The Three Keys to Saving Western Civilization

Although never one to indulge in controversy, I’d like to offer my humble opinion on three solutions that would lead these United States back from the edge of abyss of total fiscal and societal collapse and into a future of self-responsibility , freedom and prosperity for the individual, family and nation.

Whilst these solutions are undoable due to a diverse mass of ignorant, self-serving voting blocks, they are nevertheless viable solutions to keeping the lid on a melting pot that’s quickly turning  int a boiling cauldron of regional tribal interests that in time will inevitable come to blows over  scarcity of resources.

This inevitable  slide into tribalism masquerading as multiculturalism( or, the farce of the melting pot , if you will)  has been unnaturally exacerbated by a  central command and control government that’s largely been captured by rent seeking global corporations via cheap labor subsidized buy US taxpayers.

Currently, the fascist putsch is on to flood North America with millions more of  uneducated and culturally feral third worlders who will  change the political and socioeconomic  moorings of  these United States forever.Bet on it.

There is no surer way of corrupting the citizens, and to divide the city against itself, than to foment the spirit of faction that may prevail there; for each party will strive by every means of corruption to secure friends and supporters. — Niccoló Machiavelli, The Discourses. 1517.

844-Page Bill Would Take 3 Days to Read NONSTOP Before Friday Morning Hearing…

 

That said , and with further ado , I present my three solutions.

 

1) Re-establish the Articles of Confederation, thereby disabusing the people and states of a central based command and control structure in which they have no voice and return the sovereignty to the people and states where it belongs.

When the US Constitution and the black-robed rulers began to serve the Rule of Law and the Bill of Rights please let me know , because anomalies are often so quaint.

Back To the Articles


Economic reasons these united States should restore the Articles of Confederation as the legitimate central government of the US

Step Five: Our goal should be to ultimately replace the failed Washington federal government that is operated for the benefit of a few wealthy special interests with a central government controlled and responsible to productive working American citizens where the states and people are sovereign. Although some sovereign states might want to remain outside the framework of a central government, our goal should be to remove the offending bankrupt entity and replace it with a debt-free, restored legitimate confederation government based on America’s first government, The Articles of Confederation.

Step Six: The individual states in state convention should meet again or once the Articles of Confederation is established, at the secession convention adjourn and immediately reconvene and adopt the Articles thus recreating “these united States” so declared in the original Declaration of Independence. We will have restored the original first government of our patriot founding fathers but with the necessary checks and balances and right of referendum and initiative for the people to keep out the former special interests who have previously stolen our government from the people.

Finally, two key points about this proposal need to be discussed. First, it isn’t necessary for all 50 states to go through the state convention process and obtain the necessary majority support to secede from the federal government and then join a restored Articles of Confederation. In fact, it may not be necessary for even one state to actually secede from the current Washington-led forced political union.

2) Repeal the 19th Amendment . Regardless the hyperbole and empty rhetoric, historically the  voting patterns of womynz have been detrimental to limited government, moral and fiscal responsibility.

O’ the wailing and gnashing of teeth and throw in a little renting of sack clothe and colour me amused . Facts are not negated by emotion…regardless the fine pair of tits doing the emoting.

 See e.g. here:
 Explaining the Gender Gap On Gun Control

Most women support strengthening gun laws, compared with fewer than half of men.

And i.e. here:

Did Women’s Suffrage Change the Size and Scope of Government

by JR Lott Jr1999
 We find that government continued to grow as female voter turnout increased over time.  

 

3) And lastly.Limit voting participation to male property owners thirty years of age or older.For obvious reasons.

By the time a male is thirty, the testosterone driven insanity pounding his will into submission has largely subsided to a mild nag and most( Stucky not included) have had enough of the red snapper to not be turned into a pile of quivering jello at the hands of a wily seductress seeking support and gold.

One thing is certain, none of these three legislative suggestions will ever be considered as solutions to the ongoing death of Republicanism by Mobacracy , but nevertheless , I suspect what prevails will be magnitudes worse.

No need to thank me for the keys to saving western civilization, I’m just doing my duty as a fellow voyager on this ship of fools known as humanity.

38
Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
flash
flash

Muck , this post has nothing to do with loving , hating or forcing women into some sort personal submission.The post is about limited government and a path to saving western civilization.

And, as much as you may dislike the solution , it stands on truth.The only recourse for limiting government is limiting accessibility to the vote, specifically those who normally base their votes on emotion, entitlements or tribal influence.

The evidence is clear and factual, women vote overwhelming for big government (e.g. security and entitlements), hence the rise of the welfare and police state.
And, they will continues to do so , regardless how warm and fuzzy they make you feel.

Regardless what you want to believe the popular vote is not the path to limited government , but the path to total tyranny.

Only a blind maroon can’t see the tyranny creep. This oozing sleaze of Potomac based tyranny did not grow from the thirty year old male property owner petri dish , I assure you.

Limit the vote.
Limit the centralized control
And, just maybe this Republic can stand again once again, otherwise the world created by the popular vote will devolve into something no women alive will ever want to experience up close and personal.

Bob
Bob

Heinlein had great ideas about citizenship and voting. My favorite has always been:

Only people who pay taxes to a particular government entity should be alloed to vote for representative of that entity.

Accountability — an endangered concept!

TPC
TPC

I think there are much better thought out and realistic solutions than what flash is proposing.

I think Heinlein had it right.

flash
flash

TPC the gooshed weighs in.

I’m impressed.

Realistically ,stupid people voting for mass manipulators ain’t working …

Novista

The 17th Amendment was another of those reforms dear to the hearts of populists / progressives. Perhaps the prime rationale was fear of corruption in the states. All democracy succeeded in doing was taking some power from the states and gifting it to the DC swamp.

But the lobbyists were happy, with all the senators accessible in one place. Heh.

Bruce
Bruce

Is there a good reason to save civilization? We might want to get rid of civilization for a while and see what happens.

flash
flash

Bruce, do we really want to retread the path to the dark ages?

A time in which churches, academia, business and civil society thrived sans government?

flash
flash

FWIW…seems ignorance and democracy share the same stage.

The creator of the Dark Age myth was an Italian named Francesco Petrarca.

Known as Petrarch, the famous scholar of the fourteenth century is often referred to as the
Chasin
7
“Father of Humanism.” Petrarch idolized the ancient Roman Empire and placed
it on a pedestal. He resented medieval society because he believed it did not value
Roman literature and culture. Despite the medieval period having achieved significant
innovations in literature, art, and technology , Petrarch believed that the medieval period
was worthless, simply because it could not live up to his high expectations of
Rome.
When Pet rarch began using the term “
Dark Ages to refer to the medieval period, he
created the Dark Age myth, and cast the
whole medieval period into utter darkness.
https://digital.library.txstate.edu/bitstream/handle/10877/3219/fulltext.pdf?sequence=1

flash
flash

for the enlightened freedom for all from all responsibility.
Rock the vote.

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/solzhenitsyn/harvard1978.html
ext of Address by

Alexander Solzhenitsyn
comment image?w=400&h=594

at Harvard Class Day Afternoon Exercises,

Thursday, June 8, 1978
Humanism and Its Consequences

How has this unfavorable relation of forces come about? How did the West decline from its triumphal march to its present sickness? Have there been fatal turns and losses of direction in its development? It does not seem so. The West kept advancing socially in accordance with its proclaimed intentions, with the help of brilliant technological progress. And all of a sudden it found itself in its present state of weakness.

This means that the mistake must be at the root, at the very basis of human thinking in the past centuries. I refer to the prevailing Western view of the world which was first born during the Renaissance and found its political expression from the period of the Enlightenment. It became the basis for government and social science and could be defined as rationalistic humanism or humanistic autonomy: the proclaimed and enforced autonomy of man from any higher force above him. It could also be called anthropocentricity, with man seen as the center of everything that exists.

The turn introduced by the Renaissance evidently was inevitable historically. The Middle Ages had come to a natural end by exhaustion, becoming an intolerable despotic repression of man’s physical nature in favor of the spiritual one. Then, however, we turned our backs upon the Spirit and embraced all that is material with excessive and unwarranted zeal. This new way of thinking, which had imposed on us its guidance, did not admit the existence of intrinsic evil in man nor did it see any higher task than the attainment of happiness on earth. It based modern Western civilization on the dangerous trend to worship man and his material needs. Everything beyond physical well-being and accumulation of material goods, all other human requirements and characteristics of a subtler and higher nature, were left outside the area of attention of state and social systems, as if human life did not have any superior sense. That provided access for evil, of which in our days there is a free and constant flow. Merely freedom does not in the least solve all the problems of human life and it even adds a number of new ones.

However, in early democracies, as in American democracy at the time of its birth, all individual human rights were granted because man is God’s creature. That is, freedom was given to the individual conditionally, in the assumption of his constant religious responsibility. Such was the heritage of the preceding thousand years. Two hundred or even fifty years ago, it would have seemed quite impossible, in America, that an individual could be granted boundless freedom simply for the satisfaction of his instincts or whims. Subsequently, however, all such limitations were discarded everywhere in the West; a total liberation occurred from the moral heritage of Christian centuries with their great reserves of mercy and sacrifice. State systems were becoming increasingly and totally materialistic. The West ended up by truly enforcing human rights, sometimes even excessively, but man’s sense of responsibility to God and society grew dimmer and dimmer. In the past decades, the legalistically selfish aspect of Western approach and thinking has reached its final dimension and the world wound up in a harsh spiritual crisis and a political impasse. All the glorified technological achievements of Progress, including the conquest of outer space, do not redeem the Twentieth century’s moral poverty which no one could imagine even as late as in the Nineteenth Century.
An Unexpected Kinship

As humanism in its development became more and more materialistic, it made itself increasingly accessible to speculation and manipulation at first by socialism and then by communism. So that Karl Marx was able to say in 1844 that “communism is naturalized humanism.”

This statement turned out not to be entirely senseless. One does see the same stones in the foundations of a despiritualized humanism and of any type of socialism: endless materialism; freedom from religion and religious responsibility, which under communist regimes reach the stage of anti-religious dictatorship; concentration on social structures with a seemingly scientific approach. (This is typical of the Enlightenment in the Eighteenth Century and of Marxism). Not by coincidence all of communism’s meaningless pledges and oaths are about Man, with a capital M, and his earthly happiness. At first glance it seems an ugly parallel: common traits in the thinking and way of life of today’s West and today’s East? But such is the logic of materialistic development.

The interrelationship is such, too, that the current of materialism which is most to the left always ends up by being stronger, more attractive and victorious, because it is more consistent. Humanism without its Christian heritage cannot resist such competition. We watch this process in the past centuries and especially in the past decades, on a world scale as the situation becomes increasingly dramatic. Liberalism was inevitably displaced by radicalism, radicalism had to surrender to socialism and socialism could never resist communism. The communist regime in the East could stand and grow due to the enthusiastic support from an enormous number of Western intellectuals who felt a kinship and refused to see communism’s crimes. When they no longer could do so, they tried to justify them. In our Eastern countries, communism has suffered a complete ideological defeat; it is zero and less than zero. But Western intellectuals still look at it with interest and with empathy, and this is precisely what makes it so immensely difficult for the West to withstand the East.
Before the Turn

I am not examining here the case of a world war disaster and the changes which it would produce in society. As long as we wake up every morning under a peaceful sun, we have to lead an everyday life. There is a disaster, however, which has already been under way for quite some time. I am referring to the calamity of a despiritualized and irreligious humanistic consciousness.

To such consciousness, man is the touchstone in judging and evaluating everything on earth. Imperfect man, who is never free of pride, self-interest, envy, vanity, and dozens of other defects. We are now experiencing the consequences of mistakes which had not been noticed at the beginning of the journey. On the way from the Renaissance to our days we have enriched our experience, but we have lost the concept of a Supreme Complete Entity which used to restrain our passions and our irresponsibility. We have placed too much hope in political and social reforms, only to find out that we were being deprived of our most precious possession: our spiritual life. In the East, it is destroyed by the dealings and machinations of the ruling party. In the West, commercial interests tend to suffocate it. This is the real crisis. The split in the world is less terrible than the similarity of the disease plaguing its main sections.

If humanism were right in declaring that man is born to be happy, he would not be born to die. Since his body is doomed to die, his task on earth evidently must be of a more spiritual nature. It cannot unrestrained enjoyment of everyday life. It cannot be the search for the best ways to obtain material goods and then cheerfully get the most out of them. It has to be the fulfillment of a permanent, earnest duty so that one’s life journey may become an experience of moral growth, so that one may leave life a better human being than one started it. It is imperative to review the table of widespread human values. Its present incorrectness is astounding. It is not possible that assessment of the President’s performance be reduced to the question of how much money one makes or of unlimited availability of gasoline. Only voluntary, inspired self-restraint can raise man above the world stream of materialism.

It would be retrogression to attach oneself today to the ossified formulas of the Enlightenment. Social dogmatism leaves us completely helpless in front of the trials of our times.

Even if we are spared destruction by war, our lives will have to change if we want to save life from self-destruction. We cannot avoid revising the fundamental definitions of human life and human society. Is it true that man is above everything? Is there no Superior Spirit above him? Is it right that man’s life and society’s activities have to be determined by material expansion in the first place? Is it permissible to promote such expansion to the detriment of our spiritual integrity?

If the world has not come to its end, it has approached a major turn in history, equal in importance to the turn from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance. It will exact from us a spiritual upsurge, we shall have to rise to a new height of vision, to a new level of life where our physical nature will not be cursed as in the Middle Ages, but, even more importantly, our spiritual being will not be trampled upon as in the Modern era.

This ascension will be similar to climbing onto the next anthropologic stage. No one on earth has any other way left but — upward.

comment image

TPC
TPC

Personally, I’m in favor of the following:

Must be a tax payer.

Must have served a brief stint in the military, or some other service similar to how Switzerland acts. People would be a lot less likely to want war if it might be their ass or their kids’ ass on the line.

Right now its always poor farm kids.

Anyways, just those two I think would be sufficient to keep people from being able to vote themselves more money and benefits at the cost to someone else.

flash
flash

TPC, I swerved in the military and I can say with confidence that most who enlist come out just as dumb as they went in.
The military pays a check ,but no intellectual dividends.

And , everyone I know is a taxpayers with one being just as clueless as the other.

The key to limiting government is drastically limiting voter participation.
People who murder kids and lie on tax forms should no participate.

TeresaE
TeresaE

Explain the fucking civil war flash. Absolutely, positively, destroyed the south and not a woman voting anywhere.

Such tools.

So I’m good enough to build a freaking business, or save my money and buy land, stocks and have bank accounts, but have no right to voice my opinion on what happens to the money the government takes from my back every freaking day.

Screw that.

You dear, are the reason why I know in my heart this country is doomed, this country will become horrific and I will forever be sorrowful of the shitstorm that will rain down upon my children and grandchild.

You prove there is no hope. It isn’t the women, you ass, it is ALL the progressive & religious tools that want the government to make things right for THEM (you) and ignore the fact that it CAN’T!

Your god is deeply ashamed of you. I know in my heart that he is. I also know that some women, at sometime, somewhere, hurt you deeply. Strangely your god hasn’t helped you get over this. Don’t feel bad, he didn’t help my mom either.

I first read this crap of yours last week but was knee deep in loan officer bullshit, along with a complete redo on my son’s starter home and a benefit for over 100 people for stepniece that has cancer. This ate at me and ate at me until I finally had to drop by to read it again and go through the comments.

You tie every evil in our modern world back to women, yet the overwhelming evidence suggests that it has been the cultures and civilizations that did not count women as equal citizens that have visited the most human suffering and destruction upon the innocent.

So, just to be clear, once again, fuck you and your wet dream of Eden based on a 2000-4000 year old MIDDLE EASTERN civilization.

The problems in this world have little to do with the equipment between our legs and most to do with the equipment between our ears.

History proves to me that you men haven’t chosen the right path.

Or were all those rulers, murderers and royal psychopaths all gay?

I’m so done with you. Just when I think you might be pulling your head from your ass, you prove me wrong, again.

Seek help, the past can’t hurt you anymore if you don’t let it.

Stucky

TeresaE

I wish I could vote 100 thumbs up on your post … and conversely the same amount of thumbs down on flash.

Don’t let his views bother you, my dear. He’s just one guy with demented views regarding the subject at hand.

His proposed “solutions” have a snowball’s chance in hell of ever coming to fruition. So, why worry?

I think he would be much happier living in Saudi Arabia.

Stucky

flash

In the entire history of humanity, what percentage of a nation’s leaders have been men? I’m guessing about 95%.

Who starts wars?

Who fights wars?

Who invents the instruments of death? The long bow? Gunpowder? Bullets? ICBMs? Nukes?

Yea, baby! We men have done such a fine fucking job, eh, champ? I say it’s time to give The Ladies a chance.

flash
flash

Stucky , you read, but you do not comprehend…is it ADHD?

From the second paragraph…”Whilst these solutions are undoable due to a diverse mass of ignorant, self-serving voting blocks, they are nevertheless viable solutions to keeping the lid on a melting pot that’s quickly turning int a boiling cauldron of regional tribal interests that in time will inevitable come to blows over scarcity of resources.”

And, at what point does empirical evidence of women supporting out of control government metastasize into dementia.

I think you hormones are becoming completely unbalanced….maybe you need a shot..

And like I’ve said , if you think Christian culture is oppressive wait till you and TE get a load of the replacement post-Christian culture.

And yes, you built that…rock those votes.

Americans ‘snapping’ by the millions


Conversely, when – as is the case today – we have widespread family breakdown, a depraved culture that mocks traditional moral values, a chaotic economy and disintegrating monetary system and a power-mad government dominated by demagogues and sociopaths, the normal stresses of life are greatly multiplied.

Thus it has come to pass that America, long the hope of the world, has grown increasingly dispirited and angry, which in turn breeds anxiety, fear, confusion, hopelessness and depression.

Suicide has surpassed car crashes as the leading cause of injury death for Americans. Even more disturbing, in the world’s greatest military, more U.S. soldiers died last year by suicide than in combat;

Fully one-third of the nation’s employees suffer chronic debilitating stress, and more than half of all “millennials” (18 to 33 year olds) experience a level of stress that keeps them awake at night, including large numbers diagnosed with depression or anxiety disorder.

Shocking new research from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows that one in five of all high-school-aged children in the United States has been diagnosed with ADHD, and likewise a large new study of New York City residents shows, sadly, that one in five preteens – children aged six to 12 – have been medically diagnosed with either ADHD, anxiety, depression or bipolar disorder;

New research concludes that stress renders people susceptible to serious illness, and a growing number of studies now confirm that chronic stress plays a major role in the progression of cancer, the nation’s second-biggest killer. The biggest killer of all, heart disease, which causes one in four deaths in the U.S., is also known to have a huge stress component;

Incredibly, 11 percent of all Americans aged 12 and older are currently taking SSRI antidepressants – those highly controversial, mood-altering psychiatric drugs with the FDA’s “suicidality” warning label and alarming correlation with school shooters. Women are especially prone to depression, with a stunning 23 percent of all American women in their 40s and 50s – almost one in four – now taking antidepressants, according to a major study by the CDC;

flash
flash

Stucky , in that entire history of humanity what percentage of a nations leader have been Christian men?

And, I don’t mean George Bush christian. I mean C.S. Lewis Christian

There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, ‘Thy will be done,’ and those to whom God says, ‘All right, then, have it your way.’
C. S. Lewis

flash
flash

Christianity, if false, is of no importance, and if true, of infinite importance. The only thing it cannot be is moderately important.
C. S. Lewis

Stucky

flash

Whatever.

As far as reading and comprehending, well, you are out of your league. I do both exceedingly well.

What I don’t do is read most of your copy and pastes. Sometimes I wonder if you are capable of original thought … or, at least, expressing it.

IMHO, you are a misogynist. You can deny it all you want, but that’s my opinion.

flash
flash

Stuck -What I don’t do is read most of your copy and pastes. Sometimes I wonder if you are capable of original thought … or, at least, expressing it.

You don’t read ’em , just troll ’em for attention? OK. I’m alright with that.

Stuck -IMHO, you are a misogynist.

Uh…you left out raciss and bigot and all around meanie

I’m right up there with that evil meanie bastard Tocqueville

There are people in Europe who, confounding together the different characteristics of the sexes, would make man and woman into beings not only equal but alike. They would give to both the same functions, impose on both the same duties, and grant to both the same rights; they would mix them in all things – their occupations, their pleasures, their business. It may readily be conceived that by thus attempting to make one sex equal to the other, both are degraded, and from so preposterous a medley of the works of nature nothing could ever result but weak men and disorderly women.”

Alexis de Tocqueville

http://www.menstribune.com/

flash
flash

The future foretold.

Women’s Suffrage
by Rev. Prof. H. M. Goodwin
New Englander and Yale review, Volume 43, Issue 179 (March 1884), pp. 193-213.

Society as at present constituted is based upon the Family as the social unit. The State is not an aggregation of individuals, but an organism, of which the family is an integral part. This social unit is represented by the constituted head of the family,—the husband, father, or householder, to whom the care and support and interests of the family are naturally intrusted. Whatever tends to disintegrate this organic family unity is a violation of the divine constitution, and can work only mischief, whether it be enforced celibacy, easy divorce, or female suffrage. Individualism is the bane of our modern social life, as is but too apparent in the theories and practices respecting marriage, which is fast becoming a mere contract, with reserved individual rights, dissolvable at the will of the parties, instead of that sacred and indissoluble union which is its divine idea. It is, whether applied to marriage, the family, or the State, an essentially infidel theory whose legitimate issue is the destruction of the family, of government, and the church, as divine institutions, and the exaltation and assertion of individual ‘rights’ under the flag of Each one for himself.

The practical tendency of women’s suffrage, as all must see, is to impair the unity of the family as a social organism, being itself a denial of it, and to create discord and rivalries between husband and wife, who by the divine ordinance are “no more twain but one flesh,” but by this act are legally declared to be not one but two. Besides, such suffrage is a tacit declaration that the husband and father cannot be trusted to protect the interests of wife and daughter in political as in domestic affairs, which is a sure method of relaxing his sense of responsibility and loosening the ties of family affection. Where there is true affection, the wife, if she vote at all, will vote with her husband, even against her own interest; and where there is not, the multiplying of causes of discord will not remedy but only aggravate the evil. The kind of rivalries that woman suffrage will introduce into the family is strikingly seen in an actual case reported in the papers some months ago. In one place in Wyoming it was stated that “Mr. Horatio Evans and his wife ran on opposite tickets for the same office, and Mr. Evans won.” The domestic consequences of this political strife in a house thus divided against itself are not reported, but may easily be imagined. In any case, woman suffrage strikes at the root of that which should be the first end of government to protect, the sacred unity of the Family.

But, it is said, a great many women are unmarried, and own property on which they pay taxes to the government; therefore justice requires that the right of suffrage be extended to them. Passing by the question whether the payment of taxes involves a right of representation, and this a right of voting,—which, though seemingly taken for granted, is a groundless assumption,—allowing the justness of the plea, we answer, that marriage is the normal status of woman; singleness is the exception and not the rule, and political institutions should be based on broad and general and not exceptional facts. Especially should great social interests not be sacrificed to those which are special and individual. The anomaly, if it be one, is not peculiar to woman, but is inseparable from any system of law and government. All male persons under twenty-one years of age are excluded from voting, although they have as much natural ‘right’ to the suffrage before as after this age. And many a young man is more capable of exercising this right than multitudes who do possess and abuse it. Again, all minors having property may not legally dispose of it, but are put under guardians till they arrive at mature age; although many have as much or more business knowledge and discretion at eighteen as others at forty. But government legislates on general principles for the general good, and not for exceptional cases.

Stucky

Soooo, if CS Lewis type Christians led the world, everything would be peachy keen, eh?

Hmmm. Let’s take a closer look. How about the OT King David? God himself said of David — ‘I have found David son of Jesse, a man after my own heart”. Not even CS Lewis got those kind of props.

And what kind of man was David? A man of perpetual war. A murderer. A liar. Immoral. And one who suffered bouts of dementia. If he lived today, we would call him a Neocon Warmonger.

And what kind of man was CS Lewis? Well, he did say this — “When equality is treated as an ideal we begin to breed that stunted and envious sort of mind which hates all superiority.”. There ya go, folks. We NEED inequality! Flash needs a new hero.

I’m done with this thread. We both know how each feels. No need to beat it to death.

TPC
TPC

“TPC, I swerved in the military and I can say with confidence that most who enlist come out just as dumb as they went in.
The military pays a check ,but no intellectual dividends.”

I didn’t say it created intellect, the intention is to foster a sense of responsibility.

@TeresaE/Stucky – I just comment on the only parts of his posts worth commenting on. The 4chan bullshit is just here to rile people up.

flash
flash

Stucky are you saying that King David was a Christian?

Like I said , you read but you do not comprehend.

flash
flash

TPC, since you’ve already had your gooch split , there may be no hope for you.

but nevertheless, try a chaw of this savory piece.

http://www.menstribune.com/feminist.htm

THE FEMINIST TOTALITARIAN STATE

Seeing now the the two opposite tendencies in men and women, and in their politics, we may now recognize familiar complaints; the male complains that his freedom is being denied to him, while the female complains that she is being “abandoned” by the male exercising his freedom. If legitimate government is by “the consent of the governed” then the female complaint is unjustified, for a man should be allowed to “abandon” any situation that he feels does not sufficiently address his interests, just as women have granted themselves the “right” to do. The proper remedy for women should be to see to it that the “social contract,” as with their personal relationships, sufficiently addresses the interests of men, so that they will voluntarily wish to participate. Yet, just as women – as women, have little respect for freedom because it is a quality they do not possess in abundance, so too does their lack of a sense of justice – which is derived from reason, allow them to sufficiently address the interests of men.

We can now view a patriarchal society vis-a-vis the “War of the Sexes”; since a greater population density forces people to associate, and because allowing women to rule would mean certain tyranny, men must assume patriarchal roles as a means of self defense. Consequently, women’s claims for “liberation” from the patriarchal state are really their desire to oppress men further then men would be oppressed assuming patriarchal roles, so men are then forced to choose the lesser of the two evils and “oppress the oppressors.” The perspective of a patriarch is not, of course, this raw play of powers as it is for women, he has lofty moral principles that animate his conduct and cause him to forsake his self interest, but since the strongest desire of men is for freedom, and since reason causes men to forsake their self interest, then obviously a patriarchal society is something that is imposed on men by others, or by conditions in general.

Viewing things from an evolutionary standpoint, and using the non politicized language of economics for purposes of objectivity, we see that a patriarchal society, while erecting a rational hierarchy, uses the outward force of repulsion – of masculinity, and undergoes an “expansion.” The reverse effects of attraction – of femininity, causes society to be drawn inward, that is, it causes a “contraction.” Now, which of these terms has the positive connotation in the world of economics; is it not the same valuation that we give to whole civilizations when they are said to “rise” and “fall”? According to feminists, the “Golden Ages” of many civilizations were really not golden at all, because they displayed a preference for men. We have seen though that this is not the arbitrary preference feminists would have you think, because it is the self-denying element of reason, most abundant in males, which advances and declines as a civilization rises and falls. Just as society at its peak is controlled by the most rational and moral men, so when it is declining is it controlled by, and showing a preference for, those without a high degree of reason and morality; these would include women, children, and for simplicity, what is called the lower classes. In addition, it would include those who, while intelligent, lack the self control or morality needed in order to properly lead – artists, epicureans, and shysters for example.

Incorporating a tactical element now, all those groups above will find common ground in their lack of rationality with which to form a alliance against the patriarchal society. As the patriarchal society declines though, there will be a shift from irrational v. rational to the the more fundamental play of attraction against repulsion, of women against men. Taking the United States for example, we find that the women – or feminists, of that country incorporated blacks into their coalition, whenever their allies did something morally repugnant or illegal, the feminists were quick to make excuses for them. But now, as that former patriarchal society has been brought very low, the excuses are drying up, black males who were once excused no longer get the same support from the feminists, it may even be the feminists who are leading the attack. And though someone could still cry “racism” – they don’t, because it is understood that these men are being attacked, not because they are black, but because they are men. Of course, it is a general political rule, that once the common enemy is defeated, the dominant faction of any coalition will then turn on their allies.

The history of woman is the history of the worst form of tyranny
the world has ever known; the tyranny of the weak over
the strong. It is the only tyranny that lasts.

Oscar Wilde

TPC
TPC

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/crazy

cra·zy (krz)
adj. cra·zi·er, cra·zi·est

1. Affected with madness; insane.
2. Informal Departing from proportion or moderation, especially:
a. Possessed by enthusiasm or excitement: The crowd at the game went crazy.
b. Immoderately fond; infatuated: was crazy about boys.
c. Intensely involved or preoccupied: is crazy about cars and racing.
d. Foolish or impractical; senseless: a crazy scheme for making quick money.
n. pl. cra·zies
One who is or appears insane: “To them she is not a brusque crazy, but ‘appropriately passionate'” (Mary McGrory).
Idiom:
like crazy Informal
To an exceeding degree: They were running around like crazy.

flash
flash

All this thread needs now is Muck chiming in with how more third world immigration can only make US stronger.

Yep , 20 million more Mexican voting with the collectivist gender can only lead to bluer skies and greener pastures.

flash
flash

Oh pissy , I see you been studying the AWD debate style….bully for you , goochy.

WTF …couldn’t find any straight jacket pics?

TPC
TPC

flash, the best you ever manage to be is annoying.

There is literally a kennel full of TBP dogs who shit better arguments than you do, which they demonstrate week in week out.

Sorry man, but you just aren’t worth the effort anymore. I’m bored now, good bye.

flash
flash

for pissy the femista’ .You’d make Ann a very good wife.

“If we took away women’s right to vote, we’d never have to worry about another Democrat [sic] president. It’s kind of a pipe dream, it’s a personal fantasy of mine, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. And it is a good way of making the point that women are voting so stupidly, at least single women.”

– Ann Coulter

“(The) logic of that chapter [“The Case Against Women’s Suffrage”], that chapter five in my book, rests on the proposition that women voting is bad for conservatism, and as a conservative, of course, I think that’s bad for society.”

– John Derbyshire, author, We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism

“Far too many women are fascists at heart. You can see this at work in almost every female-dominant organization and in the way that women’s organizations constantly attempt to force change on everyone, men and women, who don’t want it. Some people think the Founding Fathers had never even considered the thought of allowing women to vote, that it was just a historical oversight on the part of some unconsciously sexist men. I suspect that they knew perfectly well what they were doing, given the obvious connection between the female franchise and the West’s continental drift into socialism.”

– Vox Day

Stucky

“flash, the best you ever manage to be is annoying….. Sorry man, but you just aren’t worth the effort anymore. ….. good bye.” ———- TPC

BEST summary and advice in this thread.

flash
flash

Stuck ,thanks for returning to let me know you’ll not be returning …color me awe struck.

In turpitude we trust.

Monday, April 22, 2013
Women love the strong horse
In the absence of Christians and others of the traditional civilized West willing to stand up against modern trash culture and the third world invasion, women will naturally be drawn to the masculine strength they perceive in Muslims, even skinny, pot-smoking Muslims armed with pressure cookers. After reading “a poem for dzhokhar”, it is apparent that Amanda Palmer wants nothing more than to run her hands through the surviving bomber’s dark, curly hair, bury his face in her breasts, and give her all to ease his noble suffering.

you don’t know where your friends went.
you don’t know how to dance but you give it a shot anyway.
you don’t know how your life managed to move twenty six miles forward and twenty eight miles back.
you don’t know how to pay your debts.
you don’t know how to separate from this partnership to escape and finally breathe.
you don’t know how come people run their goddamn knees into the ground anyway.
you don’t know how to measure the value of the twenty dollar bill clutched in your hurting hand.
you don’t know how you walked into this trap so obliviously.
you don’t know how to adjust the rearview mirror.
you don’t know how to mourn your dead brother.
you don’t know how to drive this car.
you don’t know the way to new york.
you don’t know the way to new york.
you don’t know the way to new york.
you don’t know the way to new york.

If the Muslim doesn’t know his way to New York, then obviously Amanda must go to the Muslim.

She will look beautiful in hijab.

As one author comments: “This is our culture, this is our field, this is what’s permissible and expected. May God have mercy on our souls.”

I look forward to reading Ms Palmer’s other poems, including “A Hummer for McVeigh” and “Say What You Like About the Tenets of National Socialism, Girl, Those Uniforms Were Hot”.

UPDATE: Sarah Hoyt adds her two cents on the matter, not so much on the Vogon-like “poetry”, (which frankly, in my opinion, is glorious in its unabashed self-satisfied myopia), but on the contrast between the reaction of the SF/F community to this versus Orson Scott Card’s insufficient enthusiasm for abnormal sexual relations.

Orson Scott Card was near-crucified for expressing an opinion one would EXPECT from someone with his religious beliefs. (I disagree with his opinion but while religious I’m very odd. Also, my religion is not his.) HOWEVER it is not only permissible, it is ENCOURAGED to publish a poem empathizing with a mass murderer, who murdered in the name of a religion that HANGS gay people, mutilates women, and aims at world-wide dominance.

Wait, what?

But see, the second religion a) has been identified as “of little brown people” which is why we keep getting told being anti-Islam is “racist” – even though most of them look about as dark as I am. b) it aims to destroy America, and so it must be good, right?

(And before you tell me the repulsive terrorist-glorifying poem was written by one of my colleague’s wife, not himself. Yes. Indeed. However, DO rest assured that in this field we have to watch what our spouses do too – or we had to. I frankly can go indie and my give-a-d*mn is broken. – Imagine as a thought experiment that my husband wrote a poem about the Koch brothers, sweet Libertarian bachelors who have not in fact ever killed anyone. How long do you imagine it would take before ANYONE refused to talk to me at conventions?)

So this is the way things are. Why would they upset me, if I’ve always known they’re that way?

Because I suddenly realized, with a swimming sense of nausea and shame that this is as much our fault as theirs.

She is right. It is our fault. It is our fault for not mocking these lunatics, idiots, and shysters. It is our fault for enabling them. It is our fault for buying their books, watching their movies, and generally supporting them as they shit ceaselessly on our society, our culture, and our civilization. It is our fault for permitting them to have it both ways. It is our fault for not calling them out when they call good evil and evil good. It is our fault for permitting them to blithely pass off talentless hacks as artistic geniuses. It is our fault for letting them first infest, then pollute, then degrade, and finally kill off our literary traditions just as they have attempted to kill off our societal and civilizational traditions.

We have failed to stand up for the Orson Scott Cards and failed to spit on the Amanda Fucking Palmers.

The choice is stark. Western civilization or idiot women writing Vogon mash poems to Islamic killers. I would say the choice is simple, but then, as we have learned, MPAI.

Labels: freakshow, music

http://voxday.blogspot.com/

flash
flash

TPC- I didn’t say it created intellect, the intention is to foster a sense of responsibility.

Serving the state in killing the innocent “fosters a sense of responsibility” sez the male with the split gooch.

And how would you know this , pissy?

flash
flash

The US Supreme court is about as useless in protecting the rights of all Americans as the paper the US Constitution is written on as has been proven time and again.

Bill of Rights?…phhhhhtttt.What a joke,

http://www.woodpilereport.com/html/index-317.htm
15th April 2013 – The Supreme Court on Monday said it would not weigh in on a major Second Amendment question that has divided the lower courts: May states bar or strictly limit the carrying of guns in public for self-defense? The justices turned down a case concerning a New York State law that requires people seeking permits to carry guns in public to demonstrate that they have a special need for self-protection. In urging the justices to hear the case, the National Rifle Association called the law “a de facto ban on carrying a handgun outside the home.”

– Adam Liptak at nytimes.com

With this outrage, the federal courts stand revealed as utterly corrupt, willful accomplices in the drive to strip America of that which made it unique: governance based on the natural rights of man. It’s well to remember why the states instituted a central government—to protect and defend the Constitution, just as their oath of office demands. Its one and only function was to guarantee transactions between peoples, institutions, the states and foreign countries were in accordance with the founding law of the land. Those powers granted to it were for this purpose and this purpose only. Where disputes arose in to how to apply the Constitution in specific cases, the Supreme Court was charged with discovering the way of highest fidelity. Over time the court abandoned this duty and regarded the Constitution as an inconvenient, and at times embarrassing, anachronism. Where clever gaming of its black-letter provisions didn’t work, the court referred to its own decisions instead, and where that didn’t work, it was ignored, at most begrudgingly cited as a footnote for antiquarians. This is how it’s done today, mainly, with a wink and a nod and a Georgetown cocktail party afterward.

That one man believes himself empowered to prevent another from protecting his life is outrageous in itself. In New York we find an even more absurd proposition. To bear arms for self protection outside the home, the state of New York requires a demonstration of need in advance of the event itself. If this weren’t bizarre enough, the need must be demonstrated to be “special.” Apparently the applicant is required to know with certainty when and where a mortal threat will be presented, and also convince the state that his need to survive the event is greater than another person’s. The Second Amendment imposes no such requirements, its authors having been of sound mind, yet a lower court decided New York was acting in accordance with the Constitution. The Supreme Court saw no grounds to review the decision and let it stand.

This isn’t merely a lapse. This is in a class by itself, even beyond upholding the fugitive slave laws. The federal courts are openly serving self-described enemies of the Constitution, and this in addition to protecting and defending government entities—states and municipalities—operating outside their legal mandate. In doing so the federal courts have exposed themselves as a willing hand in the dismantling of the rule of law and thereby forfeit their legitimacy and the respect of honorable people. In their recklessness they’ve not considered how dangerous a path they’ve chosen: if the Constitution doesn’t protect the people from government, it doesn’t protect government from the people…
***

http://www.examiner.com/article/after-senate-setback-obama-quietly-moving-forward-with-gun-regulation
After Senate setback, Obama quietly moving forward with gun regulation

fucking tired of all the bull shit
fucking tired of all the bull shit

7H15 M3554G3 53RV35
7O PR0V3 H0W 0UR M1ND5
C4N D0 4M4Z1NG 7H1NG5!
1MPR3551V3 7H1NG5!
1N 7H3 B3G1NN1NG
17 WA5 H4RD BU7 N0W,
0N 7H15 LIN3 Y0UR M1ND
1S R34D1NG 17 4U70M471C4LLY
W17H 0U7 3V3N 7H1NK1NG 4B0U7 17,
B3 PROUD! 0NLY C3R741N P30PL3
C4N R3AD 7H15.
PL3453 F0RW4RD 1F U C4N R34D 7H15.

Anthony Ravlich
Anthony Ravlich

Saving Western civilization and global freedom. I am a human rights author, activist, outsider (26yrs) from Auckland, New Zealand. I have been seeking truth ever since New Zealand adopted neoliberalism in 1984 and two books later I strongly believe I have found what I have been looking for. The answer I believe would save Western civilization and global freedom. Much depends on whether respect for truth still exists because my research findings are verifiable. I have been circulating the following:
Researching Islamic Terrorism in Europe, by Anthony Ravlich, http://www.indymedia.org.nz/articles/12053

Rdawg the fascist
Rdawg the fascist

Oh fuck, here we go again…

olde reb
olde reb

..I submit the major error of our Founding Fathers was to believe good people could be elected to office to represent them but to retain NO accountability to the people except the next election.

If the elected representatives to Congress were directly and immediately responsible to the various state legislative bodies, in the manner of appointed/elected state employees, the corruption of self-governing of congress might be avoided.

Discover more from The Burning Platform

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading