Can a man both be Rich and Rustic?

20 Dec

Rome began Strong and Rustic, full of masculine energy able to conquer the Mediterranean and able to plunder their enemies. However though beginning as virile the ease of luxury gradually made the Romans weak. Gradually they were overcome by the Barbarians and the empire was divided among the various barbarian tribes.

When Rome in its more virile era is confronted with a similiar Crisis however which manifested itself in the Carthaginian general Hannibal. She despite many defeats was able to overcome such a general and lay waste to the Carthaginian empire. Not so in the later era.

It seems that Wealth in every era and in every age present as much a challenge in its seduction of luxury as poverty which also likewise devastates Men. Consider the common imagery of foppery of so called Fat-cats and consider the Rustic men of the lower class of any era. Consider also the effeminacy of white-collar workers whose face is soft and clean shaven and berefit of muscle in contrast to blue-collar workers who look more masculine in appearance as well as a well chiseled body. Who do you think will win in a fight?

It therefore is self-evident that as it is with empires that successful at 1st and rising to the top are as with all human failings is then seduced by luxury sapping of their virility and leaving them husks of what they were as well as losing the competitive edge that made them great in the 1st place. With the decline of manhood and hence Arete(excellence) is part of the reason why empires fall and groups fail. Therefore luxury is as much a threat to virility as being smothered in femininity.

And in order for men to remain great that luxury should be shunned as much as possible lest they lose the masculine energy that drove them to the top in the 1st place. My summary of the History of empires is of course overly simplified and generalized for the sake of the post  and I will credit the book: “Tragedy and Hope” by Carrol Quigley with the inspiration.

 

 

 

Advertisements

9 Responses to “Can a man both be Rich and Rustic?”

  1. Leap of a Beta December 20, 2013 at 5:44 pm #

    From what I can tell a country can be both rich and rustic when the culture holds putting forward their money towards something other than the self. Britain’s empire did well for a long time with a great deal of wealth by putting that wealth towards expansion of the empire or improvements within it, by having a healthy balance of charity, and by having a masculine artistic class who explored ideas of man, woman, and God.

    I don’t think a country can be wealthy and stay strong without a strong sense of Christianity to keep them from the temptations of luxury and indulgence.

    • infowarrior1 December 20, 2013 at 11:53 pm #

      Do you see the cycle of history as inevitable? If so is it possible to shorten and reduce the wane and lengthen and maximize the wax?

      I am also inclined to agree that a strong sense of Christianity to keep them from the temptations of luxury and indulgence. However given the feminization of the church both catholic and protestant with the eastern orthodox as the exception. It doesn’t seem the Christianity is immune from this either. I would like your thoughts.

      • Leap of a Beta December 21, 2013 at 7:41 am #

        I don’t see it as either inevitable or as a cycle, but rather a pattern.

        History operates on patterns, which will be repeated until a great force interrupts the pattern and sets a new one. Christ was one such reset. The enlightenment another. Protestant reformation could be one, though is largely tied up with the enlightenment. Marxism. Nazis. The Internet.

        It’s not that these things reset a cycle, or that a new cycle found new means of expression, but that there is a different pattern with the same players, colors, and flavors interwoven. Man is still sinful, but the Devil is always creative in his temptations and God always there with mercy, justice, and his supreme power.

        That being said, feminism is a totally new pattern, which only had slight echoes in previous patterns of history which can be seen the classical literature and some of the philosophers. It’s not that it wasn’t foreseen, but that victor being masculine nature was always assumed in previous writings. We’re in uncharted territory, which always brings with it inability to forecast the future as well as the honest and real nature that we may face judgment. Any Christian denying such a reality is being untruthful, and any claiming knowledge that such a thing is absolutely going to happen is lying. We’re simply trying to follow God’s will, and will see where it leads us.

      • infowarrior1 December 21, 2013 at 7:57 am #

        Have you read my earlier article that links to the origins of chivalric love?

        Likewise you will find this this video enlightening:

      • Leap of a Beta December 21, 2013 at 8:18 am #

        No, I haven’t. And as much as I enjoy Aurini, I’ll see if I can make time to watch that tomorrow.

      • infowarrior1 December 21, 2013 at 8:26 am #

        Here is the link:
        http://gynocentrism.com/2013/07/14/the-birth-of-chivalric-love/

      • Leap of a Beta December 21, 2013 at 9:17 pm #

        A great deal of what Aurini was talking about falls into what I was describing as patterns. He reduced it down to cycles with ‘exceptions’, which doesn’t quiet get to the truth of it as I see it. His exceptions are what I was describing as ways in which old elements to old patterns are twisted to create new ones. The same elements are there – we’ve always had rebellious women, we’ve always had those that believe in what we now describe as socialism, we’ve always had people that believe in a ‘live life to the fullest’ in hedonistic ways. Yet all of those have changed drastically over the course of history, to create new ways that old problems are expressed or to push what was once the cause of an ‘age of conflict’ to the background, while bringing another aspect of human’s fallen nature to the foreground as the cause of the conflict. Nazi Germany was an issue of Pride, Envy, and Wrath. Our current conflict is an issue of Pride, Lust, and Sloth. Not that the other capital sins weren’t heavily involved then and are not now; simply the ones that are prominent are different, and it lends itself to a different pattern that is created by ways in which the world has irrecoverably changed – your Chivalry was one of those that has infected many of the Ages of Conflict since it’s inception, and is particularly relevant in this one.

        However, I disagree with Aurini on one thing – he seems to have more hope for society and the world than I do; where I have more hope for God. The world progressively seems to become an easier place to live in, and a more evil place. The City of the Devil is a comfortable place, indeed. Thus, he already takes for granted the world will settle back down; while I make no such assumption. God’s Will shall be done, and I am not presumptuous enough to say that such a Will could not mean that any ‘age of conflict’ could not, in fact, be the final one. Thus, I prepare my mind, body, and soul for either result, praying for the strength to be able to react and bear my cross as needed.

      • Leap of a Beta December 21, 2013 at 9:52 pm #

        I realized I could describe my view of history a bit better with a Catholic view of things. Just as Catholicism has a history of tradition that involves worship, practice, and beliefs that have evolved over the years; so does Conflict have a history of tradition of conflict which involves the ways in which it dissolves, fights, and cobbles together a new civilization from the rubble. Each side responds to developments by humanity which will change and evolve future conflicts, the way in which each side is armed, and how they come to understand our world. Yet to say that we operate in cycles is so reductionist on the tradition of evil and conflict that it will never lead to deep understanding even if it may, occasionally, predict when conflict will occur or other minor parts of the conflict. This would be the same as reading a statement or writing of the Pope without any wisdom founded within Catholic Tradition – you might gain shallow understandings, but will never understand the depths from which those words rise.

        The Catholic church has been predicting a downfall of Western Civilization since the moment that Abortion, birth control, and Gay Marriage started being acceptable. Who is wiser – the ones that saw the problem but not the details of the conflict LONG before it was recognizable as such; or one that can see we’re in a cycle of deconstruction and is able to now point at the specifics as well as predict how the fall may happen.

        There may be more knowledge in the latter, but I would say that there is more wisdom in the former.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: