Saturday, April 29, 2017
Of course, there’s no such thing as “racism”. The word literally has a million definitions and meanings, and since the definition of definition is definitive, “racism” literally doesn’t exist.
But racism as a rhetorical political tool is used to for only one purpose: the enforcing of a single, monolithic, global police state.
You can see this when globalists use the term “White Supremacist”. It’s a construct that has one hell of a presupposition at it’s base.
Supremacy of what?
If there are hundreds of nations (ethnic groups) living in their own societies by their own customs, laws and cultures then the concept of "racial supremacy” has no meaning.
It’s only when you presuppose that a universal, global, totalitarian state is inevitable that you entertain notions of one group or another fighting for top position within it.
And then the best way to keep such struggle for supremacy from happening is to enforce “multiculturalsim”, “diversity”, race mixing, gay marriage, transgenderism, etc.
Of course the vast majority of human beings do not want to live in such a globalist state.
Most peoples want to live in a society of, and with, their own kind, with their own customs, laws, social mores, cultural traditions, religions and so on.
Those who promote diversity, equality, a world without borders, anti-racism etc, are working towards the enthronement of a hideous global Babylonian system in which all nations are destroyed, the family is destroyed and every single human being on earth will be atomized and hopelessly enslaved.
Wednesday, April 26, 2017
What with that there North Koe-reean feller invading and destroying so many countries around the world, it’s inevitable that good ol’ Murica will be called, (by no less than God himself) to step in and save the day.
Murica must liberate those poor North Korean people who don’t have gay marriage, teen abortion, Tranny’s on TV, fifty million Mexicans and “refugees” from the middle-east and so on.
Clearly, something has to be done.
Thank God Communist China has our back!!!
And no doubt a war may lead to significant damage to trade ports in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, China...
If that were to happen, you wouldn’t be able to buy all of that highly inflated Chinese made crap from Wal-Mart.
In such a case, some sort of lend-lease deal would be needed to help re-build any damaged infrastructure in those east-Asian cities and ports.
Some sort of, oh, I don’t know, trans-pacific-partnership......or something.
Sure the global economy would take a bit of a hit for a few years, but the long term economic benefits from such a paradigm shift to the part of the word that has 4 of the world’s 7 billion consumers - I mean people, would mean massive expansion of top CEO’s portfolios.
But even if there’s no war, such a trans-pacific-partnership might be needed anyway, just to keep the profits. I’m sorry, I mean the peace.
Saturday, April 22, 2017
Many people (even those with pet birds) acknowledge the fundamental truth that a caged bird is a tragedy. Birds are meant to fly - to soar through the air with the wings Gnon* has given them. Keeping them caged is unnatural.
But therein the modern, progressive, mind betrays itself.
After all, what is normal? Right?
What is natural?
Is not the entire project of modernized civilization constructed upon the ashes of concepts such as natural and normal?
Is it natural for two men to get married?
Is it natural for a man to dress and act as a woman?
Is it natural for people of different ethnicities or races or classes to marry?
If, as the progressive insists, there is no normal and nature has no law, then a caged bird is no longer a tragedy.
*note: Gnon stands for God of Nature Or Nature
Thursday, April 20, 2017
Funny how the American version of freedom (inspired by the French and American Revolutions) tends to render everything meaningless.
After all, without “freedom of religion” religion wouldn’t be able to mean absolutely nothing, as it does today.
Freedom allows couples to divorce at a whim and destroy families.
Freedom allows homosexuals to marry and make a mockery of marriage.
Freedom allows mixed-race and mixed ethnic marriages, thus destroying whole nations (a nation is an ethnic group, not a place).
Freedom allows men to put on women’s dresses, mocking and denigrating men and women.
Freedom allows new generations to walk away from their families, their countries, their religions and their cultures and thus renders all of them meaningless.
But of course this freedom can only continue as long as freedom of association is prohibited, as that would be racist and discriminatory -hence the destruction of nations, families, marriage, races, ethnicities, religions and so on, in the name of equality.....and freedom!
Freedom knows know king, and subsequently it knows no father or mother either. And so cultures, faiths, traditions and the very foundations of human society, sustained and nurtured by natural hierarchical authority, are cast aside.
And the wages of freedom?
The lust for freedom has set the world ablaze. The fires are spreading. And those not yet consumed in the blaze are choking to death from the smoke.
Freedom? How can a poor pitiful creature like man -bound by mortality and the daily precariousness of his life upon this rock in space, speak of freedom?
What fools we are.
Wednesday, April 19, 2017
Billy The Kid, the famous/infamous Old West outlaw first gained wider national attention in 1880, when he was 20/21 years old. He was shot (in the dark) and killed by Sheriff Pat Garret a year later in 1881, a couple months shy of his 22 birthday.
Notice something in that brief biography?
Billy THE KID entered the wider national conscience when he was 20 years old.
There has never been a time in history when those under 25 years of age were not considered to be kids -non adults.
And for good reason.
Critical areas of your brain, that involve decision making, do not fully develop until the mid-twenties.
So yes, you can have an opinion at 22, it just won’t be a well informed or personal one.
And even beyond 25, it takes years of experience to be better able to navigate life’s bland intricacies.
But even at that, very, very few have it in them to make critical choices. Which is why leaders are few and great leaders are rare. One shepherd, many sheep. And sheep are dumb.
99.9% of people follow well worn paths in every area of their life, through out their life.
A voting age of 21 was bad enough, but lowering it to 18 was ridiculous. At that point there is no logical argument against lowering it to 2.
And yes, I know, 18 years olds get sent off to fight and die in wars, etc.
Yeah, they do. Because they’re easy to manipulate and use. They’re energetic, naive and have jelly for brains.
As has been pointed out before by others, there is a reason you really don’t see too many 40 year old suicide bombers or genuinely passionate religious/ideological zealots with grey hair.
This is a tough pill for many to swallow, especially those raised in America where platitudes of “individuality” and “choice” have been used by vipers to hypnotize and lure easy prey.
These cheap platitudes about “freedom” and “independence” have also fed into the atomization of people, leaving them unable to defend themselves from invasion and destruction.
You’re not free and you’re not independent. And democracy is the biggest damn con in history.
And robbed of the basic knowledge about basic survival that used to be passed from father to son and via tribal traditions, you are completely defenseless in this wilderness of a world.
In other words, Mr. Roughed Individual, without strong, wise and mighty political and religious leaders from your own people, who rule with a rod or iron, you and your family are in big f*@king trouble.
You can repeat bulls@*t about democracy and “no king but Jesus” all you want, but you only pile more dirt upon your own grave as you do it -much to the glee of the stronger and wiser men who have deceived and ensnared you.
What is happening to the people of the West now is not the result of reckless or foolish leadership -no, it is ritualistic humiliation of a conquered and defeated people -a ritualistic humiliation which precedes mass slaughter -similar to what happened to the Romanov family in the "House of Special Purpose".
“As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.”
Monday, April 17, 2017
What do Hank Hanegraaff and North Korea have in common? They both represent drama-as-news-cycle that I only know about because I occasionally walk into/through a room with a TV on....or happen to here about from every single freakin human being I come into contact with.
Of course “we” have to do something about that North Korea dictator guy. I mean, how many countries has this psychopath attacked and invaded now? Look at what he did to Iraq! And Syria! And Libya! And Yemen! And what about Turkey? Ooops, lets not talk about that. WWIII it is! Yeehaw! Murica Rules!
If you don’t know who Hank Hanegraaff is, do yourself a favor and don’t look into it.
Of course the Bible Answer Man pulling a Judas on Martin Luther by joining that weird wing of Popeless Catholicism known as the Orthodox Church in this, the 500 year anniversary of the Reformation, is without a doubt the seventh trumpet of Revelation.
At any rate I always knew the guy had to be a phony. After all, where in the Bible does it use the words “Hank Hanegraaff”?
That’s what I Thought!
Meanwhile a county, city and neighborhood near you is being fundamentally and radically transformed into a third-world hellhole via the largest mass migration of human beings in history.
Your culture, your society and your people are being decimated right before your eyes.
Whites are now just 8% of the world’s population, and dropping.
I wonder what Hank will call his program now that he’s no longer a Bible-aloner?
It’s a fine line between making a point and stating the obvious.
The alt-media or alt-right is growing rapidly because it (more often than not) states the obvious, rather than trying to make a point. Memes are a good example of this.
State, or present, the obvious and people will see the point. Try to make a point and you either end up sounding preachy and sanctimonious or you leave people scratching their heads trying to figure out what your point is.
We don’t always do this, of course, but we do do it.
The left and old right, however, go the “making a point” route exclusively because those damn facts are always ganging up on them and kicking the non-subjective shit out of them.
Whenever a SJW tosses out some pre-packaged Soros-funded talking point disguised as a question, such as, “how would you feel if you were a homeless refugee?”, I always reply that I’d rather ponder how I’d feel if I were a bad-ass warlord with harem full of Victoria’s Secret supermodels.
Emotionally manipulative hypotheticals are all the left has, but even in that they have to be able to control a very narrow array of hypotheticals, lest reality again invade into their intellectually retarded safe spaces.
Back to the point of this post... there is an element within the new schools of discourse that gets a bit too carried away with unnecessary ponderings on what-if’s and maybe’s, and that, of course, is the neo-reactionary world.
It’s one thing to what-if the present or near-future but the neo-reactionaries have a tendency to what if long range scenarios involving highly complex theoretical and hypothetical overlapping situations, which may or may not evolve given happenstance A B & C developing into an inevitable D E & F.
They tend to go off on long involved rants about the pros and cons of an Aristotelian based nobility ruling over a land based empire, during a a multi-year drought, in the year 4242 AD, and stuff like that.
Granted, it’s sometimes interesting -but only for so far. The Nrx has long been seen as the crazy uncle in the attic of the alt-right for a reason. Occasionally enlightening, but still crazy.
So when someone asks me about the Nrx I always suggest that they not get overly involved with groups who develop complex systems that require multi-leveled hypothetical analyzing to unpack.
Or just think of it like this: treat queries into what a person or group are about like you would a person to whom you ask the basic, simple, question, “What do you want?” The longer it takes them to answer that question the faster you should be backing away and regretting having asked it.
Friday, April 14, 2017
Fact: The office of President of the United States has infinitely more power than all of the kings and queens of antiquity combined. “The President", 1789 - ,is an unparalleled beast of a tyrant. Elections = you get to vote on what the tyrant will be called for the next four years. The Tyrant remains the same.
Fact: The colonists had LESS freedom after the Revolution than before. (they also paid higher taxes after ”independence”)
The U.S. Constitution functions towards one end -consolidation (assimilation). It brings every family, neighborhood, town, county and state under one moral, legal, political, ethical, linguistic, religious and economic jurisdiction.
In the colonies, prior to 1776, each village and colony had its own general, but particular, way of life: ethnicity, culture, religion, laws, customs, etc. Villages and colonies defined who and what they were.
After the revolution these peoples no longer had such basic (intrinsic and historical) freedom. The vast project of bringing every village and county under one monolithic federal umbrella had began.
The exaltation of the “individual’s rights” over the colony’s (or village’s) rights commenced.
The end result of the constitution is seen today, wherein one person is “free”, but two or more are not.
One man can call himself Baptist, but a town (a thousand men) cannot call themselves Methodist -because "freedom of religion".
An individual is free to declare himself a homosexual, but a city or county or state is not free to declare themselves heterosexual -because "individual liberty".
No, under the all seeing eye of Uncle Sam there can be no peoples, only individuals. There can be no distinct and particular ethnicities, races, families, tribes, colonies, etc, each with their own customs, laws, traditions and identities.
Such is denounced as racist or discriminatory.
The civil rights act effectively outlawed freedom of association, aka discrimination, which is the cornerstone, not only of freedom, but of nations, cultures and the family itself. (read that again)
The United States is thus ever hungry -ever growing and expanding, insisting that all distinctions be erased. All borders, all religions, all customs and all peoples MUST be consolidated and assimilated into one monolithic social, political and economic state of the individual consumer.
There can be no white nations (or any ethnic nations) or heterosexual families, or Mothers & Fathers, etc.
Is it any wonder then that a country like North Korea, which still has a semblance of independence from the global state and an identity of its own choosing, is seen as such a threat to the powers that be?
How terribly ironic to realize that America is Mordor and North Korea, Iran, Assad’s Syria, Putin’s Russia, etc are the lands of elves and hobbits, holding out against the ever encroaching forces of darkness.
Wednesday, April 12, 2017
An acquaintance tells me the posts here are “all over the map” in regards to religion. Am I for it or against it?
Well, the world is complicated in it’s inane simplicity.
It’s like people. I have "friends" and family who I can’t stand. Don’t like them at all. Go to a get together with them and have a great time talking and joking around with them and then leave still not liking them and not caring if I ever see them again.
Life’s funny, ain’t it?
Religion has form and function. It’s not merely about the supernatural.
I can argue within theological contexts because I’ve read the texts and have an opinion on them. I can join in a discussion between catholics and protestants over the issue of the’real presence’, for example. I lean toward the protestant view.
And yet, I don’t believe the literal supernatural elements of it.
It’s just like arguing over the nature of Tom Bombadil in ‘Lord Of The Rings’. It’s a discussion that can get pretty heated! Old Tom didn’t really exist and the story is fiction. And yet, discussions and arguments abound. And they can be rather profound. Lessons can be gathered or taught out the story. Inspiration can be found in it.
The neo-atheists who go on about religion being man-made don’t realize how stupid they sound. Of course it’s man-made. So are skyscrapers, rockets, legal systems, languages and so on.
Religions were developed over centuries, by the best educated minds in multiple generations to deal with the complexities of social problems such as law and order, ethics, principles, war and peace, life and death, etc.
These are things neo-atheists take for granted because they are spoiled brats taking the fragile social system they were born into for granted. They have the luxury to fret over things like equality and social justice -concepts that only exist in the tiny bubble of western decadence, bought and sustained by western imperialism, colonialism and global exploitation and domination
So, religion is a social system. It can be critiqued. Parts of it can be embraced while other parts of it can be attacked and rejected.
Remember, the early Christians of Europe moved in on the collapsing Roman Empire and assumed it’s institutions. The Catholic church’s structure is based, directly, on the Roman Senate. The pope is based on the emperor, etc.
And the good ol USA just happens to function on 3 branches of government. And 3 has no significance in Christianity, no, no, no of course not. And it’s not like there are 3 Abrahamic religions that are currently dominating, and destroying, the world.
So, yeah, my primary beef is with the idea of monotheism. The one-god thing.
It’s a very, very, very bad idea that naturally lends itself towards imperialism and globalism.
I won’t go into here, as I have before, but sufficient to say, the one-god of the jews, christians and muslims IS the Dark Lord of Mordor. He is the fictional concept made real via actions based on the idea of there being only the one- one god, one morality, one system of ethics -one race the human race, one government and so on.
The one-god idea is the enemy. He is the usurper and destroyer. He is death and darkness. He is deceit and malice. He is a lie.
And all who follow him ride a mountain of skulls on a river of blood, right into the deepest, darkest pits of hel.
How’s that for dramatic overstatement!
But’s it’s basically true. The one-god premise is an idea concocted by men who worship death and destruction via their thirst to conquer and exploit.
So what religion then?
Religions evolve and move. And if the situation in the middle east ever gets out of hand, the Abrahamic freaks might just take care of themselves for the rest of us.
The idea of ancestor worship or the elements representing “gods” (read, natural forces personified in a human-like character) seems most natural, to me -if you feel the need to scratch the “spiritual” itch.
The Green Man, or Old Man Winter, or Jack Frost, etc. these are a conception of religious expression that are innate to us.
There is no literal thunder god, but there is thunder!
There are no literal frost giants to threaten us, but danged if frost doesn’t come along every year and kill or stunt the grass, the leaves, the flowers and the gardens.
This is the religion we should base our society and our politics on.
After all, nature doesn’t have a beginning and an end, like the mono-god posits. No, it is cyclical (so to speak), like our “heathen” ancestors observed. Round and round the seasons go. Day follows night, follows day, etc.
In the mean time, we have to deal with what is. And right now religious institutions are run by the one-goders.
All we can do is try to make the best of a bad situation, until the situation changes.
Tuesday, April 11, 2017
One great example of how neo-Atheists get snookered by traveling sideshow atheism, making the rest of us look bad, is Bart Ehrman.
This one is almost comical. Ehrman’s whole shtick is that the gospels don’t all align, exactly, on the details of the events which they describe.
Ehrman gets up before a crowd and hammers the podium and shouts things like (and I paraphrase), “did Jesus die at noon or at 3:00 pm? It depends on which gospel you read! Were there 2 people at his grave or 3? It depends on which gospel you read!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”
His point? Good question.
Do the gospels describe the same basic events? Yes.
Do they vary on the details? Yes, yes they do.
As you would expect, different accounts differ on details. Just ask traffic cops who’ve been to a few accidents in their time. People see and remember things differently. But they usually describe the same general event.
The gospels all tell the same basic tale. A dude named Jesus taught things, had followers, was put to death and then was said to have been seen by some resurrected.
So what exactly is Ehrman’s point? What is he even arguing?
Ehrman is just doing the classic bait and switch. You see, what he is really arguing about is the subject of supernatural biblical inerrancy, not historical records or accounts.
His selling point is that he is arguing from a professional, secular, historian’s perspective.
But he ain’t.
Biblical inerrancy is a THEOLOGICAL presupposition that addresses the iffy subject of DIVINE (meaning supernatural) inspiration.
Divine inspiration is the suggestion that God (SUPERNATURALLY) inspired the writers of the various books and letters of the bible to write said books and letters.
The relevant and important question is, what exactly does it mean to be inspired by the spirit of God to write? Does it mean men were inspired to write down what they remembered, or does it mean that they were, essentially, possessed by the spirit of God, who used their physical bodies to write things down.
There is no real consensus among believing theologians or laymen on the issue.
And yet.... Ehrman’s entire publishing and speaking career is based upon an argument from a narrow and denominationally-particular presuppositional supernatural construct on what divine inspiration may mean and possibly entails.
In other words, Ehrman is not arguing from a secular historian’s position.
His fundamental arguments about biblical accounts are theological and supernatural based, not historical.
This is why he has run afoul of the Jesus Myth people.
His arguments were never about historical facts, they were about what supernatural inspiration should or would look like. And absent an appearance by the almighty himself to clear it up, that’s a ridiculously impossible subject that can only ever be wildly speculated about.
And how many of you fell for it?
I would bet that even professional quacks like Pat Robertson aren’t as dogmatic as Ehrman is in regards to the notion of what divine (supernatural) inspiration of ancient texts means and how it worked.
Don’t feel bad though. Live and learn.
Ehrman isn’t alone.
The post-2000 era has seen an endless stream of McAtheists show up and peddle their shitty generic version of the real thing.
Sad thing is they’ve gotten rich doing it. Much like their televangelist counterparts.
Monday, April 10, 2017
The great battle now unfolding is about race, not culture or religion as separate things. It is about the destruction of European peoples, not “western civilization” as a tradition, culture or “christendom” apart from the people themselves.
“Western Civilization” is simply what European peoples create, inherently. As such, it has been around for at least 30,000 years years, give or take.
Christianity didn’t make it into all of Europe until the 13th century. And even at that it was mostly a socially imposed system used by the rulers, not a supernatural faith.
Much like Political Correctness today, the average man felt compelled to pay it lip service while internally rejecting it.
In fact it’s quite obvious that political correctness, or Cultural Marxism, IS Christianity today. Which is to say, a set of social dogmas that declare their legitimacy via hypothetical applicable moral universals.
Christians may balk at that, but never-the-less they do indeed justify their adherence to Christianity on the basis of its supposed universally applicable axioms and not upon any supernatural, transcendent reality. (see Galatians 1:8)
But even in that they must choose not to reconcile this premise with other passages from the New Testament that make it clear that Christians would always be a persecuted minority in all places and at all times. Thus there can never have been, nor never could be, a Christian civilization, Christian society, Christian nation, Christian state, Christian town or even a Christian family or Christian marriage. (see Matt. 10:22, Matt 7:13, Matt 10:36)
So yes, the christian message declares itself to be objectively unnatural and thus subjectively true, all the while insinuating a mandate of universal adherence.
Sound familiar? Yes, this is the bedrock of political correctness and cultural Marxism, both of which represent the natural evolution of Christian thought.
If you start with, “there is neither Greek nor jew, male nor female in Christ”, you are going to end up with interracial and gay marriage and genderless bathrooms.
And if you’re having trouble following this, let me re-state: the Christian (or Gospel) message is predicated upon claimed universally applicable axioms and not upon supernatural, transcendent reality. The universal call for repentance in conjunction with the declaration that the kingdom of God was at hand by the “incarnate word” illustrates this fact, beyond any objection.
God was in the flesh HERE, calling upon men to repent HERE in order to inaugurate the kingdom of God HERE.
But how? What was the construct?
Again, Christ’s version of repentance was not about past actions but for unsanctioned, previously held, thoughts, beliefs or ideas. (see Matt 5: 21-22, 27-28)
This can be seen at work today among Christians and cultural Marxists alike who “reach out in love” to gay people engaging in homosexual acts, but spit vindictive hate at Whites who hold “racist ideas” (that race is a physical objective reality is a threat to their paradigm).
So we see the organic movement of Christianity. It was never about the transcendent or supernatural. It was, ironically as it may sound to some, about the secular world of man, whose person-hood is manifested solely through what he chooses to hold as beliefs.
This is why Jesus inexplicably leaves planet earth at the end of the gospel narrative. Having fulfilled his mission: he preached the word, and then died on behalf of all the people who held ideas and beliefs that were not complimentary to the hypothetical universal set of moral abstracts.
Then he rose from the grave and rode a cloud into outer space. (see Acts 1:9)
Had he remained upon planet earth there would have been that little problem of the supernatural/transcendent issue (he was god after all). But with Jesus leaving earth there remains nothing but the mind of man to deal with.
As the heathen would say, actions speak louder than words. Or, in this case, actions speak louder than the word.
But as Christianity aims to stand above the physical natural world and reality, how then to deal with this?
Within the christian paradigm, sin is thought crime (Ephesians 6:12). It is thoughts, ideas and beliefs that send men to hell, not deeds.
And naturally then with political correctness and cultural Marxism, it is not actions that are bad, but ideology. The actions that may or may not follow from ideology or belief are not factored into Christianity/Marxism, because, for it, ideas are all that count and the physical, natural world is a shadow to be feared and driven away with the illuminating light of proper beliefs.
Open borders is not a physical geographical reality, but an ideological belief.
Marriage is not a biological reality, but an ideological belief.
The kingdom of God is not a physical place, but an ideological belief.
And from this we can see the overarching problem as it relates to race, ethnicity, gender, etc.
Christianity does not transcend the physical world towards another dimension, it transcends the physical world towards the "inner man". “As a man thinks within himself, so is he” -Proverbs, 23:7
If you think properly, you are saved. If you think the right ideas, you are in heaven.
And if you think wrong -if you acknowledge the natural world, you are a pagan or atheist and you are in hell.
Of course the big obstacle with all this is that the White Man, no matter how hard he tries to be a good Christian/Politically Correct, can’t help but to see hard, physical reality as more real and significant to the value of life than beliefs and ideas. He can’t quite suppress the intuition that nature is the supreme (and only) power in this world and beliefs and ideas cannot affect it one iota.
This is a problem for the children of the kingdom of God. And so we see them drop the pretense and engage in an all out physical/material war on the White man.
Christianity interacts with the real world by asking men to adopt certain ideas as a way for them to transcend the real world, without ever leaving it. Thus for them, “change” is always in relation to the beliefs of a man, and never to material alterations of the physical man or the world.
And of course underlying all of this is the “one god”.
One god to rule them all, one god to find them,
One god to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them.
Unlike the many gods, who interacted with man and the world via natural forces (wind, rain, thunder, winter, harvests, fertility, etc) the one god conveniently resides “outside of time and space” and thus interacts with men via the “holy spirit” which, in turn, interacts with the heart/mind of man and not the physical man or the natural world.
Again, we see that with Christianity, like cultural Marxism, ideology/beliefs are everything and reality is at best, nothing, and at worst, the enemy.
Earth and sky, water and fire, flesh and blood. To the christian these things can be no more than crude symbols for the “inner man” to ponder as a foreshadowing of greater enlightenment to come.
This is why they can not fight for Western Civilization. Western Civilizaion is the physical European race of peoples, not a religion, philosophy, proposition or creed. It is physical, not an idea.
Saturday, April 8, 2017
Gay marriage, feminism, transgenderism, no-fault divorce, contraception, family planning, roughed individualism and the like can only be sustained in a society with an over abundance of wealth concentration. And the only way to attain such wealth is through conquest and exploitation.
How many people understand this?
Traditional morals, fixed social roles, large families, tribalism and the like, all manifest as a survival mechanism to protect and perpetuate life in a time and place without the perks of wealth abundance. Look no further than the third world today for examples.
The American Way Of Life, Personal Freedom, Human Rights, Equality, Democracy, etc, are only able to exist at present because of the massive abundance of wealth in the West due to Imperialism, Colonialism and Slavery.
Social stability, by way of excessive wealth, allows for the sort of “freedom” we see today.
No colonialism, no feminism.
No Imperialism, no gay marriage.
No slave trade, no transgender rights.
No stealing of resources, no democracy.
No plundering of nations, no human rights.
No wars & genocide, no no-fault divorce, family planning or vacations to Myrtle Beach.
Social Justice Warriors, be they liberal atheists or conservative Christians, are not only the socio-political descendants of Puritans, they are also the torch bearers of colonialism. Open borders is just colonialism in reverse -cheaper to exploit them here where there is already infrastructure than to exploit them over there, where there ain’t.
Of course this also means that the current situation can only be temporary and the system upon which "freedom" and "human rights" leaches off of will inevitably collapse.
Wednesday, April 5, 2017
Conservative/Evangelical Christians sure are worried about the “the times”. Everything presented via corporate news is taken at face value and is seen as a “sign of the times”, by them.
The funny thing is, conservative Christians sound very concerned and frightened at the state of the world today, but their appearance and their body language and even their particular expressed concerns tends to betray their angst.
There, I said it.
Not only do they tend to be fat (often pear shaped -always doughy) but they also tend to be comfortably dressed and manicured.
More odd than that though, is that they tend to be intimately involved in the very same society that they inform us is plotting against them and all the other true believers. The world isn’t safe anymore, and it’s dangerous “out there”, but, hey, we're going to pack an RV and travel across America this summer to get away from all the stress of the daily grind.
And man oh man are they worried about muslims, because ISIS.
CHRISTIAN: “You better get prepared, brother, because Muslims hate America. Look at what ISIS is doing to people in the middle-east!”
ME: “You know ISIS formed and flourished in US controlled Iraq, don’t you?”
CHRISTIAN: “North Korea! When are we gonna deal with that crazy dictator?”
If you engage with conservative/evangelical Christians for very long you will note a schizophrenic swing from “they” to “us”, depending on the choice of context. “They” (American society) are taking away our religious freedom, while North Korea is a threat to “us” (American society).
They also worry a lot about a One World Government, all the while calling for Murica to invade and re-arrange other countries to fit the American model, ie corporate financed liberal democracy.
And don’t even get them started on abortion! Abortion is evil! Just don’t ask them why they only have two kids of their own. Contraception, you know -that’s just plain smart thinkin!
Oh, I almost forgot -Star Trek! Evangelicals love Star Trek! Yeah! That show that presented Imperial Marxism in a warm and wondrous light (with spaceships), is to Evangelicals what The View is to feminists.
Christians claim to have a long list of perceived enemies and threats, and yet, even as they’re telling you about multiple impending Armageddons due to our neo-Babylonian culture, they always look really, really decadent themselves -the bloated doughy bodies, the dandy demeanor, the Hawaiian shirts or god-awful sweaters, the knee length cargo shorts, the goatees to hide multiple chins...I could go on.
And even as they are telling you about the enemies and cultural threats, they themselves turn right around and associate, strongly, with those enemies and cultural threats.
I guess the two main things to take away from this rant are:
A. Evangelical/Conservative Christians are concerned that godless movements like the gay agenda are succeeding culturally and politically because they are so well financed. (This just in....the church was able to raise the $25 million last month for the new sound system!)
B. Evangelical Christians are really, really fat. And even when skinny, they tend to be doughy.
Heaven, it turns out, is a bakery. A Hawaiian themed bakery!
God is good. God is cake.
Normal is living a self-sacrificial life.
Normal is NOT doing what you want to do.
Normal is NOT living how you want to live.
Put another way, Normal is the opposite of selfish.
Abnormal, or perverted, is doing what makes you happy -what pleases you -what fulfills you.
Normal is living a life that perpetuates peace and stability in family, community and society. Which is to say, Normal honors family and traditions and customs.
Abnormal, or perverted, is living a life devoted to self, which naturally causes disharmony, instability and conflict.
Granted, this is the opposite message sent by Marxist-Capitalism, which encourages, if not demands, that you recklessly and ceaselessly indulge in you.
Yet, find a person living “their life on their terms” (which is pretty much everybody today) and you’ll see an empty shell of a human being -depressed, angry -if not medicated, resentful and living a life where everything about them is in ruins, or teetering on the brink of ruination.
For God’s sake, we have a “debt-based” economy! And not surprisingly, we have a population that is either homeless or one pay check away from homelessness. Because there are so many people making 25 to 80 thousand dollars a year, but trying to live like millionaires.
That is abnormal. And it is a result of living a life devoted to self.
Sunday, April 2, 2017
note: the following is written by a non-believer in the supernatural. However, like it or not, these institutions must and will exist and are innate to us. How they function or dysfunction is important, to say the least.
Isn’t it interesting that the middle-ages church functioned in the role of the feminine social institution, side-by-side with the monarchy, which functioned in the role of masculine social institution?
The church comforted, the monarchy defended.
Mother and Father.
Neither perfect in their roles, but let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
They functioned, naturally -as an organic outgrowth of human social interaction, just like the family.
In our glorious modern age of republics and democracies, which is free from war, crime, poverty and despair, we label monarchies as institutions of the oppressive patriarchy.
Granted, once we overthrew our kings the numbers of wars, dysfunction and mass murders increased by about 10,000%, but hey, let’s not nitpick.
And the church, that symbol of woman, of the feminine, is decried for it’s tyranny and oppression and all around, general, terribleness.
Yeah. That sort of philosophical contradiction on the part of moderns, who shout “girl power!”, while simultaneously decrying the evils of the institution which embodies all that is feminine, is part and parcel of their unabashed unthinking.
Now consider the confusion today in these critical social institutions. How many churches are filled with wimpy fem-men and masculine he-shes?
Yes, the church today is more feminine, but perversely so. It’s no longer the modest saintly mother grinding at the mill, but a dolled up street whore, saying all the right things to potential johns so as to “win them over”.
And government? What was once a masculine institution which functioned like a lion strutting about to defend it’s people and punish evil, is now a bloated sow, eating its own shit and presenting its teats for whatever critter may happen to stroll by.
These two critical social institutions, the monarchy (government) and the church, representing Father and Mother, have been, from within and without, thrown down, attacked, mocked, abused and dressed in one another’s clothing for the express purpose to mock and delegitimize.
Sound familiar? See any reflections of that cast back upon the world around us?