Tfw you have slowly shifted the tone of Veeky Forums from advocacy of Modernity to its rejection

>tfw you have slowly shifted the tone of Veeky Forums from advocacy of Modernity to its rejection

But what is the essence of anti-modernism? What is replacing modernism in the ideology?

The concept of the 'Sacred' which existed in past societies and whose light must be realighted by us, the traditional.

How has sacredness been lost at all? What is sacred stems from what is valued and nowadays it ain't so much that they are without values altogether but they have few in the mainstream and put new focus on different goals.

>How has sacredness been lost at all? What is sacred stems from what is valued

Wrong

>tfw you have slowly shifted the tone of Veeky Forums from advocacy of Morality to its rejection

I hate WOLFSHIEM for his pedantry and defense of Catholic pederasty, but he is correct. The sacred is ever present. Even now, in 2017. It is the silent moments when the world is asleep, the euphoria of losing yourself in a mob, or the coiled potential that is cold hard cash in hand.

Wrong.

>tfw you have delusions of grandeur and everything you see is ultimately something you yourself triggered

Do you even know what that word means?

>*changes the course once again*

That's why the most discussed and memed books on Veeky Forums are a trilogy of modem and postmodern novels and a certain contemporary collection of poetry?

That's what you think. Give me a month ;)

meta modernism

>implying you are the cause of that change and not being changed yourself by the irreversible course of Veeky Forums

eat shitte m8 desu

I'm still here though bitch

tfw you arent pro modernism or anti modernism, but un-modern

This hasn't been true for a while.
Our greatest weakness has always been that only like ten of us actually read. No one was really losing anything in jumping from Pynchon to Peterson because they weren't going to read anyway.

>tfw οἱ πολλοί continue their trudge through the noxious swamps of political theory, now on the left foot and now on the right, their eyes fixed down on the impure bog and never thinking to look up to the stars, yet ineffectual to change their drudgery in any ways; their eyes may wander unto the next object of passing lust, but their feet and hands are fettered
>tfw οἱ σοφοί exalt, as they have from eternity, Solitary Man over all else, disdaining everything that would seek to constrain Him with mere convention, whether that convention be old or new
>tfw most of all I detest that love of pain and death for its own sake embodied equally in the intolerant Spartan, in the fascist, and in the white-collar disciple of Greenspan; because they all love to see division among mankind (between the freeman and the Helot, the "Aryan" and the Jew, the entrepreneurial man and the freeloader, and indeed between the truly tolerant citizen and the secret bigot), not along the lines of real worth, but according to base tribal instincts
>tfw, though Heraclitus was right to say that one man is worth ten thousand if he be one of the best, bloodshed is unnecessary, as all but the starkest enforcers of convention have the potential to become one of τῶν σοφῶν, if they could only get a proper education
>tfw you realize the physical accommodation for leisure brought about by what we call Modernity, for all the difficulties it presents for the preservation of the integrity of Solitary Man, is the only means by which the way can be prepared for such an education; but that, insomuch as Modernity brings in new conventions, by so much must it be destroyed; as mere Convention, whether old or new, is always barbarous and the enemy of real Tolerance and Sensibility
>tfw Blalke and the later Romantics got it exactly right almost 200 years ago and we didn't listen, or rather didn't listen right

The sacred has no need of traditions. What is sacred requires no attachment to the past nor dogma to understand it as such. What you are talking about is promoting a shared recognition of what some understand as sacred. This is absolutely profane, as no one can show another the sacred. But all can agree on it.

Language is cursed, and you sound like a rhetorician or a sophist who knows this is true. So then, accept the isolation of knowing the sacred and seek others slyly enough that you don't end up destroying what is.

Worship rather than proselytise. Gather and create the stage for the glory of the sacred.

Purple word salad. Was this made with a Deepak Chopra generator?

t. Christcucks

Arent things being deemed sacred just an easy means to control a massive amount of people?
If theyre things that have an assigned deeper meaning by the masses, couldnt it just be manufactured through constant exposure to it?

Not even, friends. I just happen to know that it is impossible for anyone to live without having the sacred to rely on. If you want to go toe to toe, I'll have to sleep on this definition so that I can show you where science prays. Or do you believe everything without questions, just as the dogmatic do?

Yes, and sacredness hasn't been lost in the modern era. All these idiots saying so in this thread don't get it. Sacredness has been spread too thin in postmodern hippie new age bullshit. Every fucking thing is sacred "through the right set of eyes". It's become such that people don't give a shit about it anymore. Everything is awesome, nothing inspires awe. People literally are bored of sacredness. The concept it done, sold out.

We need a new experience entirely.

>I'M LE AUTISTIC FAGGOT XDDDD

New Neoplatonism, anyone?