It is not surprising that a great many promoters of "Indo-European" syncretic perennialism have been unusually quiet as of late.
Their idea that our ancient faiths need elements or parts of foreign religions to function or have traditional-grounding / legitimacy was always preposterous. Such a fusion would produce a Frankenstein-faith that never existed historically, insulting the Gods and Ancestors.
This is the same rationale we are seeing with the current H1B debate in the states, "in order to have a functioning nation/business you need to integrate foreigners." Or, "in order to have a functioning pagan faith you need to syncretize with foreign faiths."
Folkishness is not hatred for everything else, it is prioritizing your own, just as every single living being does.
Hopefully this debate about H1B shows the proponents of syncretic perennialism the error of their ways. That faiths and people are distinct from one another, and that's okay. That our revival can move past the last vestages of universalism
It is not surprising that a great many promoters of "Indo-European" syncretic perennialism have been unusually quiet as of late.
Their idea that our ancient faiths need elements or parts of foreign religions to function or have traditional-grounding / legitimacy was always preposterous. Such a fusion would produce a Frankenstein-faith that never existed historically, insulting the Gods and Ancestors.
This is the same rationale we are seeing with the current H1B debate in the states, "in order to have a functioning nation/business you need to integrate foreigners." Or, "in order to have a functioning pagan faith you need to syncretize with foreign faiths."
Folkishness is not hatred for everything else, it is prioritizing your own, just as every single living being does.
Hopefully this debate about H1B shows the proponents of syncretic perennialism the error of their ways. That faiths and people are distinct from one another, and that's okay. That our revival can move past the last vestages of universalism
The company maintains that it cannot act against individual or group chats, which are “private amongst their participants,” but it will respond to requests in relation to sticker sets, channels and bots which are publicly available. During the invasion of Ukraine, Pavel Durov has wrestled with this issue a lot more prominently than he has before. Channels like Donbass Insider and Bellum Acta, as reported by Foreign Policy, started pumping out pro-Russian propaganda as the invasion began. So much so that the Ukrainian National Security and Defense Council issued a statement labeling which accounts are Russian-backed. Ukrainian officials, in potential violation of the Geneva Convention, have shared imagery of dead and captured Russian soldiers on the platform. Soloviev also promoted the channel in a post he shared on his own Telegram, which has 580,000 followers. The post recommended his viewers subscribe to "War on Fakes" in a time of fake news. And while money initially moved into stocks in the morning, capital moved out of safe-haven assets. The price of the 10-year Treasury note fell Friday, sending its yield up to 2% from a March closing low of 1.73%. I want a secure messaging app, should I use Telegram? On February 27th, Durov posted that Channels were becoming a source of unverified information and that the company lacks the ability to check on their veracity. He urged users to be mistrustful of the things shared on Channels, and initially threatened to block the feature in the countries involved for the length of the war, saying that he didn’t want Telegram to be used to aggravate conflict or incite ethnic hatred. He did, however, walk back this plan when it became clear that they had also become a vital communications tool for Ukrainian officials and citizens to help coordinate their resistance and evacuations.
from jp
