But is the Canadian government more likely to engage with him or the Canadian Nationalist Party that he is a member of whose leader has been accused of assault requiring hospital treatment by two women?
Many people from groups that oppose each other won't engage with me eg Jews and antisemites, Muslims and Islamophobes. If they do, they are so low status and low education no one cares what they think or would be surprised if they lost the argument. However, they are mostly aware that I support a one party theocracy governed by the principles of Secular Koranism which I have already been propagating for a decade.
I am pretty sure those in the political establishment and those who are anti-establishment are in some way aware of Secular Koranism. They simply do not discuss it because they are either frightened of the social and political consequences of so doing or want to deprive it of the oxygen of publicity because they oppose it.
I believe the incoherence of Jon's position and his rejection of Secular Koranism entirely stems from his belief that:
a) I do not hate Jews enough for his liking or the liking of his associates both Muslim and non-Muslim; Why Jon Vance thinks Claire Khaw is a "Jewish supremacist"
b) I have no greater prospect of success than the Canadian Nationalist Party whose members are mostly Islamophobes who also hate Secular Koranism;
c) his new Muslim community - incapable of discussing Secular Koranism honestly or rationally - regard Secular Koranism as illegitimate, and urge him to dissociate himself from me or else they will dissociate themselves from him, leaving him friendless after he has burned so many bridges to convert to Islam
However, the fact Jon has these beliefs does not invalidate the central premise of Secular Koranism, which is that it would address restore the patriarchy.
It is possible that he now fears to alienate yet another group - Muslim women prepared to marry him that he cannot reason with, or who will be forbidden from marrying him by their fathers because of his association with me and my "illegitimate"new school of sharia called Secular Koranism.
I have already explained to him that it is not safe for any man to marry in any country that has no fault divorce, but it is possible that he has forgotten. In short, he can see no prospect of success and calculates that his immediate spiritual and emotional comfort can best be served going to mosque and being in the bosom of his new Muslim community.
This is all a matter for him. While I do not necessarily expect success because it is not guaranteed, I am mindful of the role I find myself playing as a moral and political philosopher specified in
http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=28&verse=59 After all, I can only do my best to get the message delivered, but I have not worked out to whom I can address this message if not to rabbis and Islamic scholars who also ignore me because they do not want to do what is required of them.
In the case of Jews, the purpose for which they were chosen to be God's Chosen People to do is promote the Noahide laws amongst gentiles. This means to promote Secular Koranism or at least discuss or challenge it, because it is clearly more Noahide than idolatrous and blasphemous Christianity.
In the case of Muslims, their duty is to admonish those who claim God has begotten a son. quran.com/18/4
I have already met Rabbi Sacks and Abdal Hakim Murad, but the fact remains that they fear to discuss Secular Koranism and still prefer to think that Western society can remain intact without a religion at least effective at maintaining minimum standards of sexual morality. Minimum standards of sexual morality cannot be said to be satisfied if most parents are unmarried parents.
My political activism is more effective than his because he is a low status male affiliated to a party that is unashamedly antisemitic whose leader has been accused of assaulting two women while my ideas, though unpopular in the Western political establishment morally and intellectually crippled by liberalism and feminism, is at least recognised for its brand. Secular Koranism is the antithesis of liberal democracy and feminism. While no honourable and influential man will discuss my ideas, it is more likely to be the case that there are no honourable and influential public intellectuals prepared to be seen to engage with me.
This is not actually my problem, since I am but the messenger required only to deliver the message, not a revolutionary required to bring about revolution through violence and disorder. I am only one woman with no army with only my keyboard, ideas and words as weapons.
Perhaps it is a sign of my success that no man either from the establishment or against it will debate with me, because they fear to lose the argument. I am a victim of my own success. Though I am the undisputed champion of debate, I remain unacknowledged because of the hypocrisy and cowardice of dishonourable men who fear being put in the position of having to concede that I have won.
This is what he said to me in the chat:
4:19 JV:
can claire explain to the audience what she means by liberal elite and why they are so deserving of the positions they are in. We must be humble before our beloved bureaucrats?
CK responding in the comments under the video:
I have never said the liberal elite deserve to be in the position they are in. They are the liberal elite because they are the liberal elite, just like the white urban proletariat are the white urban proletariat because they are the white urban proletariat.
What is this to do with bureaucrats?
Is Jon conflating the liberal elite with bureaucrats?
What is the point he is trying to make? What is the purpose of his questions?
[He does not answer.]
39:00 JV to Church of Entropy:
"no one cares for your nirvana you are just proslitizing just as much as me. You only start doing character assignations and ad hom like claire because you have no arguement.
CK: My argument is that the patriarchy can be restored only through Secular Koranism. If not Secular Koranism, what else?
JV: Islam due to the fact any liberal bureaucrats are against Islam or any of its principles coming to fruition.
CK: Making a bargain with non-Muslims is a better way of spreading Islam than converting them without making a bargain with them.
JV: Am I coward now that reconize jesus as a prophet
CK: Islam recognises Christ as a prophet of God.
JV: You have a all or nothing approach then you want to make a bargain with them. [Islam already does this already.
CK: You think you are going to convert people, I just invite them to use Secular Koranism if they want to restore the patriarchy. My approach is focused and clear and does not involve trying to make people believe anything.
JV: Wth is sk policies exactly to enact the patriarchy
That's a lie
CK: Shaming sluts would restore the patriarchy. What is a lie?
JV: It would be a good start to have the cultural values but no one with your secular ideology will go for it. Your imposing your moral on someone else which you have no quantifiable case on how having premaritable sex directly harmed you. No in the current establishment will go for that.
CK: What do you mean by "cultural values"? Go for what?
JV: So you asked questions already and you havent even clarified your position. The cultural value of restoring the family
CK: "Your imposing your moral on someone else which you have no quantifiable case on how having premaritable sex directly harmed you. " I have no idea what you are saying.
If you want to restore the patriarchy you have to shame sluts and abolish no fault divorce.
JV: Are you sure your not a fed
CK: Why do you think I might be a fed?
JV: I ask how you will do that all I got was I was envious of the liberal gentile elite and you never want to specify who you were talking about.
Because you constantly deflect never give any clear position on anything other than repeating truisms.
CK: I have already answered your question. I will restore the patriarchy by shaming sluts. You seem to have a problem with that.
JV: That's hitler accused the Jews of doing when he would engage with them.
How? who will you talk to.
CK: "you never want to specify who you were talking about." I am clear what I am saying but half the time I have no idea what you are asking me.
What position do you want me to clarify?
No idea what this sentence means. Are you drunk?
JV: Who in the liberal elite has shown themselves that might be receptive to your message?
CK: How what? What the fuck are you talking about?
Are you drunk or suffering from mental illness?
JV: Yeah your a fed
CK: "Who in the liberal elite has shown themselves that might be receptive to your message?"
Who in the liberal elite is receptive to yours?
"Yeah your a fed"
On what basis do you come to this conclusion?
JV: I dont care what they think I would actually prefer they hate and fear what I stand for.
CK: Who are you talking about now? You make so little sense you must be drunk or mentally ill.
JV: You keep deflecting when I ask you simple questions and think it's some gotcha. You never go into specifics on who or how your plan will happen.
CK: I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE ASKING ME.
You refuse to clarify your incoherent sentences.
JV: Who in the liberal elite might listen to your message?
CK: I have no idea what you are talking about.
JV: Its like I'm talking to a wall
CK: I can only address my message to the highest status people ie the political establishment. What would be the point of talking to anyone else?
Who are you talking to?
Who is more likely to listen to you?
JV: Are you saying now you are too good for me to answer any of my simple questions?
CK: I have answered your question.
How is your way more effective than mine?
JV: Or you dont actually have a plan of action or any clear definable positions other than pretty basic common sense stuff?
All I'm asking is what your plan of attack is yet you want to push me away because you think it's some gotcha question.
CK: What plan of action must I have other than to propagate my message to whoever who will listen?
I have a message to propagate. I continue to propagate it as part of my political activism. What are you doing?
JV: Seems like you dont actually have anything to back your statements of the liberal elite wanting to actually listen to your message. You want to deflect it onto me who actually is open minded to ideas of effecting real change. Yet you think I'm hostile towards you now because I'm a Muslim when you've nothing but hostile to Christians the whole time. Then you accuse me of alienating other whtye people. The hyprocrasy and the shameless of not wanting to admit you were wrong shows you are of weak character.
Sit on your thumbs and hope someone listens
CK: Which of my statements do you want me to back up? I am selling my idea to the Western political establishment. Do you have a better idea?
What do you mean by "deflect on" you?
Why are you talking in this obscure way? I really have no idea what you are trying to say to me half the time.
JV: Yes subvert the establishment they have shown themselves nothing but incompetent fools who are guided by the foolish nature of democracy.
CK: You mean the videos you have been making about me are not hostile? "Don't talk to Claire Khaw, she is a hypocrite etc"?
JV: It's amazing you cant give me names on who were referring to as the liberal gentile elite
CK: What do you want me to admit I was wrong about?
You were the one accusing me of defending the liberal elite. Which ones?
JV: You've accused me of being a coward of not saying christianity is irrelevant. Then in the same breath you say I'm alienating them which is it?
CK: I am saying that the only way to make people who call themselves Christian give up Christianity is to say it is kaput.
JV: You said that I was envious of them then I named a couple then you said that's not who you were talking about? Are you going to tell that to the russians
CK: You already know Christians are useless, so what is the point of not offending them? They need to know their religion is kaput to think of finding a replacement, don't they? Someone needs to admit he is sick before he will go to the doctor, doesn't he?
Tell what to the Russians?
JV: Yeah I'm afraid of offending them I'm soooooo scared
CK: How many beers have you had?
JV: You want me to block you right now.
CK: You should show this exchange to someone and ask them if they can make out what you are trying to say to me.
It wouldn't make any difference if you blocked me because you make so little sense anyway.
JV: I guess I'm not good enough for your clear answers
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Who in the liberal elite has redeemable enough character to gear your message towards?
Did you get it yet?
Fucken loser fed
*****************************
I am then blocked.
We return to the point that there is no one in the Western political establishment prepared to engage with dissidents, let alone address their issues.
What are the issues?
They are the issues of angry white men who already know that their governments do not care about them.
Their governments do not care about them because they are unemployed and unemployable, and no woman will marry them. Even if women marry them, they can be divorced for no good reason at all under the rules of no fault divorce and instantly deprive them of their matrimonial home and the children they fathered.
Does the Canadian Nationalist Party discuss these issues? It does not seem they are even aware of them. https://nationalist.ca/program/ But perhaps these men already know they are unmarriageable and that is ultimately the source of their anger and despair, and they are too ashamed of saying this.
Clearly, Jon feels my methods will be too slow for there to be any prospect of change in his lifetime, because no one will listen either to him or to me. It seems he prefers more radical methods because he does not have the patience to see things through.
When men believe that their problems are being deliberately ignored and will be for the foreseeable future, I fear they will take matters into their own hands. Indeed, they already have, which is why Western governments are in fear of terrorism being committed by so-called white supremacists who are represented by white formerly working class men who no longer have a role in society. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/02/white-supremacist-violence-terrorism/606964/
But the reasons for this are curious. Clearly, there is a need for labour, because Western governments keep importing foreign labour to the rage of its own formerly working classes. Is it not the government's job to make working classes work then? But that is another can of worms.
No comments:
Post a Comment