Could Stoicism save the West?

Could Stoicism save the West?

It's possible. Certainly the west could look to the past to relearn reason and logic and decide to move in a new way forward.

A sophisticated, transcendental Paganism, where the gods are understood to be aspects of nature, is a good way for framing the universe.

The curiosity of Democritus, the Determinism of Zeno, and even the cynical freedom of Diogenes should not be taken as Nihilistic, but accepting the universe as it is, and working around it. I agree certain aspects of Eastern belief systems- Jainism, Taoism, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. brought Existential and Phenomenological forms of inquiry and introspection to the Orient, however I hold that the Greeks are the best place to start for the Faustian European man.

Christianity, however, had too many structural weaknesses. I can respect it for holding together Europa as it did, and doing so as it soared, but it should be seen as a crutch that has rotted away and served its purpose.

Stoicism may not "save the West", but if the West actively starts to act in saving itself, it may look to Stoic and related forms of thought and behavior to excel in the new world it will head.

We as men need to be sound of will, which means to be sound in our adherence to the laws of nature to excel within it. This means our "bodies", "minds", and "spirits", if you wish to see them as three divergent phenomena (which I do not).

Bumb to save western civilization

This means to change the way we look at nature, or GNON if you prefer. To have power is to successfully exert one's will over nature, most especially the humans within it. This should be what the new man should aspire to- and not the power of a petty tyrant, but the power of a commander of a rifle platoon under heavy fire, who demonstrates leadership with his own brain and body, and earns the loyalty and sacrifice of his subordinates.

>Existential
>Faustian European man.
>muh rightwing Oprah-tier spirtualism
What does it feel like to just copy other people's opinions from chans? To spew Evola and never get anywhere? Does it feel like you're fitting in?

only if we also wear togas and prioritize NEET lifestyles

No. It was invented by the Greeks and the Greeks aren't white.

Can somebody give me a quick beezow doo doo zopittybop bop bop on stoicism?

Counter-revolutionaries from de Maistre to Schmitt all major ones in the years between them should be seen as what priests and prophets should be (as opposed to the technocratic Brahmin class we have in the secular realm, and the weak-kneed NEETs we have in the religious):
>advocates of rulers far more powerful and superior to themselves
Monarchs for de Maistre, and the next best thing in the age of a degenerated aristocracy and nobility, Hitler for Schmitt.
>relayers of uncomfortable but important, even doomsaying truths
For instance, that at all points for all organisms, there is a war of all-against-all. Oxytocin and Liberalism cover this up, but the State is merely a proxy for the warlord of old.
We must all accept that nothing and no one is equal, and live and strive accordingly.

Idiots who killed Sup Forums

Monarchs are a product of the pedophillia faggot cult called Roman Christianity. They were the Stalins of old that demoralized a warrior race and turned them into peasants/slavs. Again, you don't think. You just spew memes from Oswald and Evola. Aristocracies of old were based on founding tribes of a nation and a racial class system (Aryan = Ari_stocrate)

Zorastrianism and all it brought was a mistake (Christianity, Judiasm, Dualism, Islam). And psudo-intellectual "esoterics" just try to recapture the age of great paintings.

Even further back, lol

>Liberalists: I want to back to the 1990's
>Liberals: back to the 1960's
>normiecons: back to the 1950's
>Natsocs: back to the 1930's
>Libertarians: back to 1776
>Deusvulters: back to the middle ages
>OP: back to ancient greece
>Pagans: back to god knows how long ago

Is there an ideology that is looking forward and doesn't just want to go back to a previous state in the system that brought us here?

>Evola
I am a Physicalist, while Evola very much pushed for belief of and actions pursuant to a spiritual realm. The only Christian thinker I have mentioned was de Maistre, and even his mode of thought was far from the Egalitarian refuse modern Christians tend to eat and excrete today. I respect Evola in many aspects, but he has not affected my views as much as Spengler (who should most especially be associated with "Faustian Man").
>Spiritualism
There is a difference between the form of Spirit that Nietzsche or even Schopenhauer or Heidegger worked to define and operationalize in secular manners, and that of various theists, especially the more vulgar ones found in the Semitic religions.

No, unless forward is no whites and majority homosexual, then yes.

National Socialism 2.0
+uk
-italy edition

>Pagans: back to god knows how long ago
You forgot OG nazis-
>back to pre-Yamnaya proto aryans
And yes, unironically fascism.

>Faustian
>not spiritualim
Spiritualism = dualism. And anytime you use the meme you creat two worlds. The gods of old were one with nature, until Plato came around and started his austism against the Sophists.
Evola is not worthy of respect. He's just another over-written phonie and a failure.
The definition of NEET depression, "ride the tiger because kali yuga". What's worst is none of you seem to know that the end of Kali Yuga brings on the bronze age, not golden.

Point being, Sup Forums's book list starting with Spengler, Evola, and any other esoteric has made rightwing philosophy into a stactic defeatist cyclical larp, while the bastardized Zoroastrian faiths continue to creat a melting pot of shit and ooze

You are mistaken. μόναρχος is a very ancient word, more ancient than Christianity as far as one can tell, and recognizes something even more ancient than the word itself. The original one-rulers were warriors themselves. Even through the Medieval periods we had instances of rulers going into battle themselves. A peasant class and a warrior class has always existed, and will always exist. It is not in a monarch's interest to make warriors into peasants. It may, at the very least, be in his interests to make warriors into mercenaries, though this would degrade defense of the realm for generations to come- ill-advised for a hereditary monarch.

So long as aristocracies existed, there was always at any given time one above all. There must always be an AMOG. This has nothing to do with Zoroaster, Abraham, Yeshua, or Mohammed.

>Is there an ideology that is looking forward and doesn't just want to go back to a previous state in the system that brought us here?
The fatal dieases of the "conservative".
But NatSoc was futuristic.

Nothing can save the west.

There has never been a civilization less receptive to Stoicism than the modern West.

>Is there an ideology that is looking forward
transhumanism

There sure is.

There is a difference to going back to a certain time and place and attempting to recreate it (which we would rightly call inauthentic, futile, or LARPing), and recalling the modes of thought and action that informed those times, and adopting what works from them. It's the difference between using rusted antique tools, and using tools that were cast with higher quality metal, as the antiques were, but have mechanisms that make them better for specific jobs, and modern tools are.
Nietzsche was not a dualist. When he used "spirit", he wasn't describing something that exists outside of nature, but an aspect within nature itself. Much the same, even when we have brought "love" and "hate" from a spiritual realm outside of nature, down to chemical reactions within it, that doesn't mean those terms lose their meanings or usefulness. The mechanisms behind them, and their descriptive powers, have simply shifted. It is also not accurate to conflate Spengler's spiritualism with Evola, for the reasons stated above: Spengler was very much aware of the finality of things in this material world, and used his terms in accordance with it. Evola very much held to a world beyond.

it has no soul

>It is not in a monarch's interest to make warriors into peasants.
Yes it is. And they turned all of Europe into slaves. The useless cannon fodder of Christian militaries killed our race and mixed our blood with mud, because they're slaves.
>hereditary monarch.
inbred rabbi jesus worship
>So long as aristocracies existed, there was always at any given time one above all.
Yeah, the Pope. A gay pedo who worshiped a Jew.
>This has nothing to do with Zoroaster,
Everything you esoterics believe is just a nigger-tier version of lost Zoroastrianism. That's why Nietzsche wrote Zuruthustra. His entire point was to kill the meme of spirtualism which lead to nihilism once the slaves broke their own mental chains because of the printing press and industrial age.

You can't conserve a dead folk culture. It's gone, they killed our priests and replaced them with Mithraic rabbi loving pedos.

Monarchism is just a master slave dialectic, not a true world spirit. No more moldbug or Spencer for you, son. Putin will not create the NatBol Eurasian nightmare world Dugin dreams of.
>nb4 Donald Trump will complete the system of german idealism

>transhumanism
BORG of the Jew World Order.
Eugenics is Aryan Superman futurism.
More conservative larping Brahma /Hegel. Didn't work the last time, wont work now.

>Nietzsche was not a dualist.
No one said that.

>It is also not accurate to conflate Spengler's spiritualism with Evola,
LOL!

>things in this material world, and used his terms in accordance with it. Evola very much held to a world beyond.
That's dualism you fucking mind control victim. You're still larping Zoroastrian "magic"and never understood Nietzsche. Stop larping as "smart". You're a college junior at best.

We had disagreements in this thread, but they are disagreements between brothers, not strangers. I hold that that the current order is sick, and is an ark should be left to rot away. I have built my family, my property- my lifeboat- which will likely survive after the ark does not. Those who may disagree with me may have built lifeboats of different dimensions and specifications, and with a different destination in mind, but I am confident that both of our descendants will find shore, and conquer once there.

It could help. Marcus Aurelius is someone whom every Polack should read and I certainly think Plato was right when he argued in "The Republic" that there is a need for a class of society to rule the others, selected for their dual characteristics of the ability and violence of a guard dog tempered by the wisdom and thoughtfulness of the poet.

>That's dualism you fucking mind control victim.
When I said "Evola very much held to a world beyond." I meant that was Dualism- in contradistinction to others I have mentioned, such as Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Spengler, and Heidegger, who were all Monists. Ergo the preceding clause "It is also not accurate to conflate Spengler's spiritualism with Evola", and "I respect Evola in many aspects, but he has not affected my views as much".
>The useless cannon fodder of Christian militaries
This is not historically accurate; in fact during the crusades it was the Peasants who were called upon to be warriors, not the other way around.
>inbred rabbi jesus worship
Hereditary monarchs existed long before Semites controlled politics, and poor hereditary monarchs should be killed such that they could not keep power for themselves.
>Yeah, the Pope. A gay pedo who worshiped a Jew.
I am no Christian, but AMOGs of aristocracies existed long, long, long before any pope came into being.
>His entire point was to kill the meme of spirtualism which lead to nihilism once the slaves broke their own mental chains because of the printing press and industrial age.
We agree, but Nietzsche himself rejected the old Dualistic "spirit" in favor of a creation of a new one, within his Monistic views. He redefined and operationalized "spirit" as "to carry one's head freely", just as scientists have redefined "love" as "a series of biochemical reactions". Neither spirit nor love have lost usefulness as terms.
>You can't conserve a dead folk culture. It's gone, they killed our priests and replaced them with Mithraic rabbi loving pedos
We agree.We disagree in that this is what Monarchism entails.
>Monarchism is just a master slave dialectic
I have already stated that weak monarchs deserve to be deposed by whoever has the power, whoever has the power should be able to rule, that I respect the monarchs that went into battle themselves, and the paragon of leadership is the platoon commander.

Good night and good fight to all.

>material world,
= dualism.
>This is not historically accurate; in fact during the crusades it was the Peasants who were called upon to be warriors, not the other way around.
Slaves, like modern christian militaries fighting for Zionism. In the end it muddied our race and expanded Islam.
See children's crusade.
>Hereditary monarchs existed long before Semites controlled politics, and poor hereditary monarchs should be killed such that they could not keep power for themselves.
Not really. Sure it was past on but they were challenged. It wasn't until Chistians came that it made them into absolute monarchs by blood rather than by ability.
>I have already stated that weak monarchs deserve to be deposed by whoever has the power,
They don't get disposed. They create brother wars for sometimes centuries