Re: Robert Aickman
 

Wow. When you think about it, can anyone truly take any of this stuff seriously and still remain sane? Life is terrible enough as it is; can we say religions and their l-o-o-ong histories of atrocities and oppression haven't altogether made a bad situation much worse? Maybe I should have added, "...and where we ultimately end up, after putting up with the horrors this world has in store for us. Think that was fun? Folks, you ain't seen nothin' yet."

It wasn't Revelation but reading about the Catholic concept of "purgatory" that messed me up. It was supposed to be an intermediate state between heaven and hell, where the majority of ordinary sinners would go to get purified in order to gain entrance to the Happy Place.

Sounds like a pretty good deal, until you learn that its myriad torments include being eaten alive by worms, getting ripped apart with burning hooks, taking a long bath in boiling oil, and so on, all of which can last until, I don't know, a million good souls choose to intercede on your behalf and say a billion prayers for your soul, or something. And this is only purgatory, mind you.


Speaking of Aickman's politics, wasn't he supposed to be a pacifist? If so, however low his opinion of Trump might have been, he probably wouldn't have had any time for the neo-cons and chickenhawks who oppose him in the GOP, either. (I can only imagine he would have held the Democrats in compete contempt.)

Re: Robert Aickman
 

Not everyone. But I am trying to make a point of the general political consensus dominating established mainstream media today. PC has become a fascism that controls and stigmatizes people's thinking and overrides every other quality. It's the same globalist financial group who owns and controls all of Western media, and they have their political agenda very clearly set.

Re: Robert Aickman
 

This is definitely antisemitic and fascist dog whistling, and I'm calling it out. Don't care whom I annoy or am ridiculed by, here or off-site. This is unacceptable, and those who don't think so are worth annoying. Opposing fascism is a hill worth dying on.

Triple parentheses - Wikipedia

Re: Robert Aickman
 

‘A’ fascism? Fascism is a term that has one single referent. Some historical and linguistic awareness would be most welcome.

Re: Robert Aickman
 

The excesses of progressive activism can be annoying at times, but saying they're fascism while at the same time using the language of actual legit fascism and saying fascist things about the Jews is beyond ridiculous. Some people don't like Lovecraft. That is okay. Doesn't matter whether their reasons seem silly or not. It isn't fascism. I understand why these discussions get deleted and think the mods here do a great job, but I think discussions like this are important for spreading awareness of certain rhetorical devices used by the far-right.

I'd rather we just got back on the subject of Robert Aickman.

Re: Robert Aickman
 

Perhaps somewhere else, James, in a more appropriate thread because it is an important subject. But I did not intend this to stray so far off topic.

(Ibrahim, I meant 'opinions fascism', the general social climate we live in now in Western society, where only a corridor of accepted opinions are allowed by the established rulers.)

I prefer to round it off here.

Re: Robert Aickman
 

Why, whenever anyone indulges in some life affirming #BleakSnark about morality, values et cetera being an illusion, is said #BleakSnark accompanied some angry political pronouncement which is flagrantly value-based? I used to think this was a predominantly leftist vice but this thread and other recent examples prove otherwise.

Re: Robert Aickman
 

Ignoring Knygathin's obvious prejudices and bollocky thinking, and getting back to Aickman:
As ever, Aickman's opinions are odd/interesting: According to him the First World War was a very good thing, and utterly justified, but the Second World War was a mistake that could have been avoided if only we had handled Hitler correctly. This comes from Panacea, in which Aickman discusses all the good, useful reasons for war, and considers it often necessary. He is far from being a pacifist.

Where it gets more interesting is Aickman's claim that he was a conscientious objector in the Second World War, and was thus excused from any kind of war work. This claim does not seem to be possible (having done some research.) Conscientious objectors were given admin work, agricultural work, or jobs of that nature where they would be useful to the country, but were not involved, directly or indirectly, in harming anyone. If they refused such innocuous work, they were considered suspicious and were interned. NONE of Aickman's surviving friends seem to know or understand what happened. But Jean Richardson is sure that he was simply considered medically and/or psychologically unfit to be of any use to anyone.

Re: Robert Aickman
 

Good bye and good luck, the discussions on this thread and TLO in general seem to drift into toxic political discussions. I wonder what TL thinks when he reads these. It was nice participating when the discussions were on target. DELETE.

Re: Robert Aickman
 

This is highly peculiar. How the hell did he get away with this?