Thursday 29 December 2016

Neoreaction Explained


Frederich the Great - a Neoreactionary hero

Several associates of the author of these pages have expressed some mystification regarding the contemporary phenomenon known as Neoreaction (or NRx for short).  They are aware that it is a political philosophy occupying a place on the Right (or Dexter) half of the political spectrum, and that it is perhaps related to the so-called 'Alt Right' (i.e. 'Alternative Right') and/or that mode of conservatism prefixed with paleo- (meaning old or primal or archaic), but just what it is and what it espouses escapes them. What exactly is Neoreaction? Can you explain it in fifty words or less? Why are NRx blogs and webpages so frustratingly dense and opaque? 

The topic was treated in a very introductory way on these pages recently, here, and as the new year (2017) dawns and the author's sojourning through India and Asia has come to an end and he has settled again into a domestic routine, it is hoped that further matters relevant to NRx can be treated in more detail in future posts. Indeed, it is hoped that Out of Phase might become more explicitly neoreactionary than it has been in the past. Neoreaction is a lively intellectual movement, and one entirely in keeping with the tenor and assumptions of this author. Just look at the content of these pages: neo-colonial, neo-orientalist, neo-this and neo-that. And whether it is matters of art or matters of esoterica, the author shows an abiding preference for the ways of by-gone days and a consistent aversion to modern innovations. There is no harm in making these pages more forthright in their intellectual affiliations. 

Let us, therefore, attempt a brief and demystified explanation of the Neoreactionary viewpoint. It is, admittedly, not an easy matter because the NRx community is never in any hurry to make it easy. The entire business is, to be sure, elitist, and Neoreaction has adopted an opaque posture and vocabulary as a deliberate strategy against entryism, which is to say against infiltration by hostile or just unworthy characters. It is no exaggeration to say that many of the prime movers in the movement are longwinded, while others are prolix and obscuritanistic. People complain: "I've read lots of Neoreactionary stuff, and I'm still none the wiser! What does it all mean?" Here is what it means:

A reactionary is someone who advocates a return to a status quo ante, a return to a previous status quo. Specifically, as a political proponent, a reactionary is someone who advocates a return to a political system from the past. This is different to a conservative, who merely wants to defend and preserve the current status quo. A reactionary wants to restore a status quo long since gone. In popular parlance, they want to turn back the clock, go against the tide of so-called "progress", and rebuild and restore something of value that has been lost.In reaction we find a rejection of the ideology of "progress", a critique of the conditions of modernity and a determination to recover a lost virtue. 

A neo-reactionary, therefore, is one of a new breed of reactionaries. In recent times the label has been applied especially to a diverse group of thinkers and advocates who have coalesced around a blogger known pseudonymously as Mencius Moldbug.

To be yet more specific, Neoreaction, as a political position, values and seeks a return to many of the things which prevailed in the past but which were swept away recklessly by such watersheds as the French and American Revolutions, including: monarchy, aristocracy, nobility, fealty, heroic values, vocation, loyalty, classical international law, hierarchical organisational structures, family, patriarchal social relations, localism, ethnic identity, religious observance and religious morality. It follows that, in general, Neoreactionaries are opposed to the corrosive, flattening, quantifying modern cult of equality and all the related the assumptions of progressive (Whig) ideology.In particular, Neoreaction is anti-democratic. It sees democracy as an inherently Leftist mode that is counted as the worst and least stable form of government. 

As someone explained it, Neoreactionaries want to return to the 50s. The 1450s. 

This is not to say that there is a single programme of Neoreaction. Not all Neoreactionaries are monarchists, for instance. And not all of them are religious, by any means. Ethnic identity is more important to some than to others. But they all share a determination to learn from the pre-modern era, share a rejection of progressive historiography and a belief that a great many pre-modern institutions were better than what has replaced them. In general, they subscribe to the view that traditional (pre-modern) societies were founded in realities, the stuff of nature, and that the modern project, on the contrary, is founded in delusions, wishful thinking, and serious, diabolical miscalculations of the human predicament. 



Mencius Moldbug - the face of Neoreaction

While its opponents might present Neoreaction as "Far Right" it is not, it should be stressed, a movement of political activists and agitators. No one supposes that the wished-for Restoration of Tradition and historical norms can be brought about through the ballot box or collecting petitions or staging street marches. Contemporary Neoreaction is an intellectual movement that has grown out of the above principles, largely based in a careful reading of old (pre-modern) texts and a meticulous re-reading of history. Neoreactionaries read old books. That is mainly what they do. They read old books without the lens of modern liberalism. Foremost among their favoured authors is the XIXth century Scottish essayist Thomas Carlyle, the great spokesman of old Europe. 

Also worth mentioning here is that contemporary Neoreaction - based as it is in the analysis of Mr Moldbug - proposes that the roots of Leftism are to be found in Calvinist Protestantism and that Leftism is itself essentially religious (eschatological) in its motivations. Progressive democracy, the human rights cult, egalitarianism, feminism, radical environmentalism, Whiggism of all stripes: all these related phenomena constitute a religion. They are more than political, they are religious in nature. This is an important feature of Neoreactionary thought. The NRx analysis goes much deeper than garden variety right-wing sloganeering. Finally, it is a metaphysics. 


In conclusion, contemporary neoreaction is anything but empty nostalgia. It is a rigorous field of genuine politico-philosophical inquiry, albeit conducted almost entirely outside of the formal structures of academia. The following links will take the reader to some of the more illustrious and rewarding NRx blogsites active today:

Unqualified Reservations

Outside In

The Future Primeval

Neocolonial

The Froude Society

Social Matter

Yours

Harper McAlpine Black






Thursday 15 December 2016

Lord Curzon


“If there be any one who says to me that there is no duty devolving upon a Christian Government to preserve the monuments of a pagan art or the sanctuaries of an alien faith, I cannot pause to argue with such a man. Art and beauty, and the reverence that is owing to all that has evoked human genius or has inspired human faith, are independent of creeds, and, in so far as they touch the sphere of religion, are embraced by the common religion of all mankind. Viewed from this standpoint, the rock temple of the Brahmans stands on precisely the same footing as the Buddhist Vihara, and the Mohammedan Musjid as the Christian Cathedral. There is no principle of artistic discrimination between the mausoleum of the despot and the sepulchre of the saint. What is beautiful, what is historic, what tears the mask off the face of the past and helps us to read its riddles and to look it in the eyes—these, and not the dogmas of a combative theology, are the principal criteria to which we must look.”
— Lord Curzon, Viceroy of India

Thursday 8 December 2016

A Classical Horoscopy


In response to a request from a correspondent who had noted the several astrological posts on these pages the author has prepared a brief summarised account of his personal approach to the gentle arts of horoscopy. His method is largely gleaned from classical Hellenistic sources and quite deliberately deviates from many of the established norms of modern astrological practice. Each of the points below could warrant a lengthy rationale, but they will suffice for the time being, together constituting a coherent praxis based in a certain symbolic conception that the author regards as exceedingly ancient. 

* * * 

A CLASSICAL HOROSCOPY



1. There are seven and only seven planets, namely those known to the ancients and visible to the naked eye. They are, in order of velocity along the ecliptic: Luna, Mercury, Venus, Sol, Mars, Jupiter, Saturnus.

We take no account of the so-called “modern” or trans-Saturnian planets. 

*
*  *
*  *  *

2. The seven planets have certain established relationships as recounted in many traditional sources and are to be considered according to such relationships. The most important of them are the following pairings, noting the complex relations between Luna, Sol and Saturnus:

Luna – Saturnus
Mercury – Jupiter
Venus – Mars
Luna – Sol
Sol – Saturnus

*
*  *
*  *  *

3. The aforementioned pairings of the seven planets is reflected in the traditional rulerships of the twelve signs of the zodiac, according to the following diagram (Thema Mundi):


Note that Sol and Luna rule one half of the circle each, which is to say day and night respectively, and that each of the other five planets have a diurnal rulership and a nocturnal rulership. The most basic determination in the analysis of the powers of the planets is according to this binary division. That is, it is of fundamental importance, in any given case, whether a planet is in a diurnal or nocturnal phase.

Note that, contrary to modern attributions, the sign of Aquarius is ruled by the nocturnal Saturnus and is Saturnine in quality. 

*
*  *
*  *  *

4. The structure in which the seven planets are considered is the fourfold matrix of the geocentric cosmos. The four points of definition are:

The Ascendant (where the ecliptic meets the eastern horizon),
The Descendant (where the ecliptic meets the western horizon),
The Medium Coeli (the highest arc of the ecliptic in the sky, and
The Immum Coeli (the lowest arc of the ecliptic in the underworld. 

*
*  *
*  *  *

5. There are thus eleven steps on a ladder of determinations extending from the lowest of chthonic regions to the highest of supernal regions, as follows:

Medium Coeli – Supernal
Descendant – Stellar/Extra-Saturnine
Saturnus – Ring-pass-not
Jupiter
Mars
Sol
Venus
Mercury
Luna
Ascendant – The Sub-lunary/Terrestrial
Immum Coeli – Chthonic


Note that the four coordinates (two axes) of the geocentric cosmos are co-related to vertical determinations, as follows:

Ascendant - The Sub-lunary/Terrestrial, the Earth
Descendant – Stellar/Extra-Saturnine, the realm of fixed stars
Medium Coeli – Supernal, the dark light beyond the stars
Immum Coeli – the Chthonic realm, the underworld

*
*  *
*  *  *

6. For practical purposes, and according to an important order of symbolism, the horizontal axis of Ascendant/Descendant is considered both in itself and in terms of two other markers, namely:

Pars Fortuna, a synthetic point representing the Sol/Luna/Terra relationship marking, as it were, a “pot of gold”, the Ascendant realized in its geocentric potential.

The star Sothis, representing the essence of the stellar realm. Sothis as ‘The Star’ par excellence.

Thus, as well as the seven planets we also take account of the Pars Fortuna (an essentialization of the terrestrial realm and an extension of the Ascendant) and Sothis (an essentialization of the fixed stars and an extension of the Descendant).

(Note that these determinations are reflected in the three tarot cards Star/Moon/Sun.)

The calculation for the Pars Fortuna differs according to diurnal and nocturnal events. The calculations are:

Diurnal: Ascendant + Moon - Sun
Nocturnal: Ascendant - Moon + Sun

*
*  *
*  *  *

7. A diagram of the heavens – called a Theme (Thema)– is constructed according to the above dterminations. It is foursquare, it is defined by Ascendant/Descendant, Medium Coeli/Immum Coeli and within those axes are marked the seven planets along with the Pars Fortuna and Sothis.

The foursquare structure of a Theme is located on the tropical ecliptic with the zodiacal coordinates of Ascendant/Descendant, Medium Coeli/Immum Coeli marked thereupon. We take account of the zodiacal significances indicated by these four points. 



The zodiacal positions of the seven planets are assessed in terms of their rulerships as indicated in the diagram (Thema Mundi) above, taking account of diurnal and nocturnal determinations. 



An example: The horoscope of mad rocket boy Jack Parsons.

*
*  *
*  *  *

8. All factors, the seven planets, Pars Fortuna and Sothis, are considered in terms of the risings, settings and culminations indicated by the Ascendant/Descendant and Medium Coeli/Immum Coeli axes. The nearer a planet (or star or other factor) to rising, setting or culminating, the more amplified its importance in any given Theme. 



*
*  *
*  *  *


9. We do not take account of the twelve so-called ‘Houses’ or ‘Temples’ often used in Occidental astrology. Our scheme is fourfold, as already described, and thus a so-called ‘Quadrant’ system. But of the twelve divisions marked in a Theme – which we calculate using the method of Ptolemy – we determine the various “Faces” (or “Aspects”) of each planet (or star or other factor) in relation to the others. The “Aspects” therefore are: semi-sextile, sextile, square, trine, quincunx and opposition.

Note that we do not give heed to the modern system of “Bodily Aspects” and their “orbs”. 



*
*  *
*  *  *


10. The Ruler of a Theme, in the first instance, is the planet that rules the zodiacal sign marked by the Ascendant. Particular attention is given to this planet in terms of risings, settings and culminations, and the Faces it makes in regards the other planets and especially its complementary pair. 

In addition to the Ruler of a Theme – the significance of which is terrestrial - particular attention is given to the Ruler of the Heaven (which is to say the ruler of the vertical or celestial axis, the significance of which is spiritual) this being the planet that rules the zodiacal sign marked by the Medium Coeli. It is assessed in terms of risings, settings and culminations, and the Faces it makes in regards the other planets and especially its complementary pair. 
*
*  *
*  *  *

11. 
Analysis of the seven planets, additional to the framework of the Theme, may be made in terms of the following schemes:

The sequence of the seven planets (crossing the Ascendant following their proper motion) commencing with the Ruler of the Theme.

The shape and complexities of the heptagram formed by the seven planets in order of their velocity from Luna to Saturnus.


The shape and complexities of the heptagram formed by the seven planets in order of the arrangement preserved in the days of the week and the planetary hours, namely: Luna, Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Saturnus, Sol, this heptagram being complementary to that taken from the order of velocity as active is to passive according to the following model:



*
*  *
*  *  *


12. In any given Theme there is a key, this being the peculiar and unusual feature of the celestial configurations depicted. The first and most crucial task of the astrologer is to discern this feature and place it at the centre of his analysis and prognostications. 


Yours,

Harper McAlpine Black