Thread 17797186

Why did liberalism own traditionalism so hard leading into the modern era? Is this a permanent butt blowout or does traditionalism have a chance to make a comeback?

Buttraping of the millennium

And now it's owning itself. Traditionalism just has to relax and wait.

>>17797200
Cope, religiosity's global decline has only been accelerating

>>17797209
Doesn't matter how many people of euphoria exist if the only ones breeding are religious nutjobs. They will inherit the Earth

God is dead. We looked to the stars to find him and we looked at his infinitesimally small creations but he wasn't there. What was there was the creation. If God isn't literally in this plane of existence then the authority that religious figures profess to have is false, also meaning the Church's validation of European titles was null. We know we existed in a state before God and it is from these periods that our law originates. If there is nothing intellectually divine law is surely the next best thing.

So if the monarchy isn't legitimate what do we base our movement on? Well what can we draw from our past? The age before God. We have our common law and through that law we can discern a collection of values stretching thousands of years, some would call these "Natural Rights". Some would attempt to codify them in a "Bill of Rights" or "the Rights of man".

>>17797212
and then these newly bred religious people will do what they do best: become atheist

>>17797212
Religious nutjobs breed. Their populations get bigger than their rural lifestyles can sustain. They are forced to contact society more and more, and they secularize. It's just the nature of the beast.

>>17797236
I don't mean run-of-the-mill Christcucks who only pay lip service to the religion. I'm talking about people who will spend their entire lives in a cult. Sure, maybe a few will escape, but like I said, the liberal world order is currently owning itself, so all they have to do is keep breeding and they'll end up on a positive balance of zealots

>>17797241
Ah, but there is a spectrum to this secularization. A secularized cultist doesn't simply become a raging dangerhair. You will still end up with a population that is more conservative or even reactionary

>>17797186 (OP)
After societal collapse we will revert back to the old ways. It’s almost inevitable.

>>17797248
I think this issue will eventually reach more of a systemic balance/equilibrium than you think, a large population needs liberalism and educated people to function.

>>17797257
>People follow tradition only after a complex society collapses and life is hard and sucks balls
>This tradition then leads to flourishing again and another complex society which then abandons its traditions
Why follow tradition if it always leads to this?

>>17797264
We shouldn't. It's total garbage. Fact of the matter is secular people need to start breeding and be ready to defend themselves against the fundie expansion. Israel & the Haredi will be a stark warning in the near future.

>>17797270
Nah we need to return to monkey, we popped out about 20,000 years too early to be playing with social engineering

>>17797274
There is nothing more monkey than recognizing an existential threat to your group and responding.

>>17797270
Secular people don't want to breed in their prosperous societies and want others to defend them. Meanwhile religious people breed like crazy in their shitholes and are always ready for a fight to keep what little they have or to take what scraps they can from other poor, religious people.

>>17797270
>secular people need to start breeding
good luck rolling back feminism

>>17797277
https://youtu.be/CZs0PFjX9cI?list=RDCZs0PFjX9cI

>>17797212
Religious nutjobs were the only ones breeding 300 years ago, and yet atheism is still dominant in the West.

>>17797282
Nothing about feminism stops women from breeding if it's in their best interests.

>>17797284
Remember that thing called the Thirty Years War, the French Revolution, the Napoleonic Wars, and the World Wars? It leads to massive upheavals.