His main thesis ought to interest anyone who follows CNWY (though they diverge on at least two important ideas):

That any kind of Culture is impossible without Interdicts. Interdicts he defines Mosaically (he was of Lithuanian Jewish extraction), but everyone from Bertrand Russell to Marcuse and in between is skewered more effectively than I could have believed possible, and purely by examining their own words and drawing conclusions from them. Rieff set himself against the emerging techno-therapeutic mindset. The Wiki entry doesn’t do him any justice. He read Freud more closely and critically than any before or since.

A Snippet: Page 54; “What every State can best use are empty people…”

http://lewrockwell.com/burris/burris21.1.html

It’s a general (and very informative) outline of a lesson plan geared towards self-education on the libertarian analysis of class-systems, (specifically as it contrasts to the Marxist view.)

While reading through some of the articles, I began to see how profoundly important this sort of analysis is.

Unfortunately, I no longer consider myself ideologically-allied with the Austrians, who are not interested in the Christian worldview.

Do you guys know of an agrarian (or even better, a kinist) analysis of this sort of class analysis?

Are there any posts here at Kinism.net addressing it?

Lyman Beecher - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lyman Beecher (October 12, 1775 – January 10, 1863) was a Presbyterian minister, American Temperance Society co-founder and leader, and the father of 13 children, many of whom were noted leaders, including Harriet Beecher Stowe, Henry Ward Beecher, Charles Beecher, Edward Beecher, Isabella Beecher Hooker, Catharine Beecher, and Thomas K. Beecher. He is credited as a leader of the Second Great Awakening of the United States… He was later called to Boston’s Hanover Church, where he began preaching against Unitarianism, which was then sweeping the area… In 1832, Beecher became… the first president of Lane Theological Seminary… Beecher’s term at the school came at a time when a number of burning issues, particularly slavery, threatened to divide the Presbyterian Church, the state of Ohio, and the nation. In 1834, students at the school debated the slavery issue for 18 consecutive nights and many of them chose to adopt the cause of abolitionism. When Beecher opposed their “radical” position and refused to offer classes to African-Americans, a group of about 50 students left the Seminary for Oberlin College… Beecher was also notorious for his anti-Catholicism and authored the Nativist tract “A Plea for the West.” ...

When the reading of the report was concluded Rev Lyman Beecher DD offered following resolution accompanied by appropriate remarks. “Resolved That the efforts of the Colonization Society demand the confidence and cooperation of philanthropists patriots and Christians as a wise and successful effort approved of Heaven to facilitate the education and emancipation of slaves and the abolition of slavery at home and by the introduction Christianity and civilization and civil liberty and the extinction of the slave trade in some measure to repay injured Africa for her protracted and unutterable sufferings and wrongs”

Taparelli: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luigi_Taparelli

Althusius : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Althusius

Amazingly similar, given the variegated religious background - of course, Kinism would correlate their European heritage.
In any case, these two thinkers should prove useful in helping to articulate the concept of local sovereignty, an event which will help attain perceived legitimacy (at least in the eyes of anyone who counts).

To fight such diabolism, to ensure that individual freedom now lost is regained and that no further inroads are made upon freedom, it is necessary to recognise two things - one, the liberal disease, and secondly, that one of the most fraudulent concepts ever propagated is the polarity of capitalism and communism.

...

Lenin and Trotsky were the first men in history, however, who managed - with very strange backing - to replace a civilized order with one which purported to be Communist. I use the word “purported” because the regime was financed by large-scale subsidies from top banking-houses in New York, Hamburg and other centres of finance-capitalism and built up during its formative years by the industrial-capitalists of the Western world. Hence my warning about the fiction of polarity.

The part played by the partners of New York’s Kuhn Loeb and Co. and their European affiliates in supplying Trotsky with funds is now too well known to end stressing here. What is less well known is the role of industrial-capitalism. Soon after the Revolution, when the Soviet economy was on the verge of total collapse, Lenin did not waste time in consulting the works of Karl Marx for a solution. Marxist economics, largely a rehash of the theories of Ricardo, have had about as much effect on the Soviet Union’s development as have tracts issued by the Flat Earth Society in placing men on the moon. Instead, Lenin made an appeal to Bernard Baruch, the most powerful man in America, bidding him name his own price to reshape the economic life of Russia. While there is some reason to think that he used his overwhelming influence to mobilise practical assistance. Very soon the Soviet Union became a hive of industry, but the industry was not indigenous: it came from afar.

A review of Anthony C. Sutton’s study: Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development, 1917 to 1930, by the Canadian commentator Robert Klinck throws much light on what happened. So far from Russia’s pulling herself up by her own boot-laces, as Communist propaganda would have us believe, almost all of the projects of the First Five Year Plan were designed by American companies. At least ninety-five per cent of the industrial structure received Western assistance…

pg 66-67

** he goes on to list different companies **

All the time capitalism was building up the Soviet Union the propaganda media of the West were thundering denunciations of Communist Russia. Yet the major role of the industrial giants in America and Western Europe was on so large a scale that it could not be hidden and must have been known to the national newspapers of every land. Why did they take so much trouble to conceal it from their readers? The answer, I am sure, is not that they themselves were part of the conspiracy, but fear of the tremendous Capitalist forces which by bringing pressure to bear upon their advertisers could have driven them into bankruptcy.

... As we have seen Schiff, the Warburgs, Otto Kahn and other members of Kuhn, Loeb & Co. and their associated concerns had been up to their eyebrows in the plot to start the Russian Revolution, for which purpose they furnished Trotsky with ample funds, placed at his disposal two hundred professional revolutionaries trained in New York, and secured for him from the British Government safe-conduct from Newfoundland to Russia.

...

Since that time the nexus between large-scale Capitalism and Communism has never been broken. The farming-out of contracts described in this chapter was not done fortuitously: only the big international corporations within the magic circle of patronage around Kuhn, Loeb (with the possible exception of Ford Motors) were allowed to participate in the exploitation of revolutionary Russia.

...

It is doubtful whether a single giant international corporation based in America or Europe does not have one or more large-scale factories and selling organisations working at full blast in Russia, or Poland, or Czechoslovakia or wherever it may be. When Mr. Kruschev made his famous threat to the Western nations, “We shall bury you”, I remarked to a friend: “Tomorrow the planes will be hurtling towards Moscow with representatives of every capitalist manufacturer of excavators begging for the contract!” Perhaps the idea is not as fanciful as it then seemed.

Nor was investment a one-way traffic. ...

70-72.

A.K. appears trustworthy, but such claims are at the least worth looking into.

Schooling in that early period was plentiful, innovative, and well within the reach of the common people.What effect did it have? High and Ellig note that 80 percent of New Yorkers leaving wills could sign their names. Other data show that from 1650 to 1795, male literacy climbed from 60 to 90 percent… Indeed, Senator Edward M. Kennedy’s office issued a paper not long ago stating that the literacy rate in Massachusetts has never been as high as it was before compulsory schooling was instituted. Before 1850, when Massachusetts became the first state in the United States to force children to go to school, literacy was at 98 percent. When Kennedy’s office released the paper, it was 91 percent…

Thus, the rise of public, or government, schools was not a response to any inability on the part of society to provide for the education of its children. As Joel Spring has written, “The primary result of common school reform in the middle of the nineteenth century was not the education of increasing percentages of children, but the creation of new forms of school organization.” ...

It was not always smooth going for the enforcers, however. Some 80 percent of the people of Massachusetts resisted the imposition of public schooling. In 1880, it took the militia to persuade the parents of Barnstable, on Cape Cod, to give up their children to the system. By 1900, nearly every state had government schools and compulsory attendance. At first, only elementary education was provided by the state. Later, the government system was extended to high school. These days, the many advocates of public schooling want the state to provide day care beginning at an early age and year-round schooling. The trend is unmistakable…

Specifically I wish kinists to read this:

Evola also disagreed with Aristotle’s idea that the state developed from the family. The state was created from Männerbünde, disciplined groups entered through initiation by men who were to become warriors and priests. The Männerbund, not the family, is the original basis of true political life.

Kinism seems to be in need of churches. I’m personally inclined to High Church Presbyterianism, though I also admire the apparent true faith of groups like the Amish. I’m certainly not a closet Catholic though, not that of course a Catholic couldn’t be kinist. The Catechism actually seems to favour kinism somewhat, though perhaps I’ve misunderstood…

On a related note: Did Religion Beget Civilisation?

The site isn’t just old, it redefines old: the temple was built 11,500 years ago—a staggering 7,000 years before the Great Pyramid, and more than 6,000 years before Stonehenge first took shape. The ruins are so early that they predate villages, pottery, domesticated animals, and even agriculture—the first embers of civilization. In fact, Schmidt thinks the temple itself, built after the end of the last Ice Age by hunter-gatherers, became that ember—the spark that launched mankind toward farming, urban life, and all that followed.

That’s not to say Europeans are in need of “religion”, but there does appear to be a natural yearning, the Holy Spirit at work. So, it wasn’t man who created religion for civilisation, but religion that created civilisation.

The court turns young woman over to her family, and launches investigation of police man.

RUINED BY A POLICEMAN.; MARGARET LEONARD TRIES TO KILL HER BETRAYER AND COMMIT SUICIDE.
Margaret Leonard, 20 years old, a domestic, employed in the boarding house of Mrs. Herring, No. 305 West Twenty-second-street, was brought to the Jefferson Market Police Court yesterday by Patrolman Gensheimer, of the Sixteenth Precinct, and charged before Justice ...

“During an arrest, you think since you aren’t guilty, how can they arrest you? Why should you run away? And how can you resist right then? After all, you’ll only make your situation worse; you’ll make it more difficult for them to sort out the mistake.

“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say goodbye to his family?

“Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?

The Organs [government agencies] would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! We didn’t love freedom enough. Every man always has handy a dozen glib little reasons why he is right not to sacrifice himself.”