@SecureSignals's banner p

SecureSignals

Training the Aryan LLM

14 followers   follows 1 user  
joined 2022 September 06 13:34:27 UTC 

				
User ID: 853


				
				
				

			

		

	














	


		


			



	

		

			

			

				

					

						

							
						

						

							
							

								
SecureSignals


								

								

								
								
								

								
							
					
 
				


				
Training the Aryan LLM

				
				
				

				

					14 followers  

					follows 1 user  

					joined 2022 September 06 13:34:27 UTC
				


				
					

					
No bio...

				

				

				

				

				

					

					

					
					
					

					
User ID: 853


					
					
					
				

			


					

						
					



		

	

 











			
			

			
			

			




	


		

			
‎

			

				
				

					Hour
					Day
					Week
					Month
					Year
					
				

			


			
‎

			

	
	

	 Hot Bump Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
	



		

	






	

		
		

		
		
	

	

  







		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 17, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
That perspective has nothing to do with Hitler's political objectives or animosity towards the Soviet Union. Hitler acknowledged racial inequality even within the German people has well. I also think even many HBD-aware Russians would be sympathetic to the suggestion that the Russians seem to have less capacity for constructive politics... certainly the evidence is stacked against them on that question, with the eternal dysfunction of Russian politics and the bright spots being disproportionately associated with leaders of German ancestry...


Hitler's animosity towards the Soviet Union is not based on the Slavs it's based on Bolshevism. It's a dishonest reading of Mein Kampf to pretend otherwise. He could not possibly be more clear that he regarded Bolshevism as the ultimate enemy, but you somehow manage to entirely elide Hitler's self-stated reason for his animosity towards the Soviet Union in his own work, which is the traditional approach taken from the mainstream perspective. That animosity was not derived from his plausible claim that the Russians have less capacity for constructive statecraft, or some claim that the Slavs were not Aryan even though they were explicitly considered Aryan in German racial law.




The organization of a Russian state formation was not the result of the political abilities of the Slavs in Russia, but only a wonderful example of the state-forming efficacy of the German element in an inferior race. [emphasis added]




It's worth pointing out that Hitler's theory he applies to the Russians here he applies to the Germans as well:




The German people came into being no differently than almost every truly creative civilized nation we know of in the world. A numerically small, talented race, capable of organizing and creating civilization, established itself over other peoples in the course of many centuries. It in part absorbed them, in part adapted to them. All members of our people have of course contributed their special talents to this union. It was, however, created by a nation-and-state forming elite alone. This race imposed its language, naturally not without borrowing from those it subjugated. And all shared a common fate for so long, that the life of the people directing the affairs of state became inseparably bound to the life of the gradually assimilating other members. All the while, conqueror and conquered had long become a community. This is our German people of today ... Our only wish is that all members contribute their best to the prosperity of our national life. As long as every element gives what it has to give, this element in so doing will help benefit all lives.




Hitler's theory on this front is also not related to his hostility towards the Soviet Union, it's Bolshevism which he makes abundantly clear.


Edit: i.e., from Mein Kampf:




Never forget that the rulers of present-day Russia are common blood-stained criminals; that they are the scum of humanity which, favoured by circumstances, overran a great state in a tragic hour, slaughtered out thousands of her leading intelligentsia in wild bloodlust, and now for almost ten years have been carrying on the most cruel and tyrannical regime of all time.






Furthermore, do not forget that these rulers belong to a race which combines, in a rare mixture, bestial cruelty and an inconceivable gift for lying, and which today more than ever is conscious of a mission to impose its bloody oppression on the whole world. Do not forget that the international Jew who completely dominates Russia today regards Germany not as an ally, but as a state destined to the same fate.






The danger to which Russia succumbed is always present for Germany. Only a bourgeois simpleton is capable of imagining that Bolshevism has been exorcised. With his superficial thinking he has no idea that this is an instinctive process; that is, the striving of the Jewish people for world domination, a process which is just as natural as the urge of the Anglo-Saxon to seize domination of the earth. And just as the Anglo-Saxon pursues this course in his own way and carries on the fight with his own weapons, likewise the Jew. He goes his way, the way of sneaking in among the nations and boring from within, and he fights with his weapons, with lies and slander, poison and corruption, intensifying the struggle to the point of bloodily exterminating his hated foes.






In Russian Bolshevism, we must see the attempt undertaken by the Jews in the 20th century to achieve world domination. Just as in other epochs they strove to reach the same goal by other, though inwardly related processes. Their endeavor lies profoundly rooted in their essential nature.






Germany is today the next great war aim of Bolshevism. It requires all the force of a young missionary idea to raise our people up again, to free them from the snares of this international serpent, and to stop the inner contamination of our blood, in order that the forces of the nation thus set free can be thrown in to safeguard our nationality, and thus can prevent a repetition of the recent catastrophes down to the most distant future.






If we pursue this aim, it is sheer lunacy to ally ourselves with a power whose master is the mortal enemy of our future. How can we expect to free our own people from the fetters of this poisonous embrace if we walk right into it? How shall we explain Bolshevism to the German worker as an accursed crime against humanity if we ally ourselves with the organizations of this spawn of hell, thus recognising it in the larger sense?




But somehow, without fail, the mainstream seems to interpret Hitler's animosity towards the Soviet Union as being related to Aryan racial theory relegating Slavs as subhuman. It's an intentional lie to hide the actual reason he was hostile to Russia.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 17, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Every manifestation of human culture, every product of art, science and technical skill, which we see before our eyes to-day, is almost exclusively the product of the Aryan creative power. This very fact fully justifies the conclusion that it was the Aryan alone who founded a superior type of humanity; therefore he represents the archetype of what we understand by the term: MAN. He is the Prometheus of mankind, from whose shining brow the divine spark of genius has at all times flashed forth, always kindling anew that fire which, in the form of knowledge, illuminated the dark night by drawing aside the veil of mystery and thus showing man how to rise and become master over all the other beings on the earth.
-- Mein Kampf Vol 1 Ch XI






By contrast, he expresses relative disdain for the Slavic people of Russia and Eastern Europe, whom he intends to attack and kill or displace. Hitler's disdain for the Slavs takes on special significance in the context of an "eternal victory of the strong over the weak", and of Hitler's imminent plans for war:






Even in Pan-German circles one heard the opinion expressed that the Austrian Germans might very well succeed in Germanizing the Austrian Slavs, if only the Government would be ready to cooperate. Those people did not understand that a policy of Germanization can be carried out only as regards human beings. What they mostly meant by Germanization was a process of forcing other people to speak the German language. But it is almost inconceivable how such a mistake could be made as to think that a Nigger or a Chinaman will become a German because he has learned the German language and is willing to speak German for the future, and even to cast his vote for a German political party. Our bourgeois nationalists could never clearly see that such a process of Germanization is in reality de-Germanization; for even if all the outstanding and visible differences between the various peoples could be bridged over and finally wiped out by the use of a common language, that would produce a process of bastardization which in this case would not signify Germanization but the annihilation of the German element.
-- Mein Kampf Vol 2 Ch II




While my criticism of your entire thesis from your last chapter applies to this one as well, probably even more so, one point I want to (again) make is that Slavs were considered Aryan according to Nazi racial theory and Nazi racial law.


Hitler's project was pan-Germanism, which he is delineating as exclusionary of Slavs. That does not mean Hitler did not consider Slavs to be Aryan. The Nazi hatred towards the Soviet Union was foremost driven by Communism and not any belief that Slavs are non-Aryan or sub-human.


In contrast, the Nazi racial theory on the Aryans has essentially been vindicated by recent genetic analysis showing all European cultures descend from a common Indo-European culture. They call that culture "Aryan", but all European cultures descend from it according to the theory, and that theory has been confirmed by more recent genetic and linguistic analysis.


Hitler's writing here is also cogent- rejecting the notion that "Germanization" means teaching an Arab or Chinese person the language and having him vote in a German election makes him German, which is the theory that has been forced onto Europe since the defeat of Hitler, to catastrophic consequences.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 17, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Grok not caring as much about "safety" (often aligning LLMs on cultural narratives) is a comparative advantage. It could be a real moat if Altman insists on running everything by all the usual suspects, the Expert Apparatus, for every release and Grok does not. There is evidence that RLHF degrades performance on certain benchmarks so if Grok does not align as aggressively it may help the model.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 10, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


So you assert. And if we assert back that in fact our interpretation is correct, what then?




If you are Christian, you are essentially forced to take the Divine Inspiration interpretation for the motivation of the authors for the Old Testament. You don't have a choice. This is stated plainly in OP's bio:




I believe the Bible is a message to us from the Holy Spirit




Of course OP is right that such a position is the only one consistent with Christianity. So in a world where my interpretation is correct (it is) then Christianity provides a complete roadblock to an accurate interpretation of the meaning of the Hebrew Bible. This is well-demonstrated by OP's completely ridiculous notion that the Hebrew Bible is free from "Identity Politics." Of course it is- it's a message from the Holy Spirit! It can't be nothing more than ancient Identity Politics according to Christianity. They lack the ability to interpret the mythos from that perspective by their own prior beliefs.


Christians are totally unable to contend with the fact that the Hebrew Bible is ultimately inspired by ethnic supremacism and racial propaganda. Accepting the interpretation I am proposing of the Yahweh cult that ultimately inspired the Torah would be heresy for a Christian. Their religion disallows them from accepting that interpretation as true.


It is highly notable that Christianity induces billions of Gentiles to proclaim the truth of the Torah, including the divine Chosenness of the Jews, while simultaneously cutting them off from correctly interpreting the esoteric racial subtext of the figures, myths, symbols, and ultimately tribal god that they worship. And at the same time it induces billions of Gentiles to comply with the Noahide laws which foremost compel Gentiles to worship Yahweh above anything else in the universe.


That is what I mean when I say Christians are unable to grapple with the Hebrew Bible. The prior beliefs of that religion cut you off from correctly interpreting the myths, symbolism, and esoteric racial moralization throughout the Old Testament.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 10, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Sure! But at the end of the day there is a correct answer, the people who put the pen to paper did so for specific reasons. I think Christians are forced into a wrong interpretation. Of course they believe their interpretation is correct, although frankly speaking they mostly just ignore the Old Testament except as setup for Jesus.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 10, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


In any case, it is certainly true that Samuel and SS agree (somewhat) about this, but that’s exactly the interesting thing




I essentially agree with Samuel's critique of Christian anti-semitism. Christianity makes anti-Semitism totally incoherent, regardless of the feeling of any given Christian towards the Jews. And regardless of whether or not the Christians understand the actual symbolic meaning of Yahweh, which they like OP do not. They are actually unequipped to properly analyze these works because their own religion is so deeply rooted in the mythos itself.


Christians have no idea what they are reading when they read the Old Testament, if they ever do so.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 10, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I'm going to guess it's yet another "liberalism was great until Identity Politics ruined everything." And following that train of thought leads people like you actually trying to make the ridiculous argument that the Hebrew Bible and the Roman Pantheon are not identity politics. That is all they are, if you strip away the Identity Politics they are meaningless.


The entire conservative critique of "Identity Politics" is incoherent, and the incoherence is well-embodied by your argument here. The Hebrew Bible isn't identity politics? One of the most absurd things I've ever heard in my life.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 10, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Actually this thread is indeed about Jewish identity and belief, if you go back to the very beginning of the thread. OP said something along the lines of "the Hebrews believed themselves to be Chosen, but that rule over the earth belongs to Yahweh." So the fact that to Jews, Yahweh is a symbolic representation of themselves undermines his argument that Jews have maintained a "humble forbearance" in the face of conflict with external tribes and civilizations. It could not be further from the truth. And certainly the book of Isaiah is not a representation of Humble Forbearance, it's an example par excellence of how Jewish identity politics manifests in the Hebrew Bible as it portrays conflict with Civilization.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 10, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Jamming on the enemy in itself has nothing to do with identity politics.




Of course it does, the friend/enemy distinction is the essence of identity politics. When the Hebrews do it it's just "Old Testament justice" but when Hitler identifies Jews as adversarial then it's identity politics? Give me a break.




It is holding that your people are entitled to prey on others whenever the opportunity presents itself, and whining in self-righteous indignation when the shoe is on the other foot. The Hebrews didn't do that, and neither did the pagans.




I'm sorry but this just shows a total ignorance of the Hebrew bible, which consists exactly of cycles of the Israelites genociding people according to the will of Yahweh and then acting like whiny victims when the shoe is on the other foot. Jews to this day still publicly celebrate the mass murder of the first-born sons of the Gentiles in Egypt. And don't get me started on Purim...


It is also just a plain fact that US intelligence shortly after WWII regarded Jews as a security threat to the United States. And of course nearly all Communist spies were Jewish. The idea that the entire notion was just "Hitlerian Identity Politics" is total bunk. There was more of a 'there' there.


Overall your analysis too heavily relies on these extremely high-level characterizations of Mein Kampf. If you are going to cite books from the Bible can you also cite passages from Mein Kampf that demonstrate your point rather than your over-reliance on super high-level characterizations of that work?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 10, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


At best you can say that pious Jews sincerely believe that they have an inherent spiritual bond with Yahweh, even though in actuality that Yahweh is merely an ancient literary device.




Obviously in that comment I'm treating Yahweh as a mythological figure rather than a literal figure.  Spirituality is a human behavior and expression. I said in my previous post that religiosity is a personality trait and it seems important and even necessary for people to have in some form. It is certainly possible for people to feel a spiritual connection with mythological figures.


Yes, Yahweh is an ancient literary device for Jewish identity. But even many secular Jews feel a strong connection with their Jewish identities. Even if they don't literally believe in the truth of the myths they still identify with what is represented and created by the mythology.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 10, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
If Copts, Zoroastrians, Druze, Mandaeans, Yazidis, Samaritans had migrated to Europe they would have been obliterated. Jews have always been given special treatment. My understanding is that none of those are a diaspora people that have migrated to the territory of a foreign population that is comparable to Jews migrating to Europe. A continuity among indigenous people is very different than a diaspora being allowed to establish themselves in a foreign land.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 10, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Of course I've read the original source, that provides a good summary. The summary is less annoying than pasting the verses, but here you go: It is Chapter 13 and 14:




They come from faraway lands, from the ends of the heavens— the Lord and the weapons of his wrath— to destroy the whole country...






Wail, for the day of the Lord is near; it will come like destruction from the Almighty.






Because of this, all hands will go limp, every heart will melt with fear.






See, the day of the Lord is coming —a cruel day, with wrath and fierce anger— to make the land desolate and destroy the sinners within it.






Like a hunted gazelle, like sheep without a shepherd, they will all return to their own people, they will flee to their native land.






15 Whoever is captured will be thrust through; all who are caught will fall by the sword.






16 Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses will be looted and their wives violated.






Their bows will strike down the young men; they will have no mercy on infants, nor will they look with compassion on children.






19 Babylon, the jewel of kingdoms, the pride and glory of the Babylonians,[b] will be overthrown by God like Sodom and Gomorrah.






20 She will never be inhabited or lived in through all generations; there no nomads will pitch their tents, there no shepherds will rest their flocks.






21 But desert creatures will lie there, jackals will fill her houses; there the owls will dwell, and there the wild goats will leap about.






22 Hyenas will inhabit her strongholds, jackals her luxurious palaces.






Her time is at hand, and her days will not be prolonged.




Any reader can compare what is actually Isaiah with your tripe about Humble forbearance. I cited a summary of the claims as I already knew about the prophecy. The chapter given is wrong, but the point is not misrepresented anybody can read it himself.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 10, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I can't agree to disagree because I don't even know how you incorporate Isaiah's prophecies into your analysis. You just ignore them and then end the conversation when they are brought up.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 10, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Sorry, I don't accept "agree to disagree" when your analysis ignores Isaiah's prophecy of the Messiah and the ultra-violent genocide of Babylon:




Every Babylonian who didn't manage to "flee to their native land" (13:14) would be slaughtered, including prisoners (13:15), infants (13:16,18), and children (13:18). The specific fate of the women is not mentioned, except that they would be raped (13:16). The city would be "overthrown by God like Sodom and Gomorrah" (13:19), and it would "never be inhabited or lived in through all generations" (3:20). Babylon's name, survivors, offspring, and descendants would be "wiped out" (14:22)




Humble forbearance indeed!!!


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 10, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
With respect to "humble laments", sure there are plenty of Roman myths where the god, and by extension the people the god represents, are humbled in some sort of way. And in terms of literary tone and prophecy Virgil's Aeneid has some similarities.


But ultimately you are misinterpreting Isaiah as being foremost self-criticism and "humility and forbearance in defeat" while leaving out the most important part of Isaiah, which is the prophet Isaiah professing the coming of the Messiah and the destruction of Babylon. Isaiah is another chapter in the Hebrew motif of Yahweh coming into conflict with Civilizational Order, with the Babylonians being the Civilization of the era hated by Yahweh... Another among a very long list: The Egyptians, the Assyrians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Europeans...


Mein Kampf is less like Isaiah and more like a Babylonian who read Isaiah and pieced together that the Jews want to see Babylon destroyed. Or sorry, I guess according to @4bpp it was just God's will that Babylon gets destroyed, nothing to do with the will of the Jews themselves. Prophecies are very real insofar as they symbolically represent plans and wishes.


Isaiah is relevant because it provides literary justification for the Yahweh versus Civilization dialectic that is endemic in Hebrew lore and also identified in Mein Kampf, only in the latter case interpreted from the side of the Babylonians- the side of Civilization, the side of the Romans, or the side of the exasperated Pharaoh who expelled the Jews after they wrought plagues onto civilization and murdered the first-born sons of the Gentiles...


Isaiah is not about forbearance, it's about plotting the destruction of civilization.


This also gets to the heart of the difference between Indo European Paganism and Hebrew religion. The former was meant to organize society into expansive Civilization with a clear hierarchy and social order, and the latter is meant to represent a resistance to the former.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 10, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I don't think Judaism would have survived without the Christianization of Europe. With all the incessant complaints over historical antisemitism, it's pretty remarkable that Indo Europeans just allowed Jews to live in their territory and maintain the Jewish religion. That almost certainly boils down to an impact of the Christianization of Europe. And Jews would not have allowed the same for pagan Indo Europeans if the tables were turned in some counterfactual. Not that it's going to stop them from always claiming to be the victim rather than treated very well by any reasonable historical standard.


There is an inherent, intrinsic spiritual bond between Yahweh and the Jews. This is so incredibly undeniable. Even Christians and Muslims believe this.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 10, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


I mean you flirt, in these posts, with some kind of genuine spiritual belief in Indo-European paganism that goes beyond just ‘it was good social technology’.




It basically boils down to "it was good social technology" but why it was good social technology is important. Like the Hebrew bible, it was not just about moral lessons it was about cohering the identity and racial consciousness of people who followed the religion. And using that racial consciousness to change the world. Worshipping Apollo was worshipping a racial ideal just like it is with Yahweh.


I also think humans are innately religious, and religiosity is essentially a personality trait. I do think having some pro-European and pro-Civilizational religious revival is essential, and that means moving beyond Yahweh and Hebrew lore. I don't think that revival will be a reform of Indo-European paganism although I think it would have some similarities in spirit and aesthetic.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 10, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Even the Jews themselves make a point of not requiring non-Jews to believe the part about the covenant.




The Jews do require Gentiles to follow the Noahide laws and the 10 commandments, which is accomplished by Islam and Christianity. The very first 3 of the commandments:




You shall have no other gods before me.






You shall not make idols






You shall not take the name of the LORD your god in vain.




The ordering indicates prioritization, and the first three all demand sole worship of the Jewish tribal god Yahweh above everything else. They do require Gentiles to follow those laws.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 10, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
The attempt of medieval European royal houses to appropriate Yahweh as a symbol of their lineage falls flat precisely because of the Hebrew bible. If Exodus entailed God choosing the lineage of Alfred the Great, then it would absolutely be cogent to identify the God portrayed in that mythos as representing the people chosen by him. You sure as hell wouldn't be saying "oh the worship of that god started because the Saxons claimed that god selected them as his favorite among all the nations, who knows what the god is supposed to represent! Nothing, probably."


You aren't recognizing the difference between the mythological impetus for the cult itself being the Moasic covenant, whereas it has not been in any single other case you have tried to cite as a point of comparison. You have just continued to point out that gods representing people is a thing that happens all throughout history, except for Exodus I guess! Yeah right.


The Yahweh cult is rooted in the Mosaic covenant. Yahweh is a symbol of that people. If some other cult emerged on the basis of a blood covenant between a god and a people you would certainly recognize that as plainly obvious.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 10, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Both Athens and Sparta were indeed worshipping a people represented by Athena and Apollo and the ideals they represented. It was an Indo European religion, those figures represent the Indo-Europeans themselves and cult worship of them functionally entailed worship of Indo-European forbearers and founders.


Athena and Apollo represent Indo-Europeans, Yahweh represents Jews. And in any case the Athena cult existed before Athens. Athens was named after Athena. That is nothing like the Mosaic covenant that features in Exodus. If the origin of Athena as a goddess was that she chose Athens as her city then it's unlikely it would have ever been a pan-Hellenic cult. But the pan-Hellenic cult came first and then the name of the city came later. Whereas the Mosaic covenant is the very origin of the Jewish religion and worship of Yahweh.


Can you please provide your interpretation of the blood covenant? Do you think it's literally true? If you don't think it's true, then how could you have any other literary interpretation than the god portrayed in Exodus is a symbolic representation of the people he has Chosen? The covenant is even inherited genetically, it's a tribal representation.




This is true of Romans (with respect to some foreigners), but not of all pagans; e.g. Atenism.




Yes, one of the weaknesses of the word "pagan" is a lack of clarity- I was referring to Indo European religion which does have this quality.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 10, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


This is not an interpretation I have heard before. What do you base it on?




Yahweh creates a blood covenant with the Jews. It's a tribal god, Yahweh is a metaphor for the people he represents. Very straightforward reading of the mythos. If some Roman gold selected the Romans as his Chosen people and formed a heritable blood covenant with the Romans wouldn't it be very obvious to you that the god is a symbol for the people represented in the covenant?


It is universally acknowledged that the Roman pantheon was fluid and integrated the idols of foreigners that came under the hegemony of the Roman people. The Hebrew mythos demands sole worship of Yahweh above anything else and declares a holy mission to destroy all the idols of all foreigners. It's a major difference in the religious orders that is not acknowledged by OP and is going to undermine the direction he is trying to take this.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 10, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


So the Hebrews teach that they are God's chosen people, but they are not chosen to rule the Earth. God does that. The Hebrews are chosen to receive God's law and proclaim it to the world, and in doing that to be held to a higher standard -- being especially blessed when they do right, but also especially cursed when they do wrong. It turns out people of every sort, Hebrew or otherwise, do wrong often enough this is no enviable bargain. As Tevye (Jewish main character in "Fiddler on the Roof") put it, I know, I know, we're the chosen people. But once in a while, could You choose someone else?




This is entirely wrong, as the Hebrew conception of God is simply a metaphorical and symbolic representation of themselves as a tribe.


Hebrew teaching is that they have a divine mission to heal the world, and it so happens that "healing the world" means driving out all worship of all idols offensive to Yahweh. Yahweh is a metaphor and synonym for the Jewish people themselves. Their Chosenness is not a cosmic burden, it's a declaration of ethno-supremacism that coheres them in the face of ethnic conflict.


You get close to identifying a real differentiation between pagan and Hebrew worship. Pagan worship did entail baseline respect for the idols of foreigners whereas Hebrew lore does not. The Hebrew mission is to destroy the idols of everyone else in the entire world in favor of sole worship of the Jewish tribal god Yahweh above all else.


I see where you are going with this, that German National Socialism is more Hebrew in spirit than Aryan in spirit. That could not be more incorrect, but I'll wait until you actually present that argument to respond.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 3, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
All identities are fundamentally made-up categories. American Whites certainly have a history and culture. But anyway, it's been demonstrated you don't actually support "Your rules (Identity-politics) enforced fairly", you support Identity Politics for Jews and oppose it for White people.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 3, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Wouldn't identity-politics enforced fairly mean White people participate in identity politics? But you oppose that? So you aren't even consistent in your pseudo-"game theoretic formulation." You just every step of the analysis support Jews and oppose white people and then find some justification for it.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 3, 2025
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
You just last week strongly opposed identity politics for white people, but you support it when it benefits Jews?




If the identitarian right and the wider priestly caste are going to hold on to Identity Politics as an organizing principal/value they are going to have to have to confront the fact that the perception of Identity Politics in the popular zeitgeist is that of an ideology for losers. An ideology for people too stupid, degenerate, or incompetent to survive in an honest meritocracy.




But when Jews get ever more handouts from the federal government, that's a good thing? Do I have that right?