Are you stern enough to fight the hordes of barbarians? Meed enough to sustain a peaceful society?
Just wantedd to share this with Holla Forums. It's a nice talk about chovalry, by C. S. Lewis in doodle form. NatSocs disregard the nazi imagery, as this was written by a brit when WW2 was a very recent subject.
Other urls found in this thread:
westernrifleshooters.wordpress.com
twitter.com
That talk is for christ cucks.
the true man of our generation will not know peace in their life times if we are to undo the damage of the years.
We must divorce the image of chivalry with feminism and meekness.
the chivalry must be once again be tied about fighting impossible odds and offering respect to the warrior next to you. This cuckery Lewis offers will not do.
and I mean the "warrior next to you" both the ally as the chivalrous foe. for if the battlefield will be our home from now on, let's make one that will give you valor.
0%.
You and Lewis are nostalgic for an era that never existed. Like Lancelot, chivalry is pure fiction.
"And that’s another of my pet peeves about fantasies. The bad authors adopt the class structures of the Middle Ages where you had the royalty and then you had the nobility and you had the merchant class and then you have the peasants and so forth. But they don’t seem to realize what it actually meant. They have scenes where the spunky peasant girl tells off the pretty prince. The pretty prince would have raped the spunky peasant girl. He would have put her in the stocks and then had garbage thrown at her.
I mean, the class structures in places like this had teeth. They had consequences. And people were brought up from their childhood to know their place and to know that duties of their class and the privileges of their class. It was always a source of friction when someone got outside of that thing. And I tried to reflect that.”
George Martin.
Why should I be chivalrous I'm not granted land in exchange of military service?
...
also you and George Martin are clearly just historically ignorant and just projecting? what a shit retarded wannabe medieval author never heard of "Noblice Obligè". a concept that the royalty felt they had to justify their rich and pampered existence by becoming the most perfect ideal people.
George Martin always was a fucking retard and so are you.
You're perfect for my filter, user.
...
This sort of thing is only possible for very small communities, where such advantages can be parcelled out to the participants. There is no way this thing exists in the civic state.
...
Wow. You actually believe that garbage? Let me guess. You are a monarchist.
Your problem is that you are a child living in fantasy land. This isn't a Disney movie with Prince Charming to sweep you off your feet. All of your monarchs are power hungry pedophiles. Always have been. Always will be.
Then you will be conquered again in the future. What Lewis is speaking of is the fact that polite society must not abandon its willingness for warfare. You clearly did not watch it.
Basically he cites the myriad fallen empires as proof that once a 'barbarian' culture conquers territory and becomes prosperous, they inevitably become 'soft'. He says this is specifically a problem that democracies face.
The solution however is not to abandon democracy (necessarily), but to retain a warrior persona. He notes this was more easily done in class-based societies, where you had specific warrior classes; though historically even they grow too weak and fall to corruption.
Thus we must strive to create a society that can be both prosperous and civilised, and also brutal and warlike whenever need arises. This is an aspect of Christianity oft ignored, the willingness to fight and be intolerant has shone through the Bible from the Old Testament to the New (where admittedly the violence was not particularly often, though it did occur in specific moments; but was more to do with having the balls to stand up for what is right, and telling everyone else that what they were doing is wrong). CS Lewis goes on to show it in an easier to understand format; the romantic notion of chivalry from the middle ages and the 'knights'. Now of course there were few if any who fully embodied the mythical Lancelot; however the ability to switch between polite society and a war-footing was regular for a long time, perhaps best exemplified since with the somewhat pompous British and French Empires, where the generals were on the one-hand seen as (by modern americans at least) arrogant, snotty-nosed, holier-than-thou fags who honeyed every word and were obsessed with pleasantries; and on the other hand were the greatest conquerors and warlords known to man.
Some semblance of that is required. Society must be allowed to flourish (as it did in the Christian world with many great advances for the masses like Common Law) without sacrificing the strength and willingness of the people for battle.
Quoting an obese, perverse atheist virgin writer. Absolutely degenerate lad. You also have missed the point.
/pol can't into manners and etiquette, yet claims to fight for civilization.
I watched until 2 minutes.
You completely failed to refute one word of it. Typical sheep.
Your point is stupid. It's based on the childish fantasy of "chivalry". Dragons are more realistic than you "white knights" accomplishing anything. Without a talking tiger deus ex machina, you are fucked. You are part of the problem.
u mad
I miss when well read people came to Holla Forums.
we could even debate intellectual matters like this.
why now even the mongrel mods, feel like they must get involved and actively shut it down.
fucking faggots.
I didn't argue against your points because they are irrelevant. Whether or not most Kings were decent people we cannot say; but we do know of people who are both decent in polite society, whilst also being ever-ready for combat and defending their own.
That is the balance you must seek. Barbarian society is pathetic, it is that of muds and blacks. We want society. But that society will be lost without warriors to fight for it. Thus we must retain balance.
That is what the video is about, CS Lewis is demanding we aspire to be paragons of chivalry. It does not mean we have to be perfect, but it does mean we must be ready to fight, whilst also being capable of building a successful culture.
You should have watched it a bit further. It explains why your stance is bullshit. You are a traitor to your heritage, culture, traditions, race and humanity. But don't let that keep you down, be the ferocious pavement ape you so envy.
Because you and Lewis have absolutely nothing.
Speak only for yourself.
Survival and self defense are necessary.
Your so called "chivalry" is laughable. Name a war that was won using politeness and good manners. If you want civilization to survive, then forget children books with taking tigers. Read the Art of War, the Prince and this.
westernrifleshooters.wordpress.com
That's exactly the point of the video of the video you short-attention spanned numpty. Continued civilisation requires that men stand up and fight to protect society, otherwise it will be conquered by barbarians.
Sometimes I worry about you Holla Forums. I'm hoping this user is just some drunkard who has started a little early, but sometimes I wonder if the ways of plebbit have started to rub off on us. Actually read/watch the things you are commenting on please.
look at the mirror, see why I say we are already 100% meek?
traitor to the heritage? nigger, my heritage never was threatened this far. you are the "everything is fine" percentage of the population that will trade 100 thousand of your own for a single chance to pretend life is good. I bet that if my ancestors saw themselves pressed like this they would fight, OH YEAH that was exactly what happened during the crusades.
the spanish went and took back, meanwhile I bet many of the cucks like you were fine to live under some muslim.
Wanna know my historical example of my chivalry? google Reynald de Châtillon.
he was what you must become.
Everything you say is completely wrong and utterly stupid. The video was about chivalry. Not self defense. Not about winning wars. Stupid chivalry.
Your problem is that you and Lewis feel that you can win wars by being nice and polite. That's dumb. War isn't nice. I would like to see you white knights be respectful to Isis terrorists and challenge them to a duel at dawn. They would show up at your house in the middle of the night, machine gun you to death, then gang rape your "princess" and sell her as a sex slave.
Because this is the real world and not your retarded fantasy about chivalry.
Speak for yourself. Finland used to be 60% Finnish at worst, now it is 92%. Of the remaining 8%, 5 are Swedish (used to be the 40%, they were replacing us) and the rest of the three is divided into Russians, Poles, Estonians and Somalis as the largest groups. 1917 we had a civil war because half the population supported joining USSR.
The thing about fighting is more than just cracking skulls with an ax.
You despair. You lose. The moment you succumb to the level of your enemy is the moment you become it. Chivalry does not mean "not fighting."
As far as I am concerned, I am not one of those "everything is fine" idiots. Everything has been shit since the French revolution in the European sphere. The revolutionaries won, sure. All they did was prove that whatever was before them was better than them, and it was going to get eaten. They were worse than their alleged enemies. Where were the political prisoners?
At this point, the largest threat to my nation is (((EU))) and (((NATO))). Even Britain managed to vote itself out of EU. Immediately afterwards, anti-British posters (and anti-German D/C) posting started. Let loose the ape in you and you've lost everything you claim to fight for. Unless it is your genes, in which case I say good riddance. We have no need for bacteria.
Chivalry is the balance of WARLIKE BEHAVIOUR, UTTERLY BRUTAL, ALL ABOUT DESTRUCTION, SLAUGHTER, THE HACKING OF HEADS AND THE FAMILIARITY WITH SAVAGED CORPSES alongside the those elements that are necessary for successful civilisation in the vein of the Greeks, Romans, French, British and Germans of not so long ago.
The video is in fact less about the 'meekness' side of chivalry, and more about how modern society runs the risk of being taken over by barbarians due to the prevalance of pacifists, the politically correct and the downright cowardly.
Again, watch the bloody video. You are making an utter prat of yourself.
Cutting your dicks when you are babies makes your brains grow wrong. Get kids, don't cut their dicks.
Stop repeating yourself. I watched it. Newsflash, asshole. I wasn't impressed. Lewis goes on and on about Lancelot, the fictional ideal of your chivalry. A man that fucked the wife of his king. The video only gets worse after that.
"Heroism by nature"
He then starts bashing the real world and nature. He stamps his little feet and demands that the world conforms to his boyhood stories of knights in shining armor. He spits on real warriors and soldiers that won real victories and made real sacrifices, just because they weren't as clean and as nice as his British cartoons made for children. Shameful.
user, it's time for you to grow up. Open your eyes and deal with the real world. You may not like it, but it is more interesting and exciting than any anime that you or Lewis can imagine.
Continued.
I will take the hard drinking, foul mouthed Audie Murphy over your “chivalrous” Lancelot, any day of the week.
...
Stop lying using green text.
No, you clearly just defend the "savage side", and disregard the limitations and ideals they should aspire to have. You are so integrated to the world Lewis warned us of, the dualism of weak and barbary.
The fact that the barbarians won WW2 should have made his point clear, but alas, here you are defending US/A/SSR
well if you gonna go like that, sure my people been pressed of course. but it was against europeans, now we are faced with aliens in not only culture, but a full alien species.
but meekness does.
we must purge the meekness of the chivalry, the body of chivalry should be the phrase "Si vis pacem, parabellum.".
Do you know the basics of discipline? It isn't a cuckold relationship, but it definitely does promote meekness.
well if you gonna go like that, sure my people been pressed of course. but it was against europeans, now we are faced with aliens in not only culture, but a full alien species.
but meekness does.
we must purge the meekness of the chivalry, the body of chivalry should be the phrase "Si vis pacem, para bellum.".
Not "defend". I understand it. War is a bloody business.
Your ideals are from fantasy. They are impossible. You are setting yourself up for failure.
Real men that live in the real world need real ideals and real solutions to problems.
That world is the real world. Not your fantasy land.
I don't need to "defend" America, because we won. Victory needs no explanation.
Don't pretend that the Nazis were chivalrous. Hitler would laugh at you "white knights" as well.
well if you gonna go like that, sure my people been pressed of course. but it was against europeans, now we are faced with aliens in not only culture, but a full alien species.
but meekness does.
we must purge the meekness of the chivalry, the body of chivalry should be the phrase "Si vis pacem, para bellum.".
I think we need to go back along way in the philosophical discussion and talk about 'order'. Order is the first virtue from which all others are derived; without order your warriors will be weak, without order your wife will have no loyalty to you, without order your children will ignore you and go off to be whores or drug peddlers.
In other words you will be black.
Meekness is that part of one's moral code that allows for a society that can serve everyone's interests. The 'barbarian' is an umbrella term in Lewis' language to encompass those societies that are selfish and uncaring. In small amounts these things can be good, but they will mean you have a terrible, turbulent life (unless you are a mud who just wants to murder and rape).
Chivalry, and the video in general, is also about being the brutal warrior who has no mercy, who is fierce, stern and intent on slaughter.|
The two balanced allow for a perfect society. Society will never be perfect, but the desire to have these things will make us go closer towards it. If we had 'your' way we would be as the muds or the blacks, a bunch of violent, sex-mad apes who are entirely selfish and think nothing of deserting their children or betraying those closest to them to get ahead. That is not a good society.
Instead we must be 'gentlemen' when in polite society, working for the national interests, working for our families, for our friends. Whenever the need arises however we should be ready to switch into 'warrior' mode, and be merciless unto our enemies who we shall purge with great zeal.
It is not a mere fairy-tale, this is how many cultures have lived for a long time. Yes we will never have a population who 100% exhibits these traits, but the more we can have, the better; and the more such an ideology is supported, the more we shall have.
…
As an aside, if we are entirely brutal as you suggest, then once we conquer this land for ourselves and have some degree of prosperity; we will inevitably become soft and be in turn conquered. That is another point of the video, and a lesson from history oft overlooked.
Chivalry is important. Balance is important.
Useless buzzword. You sound like a dumbass Jedi. Lancelot is the Chosen One that will bring Balance to the Force.
You completely failed to name one.
There's that assumption again. Anyone that isn't Lancelot is a nigger.
No. Leave philosophy to the navel gazing philosophers. People need practical solutions to real world problems. Not asking yourself, what would Lancelot do? That's like asking, what would Superman do?
Real world solutions. Self defense. Buy a pistol for conceal carry. "Better to be judged by twelve than carried by six." Masculinity. "Nice guys finish last." Women hate pussies. Nationalism. Vote Trump, MAGA. Win wars by following the teachings of Sun Tzu, Patton, etc. No mercy, crush the enemy.
The modern equivalent of chivalry is political correctness. Politeness to a fault. Always doing what is acceptable by decent society. Bowing to all of women's crazy demands.
Ladies and gentle nu-males. I present to you the modern day Lancelot, bow down Bernie.
"The old chivalry is dead: wars from now on will be waged by technologists."
You truly are the thickest mother fucker I've debated with (except for this 'reich' guy on here who was some total dumb fuck pagan who didn't understand basic logic).
Balance, as in; you have people train for two purposes. Civilian life and military life. The two are kept separate, but the people can switch between them with ease. When in 'military mode' they are akin to the 'barbarians'; brutal, merciless, intent on slaughter. Conquerors. When in 'civilian mode' they are gentlemen; hard-working, law-abiding (assuming the laws are not evil, like many of ours currently are), kind, merciful.
Actually I mentioned the British and French Empires. I'd also mention Nazi Germany, the early Romans, Samurai culture in Japan, and can you guess it? Chivalric culture in Europe. (Yes many people were not paragons of virtue, but the ability to switch between 'civilian mode' and 'military mode' has been common among all the greatest civilisations, though with time they forgot the military aspect and became 'soft', and were subsequently conquered).
Here's what I said:
"I think we need to go back a long way in the philosophical discussion and talk about 'order'. Order is the first virtue from which all others are derived; without order your warriors will be weak, without order your wife will have no loyalty to you, without order your children will ignore you and go off to be whores or drug peddlers.
In other words you will be black."
I was not even talking about Lancelot but rather making the point that society without order is chaotic and, essentially; black. Meekness is not a perfect allegory for order, however a total lack of meekness does equate to a society without order, unless you want to live in a society of oppressive slavery and constant rebellions/revolutions.
I know philosophy is a big word but it is an incredibly important one to understand. CS Lewis's point was in fact very similar to what you go on to say. Self defense, masculinity, strength, military discipline and training, arming ourselves. We have mastered that 'meek' part of society rather well with our tolerance and PCness (gone way too far in fact; we should only act meekly when in a righteous, civilised and lawful society; which is not what we have), we must bring back balance (your favourite buzzword) by incorporating militarism, nationalism, our own priorities and needs, strength and a willingness to fight for our own best interests.
You were completely wrong then and now.
WTF? You believe Japanese followed a strict social code from British literature?
That is not the definition of chivalry. Not even close. You don't even know what the word means.
"chivalry |ˈSHivəlrē| noun
the medieval knightly system with its religious, moral, and social code.
• historical knights, noblemen, and horsemen collectively: I fought against the cream of French chivalry.
• the combination of qualities expected of an ideal knight, especially courage, honor, courtesy, justice, and a readiness to help the weak.
• courteous behavior, especially that of a man toward women: their relations with women were models of chivalry and restraint."
No wonder you don't make any sense. You people have completely rewritten the definition of the word.
Who else would you be talking about? No one. Your only role model is a fictional character from fantasy. "Samurai", my ass. Do you even know anything about Japanese culture?
I understand it. It's playing semantic games and rewriting definitions to whatever you want. That's the problem with debating you navel gazing types. You ignore the real world and build up fantasies in your own head. You speak words that have completely different meanings to regular people.
That's not called chivalry. That's just called common sense.
During peace time, don't shout "SUPPRESSING FIRE!" and shoot up a kindergarten school with a M-60 machine gun. Wow. Thanks for the advice CS Lewis. Obvious user to the rescue.
well if you gonna go like that, sure my people been pressed of course. but it was against europeans, now we are faced with aliens in not only culture, but a full alien species.
but meekness does.
we must purge the meekness of the chivalry, the body of chivalry should be the phrase "Si vis pacem, para bellum.".
why was this anchored?
define meek for me real quick. I think we are all working on different definitions
the ability to be cucked without giving out reprimands