Disclaimer: Nothing within this page or on this site overall is the product 

of Panagiotis Kondylis's thought and work unless it is a faithful translation

 of something Kondylis wrote. Any conclusions drawn from something not 

written by Panagiotis Kondylis (in the form of an accurate translation) 

cannot constitute the basis for any valid judgement or appreciation of 

Kondylis and his work. 


·        This Prelude to the Translator’s Page, like the Translator’s Page itself, does not seek to promote any kind of normative programme or action; it touches upon some of the themes in Panagiotis Kondylis’s thought and work, as well as dealing with matters never discussed by Kondylis, at least directly or in detail, for the purpose of challenging the reader’s thought in the social sciences and the humanities, broadly understood. The Translator suggests to readers not to waste their time on the Translator's Page and its Prelude, except perhaps if readers have studied all of Kondylis's core books and articles first. It is almost certain (?) that some or much of what is said in this Prelude and on the Translator's Page is incomplete, disjointed, incorrect(?),... and displays the gross inability of the Translator in attempting to attain proper levels of consistent scientific observation... the Translator extends his best wishes to all readers and that they enjoy the best of health and well-being until they die.

·       Ancient Greece and Rome continued, albeit transformed and changed, but still in a state of at least some (linguistic and cultural) continuity, and including the preservation of Ancient Greek (and Latin) texts, in a largely Helleno(-Latin)-Christian guise throughout all the Early Christian Era and Middle Ages in the Eastern Roman Empire, and then later in the Hellenic world, even under the Ottoman Empire, until the 19th century [[Kondylis wrote all his major works about western Europe (with some reference to ancient Greece and Rome), though he explicitly acknowledged that the Greek language obviously has at least three millennia of forms of continuity, that there was at least some continuity of the Greek race, and that the Hellenic or (Greek-)Orthodox world presents conceptual and analytical challenges for historical science different to those of societas civilis or Western-European feudalism. He did not write though that the ancient world ended in the Hellenic part of the Ottoman Empire (that is Contogeorgis’s, in one sense correct, assertion)]].

·        Democracy as polity pertaining to mode of governing has only ever existed in the Hellenic world, and had some form of continuity up until the 19th century in the Hellenic part of the Ottoman Empire in the shape of ecclesiae, local communities, commons, etc.. Common law or Constitutional prime-ministerial or presidential parliamentary or congressional electable polities with massive Mass Media, Lobby Interest Groups, etc. have nothing to do with democracy as governance but sociologically-historically can be seen as mass democracies (of a Western kind) compared to Societas Civilis and Liberalism (see below). It should be noted however that whether a polity as government is parliamentary-mass Party-mass Media-powerful lobby groups-based or actually democratic of the demos of citizens actively ruling, being elected and or drawn by lot to serve, fight in wars and being readily recallable from office etc., the demos or the masses are always subject to demagogic or bread and circuses and or mass Media manipulation... in that sense Kondylis’s mass democracy not only has a solid sociological basis, but also encompasses the notion of the political as being roughly commensurate with the social, or more precisely, the same as social organisation... [[Kondylis did not refer to democracy as (a form of state) government except indirectly when once he mentioned that Western mass democracies, even though one could discuss or debate what a democracy actually was, provided more freedoms (for individuals and protest groups) than the 20th century “totalitarian” communistic regimes, which notwithstanding that they were “totalitarian”, eventually were abolished, including because of internal reasons. As mentioned above, Kondylis’s notion of “mass democracy” takes the Aristotelian position of more or less equating the political with society (social organisation) as all great theoreticians did in the West up to Clausewitz and Tocqueville. Strictly speaking the social, incl. e.g. personal relationships confined to two people regarding personal non-ideological matters, or the simple naming of things: “apple, car, fence,...”, or engaging in absolutely consistent science, etc.,... is broader than the political as the interaction of all interactions which provides for social cohesion and social order. In any event, Kondylis does highlight that mass democracy, which has various forms across the planet, includes ideological hegemony via the mass media as once was the case via the pulpit when Christianity constituted the dominant religion and ideology whether adopted to (local and or imperialistic) feudalism or nationalistic and or imperialistic capitalism,... or in (5th century B.C.) ancient Greece via demagogues,... bread and circuses in Rome,... etc.. Contogeorgis refers to Western Mass Democracies in terms of their governments as "Electable Monarchies" with features of 19th century liberalism as one step "forward" from feudalism, but one step "behind" representation, and two steps "behind" democracy, which he claims could be achieved again (at least representation, if not democracy) by using the internet to regularly have the citizenry decide on issues and to recall politicians who don't perform, etc., etc., etc.,... - of course, we all know that "big money and other special group interests" would never, ever allow such a thing,... and the masses are too "lobotomised" or "zombified" to be capable...,... Contogeorgis refers to the Byzantine Empire as something like a "Hellenic Cosmosystem of the Byzantine Period" - all of these matters of conceptualisation, analysis, etc., are fascinating and would definitely be worth studying in detail if one had the time. Established language usage of terms such as "democracy", "liberalism", "conservatism", etc. in Western mass-democratic political "science" is more often than not totally inadequate and... absolutely hilarious, if not downright cretinous, propaganda-oriented and pathetic...]].

·       The Renaissance in Italy and the “discovery” of the Americas happened, inter alia, because of the Fall of Helleno-centric (Greco-Roman) Late Byzantium.

·       Hellenism is a civilisation neither Western European nor Eastern. It ceased to effectively autonomously project and or increase and or maintain (cultural and geopolitical) grand-scale Power c. 1204-1453 A.D., though de facto 1204 A.D. reflects the period when Hellenism really Fell, because of Franks, Venetians,... = Western Europeans, rather than the “de jure” date of 1453 A.D. (though the Central Asian-Turkic-Ottoman "finishing off" of Hellenism as a Major Power started tentatively in 1071 and picked up a full head of steam by the 14th century)... [By 1821 we were already Finished Absolutely as a Major Power, and the British, French, Germans, Russians and others ensured we would never Rise again. In the year 2017 it seems unlikely that Hellenism will survive even for a few more decades or a century or so at most... at the current rate of De-Hellenisation and taking into consideration other demographic, geopolitical,... factors... No-one is to Primarily Blame but the Hellenes, Romans, Christians, Greeks, Hellenes,... themselves...] 

·        For the vast majority of homo sapiens existence of more than 100,000 or 200,000 years, the vast majority of peoples and societies were relatively racially and culturally-religiously homogeneous, though peoples and nations have existed for centuries in multi-ethnic contexts and empires as well, and obviously have also “race-mixed or miscegenated”, though at least up to the period of John Lennon meeting Yoko Ono, not that much, as can be seen by the clear physiognomic differences c. 1960 between a typical Englishman, Norwegian, Russian, Spaniard, Greek or Southern Italian, Chinaman, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, any number of Sub-Saharan Africans, Arabs, Polynesians, American Indians, Australian Aboriginals, etc., etc., etc.... Hellenic history does include however both Alexander promoting miscegenation as well as, inter alia, the Hero Digenes Akrites...

·        There are no (iron) laws of human development or evolution apart from the biological constant of Death, and the social-ontologically and anthropologically ascertained existence of the social relation, the social relation’s (friend-foe) spectrum and mechanism, the political as the interaction of all interactions providing all societies with at least some degree of social cohesion and social order, and man as being always rational in terms of existing with language and other symbolism (meaning, understanding), and as being both of nature and of culture, and never one without some relation to both nature and culture (man’s nature is his culture and his culture is in and on nature).

·       Relatively high levels of social cohesion and social order, just as civil wars and relatively high levels of anomy can take place when there is relatively high or relatively low racial and or cultural(-religious) homogeneity or heterogeneity. Just as there have been the most brutal of civil wars in circumstances of relative racial and or religious/cultural homogeneity, multi-racial and multi-cultural societies can end up in states of heightened anomie and all sorts of communal, civil, tribal etc. warfare, but not (always) necessarily so. Just because things “have been going well” for a few decades or longer, it does not necessarily mean that Hell is not necessarily waiting around the corner.

·       Capitalism in its pre-Industrial Revolution stages developed over a number of centuries in fits and starts and longer waves of development, and includes at least some input of the Protestant Spirit and Jewish and other Usury, but in the main, capitalism is a northern European social phenomenon of multiple causations over many centuries.

·       The Industrial Revolution (in its three or four key manifestations) represents humanity’s second Novum after the Agricultural Revolution as first Novum of about 10,000 to 5,000 years ago.

·       The European Enlightenment, one could say, began as new-times rationalism, i.e. as a long process of philosophical (theological, juridical,...) polemics in the late Christian Era (e.g. regarding God's necessity and or omnipotency and or voluntarism, etc.) a number of centuries before Kant (who grappled in complicated (dualistic) fashion with the ultimate implications of e.g. Hobbes's thought in order to, inter alia, "save" ethics), and notwithstanding that in its "Golden Age's" lead-up, vita activa and the sensorial world gradually replaced vita speculativa and the spiritual world (i.e. anthropology replaced theology), and in the Enlightenment’s aftermath function replaced essence or substance, with God being declared “dead” (qualitatively if not quantitatively as regards both major (before, during, and, after) phases and paradigms), its Ultimate Logical Conclusion - having first been pre-empted by Machiavelli, Hobbes, Spinoza,... and subsequently suppressed as something like the ravings of philosophes maudits, and notwithstanding the Enlightenment mainstream's considerable efforts in trying to save some kind of substance/essence and "ethics" in notions of Man, History, Progress, Reason, Rights, etc. in a still oligarchic fashion and context, but grosso modo less pyramidical and more moblie than societas civilis - is to be found in the suggested or near(ly complete) (value-)nihilism of Hume, (Helvétius) and de Sade, but especially in the absolutely consistent anti-spiritual, sense-based non-ethical, non-normative (value-)nihilism of La Mettrie. It is simply false to say that the Enlightenment and Liberalism of the 18th century lead to an individualism which eschewed historical reflection and mythologisation and collective, racial and national identity. On the contrary, it is only in circumstances of post-Enlightenment’s advanced massification and atomisation, hedonistic consumption and relatively heterogeneous “pluralism”, along with the Ideology of “human rights” and “globalisation” that ethno-patriotic and or race-based collective sentiment has subsided in Western mass democracies, especially from the 1960s – nearly two hundred years after the Enlightenment’s "Golden Age"!!!

·       The Western European Feudal Era, or in Kondylisian-Weberian ideal-typical form, Societas Civilis, was succeeded by Oligarchic Liberalism and Capitalism of the late 18th and 19th centuries, and then in the 20th century by Western Mass Democracy.

·       Polemical usage allows for present-day terms such as “liberal democracy”, “liberal world order”, “democracy”, “liberalism” and “conservatism”, “(extreme) right-wing”, “(extreme) left-wing” etc., but these terms are really scientifically useless, given that what is being referred to is a version of Western mass democracy and planetary power politics and not another kind of social formation and polity or actual “world order”.

·       Conservatism, Liberalism and (Social) Democracy faced off on the same battlefield around the middle of the 19th century. Thereafter, Conservatism, as the preservation of societas civilis as estate-based, legally unequal but divinely sanctioned pre-Industrial rural-based relatively strictly hierarchical and static feudal etc. society, (sooner or later) conceded all its territory to Liberalism (of preliminary massification, atomisation, urbanisation, capitalism, formal legal equality and oligarchic and European-imperialistic rule etc.), which in turn was replaced by Mass Democracy (of advanced massification, atomisation, urbanisation, ultra-regulated capitalism, the social welfare state, hedonistic consumption, the total abolition of essence and substance into relatively fully mobile interchangeable parts of functions etc.), (almost) totally by c. World War Two.

·       Ideal-typical comparisons are made for the sake of a basic conceptualisation. When the historian and sociologist examine concrete phenomena in concrete historical situations, obviously there concurrently exists a mix of elements from more than one ideal-typical social formation.

·       Montesquieu was much more interested in preserving feudal and aristocratic privileges than in the “separation of powers” as interpreted by theoreticians of the liberal or mass-democratic state.

·       Liberalism as (the ideology of) “free trade” can be said to exist in the “globalist” era, but strictly speaking Liberalism as a social formation ended by WW1 or WW2, just as “globalism” in the New Times Western-led sense of the term actually began c. 1492 after the Fall of Byzantium and the last hegemonic vestiges of the Greco-Roman world.

·       Since there are Races and Sexes and Homosexuals and Mohammedans and Jews, then racism, and sexism and homosexualism (“-phobia/-philia”) and Mohammedanism/Islamism (“-phobia/-philia”) and Semitism (“anti-/pro-/philo-”) will also exist, just as “Progress” and “Reaction” will always exist. What makes these terms polemically effective is how they are imposed through those exercising ideological influence as a form of power, e.g. through state(-controlled) education, the mass media, legislation and the courts. [[An example of the totally content and value-biassed, ideological loading of charging of concepts is e.g. when being rude (calling someone in public names such as “wog, chink or nigger”), in an admittedly crudely racist fashion, is considered almost a “Crime against Humanity”, whereas tangible, concrete mass (auto- or self-)racism, when a local population goes from being 90% or 99% relatively white of a particular race, racial mix and or ethnos or ethne to 80% or 50% or even 0% of that locality or district or city or nation, as the case may be, is deemed to be simply a “population shift” or "diverse enrichment" when in effect it’s a form of self-made and or elite-imposed ethnic cleansing or population/race replacement, i.e. actual or potential (auto)genocide; likewise merely saying “Gas the Jews” on YouTube is punishable [– rightly or wrongly, I have no personal opinion on the punishment whereas the phrase is obviously reprehensible, though freedom of speech seems like a good thing for a society to have, particularly if the impugned phrase was said as (sick or otherwise) comedy with a cute dog rather than as a political programme by an organised Party; on the other hand, a "social media" user in another country spews ethno-nihilist and sacrilegious profanities against an air force pilot down(ed) and dead on duty pro patria (defending the Fatherland, not on an Imperialist campaign), as well as rejoicing in his death, and is left absolutely untouched instead of getting e.g. a bullet in the head... so "freedom of speech" is an interesting phenomenon with all sorts of aspects... which ultimately like everything human has and have to do with forms of power and interrelations therewith... (Spinoza: right/law/justice = power) –] by 6 months imprisonment as being “anti-Semitic” (apparently the offender was eventually fined £800 and not gaoled), whereas politicians won’t even discuss GROSSLY DISPROPORTIONATE numbers of Jews as billionaires, Bankers, Financiers, Media Barons and or Commentators/Journalists, Judges, Academics, Foreign and Domestic Policy Lobbyists, etc. in the U.S.A., France, Australia, the U.K. etc. as being “anti-Gentile” and “pro-Semitic” or “pro-Zionist”, but pointing out such facts is deemed “anti-Semitic” too. E.g. a large American newspaper of Jewish ownership and with a grossly disproportionate number of Jewish journalists and commentators, at least at a national American level, and probably for New York too, reports, based on “findings” by the “Australian Human Rights Commission” that “privileged” (or otherwise known as “supremacist”) Whites in Australia make up 74% of Australia’s population but hold 95% of leadership positions. That is a ratio of roughly 1:1.28. Nowhere does the paper, if I’m not mistaken, mention that Jews make up Australia’s billionaires, Justices, medical practitioners, Mass Media owners and or commentators, politicians, academics, et al., etc. at ratios that can quite easily surpass 1:3, 1:5 and sometimes perhaps even 1:50!!! If someone is going to talk about “equality” and “privilege” then they have NO CREDIBILITY WHATSOEVER when they deliberately conceal FACTS, including the fact that certain racial and ethnic groups have an average considerably lower ability or no relevant interest in being proportionately in “leadership positions” or that the main age group of “leaders” has a population which is e.g. 88% rather than 74% White, thus narrowing the differential even further. On the other hand, it is quite clear who and what forces (it’s not just one group but it GROSSLY DISPROPORTIONATELY includes that (in part differentiated, in part relatively homogenous or somehow united) group), where, are wielding (relative forms of) POWER (quite effectively) (for now, tomorrow... but not...) [and it should never be forgotten that Change which brings in new elites may not make things "better" at all, in fact...] [And those who have tremendous Lust for, or Will to, Power, if they don't want to "go insane", would serve themselves well to reflect that few DESPERADOS ever come to power (in general, far less frequently in history than homines novi), and that Realism teaches that if the correlation of forces is such that small groups can do nothing about e.g. an international network, however loose or tight, with significant influence in the imperialist centre(s) of power, all that such groups can do is either "prepare and wait for their opportunity", watch other (much larger, foreign,...) groups "do the job" and or spend their lives in vain, whether others in the future Carry the Torch, Raise the Banner,... or not]. I NOTE that P.K. never wrote about the specific examples I refer to above, but did write in general terms of phenomena which can afflict all, or at least Western, societies, e.g. re: reality and ideology or appearance etc. – see e.g. below re: Plato.]]

·        Legally or propagandistically, there might be “hate speech”, but strictly speaking all speech for or against something could be called “love speech” or “hate speech”. “Hate speech” as used today is a form of ideological or spiritual dominance, domination and ruling over dissenters. It is rationalised by Academics, and propagated by Journalists, Politicians, Celebrities, et al., as well as being enshrined in Law in a manner which ought to be obeyed, but which has nothing to do with science, philosophy or conceptual clarity. Of course, freedom to be crudely and rudely racist and or offensive as in calling people “Dagos”, “Wogs”, "Slapheads", "Gooks", “Niggers” or “Kikes”, etc., (apparently ancient Greeks, ancient Judeans, ancient Chinese et al. also had words disparaging Others), was another approach to wielding power, authority, influence, dominance, etc. in a different historical and societal context. If one gives precedence to individual rights against Tradition and or Christianity then one could have a totally opposite view of Love and Hate to someone who gives precedence to Collective rights of Racial, Ethnological and or Cultural or Religious Continuity. Scientifically, every Love position has a Hate position and the objects of Love and Hate differ from society to society including or rather especially historically, and from individual to individual. [[In the history of ideas, Plato e.g. distinguished ethically-normatively by decree, i.e. in terms of content and values, between the Good or Reason, and, Pleasure or Power, so that he could justify – without his “rationality” appearing to conceal any power claims since striving after power is something only “animals” do – his overall normative schema (with concomitant power claims) which was predominant in the West in one form or another until roughly the (pre-)Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution which replaced God with Nature, then with History and Progress and or Trade/Commerce and or Communism and or Community (Authenticity) and or Equality (Human Rights) and or Self-Realisation or Self-Actualisation, etc., etc., etc., – the (Absolute) Nonsense one can read and hear is literally non-stop, unrelenting, endless,... Behind all the nonsense spouted by the Naive and or Retarded and or Self-Interested, are real, tangible interests which those wielding relatively high levels and concentrations of power have and usually want to increase...]]

·       Peoples will always live, to varying degrees, under a dominant ideology or ideologies ("ethicised discourses obfuscating a full-like understanding of reality and reinforcing false consciousnesses") behind and with which there will always be elites with comparatively increased, increasing interests in intensified forms of Power. Most people, if not too involved in the struggle to survive to notice things holistically beyond beliefs, will participate in having their thinking directed in certain ways conducive to the further exercising of authority as dominance. In any event, a fuller realisation of the "state of affairs" often, usually or nearly always has nothing at all to do with increasing tangible Power, or necessarily with levels of personal happiness or contentedness.

·       Ideology or false consciousness is a concept which can be applied to all normative thought schemes which do not only obfuscate the reality they do describe, but ultimately postulate an explicit or implicit Utopia.

·       A “primitive secret society” or kind of secret society, from Freemasons, Carbonari and the Filiki Etereia, to organised crime families and mafias, (some or many) Jews, and to Communist or Fascist Parties, The Hung Society and the Triad, etc., etc., etc., which interact with the wider community, but also secretly amongst themselves, if relatively well disciplined and given the right circumstances and correlation of forces, can achieve forms of power (as time-and-place-bound power crystallisations or accumulations, concentrations of forms of power) which is disproportionate or GROSSLY DISPROPORTIONATE compared to the percentage of people in an overall population in which they exist, including in GROSSLY DISPROPORTIONATELY OVER-PROJECTED depictions of the suffering of one people compared to all other peoples who have suffered similar or other holocausts, genocides, calamities, and cumulatively inestimably far, far worse than the one mass atrocity (genocide) hammered in Western Mass Media and Education Systems almost day-in-day-out or far too frequently to not cause NAUSEA and DISGUST (this, for instance, of course does not mean that some Jewish, just like some or many or a few Japanese, Irish, African, Bengali, Turkish,... thinkers, authors, musicians, directors, actors, et al. are not greatly admired or loved). [[Kondylis NEVER mentioned the examples given above as secret societies or anything else in this bullet point – they are the translator’s examples and observations]].

·       The levels and kinds of physical violence or the frequency and kinds of war can be different from society to society and can change from era to era, but are always at least potentially present.

·       War is a phenomenon which at least always potentially arises from the conflict inherent in every society based on the at least potential functioning of the full friend-foe spectrum in all its varying phenomenology.

·       Carl Schmitt did not recognise that the fundamental friend-foe relation belongs to the social, and not just the political.

·       International relations and geopolitics are an extension of basic human action into a realm which can be relatively far more difficult to impose or achieve relatively high levels of order and cohesion, though not necessarily so. Without a particular geopolitical state of affairs, however, certain social formations and certain distributions of power between groups, including grossly disproportionate crystallisations of power in relatively small groups in concrete situations, could not be possible. It would be “nice” if the 21st century were characterised by the U.S.A.-led West coming to an understanding with Russia (over Europe) and then balancing within the World Correlation of Forces with China and India rather than a grossly disproportionately Zio-NeoCon-“Left”-led U.S.A., acting mutatis mutandis like Rome, trying to severely limit or even crush Russia and then taking on China, an endeavour which it is almost certainly bound to lose and which will almost certainly lead to a Catastrophe from which there will be no return. In other words, one could say that the Western billionaires, who GROSSLY DISPROPORTIONATELY "just happen" to be Jews, should learn to live with non-Western billionaires, and NOT the peoples of Europe having to learn to live with masses, and masses, and masses,... of totally incompatible Mohammedans and or Africans and or Asians.... but of course, people (ultimately) never learn... [Many of the vital issues for the 21st century are at least touched upon or implied in the following article, erring (heavily) on the side of "good ol' American optimism", notwithstanding that one could quibble over, or even take justifiable exception to, a lack of terminological-conceptual clarity and certain omissions of fact(s) (= understandable, given it's an article by an American patriot about the U.S.A., who I presume probably wants to keep selling books, etc., and or, is not particularly concerned about world demographics or "mass-produced and projected "global" culture", and who is involved in producing and marketing such culture...)... http://nationalinterest.org/feature/america-vs-russia-china-welcome-cold-war-ii-25382?temp-new-window-replacement=true] [The observation of facts, whether they have or do not have causal relevance, and irrespective of the nature, breadth, depth and overall significance of any causation present, is a matter distinct from whether one admires or does not admire the achievements of others, e.g. it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to admit that Israel, in tandem with significant parts of the Jewish Diaspora, has shown a tremendous Will to Survive, which per definitionem includes a Will to Dominate... (defence, security, borders, alliances, productivity, technology, demography, cultural and collective identity reinforcement,...) in a difficult, to say the least, environment, whereas Greece - also in a very difficult environment - and her Diaspora, probably evince, more than likely at best, a strong Will to Commit Suicide or to be Euthanised... and only an anti-Hellene would rejoice in that... and why wouldn't he?] [No-one is saying, e.g. also in the light of Leo Strauss's "thought mate" Kojève, that there is an a priori moral reason why a Power (and a tiny minority wielding GROSSLY DISPROPORTIONATE power within such a Power) should not seek to impose its Will via "regime change" on the rest of the world, or that a Nation cannot be a Proposition Nation if it wants to - with particular values which traditionally have been seen as Contra Naturam or even Satanic. What is being said is that such Power Claims will inevitably come up against Other Power Claims and have to deal with Real Problems of Social Cohesion and Social Order, i.e. the Extent of Anomie, at local, nation-state and planetary levels... and that a World State providing Human Rights for All People Everywhere seems to be a Highly Unlikely Eventuality, and in fact the attempt to achieve such a state of affairs increasingly appears to be Highly Likely a Path of Destruction, Junglefication-Apeification, Hubris, Madness] [And of course in human affairs qua human affairs, there is no a priori reason of any kind whatsoever why a phenomenon cannot be GROSSLY DISPROPORTIONATE... it's only in circumstances of IDEOLOGICAL and "formal" LEGAL EQUALITY that...] [It's absolutely hilarious: c. 2000, when the Retards en masse thought that THEY were going to "Rule Forever", the talk was of the "(International) Rules-Based (Global) Order", the "Liberal World Order", "Human Rights",... and other such inanities, absurdities and ideological Chocolate Syrup and Sugar-coated Garbage... c. 2020, however, more and more are starting to talk about "the Correlation of Forces", "Power Politics",... as if they were are not ALWAYS PRESENT, ACTIVE, MULTIFARIOUS, UBIQUITOUS,...]  

·       One can be critical of e.g. a Super Power intervening and meddling in a number of countries for many different reasons, but if that Super Power had not intervened and meddled so, it does not necessarily mean that things overall would have been better over the long run or that international conflict and or war would have been avoided. Most people would like a peaceful balancing of states and nations, but human reality does not work that way, or cannot work that way indefinitely.

·       Every individual and group changes to some extent and eventually dies.

·       Irrationality is either arguing illogically or the ultimate first premise of every argumentation (since Nature does not provide without Culture any form of rationality tied to specific content, and Culture basically has to “make it up”).

·       Every World Image and World View is the Ordering of the World into things of interest and not of interest, into Good and Evil,... into I, We and You, They,... into That World and This World,... and from the original irrational starting point (still mostly in the non-human animal kingdom) whole cultures arise and develop, but Power and its extension and its multiple manifestations is what features in all individuals and groups relative to other individual and groups.  

·       Social science, as absolutely consistent science, will only take place in the thought and work of very few people who desist, not from polemics, but from normative power claims. Scientific power (knowledge) claims are non-normative, and unless weaponised or “applied” normatively (and ideologically), i.e. without shedding the characteristic of science, cannot influence society.

·       Social phenomena are often or usually or always over the long run the result of causae rather than one causa, and eventually the Heterogony of Ends means that social formations change and become distinctly different societies.

·       There is no Utopia in reality, but Utopia is always the end point of ideological thought necessary for social disciplining, the restraining of drives, urges, impulses, the passions,... in short, for Culture.

·       All individuals and groups participating in the dominant ideology or ideologies either as followers or leaders are engaging in the ethicisation of their own power claims and or the power claims they support made by others.

·       Ideologies such as the various forms of Feminism, Liberalism, Marxism, Homosexualism, Africanism, Egalitarianism, Human Rights Universalism, White Nationalism, White Identitarianism, etc., etc., etc., just like the more traditional Religions, may make some or many empirically valid points but overall constitute, in terms of scientific observation of human affairs, laughable up to ludicrous thought patterns promoted by Retards and or People with an insatiable Lust for Power. Monocausal reductionism and gross over-simplification is a common feature. Scapegoating and Conspiracy theories are also signs of ideological thought, however the observation of “secret society”-like behaviour and superior networking by particular groups where there are facts to support such findings cannot be dismissed because of use of the word “conspiracy” or “canard”, etc.. Such accusations, when the facts PROVE the contrary, are a sure sign that groups with very powerful and large interests have A LOT TO HIDE and a lot of bullshit to promote through the Mass Media which they “just happen” to GROSSLY DISPROPORTIONATELY own in certain countries!!!

·       No individual and or group can rule for ever because he or it cannot last forever.

·       Humans are animals with symbolic cultural systems they create, and all values are ultimately relative.

·       The fact that I know values are relative, and different people have different perspectives, etc.,... through the observation of humans and human history, is certain empirically verifiable scientific knowledge, therefore certain scientific knowledge is possible (but not always necessarily attainable).

·       Humans are only One Humanity vis-à-vis the rest of the animal kingdom. Amongst themselves, humans differ both individually and collectively. 

·       Every individual is born into a society and culture or has some kind of relationship with a society and culture. Society and culture come first.

·       Individuals and groups can modify or change the orientation or even basic content of their identity or identities, but they will always have an identity.

·       The content of the values people hold as paramount is both a question of collective and individual identity and identities and forms of power.

·       Identity can change, it is malleable, but there is always identity. Psychology in all its manifestations is something which occurs or can occur in all people, notwithstanding the values people may or may not believe in, e.g. a “left-winger” can be just as “abusive” as a “right-winger” to his child, or have just as much “lust for recognition and fame”, whereas a “feminist” might be just as domineering to others, whether men or women, as a “fascist” or “humanitarian”, or a “patriarchal male” can be just as nice to his cat, whilst being “depressed” as a “gender-fluid trans-homoheterosexual-sheman-hewoman” [though perhaps according to Herr Freud and Herr Marcuse the latter is "less repressed", and of course less inclined to noticing particular grossly disproportionate accumulations, concentrations and crystallisations of group power given that on average the former might over a course of a lifetime ingest fewer chemicals/drugs... but "needs" to be psychopathologised... whilst it also might be the case that Mohammedans, who tend to imbibe less alcohol, are more prone on average, perhaps, to noticing certain things... of course, all of that is pure speculation... and involvement, or correlation, as we know, does not mean necessary causal participation or significance... yet facts remain facts...] etc., etc., etc.. Another aspect of people is that in social interaction they often play different roles or wear different masks in different circumstances, etc..

·       Cultural-aesthetic likes and dislikes are ultimately and absolutely a matter of taste, and entirely subjective. Such likes and dislikes have nothing to do with rationality and irrationality as such, apart from the fact that the ultimate starting point is irrational, and then the articulation of the like and dislike is or can be undertaken in logically consistent form or illogically, contradictorily, and or hypocritically. Desire and Disgust are also matters which can and do vary from individual to individual, and from group to group, grosso modo. Behind and Beneath Human-Social EpiPhenomena and Phenomena are Ultimately Nature and Artifice without any Concrete or Specific Meaning. The Meanings, The Values, The Identities,... are Made by Humans in Societies in regard to Correlations of Forces, i.e. Distributions and Varying Manifestations of Power. [E.g. if someone says it is "irrational" for others to dislike him because of his face, nose, race, religion, etc., one could answer if one were very rude and angry: "Fuck you! You fucking disgusting ANIMAL!!! Who the fuck are you to impose your values of like and dislike onto me, FUCKING POWER-HUNGRY ANIMAL!!!", because the reality is that it is no more "rational" or "irrational", either way, to like or dislike someone because of his face, nose, race, religion, etc.. And nowhere in nature or in human societies in toto does it say "all people are equal, but a particular Group as a Group and as Individuals can have and wield GROSSLY DISPROPORTIONATE forms of power, 'no problemo', notwithstanding that all people are equal" - but neither is it said or written as CERTAIN that one Group is not permitted to dominate, in various ways and with various excuses or discourses of justification, other Groups, etc....!!! Of course, the beauty of Possessing the relative Power is that the possessor of the said power can retort: "Calm down. I'll prescribe you some pills, which will help you calm down, and everything will be fine; all will be well" = The very rude and angry person can't do anything about the distribution of power and when something is done about it, which WILL DEFINITELY HAPPEN ONE DAY,... the present-day interlocutors will probably (or rather, certainly) all be well and truly DUST...] [Mao and Deng, inter alia, ensured that George Kennan's view c. 1966 that "containment" did not apply to China, would be rendered "inaccurate or inappropriate" by c. 2016...] [If there is a major, prolonged war or war-like clashes or short war or no war, but considerable economic and other losses... requiring the Sacrifice or Holocaust or simply Impoverishment of tens or hundreds of thousands or even (tens of) millions of soldiers and civilians, between the U.S.A. and China, and if China won or got the upper hand, - we note the VERY BIG "IFs" -, then, it could be that more and more and more people will start to view relative Racial Homogeneity and "Nationalistic Dictatorship" compared to "Diverse Multi-Racial, Multi-Cultural "Democracy" with GROSSLY DISPROPORTIONATE Tribal Leadership Input" in a different light... provided of course China continued in some form of nation-based existence...] [Person Z could say that today's Western Mass Democracies are like Disgusting Freak Shows, which "just happen" to be GROSSLY DISPROPORTIONATELY Tribally led in certain countries, and by means of U.S.A. Imperialistic Power Projection incl. at the level of Culture, in virtually all Western countries,... but Person A could quite easily RETORT that that is TOTALLY SUBJECTIVE OPINION AS A MATTER OF TASTE and that Person Z has NO VIABLE ALTERNATIVE WHATSOEVER THAT WON'T ENTAIL MASS VIOLENCE IN ANY ATTEMPTED SOCIETAL RE-CALIBRATION... and Person A, who sees today's societies, with their ever increasing multi-racialism and "multiculturalism" and progressive potential possible White Genocide as something like the near-Ultimate Embodiment of ALL THAT IS GOOD IN HUMANS etc., is ABSOLUTELY CORRECT about Person Z, whilst enjoying the Relative Power of being in the current Winner's Position... If Person A, though, wanted to be an absolutely consistent scientific observer of human affairs, then Person A would have said the same about the MATTER OF TASTE of his own position as he did about Person Z's... and he would have remembered Scipio...]

·       Knowledge varies from society and society and from era to era and for most (if not (nearly) all) people in most (some, many or (nearly) all) situations contains empirically factual elements and mythological-ideological elements.

·       The trashing of God simply means that for the purpose of social interaction and social discipline, another Myth or other Myths such as (normatively-loaded or normatively super-charged interpretations and ideologies of) Nature, Man, History, Trade, Communism, Race,... Equality, Diversity, Reason, Human Rights,... are being put forward.

·       The philosophers in the century or two before and after Plato posited in written form all the important philosophical questions which are of interest to us even today.

·       Plato’s argumentation against sophistry was replete with sophisms. Whether it is sophistry or Vedic reasoning or the Chinese School of Names or Talmudic argumentation or Cartesian doubt or "the greatest philosopher of the 20th century" Martin Heidegger, etc., etc., etc., “smart arses” will be found to argue (almost) any point. He, however, who sticks to the facts seen in toto, not selectively using facts, but always logically consistently, as well as having an ability to identify and distinguish causation and or correlations, comparisons, regularities, etc., whilst also having a good general knowledge of history, won’t ever fear succumbing to “smart arses”.

·       Science does not consist of a fixed method as modus procedendi. In the social sciences there are no laws, only causes, causation, causalities (historical science) and regularities (sociology); empirical verification (as a kind of “saving the phenomena”) and absolute logical consistency are sine qua non. Social ontology deals with the social and anthropological factors and forces which (potentially) operate in all societies mentioned above. The worlds greater (e.g. of the universe) and smaller (atomic, energetic,...) are not of any interest to social science as the observation of human affairs. Nor are exercises in logic which completely depart the domain of the political and political existence.   

·       Just as the Anthropological can only notionally, for the purposes of theoretical contemplation, but never in Reality, be separated from the Social-Ontological and the Historical and the Sociological (and psychological,...), so too, within the Historical and Sociological, certain Phenomena, including Concrete Group, Collective, Tribal,... Phenomena in Concrete Social and Historical Circumstances, can be examined and theorised, but never at the end of the day, like all other Human-Social Phenomena, be Separated in Reality from the Social-Ontological and Anthropological. Over-emphasising phenomena invariably, but not necessarily always, leads to scientific Error; so too, however, does the obfuscation or attempted hiding of very real phenomena... Power within the Political is Never Science's Friend...

·       History (starting in particular with Thucydides) is the only discipline which on its own can possibly lead people to non-ideological thought.

·       Montaigne, Montesquieu, Ferguson, Kant, Marx, Pareto, Durkheim, Simmel and Weber, inter alia, at their best, gave us modern sociology.

·       Thucydides, Machiavelli, Hobbes, Spinoza, Clausewitz, Weber and Kondylis taught us about Power and its many manifestations – its ultimate ubiquity in human nature and human culture and its interweaving with Identity.

·       Raymond Aron, Werner Conze and Reinhart Koselleck were the ideal teachers and roughly contemporaries for a student of the historical and social sciences at a macro or general level. Learning from them means improving on their work, and even correcting them.

·       Human societies can obviously continue with or without Whites, Christians, Greeks, Jews, et. al., et al., et al.. Which groups survive and or prosper is a matter of human interaction both locally and internationally. No-one and no group is ultimately owed anything apart from Death, and of course some individuals or groups die well before others.

·       Even if one group is replaced or “properly confined”, “oppression” and the varying elements of hierarchy and equality every society has, will never go away – they will simply occur in different doses depending on the concrete situation without the replaced or “properly confined” group. [E.g. over the very long term, if peoples don't nuclear etc. bomb one another out of existence, and even if relatively white peoples are totally effaced from the planet,... relatively tighter Group, Collective, Tribal,... identities will Coalesce in Regions Again, and any Conceited, Arrogant, (as a whole) Grossly Ugly (totally subjectively seen as a matter of Taste) Tribe, with GROSSLY DISPROPORTIONATE forms of Power in some or many of its members' possession, and which thinks it will (in part) comparatively Rule (or GROSSLY DISPROPORTIONATELY wield various forms of Power) Forever, will be "pleasantly surprised", to say the Least... One can learn a lot by watching e.g. the often Grossly Underrated Pasolini's Il fiore delle mille e una notte = The Flower of the One Thousand and One Nights = Arabian Nights, 1974, - groups, individuals, flesh, spirit, identity, power -, as well as by researching how many great authors and other artistic creators there have been only in the last 50 to 100 years completely outside of the Anglo-American-centric Cultural Orbit, in at least 10 languages and or (historical) cultures I know about to a lesser or greater extent, and completely outside of the Awarding of Prizes, which "just happen" to feature GROSSLY DISPROPORTIONATE numbers of...] [It seems quite clear c. 2017 that the relatively white nations of European Origin went, macro-historically and Grosso Modo, from (civil, tribal, religious, ethnic, racial and) Class War to a process of (potential) Auto-Genocide in a state of increasing (civil, religious, class, ethnic, racial and) Tribal War... with the long-term Future clearly belonging to Others... at least it seems that way...] [It would be a very serious mistake in scientific observation to overestimate Foe continuity phenomenology and underestimate Friend continuity phenomenology in the continually active and rich in innumerable gradations and manifestations of social interaction Spectrum... in addition to underestimating/overestimating the degree of Social Coherence and Social Order in the present, and overestimating/ underestimating such Social Coherence and Social Order in the past... or underestimating/overestimating the Future (which we really can't know... that well... or rather, the further into the Future we look,... at all...)...]  

·       High Culture, as creative products of relatively high quality and craftsmanship and (written) learning, whether valued or not, whether thought to be “better” or not, macro-historically seen, has mostly appeared in Europe and Asia, not so much in Sub-Saharan Africa and America before European Settlement. High Culture, like all things human, eventually Ends.

·       Conquering, Killing, Massacring, Enslaving, Torturing, etc. are phenomena, just like language, culture, song, dance,... which have appeared (albeit nowhere near or not necessarily as frequently) all over the world in all (major) racial, ethnic and or cultural groups. Certain groups in certain parts of the world abandoned cannibalism and ritual human sacrifice much later than other groups. Other groups developed technology to the extent that they could kill millions in relatively short periods of time.

·       Population explosions, lack of water, of resources,... even of air,... weapons of mass destruction, terrorism, increasing Anomie, the Ideology of Human Rights and the Model of Hedonistic Consumerism and ever-expanding G.D.P.s, etc.,... could all possibly culminate in a “Perfect Storm” of Catastrophe on a Scale hitherto unknown in human history. [It is understandable that unlimited numbers of people can view, in the final analysis, that the meaning of life is money or connected to money (and associated accumulating power). But if that is the model for a planet of 10 billion people rather than 1 billion people, then the only thing that can eventuate is trouble, a lot of trouble, a very great deal of trouble, unheard-of and unknown in all of human history trouble,... HELL] [No-one in their right mind would say that by Year ???? such and such catastrophes will befall "humanity", however certain trends have become apparent, and we do know WITH ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY that no specific correlation of forces and "regime(s)" last forever... it truly is a matter of TIME...]

·       The Heterogony of Ends will keep on having the Final Say, until there is no say to be had...

·       The tragic dimension in life, e.g.: two individuals of different backgrounds can be the best of friends and truly admire or even love each other as individual human beings, but if circumstances are such that one or both must take Sides, then the only Loyalty for an individual with a strong historical and or collective sense of being is to side with his grandparents and or his co-religionists, broadly understood, i.e. his TRIBE.

·       The absolutely consistent scientist always seeks to identify and correct any errors, but never fears the truth and the limits of his knowledge, nor does he do any individual or group any favours whatsoever (even if in the capacity as a non-scientist he is a fanatical supporter of, or indifferent to, his own inherited and or adopted group).

·       No society whatsoever, could possibly ever have any kind of social AND political need for P.K.'s work seen, and having been studied, in toto. In fact, even professional "thinkers" almost to a Man, Woman and IT, would never want to go anywhere near P.K.'s thought globally understood and appreciated... (only in the outskirts of town, on the fringes, at the margins,...)... and THAT will NEVER change.

·   In P.K.’s case, a (total) lack of recognition is a sure sign of (total) success. Fame would be a

    Catastrophe. [Why on earth would anyone in his right mind seek Recognition from people he not only does not consider to be his people, but often inimical and or even repulsive, repugnant, disgusting,...?] [If P.K.'s work would be incinerated, sidelined, ignored or grossly deformed and misinterpreted in any social formation no matter how "free", how "liberal", how "democratic",... and if his work offers no solution to any problem outside of theory as the scientific observation of human affairs, what could possibly be the point of someone "worrying" about Recognition, Fame and Posterity, unless one was Incapable of Relativising Himself, Laughing at Himself and Laughing at the human-animal artificiality-naturalness of Himself and Others (whilst not enjoying the (almost) exclusive knowledge gained and possessed whilst alive)?] 

·   Interpretations can land copiers and or creators in galaxies far, far away.

·   Λήθη means the End.

·        Σολωμὸς ἐδίδαξεν ὅτι μέσα στὴν ἧττα ὑπάρχει νίκη, ἀρκεῖ νὰ τὴν εὕρῃς μὲ ψυχὴ καθαρὰν καὶ φρόνημα ἑλληνικόν... ἑνὸς ἐλευθέρου πεπολιορκημένου... [ Παπαδιαμάντης, Κᾶλβος, Καβάφης,... ἐπίσης ὁδηγοῦν εἰς τὸν Σοφοκλήν,... τὸν Πίνδαρον καὶ τὸν Ὅμηρον. Εἰς τὴν ἡσυχίαν. Ἀμήν.]

Make a free website with Yola