OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 01, 2014, 03:11:02 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Let's deconstruct "traditionalism"  (Read 3322 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,859



« Reply #90 on: January 23, 2013, 10:39:50 PM »

Yeah you can become a monarchist I guess defending the divine right of the Stuarts over the British throne and ergo USA. That would only be more cartoonish
I could, but I haven't, and where does that leave your argument?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
augustin717
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,634



« Reply #91 on: January 23, 2013, 10:44:58 PM »

once the means of production change social relations follow suite.  You can't well wish it away. Although those that try are sometimes endearing.

When more people think alike, they may just wish things away, can't they? That's how revolutions work...

The means of production can still change and so can social relations.

There were societies where class struggle was not as sharp or unbearable to demand rebellions. Ideally, that's what we pray for in church: a peaceful, well-ordered, established society. That entails rulers (whether they be elected presidents or monarchs or emperors) and some sort of social order, not anarchy.

The dictatorship of the proletarians also had rulers: some were complete idiots, others were tyrannical brutes. Equally or even more oppressive than the "filthy burgeois"... God save us from them all!
whats your political project ? Mine isn't turning the clock back to Stalin but I'm sincerely curious about yours. Other than outlaw gay parades?
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,859



« Reply #92 on: January 23, 2013, 10:53:54 PM »

once the means of production change social relations follow suite.  You can't well wish it away. Although those that try are sometimes endearing.

When more people think alike, they may just wish things away, can't they? That's how revolutions work...

The means of production can still change and so can social relations.

There were societies where class struggle was not as sharp or unbearable to demand rebellions. Ideally, that's what we pray for in church: a peaceful, well-ordered, established society. That entails rulers (whether they be elected presidents or monarchs or emperors) and some sort of social order, not anarchy.

The dictatorship of the proletarians also had rulers: some were complete idiots, others were tyrannical brutes. Equally or even more oppressive than the "filthy burgeois"... God save us from them all!
whats your political project ? Mine isn't turning the clock back to Stalin but I'm sincerely curious about yours. Other than outlaw gay parades?
and this thread wasn't started in politics why?

So, you just want to go back to Ceausescu?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Romaios
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Romanian
Posts: 2,933



« Reply #93 on: January 23, 2013, 10:57:36 PM »

whats your political project ?

I don't have one - Romanians are traditionally apolitical in their homeland. We import political ideologies (kings also!) from abroad that nobody gives a damn about, pretend to 'implement' them and then passively endure the consequences. We are resigned pessimists.

Mine isn't turning the clock back to Stalin

For some reasons, after hearing your opinions on the "filthy burgeois", I couldn't trust you on that.

Other than outlaw gay parades?

They don't bug me that much, to tell you the truth. I wouldn't join one, but I'd forbid foreigners to come join them in Romania. I'd check all the participants' ID and only allow them to march if they were born and bred in the homeland. Every country is blessed with its own minorities - they should suffice.
   

« Last Edit: January 23, 2013, 11:15:29 PM by Romaios » Logged
augustin717
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,634



« Reply #94 on: January 23, 2013, 11:02:59 PM »

And perhaps building a desert as Romania doesn't have one naturally where truly radical stuff can happen. Or perhaps Gabriel mining corporation will do that as a bonus.
Logged
Romaios
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Romanian
Posts: 2,933



« Reply #95 on: January 23, 2013, 11:07:52 PM »

And perhaps building a desert as Romania doesn't have one naturally where truly radical stuff can happen. Or perhaps Gabriel mining corporation will do that as a bonus.

Oh, forests and mountains serve our needs for solitude all right.

I'm not a fan of 'truly radical stuff'.

I'd do anything in my power to stop those guys. Unfortunately, the only people allowed to vote for/against it were the inhabitants of Alba. Still, less than 50% voted, so the referendum wasn't valid.

Mining for gold should be forbidden altogether. I'd much rather we stayed poor and underdeveloped than do that to our country.

That doesn't make for a political project, though.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2013, 11:16:54 PM by Romaios » Logged
Symeon77
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese
Posts: 102


'with fear and trembling work out your salvation.'


« Reply #96 on: January 23, 2013, 11:11:38 PM »

I would venture that you are essentially correct on the first point- employing what I deem to be the common understanding of the genealogy of what we call traditionalism- though it would still be helpful for all of us if you might propose a working definition of the 'traditionalism' you take aim at.

As I understand it, you are here considering a complex of ideas, generated mostly from 18th-19th C. Reactionary thought in opposition to the ideals of the French Revolution? And how is it that the second point follows from the first? Are there not still ways to fruitfully engage with this perspective without devolving into outright obscurantism? It seems to me that Reactionary/ Traditionalist thought may have more varied permutations than your reductionist perspective admits of.

Why should we give the Progressivist/ Enlightenment side of the coin all of the benefit of the doubt, while refusing to extend the same charity to the other side in our approach to the problems of modern life?

The example you give (the photograph) does not exhaust its possible trajectories.

It strikes me that this thread may have began with the erection of a straw man.
Logged

Where Christianity disappears, greed, envy, and lust invent a thousand ideologies to justify themselves.~ Nicolás Gómez Dávila

Abba Anthony said, "A time is coming when men will go mad, and when they see someone who is not mad, they will attack him saying, 'You are mad, you are not like us.'"
augustin717
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,634



« Reply #97 on: January 23, 2013, 11:20:23 PM »

Yes reactionary thought is indeed varied and also persistent. It has been able to re-invent itself  for over 200 years. When starting this thread-actually what prompted me- was some cartoonish stuff I saw on the internet. Hence yeah, I can see the straw-man too. I was aware of that.
So would you say it's correct to say that what unifies different strains conservatism at the most basic lebvel is a defense of existing hierarchies?
« Last Edit: January 23, 2013, 11:21:56 PM by augustin717 » Logged
Romaios
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Romanian
Posts: 2,933



« Reply #98 on: January 23, 2013, 11:29:06 PM »

Yes reactionary thought is indeed varied and also persistent. It has been able to re-invent itself  for over 200 years.

Weren't you for diversity and freedom of thought and opinion?

So would you say it's correct to say that what unifies different strains conservatism at the most basic level is a defense of existing hierarchies?

That would allow for left-wing conservatives defending the hierarchy of the Party, wouldn't it? Such "Communist conservatives" of the old guard still exist in places like the Republic of Moldavia.

Leaving that unholy and accursed hierarchy aside, why would a hierarchy be inherently evil or undesirable?
« Last Edit: January 23, 2013, 11:30:44 PM by Romaios » Logged
Symeon77
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese
Posts: 102


'with fear and trembling work out your salvation.'


« Reply #99 on: January 23, 2013, 11:50:08 PM »

Yes reactionary thought is indeed varied and also persistent. It has been able to re-invent itself  for over 200 years. When starting this thread-actually what prompted me- was some cartoonish stuff I saw on the internet. Hence yeah, I can see the straw-man too. I was aware of that.
So would you say it's correct to say that what unifies different strains conservatism at the most basic lebvel is a defense of existing hierarchies?

Uncertain. I can see where that definition imposes some unnecessary constraints. That is, I see no reason for it to be limited to upholding existing hierarchies. It can be more historically discontinuous. But generally, yes, I see conservatism as looking for enduring constants in human experience and institutions that it regards as viable for the present; some form of hierarchy is generally admitted as desirable on the basis of that orientation.
Logged

Where Christianity disappears, greed, envy, and lust invent a thousand ideologies to justify themselves.~ Nicolás Gómez Dávila

Abba Anthony said, "A time is coming when men will go mad, and when they see someone who is not mad, they will attack him saying, 'You are mad, you are not like us.'"
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,859



« Reply #100 on: January 23, 2013, 11:53:38 PM »

I would venture that you are essentially correct on the first point- employing what I deem to be the common understanding of the genealogy of what we call traditionalism- though it would still be helpful for all of us if you might propose a working definition of the 'traditionalism' you take aim at.

As I understand it, you are here considering a complex of ideas, generated mostly from 18th-19th C. Reactionary thought in opposition to the ideals of the French Revolution? And how is it that the second point follows from the first? Are there not still ways to fruitfully engage with this perspective without devolving into outright obscurantism? It seems to me that Reactionary/ Traditionalist thought may have more varied permutations than your reductionist perspective admits of.

Why should we give the Progressivist/ Enlightenment side of the coin all of the benefit of the doubt, while refusing to extend the same charity to the other side in our approach to the problems of modern life?

The example you give (the photograph) does not exhaust its possible trajectories.

It strikes me that this thread may have began with the erection of a straw man.

I could swear that there is some Romanian Festival where they they dress up in straw coats.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Jetavan
Argumentum ad australopithecum
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Science to the Fourth Power
Jurisdiction: Ohayo Gozaimasu
Posts: 6,580


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #101 on: January 23, 2013, 11:57:04 PM »

TRADITIONALIST: One who challenges the novel practices and teachings of Catholics (including bishops and priests) which appear to contradict the prior teaching of the Church. A traditionalist questions the prudence of new pastoral approaches and holds the belief that those things generally deemed objectively good or evil several decades ago remain so today.
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,859



« Reply #102 on: January 24, 2013, 12:02:13 AM »

Yes reactionary thought is indeed varied and also persistent. It has been able to re-invent itself  for over 200 years. When starting this thread-actually what prompted me- was some cartoonish stuff I saw on the internet. Hence yeah, I can see the straw-man too. I was aware of that.
So would you say it's correct to say that what unifies different strains conservatism at the most basic lebvel is a defense of existing hierarchies?

Uncertain. I can see where that definition imposes some unnecessary constraints. That is, I see no reason for it to be limited to upholding existing hierarchies. It can be more historically discontinuous. But generally, yes, I see conservatism as looking for enduring constants in human experience and institutions that it regards as viable for the present; some form of hierarchy is generally admitted as desirable on the basis of that orientation.
Conservatism consists in the orientation to subsume change within the existing or preceding (real or imagined) order, rather than favoring conforming it to change (liberalism).  that goes for more than just the hierarchy, as you indicate.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #103 on: January 24, 2013, 12:11:20 AM »

Yes reactionary thought is indeed varied and also persistent. It has been able to re-invent itself  for over 200 years. When starting this thread-actually what prompted me- was some cartoonish stuff I saw on the internet. Hence yeah, I can see the straw-man too. I was aware of that.
So would you say it's correct to say that what unifies different strains conservatism at the most basic lebvel is a defense of existing hierarchies?

Uncertain. I can see where that definition imposes some unnecessary constraints. That is, I see no reason for it to be limited to upholding existing hierarchies. It can be more historically discontinuous. But generally, yes, I see conservatism as looking for enduring constants in human experience and institutions that it regards as viable for the present; some form of hierarchy is generally admitted as desirable on the basis of that orientation.
Conservatism consists in the orientation to subsume change within the existing or preceding (real or imagined) order, rather than favoring conforming it to change (liberalism).  that goes for more than just the hierarchy, as you indicate.
But what exactly are liberals trying to conform the order to change, since that order is already existing, according to you.

And what order are you talking about?

There is disorder all around us.
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Symeon77
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese
Posts: 102


'with fear and trembling work out your salvation.'


« Reply #104 on: January 24, 2013, 12:33:34 AM »

Yes reactionary thought is indeed varied and also persistent. It has been able to re-invent itself  for over 200 years. When starting this thread-actually what prompted me- was some cartoonish stuff I saw on the internet. Hence yeah, I can see the straw-man too. I was aware of that.
So would you say it's correct to say that what unifies different strains conservatism at the most basic lebvel is a defense of existing hierarchies?

Uncertain. I can see where that definition imposes some unnecessary constraints. That is, I see no reason for it to be limited to upholding existing hierarchies. It can be more historically discontinuous. But generally, yes, I see conservatism as looking for enduring constants in human experience and institutions that it regards as viable for the present; some form of hierarchy is generally admitted as desirable on the basis of that orientation.
Conservatism consists in the orientation to subsume change within the existing or preceding (real or imagined) order, rather than favoring conforming it to change (liberalism).  that goes for more than just the hierarchy, as you indicate.

Agreed. I think we have share consensus on this. However, I fear we have moved no closer to the intent of the OP which was aimed at the critique of a certain sort of 'traditionalism', which has yet to be defined. Perhaps through enumeration of certain concrete examples in thought and behavior (besides the one provided) the OP could help bring us towards an elaboration of the concept before we proceed to deconstructing it? I am really interested in this.
Logged

Where Christianity disappears, greed, envy, and lust invent a thousand ideologies to justify themselves.~ Nicolás Gómez Dávila

Abba Anthony said, "A time is coming when men will go mad, and when they see someone who is not mad, they will attack him saying, 'You are mad, you are not like us.'"
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,859



« Reply #105 on: January 24, 2013, 12:50:08 AM »

Yes reactionary thought is indeed varied and also persistent. It has been able to re-invent itself  for over 200 years. When starting this thread-actually what prompted me- was some cartoonish stuff I saw on the internet. Hence yeah, I can see the straw-man too. I was aware of that.
So would you say it's correct to say that what unifies different strains conservatism at the most basic lebvel is a defense of existing hierarchies?

Uncertain. I can see where that definition imposes some unnecessary constraints. That is, I see no reason for it to be limited to upholding existing hierarchies. It can be more historically discontinuous. But generally, yes, I see conservatism as looking for enduring constants in human experience and institutions that it regards as viable for the present; some form of hierarchy is generally admitted as desirable on the basis of that orientation.
Conservatism consists in the orientation to subsume change within the existing or preceding (real or imagined) order, rather than favoring conforming it to change (liberalism).  that goes for more than just the hierarchy, as you indicate.
But what exactly are liberals trying to conform the order to change, since that order is already existing, according to you.

And what order are you talking about?

There is disorder all around us.
We were talking overarching analogies.

But to get to a specific example:the US Founding Fathers (I know that they are connected to the present day conservatives: most successful liberals form a conservative block once they have gotten their way) tried-and succeeded-in conforming the already existing order to the change in autonomy of the colonies, i.e. they had become more or less self sufficient.  That wasn't necessary. The Loyalists  knew that, and the Canadians continued in the already existing order until patriation of their consitution in 1982.  In fact, they did the opposite of the Continental Congress: the Canadian parliament specifically requested to continue political dependence on London in 1931.

Oddly enough, the Canadian Constitutional crisis came when Liberal PM King made a conservative argument to the Governor-General Byng to consult the Colonial Office, the King-Byng-Thing.  But then I never accuse Liberals of consistency.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,859



« Reply #106 on: January 24, 2013, 03:54:07 AM »

Yes reactionary thought is indeed varied and also persistent. It has been able to re-invent itself  for over 200 years. When starting this thread-actually what prompted me- was some cartoonish stuff I saw on the internet. Hence yeah, I can see the straw-man too. I was aware of that.
So would you say it's correct to say that what unifies different strains conservatism at the most basic lebvel is a defense of existing hierarchies?

Uncertain. I can see where that definition imposes some unnecessary constraints. That is, I see no reason for it to be limited to upholding existing hierarchies. It can be more historically discontinuous. But generally, yes, I see conservatism as looking for enduring constants in human experience and institutions that it regards as viable for the present; some form of hierarchy is generally admitted as desirable on the basis of that orientation.
Conservatism consists in the orientation to subsume change within the existing or preceding (real or imagined) order, rather than favoring conforming it to change (liberalism).  that goes for more than just the hierarchy, as you indicate.

Agreed. I think we have share consensus on this. However, I fear we have moved no closer to the intent of the OP which was aimed at the critique of a certain sort of 'traditionalism', which has yet to be defined. Perhaps through enumeration of certain concrete examples in thought and behavior (besides the one provided) the OP could help bring us towards an elaboration of the concept before we proceed to deconstructing it? I am really interested in this.
I can't speak to augustine's idiosyncratic and idealogically driven definition of "traditionalism," but to add what I've posted

To save this thread from its OP:

Traditionalism: the dead world of the living; the orientation of keeping a fossil on life support indefinitely, resisting any signs of life, growth and change.
I would say that any number of émigré communities provide an excellent source of material through which to thresh out the idea.  My favorite example would be the ROCOR émigré community.  Neither all ROCOR parishioners nor all émigrés fell within the definition. I'm thinking of those who I used to define (before the Act of Canonical Communion, when they just became schismatic) as those who would rather have their right arm wretched out of its socket rather than write a word without a "hard sign"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_sign#Old_Russian:_Yer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yat#Russian
and expected that once the Soviet Union fell any day (on the Old Calendar, of course), the Holy Governing Synod in exile would be installed in Moscow and the Romanov pretender would take the throne.  All of which are prime examples of traditionalism, as the spelling reforms had long been advocated under the Czars and had been implemented before the Bolsheviks took over, the restoration of the Patriarchate had been in the works before the Czar fell and was restored the Bolsheviks took over, and the Romanovs had fallen from power and the throne had been offered to other noble houses before Kerensky and his socialist coalition proclaimed Russia a republic.  Even if Lvov retained the government, the world that these ROCOR émigrés tried to maintain in exile would not have existed in Holy Mother Russia.

Émigrés do not have to be so wedded to tradition for tradition's sake to prove something.  Charles X's traditionalism (with its insistence at a coronation with all the pomp in Rheims after the restoration) contrasted with Louis Philippe I's conservatism (with its resumption of the title "King of the French" (as opposed to the feudal "of France and of Navarre") of Lois XVI's phase of rule as a constitutional monarch), which had come out of the latter's liberal agitation for a constitutional monarchy under the  Ancien Régime.  This was epitomized by the preamble of the Constition of the Bourbon Restoration:
Quote
Louis, by the grace of God, King of France and Navarre, to all those to whom these presents come, greeting.

Divine Providence, in recalling us to our estates after a long absence, has laid upon us great obligations. Peace was the first need of our subjects: we have employed ourselves thereto without relaxation; and that peace, so necessary for France, as well as for the remainder of Europe, is signed. A constitutional charter was called for by the actual condition of the kingdom; we promised it, and we now publish it. We have taken into consideration that, although all authority in France resides in the person of the king, our predecessors have not hesitated to alter the exercise thereof in accordance with the change of the times: that it was in this manner that the communes owed their emancipation to Louis, the Fat, the confirmation and extension of their rights to Saint Louis and Philip the Fair; that the judicial system was established and developed by the laws of Louis XI, Henry II and Charles IX; and finally, that Louis XIV regulated almost all parts of the public administration by various ordinances whose wisdom nothing has yet surpassed.

We are bound, by the example of the kings, our predecessors, to estimate the effects of the ever increasing progress of enlightenment, the new relations which these advances have introduced into society, the direction impressed upon opinions during the past half century, and the significant alterations which have resulted therefrom: we have recognized that the wish of our subjects for a constitutional charter was the expression of a real need; but, in yielding to this wish, we have taken every precaution that this charter should be worthy of us and of the people over whom we are proud to rule. Sagacious men taken from the highest body of the state met with commissioners of our council to labor upon this important work.

While we have recognized that a free and monarchical constitution was necessary to meet the expectation of enlightened Europe, We have also been constrained to remember that our first duty towards our subjects was to preserve, in their own interest, the rights and prerogatives of our crown. We have hoped that, taught by experience, they may be convinced that only the supreme authority can give to institutions which it establishes the strength, permanence, and majesty with which it is itself invested; that thus, when the wisdom of the king freely coincides with the wish of the people, a constitutional charter can be of long duration; but that, when violence wrests concessions from the feebleness of the government, public liberty is not less in danger than the throne itself. In a word, we have sought the principles of the constitutional charter in the French character and in the enduring examples of past ages. Thus, we have seen, in the renewal of the peerage, an institution truly national and one which must bind all the recollections with all the hopes, in bringing together former and present times.

We have replaced by the Chamber of Deputies those former assemblies of the fields of March and May, and those chambers of the Third Estate, which so often gave at the same time proof of zeal for the interests of the people and of fidelity and respect for the authority of the king. In thus attempting to renew the chain of the times, which disastrous errors have broken, we have banished from our recollection, as we could wish it were possible to blot out from history, all the evils which have afflicted the fatherland during our absence. Happy to find ourselves once more in the bosom of our great family, we have felt that we could respond to the love of which we have received so many testimonials, only by pronouncing words of peace and consolation. The dearest wish of our heart is that all Frenchmen should live as brothers, and that no bitter recollection should ever disturb the security that must follow the solemn act which we grant them to-day.

Assured of our intentions, and strengthened by our conscience, we pledge ourselves, in the presence of the assembly which hears us, to be faithful to this constitutional charter, reserving to ourselves to swear to maintain it with a new solemnity, before the altars of Him who weighs in the same balance kings and nations.

For these reasons,

We have voluntarily, and by the free exercise of our royal authority, accorded and do accord, grant and concede to our subjects, as well for us as for our successors forever, the constitutional charter which follows:
http://www.napoleon-series.org/research/government/legislation/c_charter.html
which could have been merely traditional, if its traditionalist implementation by the Bourbons did not prove otherwise.  Contrast the tradition based Charter that Louis Philippe accepted with the throne:
Quote
The chamber of deputies, taking into consideration the imperious necessity which results from the events of the 26th, 27th, 28th and 29th of July, and the following days; and from the situation in which France is placed in consequence of the violation of the constitutional charter:

Considering, moreover, that by this violation, and the heroic resistance of the citizens of Paris, his majesty Charles X., his royal highness Louis Antoine, dauphin, and all the members of the senior branch of the royal house, are leaving, at this moment, the French territory—

Declares that the throne is vacant de facto et de jure, and that it is necessary to fill it.

The chamber of deputies declares secondly, that according to the wish, and for the interest of the French people, the preamble of the constitutional charter is suppressed, as wounding the national dignity in appearing to grant to the French rights which essentially belong to them; and that the following articles of the same charter ought to be suppressed or modified in the following manner.

Louis Philippe, King of the French, to all to whom these presents shall come, greeting:

We have ordained and ordain, that the constitutional charter of 1814, as amended by the two chambers on the 7th August, and adopted by us on the 9th, be published anew in the following terms:
http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=863&Itemid=264
Basically, the traditionalist's approach to current reality is to pretend that it hasn't happened, and to convince itself of that by strident reaffirmation of its idealized past, epitomized by Henry V, the heir of Charles X supported by Louis Philippe's heir, loosing the French throne after the fall of the Second French Empire, by insisting that France take down the tricolor and raise up the fleur de lys as its standard.  The royalist majority of France had to proclaim the Third Republic, so far France's longest lasting-although it was founded as a temporary care taker regime until Henry came to his senses. Instead, he became the father of the French Republic (as its presidents pointed out) and doomed the French monarchy with his manifesto of July 5, 1871:
Quote
Frenchmen!
I am in the midst of you

You have opened the doors of France, and I could not deny myself the pleasure of seeing again my homeland. [the Assembly had just let emigres return]

But I do not want to give by my prolonged presence, new pretexts for the agitation of minds so disturbed now.

I leave this Chambord that you gave me and whose name I wore with pride, for forty years, one the paths of exile.

As I walk away, I would like to tell you, I do not separate myself from you; France knows that I belong to it.

I can not forget that monarchist right is the heritage of the nation or decline the duties it imposes on me to it.

These duties, I will act, believe my word as an honest man and king [this was the first time Henri V assumed the title].

God willing, we will build together, and when you wish, on the broad foundation of administrative decentralization and local franchises, a government according to the real needs of the country.

We will give guarantee to these public freedoms to which all Christian people needs, universal suffrage honestly practiced and control of both houses, and resume, by restoring its veritable character, the national movement of the end of the last century.

A minority rebelled against the wishes of the country, made the starting point of a period of demoralization by falsehood and disruption by violence. Their criminal attacks have forced to a revolution a nation that only called for reforms, and have therefore pushed towards the abyss yesterday where she would have persihed, without the heroic efforts of our army.

These are the working class, these workers in the fields and cities whose fate has been my liveliest preoccupation and my dearest studies, which have suffered from this social disorder.

But France, cruelly disillusioned by disasters without parrallel, will understand that does not come back to the truth in changing error, that one can not escape by expedients eternal necessities.

It will call me, and I will come to it as a whole, with my devotion, my principle and my flag.

On the occasion of this flag, one spoke about conditions that I should not suffer.

Frenchmen!  I am ready to do anything to help my country rise from its ruins and take again its proper place in the world.  I am prepared to sacrifice everything for my country, except my honor.

I am, and wish to be, a man of my time.  I render sincere homage to all of France's grandeurs.  Whatever the color of the flag under which our soldiers marched, I have always admired their heroism and given thanks to God for everything that their bravery has added to the treasury of the glories of France.

Between you and me, there should e no misunderstandings and nothing hidden.

Just because there has been ignorant and credulous talk of privileges, absolutism, or intolerance - and, what else - of tithes and feudal rights -phantoms which the most audacious dishonesty attempts to revive before your eyes, I will not allow the standard of Henry IV, Francis I, and Joan of Arc to be snatched from my hands.

It was with this standard that national unity was achieved, it was with this standard that your ancestors, led by my ancestors, conquered Alsace and Lorraine, whose loyalty will be the consolation of our misfortunes.

This standard conquered barbarism in Africa and witnessed the first feats of arms of the princes of my family, and this standard will conquer the new barbarism which threatens the world! I will entrust this standard to the valor of our army, which knows that the standard has followed only the path of honor.

I received this standard as a sacred trust from the old king, my grandfather, dying in exile.  For me, the standard has always been
inseparable from the absent fatherland; it flew over my cradle, and I want it to cover my tomb.

In the glorious folds of this standard without stain, I will bring you order and liberty.

Frenchmen—Henri V. cannot abandon .the white flag of Henry IV

On those "paths of exile", Henri his personally designed flag, oddly enough, was traditional, not traditionalist.


So too the restoration in Romania, Russia, etc. of the national symbols (flage, coat of arms, etc.) of the former monarchies before the socialist/people's republics, and the adoption of the Libyan Revolution of a flag based on the Libyan monarchy.  Traditional, but not traditionalist.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
augustin717
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,634



« Reply #107 on: January 24, 2013, 04:17:59 AM »

Now let's see whether any conservative movement can be an agen of change and emancipation . I mean not in the abstract but in real history.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,859



« Reply #108 on: January 24, 2013, 04:40:38 AM »

Now let's see whether any conservative movement can be an agen of change and emancipation . I mean not in the abstract but in real history.

The Lei Áurea "Golden Law" issued by the Empire of Brazil abolishing slavery, in two articles:
Quote
Law No. 3353 of 13 of May 1888
Declares slavery extinguished in Brazil :
The Princess Imperial Regent, in the Name of His Majesty the Emperor, the Lord D. Pedro II, makes known to all subjects of the Empire that the General Assembly has decided and sanctioned the following law:
Article 1: From this date, slavery is declared abolished in Brazil.
Article 2: All dispositions to the contrary are revoked.
Mandates therefore all authorities, to whom the knowledge and implementation of this law belong to meet, and enforce and guard as fully as it contains.
The Secretary of State for Agriculture, Commerce and Public Works and Acting Foreign Affairs, Bachelor Rodrigo Augusto da Silva, the Council of His Majesty the Emperor, does print, publish and circulate.
Given at the Palace of Rio de Janeiro, on 13 May 1888, 67 of Independence and of the Empire.
[Signatures of the] Princess Imperial Regent.
Rodrigo Augusto da Silva
Letter of the law, by which Your Imperial Highness sends execute the decree of the General Assembly, who saw fit to sanction, declaring abolished slavery in Brazil, as it is stated.
For Your Imperial Highness to see.
Chancellery chief of the Empire - Antonio Ferreira Viana.
Transited on May 13, 1888. - José Júlio de Albuque
The slave owners retaliated by overthrowing the government and proclaiming a republic, trying to connect it the American and French revolutions, although it had connections to neither.


Btw, sleeping easier now that the mortal remains of the only European monarch on US soil has now been removed?
« Last Edit: January 24, 2013, 04:53:23 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,859



« Reply #109 on: January 24, 2013, 05:33:35 AM »

For some traditionalism

That's Chicago City Hall.


Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #110 on: January 24, 2013, 06:46:54 AM »

Off the cuff, since it's quite an amorphous reality, traditionalism seems to me the (reactionary) ideology that one can create nice little islands of archaism that can be insulated from the social and economic forces shaping our contemporary world.

You mean sin?
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #111 on: January 24, 2013, 06:47:50 AM »

Thesis: Traditionalism is a thoroughly modern phenomenon.

Well, wouldn't it take time for something to be a tradition, i.e., only recently being recognized as such?
« Last Edit: January 24, 2013, 07:13:25 AM by Kerdy » Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #112 on: January 24, 2013, 06:49:45 AM »

Quote
The radical antidote? A fortnight in the desert. Or a lifetime.       
Although I really like deserts I do not see how fleeing from human society is a solution. It might be extreme yes, but not a solution.

I would like to introduce you to the desert fathers many of which are saints.
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #113 on: January 24, 2013, 06:50:13 AM »

Also traditionalism-as it is plenty clear on this board and the blogosphere-can be a longing/melancholia that prejudices have changed.

Define prejudices.
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #114 on: January 24, 2013, 06:53:36 AM »

Let me be clear that I although "modernity" can be a very nebulous concept, for me it's shorthand for largely progressive, leftist movements toward greater liberty: economic, social, political. But also the present economic  structure of global capitalism that is liberty's enemy in the end.
Meh. Roll Eyes
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #115 on: January 24, 2013, 06:54:25 AM »

I still do not know who or what are you discussing.

I have an idea, but I prefer him to reveal it himself.
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #116 on: January 24, 2013, 06:56:13 AM »

Quote
human animal

While I cannot force you to stop, I do ask politely you no longer use this phrase.  It really bothers me.  A simple "human" is fine.
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #117 on: January 24, 2013, 06:56:41 AM »

Why is it all important for nearly all self-described "traditionalists" to oppose women's rights, gay rights, worker's rights, immigration, Gypsies etc etc? For some pater familias to feel like he's big and has got power? In the end I think so...On the micro-level I mean. In the macro it's all about the power of capital to easily dispose people as needed by the demands of it's inner logic.

Define "right"
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #118 on: January 24, 2013, 06:58:02 AM »

I still do not know who or what are you discussing.
Trying at least to talk about what fuels movements and individuals self-described as "traditional(ist)".

I think of myself as a traditionalist however many of people here can think of me as liberal. These are very subjective terms.
From what you write here I never thought of you as a "traditionalist" in the sense discussed here.
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #119 on: January 24, 2013, 06:58:49 AM »

Quote
So, to quote one of your 'favourite' authors: "What is lost when something is gained?"   
Perhaps some idyllism, that never was as idyllic to begin with is lost, like a nice home-loomed shirt. What is gained? Berhaps more women getting to have a say in whom they marry? I think it's not a terrible exchange. Neither do some of those that tasted that, think so.

Culture is lost. I'd rather have people wearing traditional clothes, eating home-made food and speaking their native language than whole world wearing jeans, eating McFood and speakind American English

Me too!
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #120 on: January 24, 2013, 07:01:04 AM »

Unlike you I do not look at a past epoch to be reproduced here and now.

Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.
Logged
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #121 on: January 24, 2013, 07:07:44 AM »

Yeah you can become a monarchist I guess defending the divine right of the Stuarts over the British throne and ergo USA. That would only be more cartoonish
Boy, do you jump around a lot.

You are a progressive liberal…we get it…and for the most part, don’t care…and this isn’t the politics forum.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,859



« Reply #122 on: January 24, 2013, 02:24:51 PM »

Yeah you can become a monarchist I guess defending the divine right of the Stuarts over the British throne and ergo USA. That would only be more cartoonish
Boy, do you jump around a lot.
Yes, he spends a lot of time demonstrating that the "progressive" liberals are a squirmy and slippery lot.
You are a progressive liberal…we get it…and for the most part, don’t care…and this isn’t the politics forum.
Few things are more amusing than being called cartoonish by a cartoon.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
augustin717
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,634



« Reply #123 on: January 24, 2013, 02:53:54 PM »

Yeah you can become a monarchist I guess defending the divine right of the Stuarts over the British throne and ergo USA. That would only be more cartoonish
Boy, do you jump around a lot.
Yes, he spends a lot of time demonstrating that the "progressive" liberals are a squirmy and slippery lot.
You are a progressive liberal…we get it…and for the most part, don’t care…and this isn’t the politics forum.
Few things are more amusing than being called cartoonish by a cartoon.
At least on us-not talking about myself here- but some other party members Someone is keeping an eye on. I doubt the establishment feels in any way the same about your kind.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,859



« Reply #124 on: January 24, 2013, 04:58:14 PM »

Quote
So, to quote one of your 'favourite' authors: "What is lost when something is gained?"  
Perhaps some idyllism, that never was as idyllic to begin with is lost, like a nice home-loomed shirt. What is gained? Berhaps more women getting to have a say in whom they marry? I think it's not a terrible exchange. Neither do some of those that tasted that, think so.

Culture is lost. I'd rather have people wearing traditional clothes, eating home-made food and speaking their native language than whole world wearing jeans, eating McFood and speakind American English
Me too!
+1
« Last Edit: January 24, 2013, 04:58:35 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,859



« Reply #125 on: January 24, 2013, 04:59:30 PM »

Yeah you can become a monarchist I guess defending the divine right of the Stuarts over the British throne and ergo USA. That would only be more cartoonish
Boy, do you jump around a lot.
Yes, he spends a lot of time demonstrating that the "progressive" liberals are a squirmy and slippery lot.
You are a progressive liberal…we get it…and for the most part, don’t care…and this isn’t the politics forum.
Few things are more amusing than being called cartoonish by a cartoon.
At least on us-not talking about myself here- but some other party members Someone is keeping an eye on. I doubt the establishment feels in any way the same about your kind.
we don't need a martyr complex for validation.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
augustin717
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,634



« Reply #126 on: January 24, 2013, 05:02:56 PM »

Forgot that u think u have already martyred by the liberal media
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,859



« Reply #127 on: January 24, 2013, 05:03:17 PM »

Thesis: Traditionalism is a thoroughly modern phenomenon.

Well, wouldn't it take time for something to be a tradition, i.e., only recently being recognized as such?
Not as much as you might expect. Hobsbawm and Ranger gave many in "The Invention of Tradition."   Examples that would stick in augustine's craw would be the monarchies of Romania and Greece, and American nationality.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #128 on: January 24, 2013, 05:03:51 PM »

Quote
So, to quote one of your 'favourite' authors: "What is lost when something is gained?"  
Perhaps some idyllism, that never was as idyllic to begin with is lost, like a nice home-loomed shirt. What is gained? Berhaps more women getting to have a say in whom they marry? I think it's not a terrible exchange. Neither do some of those that tasted that, think so.

Culture is lost. I'd rather have people wearing traditional clothes, eating home-made food and speaking their native language than whole world wearing jeans, eating McFood and speakind American English
Me too!
+1
That's really dumb. My "culture" is American. I eat "McFood" and wear jeans. I don't care what my ancestry is and have no desire to preserve any of it's "culture" in America.

Oh and I speak American English because I'm American.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2013, 05:04:39 PM by Achronos » Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,859



« Reply #129 on: January 24, 2013, 05:04:40 PM »

Forgot that u think u have already martyred by the liberal media
Hardly. We're still alive.  And kicking their posterior in ratings
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,859



« Reply #130 on: January 24, 2013, 05:06:09 PM »

Quote
So, to quote one of your 'favourite' authors: "What is lost when something is gained?"  
Perhaps some idyllism, that never was as idyllic to begin with is lost, like a nice home-loomed shirt. What is gained? Berhaps more women getting to have a say in whom they marry? I think it's not a terrible exchange. Neither do some of those that tasted that, think so.

Culture is lost. I'd rather have people wearing traditional clothes, eating home-made food and speaking their native language than whole world wearing jeans, eating McFood and speakind American English
Me too!
+1
That's really dumb. My "culture" is American. I eat "McFood" and wear jeans. I don't care what my ancestry is and have no desire to preserve any of it's "culture" in America.

Oh and I speak American English because I'm American.
Alpo was referring to those of us who are not.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
augustin717
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,634



« Reply #131 on: January 24, 2013, 05:14:35 PM »

Those of us no the Northside of Chicago. The North Bank
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,859



« Reply #132 on: January 24, 2013, 05:25:30 PM »

Those of us no the Northside of Chicago. The North Bank
any post you responding to, or just another shot in the dark?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #133 on: January 24, 2013, 05:32:18 PM »

Quote
So, to quote one of your 'favourite' authors: "What is lost when something is gained?"  
Perhaps some idyllism, that never was as idyllic to begin with is lost, like a nice home-loomed shirt. What is gained? Berhaps more women getting to have a say in whom they marry? I think it's not a terrible exchange. Neither do some of those that tasted that, think so.

Culture is lost. I'd rather have people wearing traditional clothes, eating home-made food and speaking their native language than whole world wearing jeans, eating McFood and speakind American English
Me too!
+1
That's really dumb. My "culture" is American. I eat "McFood" and wear jeans. I don't care what my ancestry is and have no desire to preserve any of it's "culture" in America.

Oh and I speak American English because I'm American.
Alpo was referring to those of us who are not.
And you are not American because?

Wasn't there a debate on this same thing a few months ago?
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Jerkodox
Posts: 6,801



« Reply #134 on: January 24, 2013, 05:36:13 PM »

Alpo was referring to those of us who are not.

Correct. American culture is nice (if such thing exists. I tend to think cultures existing in smaller units than whole countries.) but other cultures are nice too.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2013, 05:37:12 PM by Alpo » Logged

Tags: traditionalism 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.184 seconds with 72 queries.