Schopenhauer, Métaphysique de l'Amour, Extraits

Extrait de La Métaphysique de l'Amour de Schopenhauer :

 

 

.....Poursuivons : l'opération qui permet à la volonté de

s'affirmer et à l'homme de naître est un acte dont tous les

individus éprouvent une honte intime, dont ils se cachent

avec -soin, effrayés, si on les saisit sur le fait, comme s'ils

étaient surpris dans l'accomplissement d'un crime. C'est

une action dont la pensée n'excite, de sang-froid, que la

répugnance, et, dans des dispositions d'esprit plus élevées,

que l'horreur.

 

......Et cependant l'incessante répétition d'un acte de cette nature

est le seul, l'unique moyen qui assure l'existence de la race

humaine. - Si maintenant l'optimisme avait raison, s'il

nous fallait reconnaître avec gratitude dans notre existence

le don gracieux d'une suprême bonté guidée par la sagesse,

par suite un don en lui-même digne d'éloges, une source

de gloire et de joie, alors l'acte destiné à la perpétuer devrait

revêtir vraiment une apparence tout autre. Cette existence

n'est-elle au contraire qu'une sorte de faux pas, ou de

fausse route, est-elle l'œuvre d'une volonté originellement

aveugle, dont le développement le plus heureux consis-

terait à revenir à elle-même, pour se supprimer de son

propre mouvement, alors l'acte qui perpétue cette existence

doit avoir exactement l'apparence qu'il a.

 

......Ici doit se placer une remarque relative à la vérité pre-

mière et fondamentale de ma doctrine : la honte signalée

plus haut comme provoquée par l'acte de la génération

s'étend même aux parties qui servent à l'accomplir, quoique

la nature nous les ait données dès la naissance, comme tous

les autres organes. C'est encore une preuve frappante que,

non seulement les actions, mais déjà même le corps, de

l'homme se peut regarder comme la forme phénoménale,

comme l'objectivation et l'œuvre de sa volonté. Car l'homme

pourrait-il rougir d'une chose qui existerait sans sa volonté?

 

 

....Cette propriété n'explique pas moins qu'il est le grand

"arrètov", (mot grec) le secret de polichinelle, dont il n'est permis de

parler expressément en aucun temps et en aucun lieu, mais

qui toujours et partout s'entend de lui-même comme la

chose capitale, pensée toujours présente à l'esprit de tous

et qui fait saisir sur-le-champ la moindre allusion à ce sujet.

Puisque partout les uns pratiquent et les autres supposent

des intrigues d'amour, le rôle principal que joue dans le

monde cet acte et tout ce qui s'y rattache répond bien à

l'importance de ce punctum saliens de l'œuf du monde. Le

côté plaisant de la chose, c'est le perpétuel mystère dont on

entoure cette opération, intéressante pour nous entre toutes.

Mais voyez maintenant toute la frayeur de l'intellect

humain, jeune et innocent encore, épouvanté par l'énor-

mité de l'acte commis, quand pour la première fois ce

grand mystère du monde se découvre à lui. En voici la

raison: dans cette longue route que la volonté dépourvue

de connaissance dans le principe avait à parcourir, avant

de s'élever jusqu'à l'intellect, surtout jusqu'à l'intellect

humain et raisonnable, la volonté est devenue tellement

étrangère à elle-même, qu'elle ne connait plus son origine,

cette “pœnitmda origo”, et qu'en la considérant du point de

vue de la connaissance pure et innocente, elle est frappée

de terreur à ce spectacle.

 

....La volonté trouve son foyer, c'est-à-dire son centre et

sa plus haute expression, dans l'instinct sexuel et sa satis-

faction; c'est donc un fait bien caractéristique et dont la

nature rend naïvement compte dans son langage symbolique

que la volonté individualisée, c'est-à-dire que l'homme et

l'animal ne puissent entrer dans le monde que par la

porte des parties sexuelles.

 

 

 

The Violence We Don’t See

September 12, 2013 By Daniel Greenfield

 

Lashawn Marten was playing chess when he announced, “I hate white people.” Then he began hitting random white people who were walking by. By the time he was done, several were wounded and one lay dead.

I have walked by countless times and seen the chess players sitting near the overhang of the Union Square subway entrance; mostly black men daring white passerby into a money game. At the fountain to the left, Moonies squat on a blanket and sing their sonorous chants. To the right, the remnants of Occupy Wall Street set up tables to collect money and dispense buttons.

In warmer weather, break dancers perform on the stairs and office workers sit beneath the statue of George Washington expelling the British and eat lunch. Elderly Puerto Rican men push makeshift wooden carts piled with unlabeled bottles of homebrewed soda pop.

Jeffrey Babbitt, the man Lashawn beat to death, looks familiar to me because he has that type of New York face that you pass on the street. You see it worn by plumbers and high school teachers. It’s the badge of the vanishing New York City working class.

No conclusions will be drawn from the murder. Lashawn Marten was obviously mentally ill. And if his mental illness took the form of violent racism toward white people, that is an incidental fact. The murder is an incident. The details are incidental. No conclusions will be drawn from what happened between the chess tables.

Incidents take place all around us, but patterns have to be articulated. The incident is insignificant. It’s the pattern that counts.

The incident is something we have to learn to get over so we can get back to shopping in downtown Manhattan or walking through Union Square. The pattern is a social problem that we must dedicate ourselves to fighting. The incident isn’t supposed to define our lives. The pattern is.

The murder of Chris Lane was an incident. The murder of Jeffrey Babbitt was an incident.

The Boston Marathon bombing was an incident. So was the Fort Hood Massacre. So was 9/11. No conclusions can be drawn from them and no pattern can be used to tie them together. They are to be processed separately and discarded as having no further meaning than the private pain of their victims.

The media is not that concerned with suppressing incidents. It is concerned with suppressing pattern awareness. No one can deny that the occasional racial murder takes place and that the perpetrators look like Obama’s sons. And no one can deny that Muslims sometimes set off bombs or fly planes into buildings. They deny only that these incidents form a pattern.

Every Muslim terrorist attack is met with media chatter about an Islamophobic backlash. The backlash never materializes, but it doesn’t need to. The mere repetition of it does the trick and sets the pattern. It tells readers that the attack is the incident, but the backlash is the pattern.

The attack is only an incident and not characteristic of Muslims while the backlash is a pattern and characteristic of our bigotry and intolerance.

White racism is a pattern. Black racism is an incident. Racism is characteristic of white people, but not of black people. The crowds passing through Union Square are subdivided into the oppressors and the oppressed. Their lives are color coded for morality and justice. Jeffrey Babbitt, who dreamed of being a motorman, loved comics and took care of his elderly mother, was an oppressor. His death is an incident that in no way detracts from the pervasive pattern of white racism.

Jeffrey Babbitt was an oppressor and Lashawn Marten was one of the oppressed. This social dynamic was imposed on them at birth. The occasional death of an oppressor in no way alters the fixed pattern of the oppressors and the oppressed.

The pattern of American intolerance is likewise unmoved by September 11 or by two Chechens who set off a bomb near an 8-year-old. The blood and ashes of 3,000 dead is nothing but a stain on the liberal pattern. More people die of cancer or in car accidents, the liberal can always answer. Numbers alone do not make a pattern. And if the pattern is not recognized, then it does not exist.

We live in this world of unreal patterns and real lives where inexplicable things happen all the time.

Overhead, I see two beams of pale light piercing the sky and reflecting at an angle. The towers of light remind us of an incident. Not a pattern. After over a decade of war, no one in authority will admit what we are fighting or why. All that ash and rubble, the twisted steel and the falling bodies, are not part of a pattern. But when a Muslim cabbie is stabbed by a drunk, that is a pattern.

Most of us see the real patterns, even if only hazily, like the beams of light cutting across the sky. And we see that the unreal patterns, the obsessions with Muslim backlashes and the martyrdom of Trayvon Martin, are unreal things. Not true patterns, but false patterns that reflect at an angle from the true light.

We do not speak of these true patterns. But we know them. They stir in us when the right moment appears. They keep us alive.

Millions walk through life with this double vision, the lenses of their minds blurring the real and the unreal, paying lip service to the grave threat that someone will spray paint a mosque while nervously studying the Muslim sitting in the seat in front of them or voting for Obama but moving out to the suburbs.

Patterns are power. The pattern-makers and pattern-dealers derive theirs from being able to dictate the problem and the solution. They are determined to understand things for us so that we will see the same patterns that they do. They know all too well that if we stop seeing their patterns, their cause and their power will die.

For now it is men like Jeffrey Babbitt or the spectators in the Boston Marathon and the soldiers at Fort Hood who die. They die caught in an invisible pattern that they cannot see.

We live in a world of phony patterns, of global environmental apocalypses made to order, of shadows and illusions, of phantom fears, panics and doubts. But even in the liberal world of ghosts and shadows, where rogue air conditioners and cow flatulence are a greater threat to the planet than the nuclear bomb, where Lashawn Marten was oppressed by the unconscious white privilege of Jeffrey Babbitt who died for what he did not even know he had and where Muslim terrorism is a phantom fear of bigots, these true patterns intrude.

Terrible acts of violence momentarily tear apart the illusory false patterns with blood and fire and reveal the terrible truth.

On September 11, thousands of New Yorkers standing at Union Square looked downtown to see a plume of smoke rising over Broadway. I was one of them. Some fell to making anti-war posters on the spot. Others enlisted in a long war. On another distant September, some New Yorkers came to the defense of a 62-year-old man being beaten to death for the color of his skin. Others walked on to the farmers’ market, bought their organic peaches while the liberal memes in their heads told them to see no evil.

Our lives are sharpest and clearest when we see the pattern. In moments of revelation, the comforting illusions are torn away and the true pattern of our world stands revealed.

 

L'Islam est le problème; pas les "extrémistes".

Common Sense Moderates vs Violent Extremists

by sheikyermami on May 28, 2013

Extremism and the Displacement of the Political Spectrum

Reject obscurantism. Words like ‘extremism’ are a criminal distortion of reality. When the problem is Islam, we should say ’Islam’, because Islam is the 800 pound gorilla in the room, not “extremism”. Islam is the problem because devout Muslims follow the teachings of Muhammad, the perfect man, uswa hasana, al insan al kamil. When Muslims do that, they turn into violent savages.

May 23, 2013 Colin Liddell

A near Orwellian police state with bans on weapons, bans on words and thoughts, and an incessant flow of PC propaganda is no defence against the insanities created by “multicultural Britain,” as we saw yet again in London, where we were recently ‘treated’ to an iPhone clip of a Sub-Saharan Muslim lecturing us with hands crimsoned with the blood of an off-duty British soldier that he and an associate had just hit with a car and then butchered with knives and a meat cleaver on the streets of Woolwich in South East London.

The basic problem is not the nature of Sub-Saharan Africans or the nature of Islam. These have been well-known for a long time and are what they are for a variety of reasons that it is superfluous to go into here. No, the real problem is one of politics and ideology, and, in short, of the systemic dislocation of the political spectrum.

In the wake of such horror, we can expect to hear the usual cries for “tolerance” and the throb-in-the-throat pleas not to let the “extremists” win. But the trouble is the extremists won long ago. What other word can you use for political parties like the Conservative and Labour Parties that have been creating cultural chaos and enacting genocide and race replacement on a massive scale?

The only extremists are those holding the reins of government, as they have been doing for the last 60 years. But they would have you believe that they are the “moderates,” the reasonable ones, and that the extremists are the “unrepresentative” Muslims who committed the Woolwich atrocity and the “Far Right” parties and organizations who have opposed mass immigration and the kind of multiracialism that has Sub-Saharan Muslims living cheek-by-slashed-jowl with troops serving the interests of America and Israel.

The Muslims who committed this atrocity are not extremists. They are following one of the broadest roads in a major world religion, a religion that grew up among a band of desert cutthroats and expanded by conquest, violence, intimidation, slavery, and mass rape; a religion that tolerates nothing but itself and drives its more logical adherents to acts of violence.

A so-called “moderate” Muslim is nothing more than a bad Muslim, someone who probably drinks alcohol and eats pork as well. A good Muslim is one who acts within the genocidal dictates of the religion’s founder. Needless to say, the rest of us should avoid good Muslims like the plague and be wary of bad Muslims in case they start taking their religion seriously.

The so-called “racists” and “fascists” who oppose multiracial Britain and wish not only to stop mass immigration but also to start the necessary process of “exigration” – the removal of the unassimilatable immigrant population – are not the extremists either. These people are common sense moderates, who, despite the lies of their higher and betters and the endless extremist propaganda of the “multicultural” state, realized at some gut level that the ruling elites were creating a madhouse.

The extremists are David Cameron, Gordon Brown, Tony Blair, John Major, Margaret Thatcher, Jim Callaghan, Harold Wilson, Douglas Hume, Harold McMillan, and Anthony Eden, the prime ministers who facilitated the process by which Britain has been transformed into the Bedlam it is today.

The extremists are the media, the BBC and the newspapers of the oligarchs, who have bandied about the word “racist” in an attempt to suppress any opposition to the Third World colonization of Britain, in effect creating a society whose every second thought is now race.

The extremists are the academics, who have used their intelligence to blind themselves for the pleasures of sneering at lowly common sense and basking in the glow of a false moral smugness, while furthering their lie-driven careers.

But the extremists are also the majority of the British people who have voted for these politicians, listened to these journalists, and respected these academics, all the while feeling that something was deeply wrong.

Things like the increasing imposition of multicultural totalitarianism and the Woolwich atrocity that it pathetically failed to stop are not accidents. They are the symptoms of a deep disease of the political system. This disease is extremism, but not as the mass media uses the term.

Extremism exists naturally at the extreme ends of any system. Think of it like a bell curve. The left and right sides of the curve – the ‘extremes’ – taper to nothing, while the centre bulges to the highest point and contains most of the mass.

The fact that extremes exist in any system is not a problem in itself, and, in the grand scheme of things, may even be necessary. The problem we have in the West is that “the bulge” has been dislocated so that now the weight of opinion and power has been dislocated to the extreme Left for the last 60 years.

What is ‘centric’ or moderate about the ideas on which modern Britain is based? Nothing! The viewpoint that race is a construct, that blood exerts no pull on the human heart, that loyalty to your own kind is evil, and that we are all blank slates is self-evidently an extremist Leftist one, but it is one that has become displaced towards the centre of our society.

What is “extremist” about the wish to prevent your country being colonized and your race sunk in a flood of Third World immigration, degradation, and animalistic violence? This is self evidently a centric notion, but in today’s insane world this is given the name “far-right,” “fascist,” or “racist,” all words signifying extremism and evil.

Sensible common sense, the traditional outlook of the vast majority, is now regarded as right-wing extremism. But what has caused this dislocation of the political spectrum? The causes are many, but essentially it is the switch from a society characterized by structure, ties, and values to one based on fluidity, nexus, and price. This shift requires a change in the basic concept of humanity from a static notion based on essence and being to a dynamic notion based on function and interaction: synapses instead of neurons, algebra instead of numbers.

This results in the cult of “androidism,” where anything man-shaped is considered equivalent and connected to every other thing that is man-like, with the ability to acquire money the only distinguisher. This is how multinationals, super states, and global elites see the world, and it creates the fluidity and interchangeability required by late-period global capitalism to facilitate more economic interactions, be they Keynsian or Austrian, public sector or private. To revert to a world of structure, ties, and values would cause an economic meltdown (actually much to be desired), so we are forced to live outside our mental comfort zone and fall down before the Golden Calf of multiculturalism.

The extremists who control the West see androidism as a means to facilitate short-term economic interests – their own and also that of the wider society (hence the widespread support for this stupidity) – but they also see it as a solution to the problems that it creates. Not only does androidism broaden markets, enlarge the labour pool, and create marketable stresses and problems, but it also promises the solution to the chaos it unleashes in the vast reprogramming of the human race.

Be the subjects Sub-Saharans with markedly lower IQs or Muslims with a deeply incompatible culture, the androidist extremists who control the West believe that they can use “education” and “culture” to maintain the status quo in their vast game of demographic musical chairs. Sub-Saharans can be educated to replace low-breeding Europeans and Muslims can be culturally reprogrammed by the potency and insidiousness of Western popular culture.

In this view, the great multiracial cities of West are educational laboratories doing what has never been done before, or vast cultural concentration camps exterminating the awkward culture of the incomers in a flood of porn, feminism, consumerism individualism, and sheer godlessness.

Credit where it’s due: This is a titanic theory and astounding in its scope – if it works. But the great flaw with extreme ideas is that they are extreme for a reason, and this reason is their more tenuous connection with reality. This is how you know they are extreme. This is the case with androidism. Just because someone has two arms and two legs, and walks upright, doesn’t mean that he is equivalent to all the other two-armed and two-legged creatures walking upright. The atrocity in Woolwich is a graphic example of this much denied truism.

http://alternativeright.com/blog/2013/5/23/extremism-and-the-displacement-of-the-political-spectrum

 

Thomas Hobbes, Karl Poper , Citations

« Aimer son prochain, c’est vouloir le rendre heureux comme l’enseignait Saint Thomas d’Aquin. Mais vouloir le bonheur du peuple est peut-être le plus redoutable des idéaux politiques car il aboutit fatalement à vouloir imposer aux autres une échelle de valeur supérieure jugée nécessaire à ce bonheur. On verse ainsi dans l’utopie et le romantisme : et à vouloir créer le paradis terrestre, on se condamne inévitablement à l’enfer….Que nous ayons le devoir d’aider ceux qui sont dans le besoin, nul ne le conteste; mais vouloir le bonheur des autres, c’est trop souvent forcer leur intimité et attenter à leur indépendance. »
Karl Popper.

« En effet, celui qui est modeste et arrangeant et qui tiendrait toutes ses promesses en temps et lieu, alors que personne d’autre ne ferait de même, ne ferait rien que se transformer en proie pour les autres et pourvoir avec certitude à sa propre perte contrairement au fondement de toutes les lois de la nature qui tendent à la conservation des natures. »   
Thomas Hobbes, 1588-1679 , Léviathan, p.266

« Les pensées secrètes d’une personne parcourent tous les domaines, sacrés, profanes, pudiques, obscènes, graves et légers, sans encourir honte ni blâme, ce que le discours parlé ne peut faire au delà de ce que le jugement de l’époque autorise quant au moment, au lieu et aux personnes. »  
Thomas Hobbes, 1588-1679, Léviathan, Folio, p.151

« Quelle opinion se fait-il de ses semblables quand il voyage tout armé; de ses concitoyens quand il boucle ses portes; et de ses enfants, de ses domestiques quand il verrouille ses coffres ? N’accuse-t-il pas autant le genre humain par ses actes que je le fais avec mes mots ? »  
Thomas Hobbes,1588-1679, Léviathan, Folio p.226

David Cameron et l'Islam

David Cameron dit :

« Ce n’était pas seulement une attaque contre la Grande Bretagne et le mode de vie britannique. C’était aussi une trahison de l’islam et des communautés qui apportent tant à notre pays. Rien dans l’islam ne justifie un tel acte épouvantable." 

Bassam Tibi est un musulman libéral et un éminent spécialiste de l’Islam. Il est né en Syrie. Il vit actuellement en Allemagne où il enseigne les sciences politiques et les relations internationales et il a obtenu la nationalité allemande. Il nous explique ce que veulent dire les versets du Coran qui suivent : (comme s’il en était besoin….)

“Combattez-les jusqu’à ce qu’il n’y ait plus d’opposition et que le culte d’Allah soit rendu dans sa totalité".   Coran : 8 :29
   
 “Combattez-les jusqu’à ce qu’ils paient directement le tribut après s’être humiliés". Coran 9 :29

  « Le Prophète a dit : J’ai reçu l’ordre de combattre les infidèles jusqu’à ce qu’ils professent qu’il  n’y a pas d’autre dieu qu’Allah et que Mahomet est son Prophète; qu’ils prient en se prosternant et paient la Zakat. S’ils le font, leur vie et leurs propriétés seront épargnées » Muslim, C9B1N33

Voici, M. Cameron, les commentaires de Bassam Tibi :

« L’Islam oblige les Musulmans à imposer la foi islamique dans le monde entier. Si les non-musulmans se convertissent ou se soumettent volontairement, il n’y aura pas de violence. Mais s’ils s’y s’opposent, les Musulmans sont obligés de leur faire la guerre. Et les responsables de la guerre seront ceux qui leur résistent. »

« S’ils veulent avoir la paix, les non-musulmans doivent se soumettre à l’appel de l’Islam (dawa) en se convertissant. S’ils ne veulent pas se convertir, ils devront accepter le statut de minorité religieuse (dhimmis) et payer une taxe de protection, la jizya. S’ils ne paient pas ils seront tués et leurs propriétés seront données aux croyants. Ceci est valable uniquement pour les Juifs et les Chrétiens. Pour les autres, c’est la conversion ou la mort.

« Le recours à la force qu’utilisent les Musulmans ne peut pas être appelé « guerre » (Harb); car le mot « guerre » ne s’applique qu’à l’usage de la force employée par les non-musulmans qui résistent à l’Islam. « La paix règnera dans le monde, seulement quand toute l’humanité sera convertie ou soumise à l’Islam ».

Le Coran est clair et la jurisprudence musulmane est claire. L’interprétation exhaustive du Coran est terminée depuis le lXième siècle et ce qui a été dit ici traduit l’exacte doctrine de l’Islam. Aucun Musulman ne peut me contredire sans renier le Coran, l’Islam et Allah. Aucun Musulman n’osera contredire ce qui est écrit dans le Coran. Tout ce qu’il peut faire, c’est de jeter de la poudre aux yeux, de répéter les mensonges habituels en espérant qu’on le croie sur parole.

Cameron préfère nier la réalité que de désavouer l’idéologie qui a mené l’Angleterre à cette situation catastrophique. Il préfère se fermer les yeux et continuer à s’enfoncer plus profondément en espérant que ça ira mieux dans le futur s’il participe aux mensonges et aux faux-fuyants des Musulmans qui ont peur qu’on découvre la vérité pourtant écrite noir sur blanc dans le Coran.

Et il faut être complètement insensé pour croire que les choses vont aller en s’améliorant dans le futur.

Il faut être franchement malade intellectuellement et psychologiquement pour venir nous dire que l’Islam est une religion de paix et que « rien dans l’Islam ne justifie un tel acte épouvantable. »

Lisez donc !

« Exterminez les incroyants jusqu’au derniers afin de faire prévaloir la Vérité. » Coran 8;7-8

« Le Prophète a dit : « Allah m’a donné les clefs de l’éloquence et la terreur m’a donné la victoire. » Boukhari V9B87N127

« Je (Allah) vais jeter l’effroi dans le cœur des infidèles » Coran :8;12


L’islam me considère comme un impie.

L’islam dit qu’il faut me terroriser, m’asservir ou me tuer et je devrais aimer l’Islam !

Je serais un vilain « islamophobe » un fanatique d’ « extrême-droite » ?

MAIS CERTAINEMENT QUE JE SUIS UN ISLAMOPHOBE ! DIEU MERCI ! JE SUIS SAIN D’EPRIT PARMI LES FOUS.

Philippe Bernier-Arcand : entrevue délirante à R-C avec Nuovo 2013-04-07 J'y reviendrai