Quantus tremor est futurus - Actaeon Journal

"Homeric hexameter or a Pindaric ode has as much exactness as any causal relation or mathematical formula. But this rhythmic, metrical exactness is of another, higher order." ~ Friedrich Georg Jünger And yet the same may be said of math and science, it has its own poetry, its own higher order. Where this is lost human language as a whole is diminished, no matter if it is rational or poetic. Archimedes created without formula, and against necessity. He was no inventor of systems or machines, he spoke, as it was for the poets, to the Muses. He studied in his circle until the end, but his death was no mere abstraction. https://youtu.be/c08i_9gumJs?si=yQwf-RhKFHd9foQd

A great lesson of Hamann is that one must be at peace with speaking to no one. Nietzsche, and this is his great failing, thought it necessary to speak to everyone even as he spoke to no one. This was his great fear of the mass, who returned again and again to the original state, to the earth who is no one. And so the Übermensch sees the last man walk on the ceiling, just because he could no longer keep his feet on the ground.

1985 – Descent into the realism of the noble savage.

The irony is that the Left once used these same paintings to glorify the French Revolution and the Third Estate.

Woke as the plebiscite of the defeated revolutionary movements, the aggressiveness of progress without planning.

It is the complete lack of the ethical, of peace, which prevents Nietzsche from achieving poetry. With every word the poetic is given over to the will, but this act is itself unwilled, a rudimentary beauty.

Nietzsche's relation to the great men, "What the shoulders can sustain, and what they must sink under."

"God giveth not all things to each; nor can we each do all things." The will to power, as the will to technology, is man's granting to himself all things, freeing himself of the burden of man and law.

The contradiction of the will: indecision before Scylla and Charybdis.

"I am but a barbarian and do all things barbarously." Both Nietzsche and Luther say this, but their intentions are worlds apart. In this is the question of the will and technology.

A question for Schmittians, why do the parliaments become absolute at the very moment they are replaced by a greater power? A contradictory question, yet it speaks to the illusory forces behind the social war.

Friend-enemy cannot exist apart from sovereign decision. It will either endure itself or be resolved as if automatically. The sustained presence of private foes is an element of party politics, a type of non-decisionist power.

Carl Schmitt tells us that the difference between a parliamentary state and a multi-party state can be greater than that between monarchy and any other state form. This introduces a great problem in the determination of groupings as classical oppositions no longer hold. The question of monarchy or republic is surpassed, with Left and Right turning towards the movement of parties as their fundamental distinction. Here Plato's Five Forms are left behind, becoming mere implements of technical necessity – the elemental or titan state rises.

Generally I try to avoid references to popular culture, but The Prisoner is a great representation of Carl Schmitt's concept of space and how the cold civil war affected everyday life and mores.

What does friend and enemy mean in a state without a sovereign, where the face of power is constantly changing, and where the will of man has been limited to the amassing of information to perfect systems of control? One must not forget that the system of communication through which a new enemy is named and denounced daily is a system developed by the intelligence state within the cold civil war. The world enemy appears from nowhere, and returns to nothing. He is something to be appropriated, and he is the self-destroying figure who appropriates entire lands and peoples.

Lessons for the Post-Right – Take breaks from the discourse until you hit your one-rep max.

What is the difference between loss and decline?

The aggressiveness of progress follows the loss of mores, it is the world citizen's counterpart to nationalism and defeat.

What is the friend-enemy distinction to master and slave? The European Revolution is also a civil war of the estates. But the totalisation of humanity into a single estate does not unite man, class conflict is introduced with a destructive power equal to the national wars. Unity fanatacism is combined with the conceit that every last man represents the sole power over the earth. It is in this light that we should see the worker and bourgeois, as part of the world conflict, but also the spiritual battle of master and slave which exists in every man. The species in his shadow.

The private man holds up the celestial spheres.