Comments for The Orthosphere

Comment on What is the Orthosphere? by nickbsteves

nickbsteves — Sat, 25 May 2013 18:34:17 +0000

Good luck coming up with a new name. Moldbug called it The Cathedral. The Cathedral it is… if you wanna use quoties, I’m sure that’ll be fine.

Comment on Theodicy and sexual frustration by rightwingnutsandbolts

rightwingnutsandbolts — Sat, 25 May 2013 18:23:19 +0000

Since I am ambidextrous, I should be a wimp and a liberal. Brings up and interesting question: what is a liberal? And what is authoritarian? If the answer to being liberal is “live and let live”, then I would say that I am not. If it is to be compassionate, then I am. But, if part of compassion is to allow people to live in unhealthy ways, then I would say I’m more of an authoritarian and less compassionate.

God took a bunch of timid men and made them the apostles. Some of them were fiery by nature, and others not. None of them had enough huevos to face death for the Gospel until he gave it to them. In the end, I think one’s leanings are more dependent upon one’s programming than one’s genetics.

Comment on Theodicy and sexual frustration by rightwingnutsandbolts

rightwingnutsandbolts — Sat, 25 May 2013 18:14:57 +0000

I suppose I could prove you wrong, but then I couldn’t save myself for marriage

Comment on Theodicy and sexual frustration by rightwingnutsandbolts

rightwingnutsandbolts — Sat, 25 May 2013 18:13:59 +0000

Yikes! I’m doomed!

Comment on Theodicy and sexual frustration by rightwingnutsandbolts

rightwingnutsandbolts — Sat, 25 May 2013 18:06:42 +0000

Excellent points. As much as a talk about how much feminism is emasculating men, it’s also true that our toxin-filled world is doing a good job of it also, as well as creating more manly women.
It’s also true that children are reaching puberty at a much younger age because of what they eat, and they grow much bigger. This means they become sexually aware and mature much sooner, even as our society coddles them to shirk the responsibilities of adulthood for much longer. When I was young, most kids got interested in sex in high school and were married within a few years. Today, kids must think about sex from middle school, but no one expects them to be married much before mid-20′s. So we’ve opened the celibacy gap from a few years to more than a decade. During this time, kids tend to do all the sexual experimenting they please, so that marriage no longer holds any special mystery. Even most couples who do marry have little to discover about their partners after marriage. Couple this with decreasing libido, and there is little wonder that marriages are lacking.
However, the marriage vow, if taken seriously, says “to love”, not “to be in love (lust).” Marriages fail because lust is selfish. Love is a giving of oneself, selfless. What else can explain loving couples in their 5th and sixth generations of marriage, when, often, the lust is long gone.
One should feel guilt for violating God’s laws. That is what drives them to repentance and saves them. That humans will fail is inevitable. That we do not minimize the sin is paramount. That we understand the depths of God’s grace and live in his forgiveness is essential.

Comment on What is the Orthosphere? by The Man Who Was . . .

The Man Who Was . . . — Sat, 25 May 2013 17:33:09 +0000

That about sums it up.

Comment on What is the Orthosphere? by alcestiseshtemoa

alcestiseshtemoa — Sat, 25 May 2013 16:25:05 +0000

Cult of Moloch sounds good.

Comment on What is the Orthosphere? by Kristor

Kristor — Sat, 25 May 2013 16:18:54 +0000

But there are no Puritans around any more, many Englishmen and Protestants are members of the orthosphere, and the enemy is not theist.

Just call it the Liberal Establishment and everyone will be clear on what is meant. If you want to connote its religious foundation, call it the Cult of Moloch.

Comment on What is the Orthosphere? by Bonald

Bonald — Sat, 25 May 2013 14:44:13 +0000

Hello Oligopsony,

You know, I am surprised radical Leftism like yours isn’t more popular. I’ve often thought that many Leftist beliefs could be more easily defended as objectively true and good than as neutral. Not that I think they are true, but the claim is not as unreasonable as the claim that enforcing those beliefs is a form of neutrality. If the goal of these neutrality claims is to avoid a discussion of Leftism’s objective merits, it seems like a bad move, because the neutrality claim itself should be a harder sell than what one wants to sneak in under it. Nevertheless, liberals keep coming back to it, so I can only conclude that it really does reflect something about how they see themselves.

Comment on What is the Orthosphere? by Bonald

Bonald — Sat, 25 May 2013 14:36:22 +0000

Hello Mr. Powell,

Thank you for elaborating your group’s positions. I had been hoping that my “What is…” post would inspire other antiliberal blog clusters to do the same so that we can all have clearer idea of where we agree and disagree.