.

    (It’s hilarious that a homosexual commenter from CC suggested here in WDH that I was sexually abused to understand my “homophobia” because that was not the kind of abuse perpetrated on me; I was never molested.)

    Off topic, Zoroastrian scripture condemns homosexuality even more explicitly than Hebrew scripture does.

    By the way, have you read my article “On Erasmus”?

    Yeah, if our race fully internalized the concept of eternal damnation we’d probably have all become gibbering wrecks.

    Strangely enough, the dark ages might have saved us from Roman miscegenation, as communism saved Eastern Europe.

    Uh, no! I think that my POV is rather different. But it is complex. That’s why I want to translate the five books of my Hojas Susurrantes to English. Remember that only the 4th book has been translated for this blog.

    I was sort of putting forth a thesis of my own, but if the relationship between children and their parents is hard to understand objectively the relationship between a race and their god must be near impossible.

    Hmm, I’ll have to put my theory on the backburner for now, I can’t think of any way to develop it.

    That’s exactly what I do in my book…

    Yeah, I figured you were thick-skinned but I didn’t want to be impolite.

    • Yeah, if our race fully internalized the concept of eternal damnation we’d probably have all become gibbering wrecks.

      Now we are communicating.

      Strangely enough, the dark ages might have saved us from Roman miscegenation, as communism saved Eastern Europe.

      Yes, but you can imagine what would have happened if a sort of very developed Spartan-Athenian synthesis (i.e., Roman without Christianity but without Roman decadence) had been in charge during the Mongol invasions. This was the greatest catastrophe for the white race together with our times, as Mongols effectively murdered the “Womb of the White nations” located in Russia before such invasions.

      Christianized Europeans were unprepared for such a titanic assault.

  5. Many Christians think it is hypocritical that you propose eugenic infanticide, but complain about being abused as a child.

    Talking about symbols, what about considering the Aryan Sky Father to be the same as the Judeo-Islamic devil; Azazel/Iblis, often supposed to be the first “racist”?

    • No comment on Islam, but “Satanism” seems counter-intuitive as far as Christianity is concerned. Satan is primarily a Christian figure, who becomes prominent in European mythology, which I have less objection to. In the Old Testament he seems just as complicit in tormenting mortals (Job) as God, hardly the “cosmic rebel” his supporters like to think of him as.

      I do have some sympathy for the snake in Eden; he was “created” with no limbs, I’d be mad too! I don’t think he was supposed to be Satan in the original draft though, just literally a talking snake (hence his being cursed with crawling on his belly).

    • Many Christians think it is hypocritical that you propose eugenic infanticide, but complain about being abused as a child.

      First, failing to kill a truly defective baby (say, a mongolic) is abuse for the simple reason that handicapped children get abused far more than healthy ones. I’d have no complain at all if someone infanticided me had I born defective: that’s the compassionate thing to do.

      Second, the word “abuse” is immensely abused in our times. I am talking of mind-destroying abuse, not the comparatively lesser forms of abuse shown in these brutal articles about Sparta. See the effects of the abuse I have in mind in e.g., these entries on Nietzsche:

      https://chechar.wordpress.com/category/curt-paul-janz/

      —although, I admit, very very few have connected the dots as to why a specific form of parental-filial relationship produces the other. Again, this is the subject of Hojas Susurrantes. If you read Spanish let me know and I’ll link to another of the chapters of my book that specifically address this matter.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: