1:09:00 The West's "female problem" caused by single mothers and easy divorce

In case this gets maliciously reported and then deleted for breaching YouTube Community Rules, the transcript of what Joseph Cotto said is below:

M Joseph Sheppard:

We have a problem supposedly with Karen. What women are saying to the pollsters does not necessarily reflect what they're going to do in the voting booth. I think we saw that at to a degree in 2016. How much of it is real and what can be done? The time is getting short to address it uh for the Republican Party, if it's real.

Joseph Cotto:

I think that there is obviously a female problem. A lot of women are radicalised against tradition, against anything they believe is male dominated. They despise men, period. They are told throughout their years in education that men are to blame for your problems. They're told through various theories that are taught in various so-called disciplines and also the media pumps these ideas into their heads so that reinforces what they're learning at school. This would not hold on if these women had a generally positive view of men from the outset. You have so many broken families nowadays. You have so many girls who grew up in divorced households where they're almost always raised by the mother and the mother tells them just how awful men are because of the divorce. Most households today are broken. You have to take this into consideration. I think that sets these girls up to become women that are SJW woke fanatics. I don't think you find very many of these people who come from uh traditional two-parent households unless there are some hardcore leftists who just raised them to think this way. Given the statistics on divorce, I think that  really does set girls up to become women that are politically out there to say the absolute least. A lot of these women the GOP will never be able to reach because they have an identity now: hating tradition and hating the so-called patriarchy, hating men. It's in their interests to support the Republicans against the Democrats, from freedom of speech to not letting large-scale immigration that would hurt them economically. 

M Joseph Sheppard:

Safety and security is another aspect. Women in New York are fleeing the Upper West Side because of violence and downtown Chicago. 

It's never less than 96% of black women who vote for the Democrats whereas black men will waver a bit maybe because of economics. Governor DeSantis won his election on school choice basically because of black women swinging to him. 

Women are my concern at the moment. It's not unheard of that sometimes what women say and what they do in the privacy of the polling booth may be different to what they say amongst their peers. 

Just as the Archbishop of Canterbury used to be the conscience of the English monarch, Rabbi Sacks is now the conscience of Western leaders

http://www.shakespeare-online.com/plays/henryv_1_2.html

Henry V to the Archbishop of Canterbury:

My learned lord, we pray you to proceed
And justly and religiously unfold
Why the law Salique that they have in France
Or should, or should not, bar us in our claim:
And God forbid, my dear and faithful lord,
 That you should fashion, wrest, or bow your reading,
Or nicely charge your understanding soul
With opening titles miscreate, whose right
Suits not in native colours with the truth;
For God doth know how many now in health
Shall drop their blood in approbation
Of what your reverence shall incite us to.
 Therefore take heed how you impawn our person,
 How you awake our sleeping sword of war:
We charge you, in the name of God, take heed;
 For never two such kingdoms did contend
 Without much fall of blood; whose guiltless drops
 Are every one a woe, a sore complaint
 'Gainst him whose wrong gives edge unto the swords
 That make such waste in brief mortality.
 Under this conjuration, speak, my lord;
 For we will hear, note and believe in heart
 That what you speak is in your conscience wash'd
 As pure as sin with baptism.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/britains-former-chief-rabbi-behind-pences-biblical-knesset-address/

http://rabbisacks.org/rabbi-sacks-receives-irving-kristol-award-american-enterprise-institute/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism

Neocons organized in the American Enterprise Institute and The Heritage Foundation to counter the liberal establishment

Arthur Brooks – President of the American Enterprise Institute

Danielle Pletka – Senior Vice President of the American Enterprise Institute for Foreign and Defense Studies, former member of Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Gary Schmitt – Resident Scholar, Co-Director of the Marilyn Ware Center for Security Studies and Director of the Program on American Citizenship at the American Enterprise Institute, former Executive Director, Project for the New American Century, Executive Director for President Reagan's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, White House The Weekly Standard

Frederick Kagan – Resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute

Joshua Muravchik – Resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute

Michael Rubin – Resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/02/09/american-think-tanks-hired-purveyors-fake-news/

Think tanks, such as the American Enterprise Institute, Brookings Institution, and the Atlantic Council, speak for those who fund them. Increasingly, they speak for the military/security complex, American hegemony, corporate interests, and Israel.

http://rabbisacks.org/rabbi-sacks-national-prayer-breakfast/

https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/david-cameron-thanks-lord-sacks-for-middle-east-peace-efforts-1.44156

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/423369/You-have-let-down-families-Chief-Rabbi-tells-David-Cameron

Sir Paul Coleridge of the Marriage Foundation is mentioned.

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2018/01/the-marriage-foundation-will-not-be.html

It is time for Rabbi Sacks to discuss feminism, is it not?

My view is that feminism operates by bribing men with fornication and other forms of sexual liberation from the rules of marriage and distracting both men and women from the parenting of legitimate children. This adversely affects the quality of the national gene pool and causes what is know as degeneracy.

Marriage is eugenic, bastardy dysgenic.

All advanced civilisations are patriarchies, all declining, primitive and extinct civilisations are matriarchies.

A patriarchy is a society governed by the preferences of married fathers, a matriarchy is a society governed by the preferences of unmarried mothers.

The West is now a matriarchy, and Britain has been a matriarchy since 1974.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2285670/Most-children-of-British-mothers-born-out-of-wedlock.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10172627/Most-children-will-be-born-out-of-wedlock-by-2016.html

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/wintour-and-watt/2010/nov/25/conservatives-davidcameron

Keith Joseph, Jew:

The balance of our population, our human stock is threatened. A recent article in Poverty, published by the Child Poverty Action Group, showed that a high and rising proportion of children are being born to mothers least fitted to bring children into the world and bring them up. They are born to mother who were first pregnant in adolescence in social classes 4 and 5.

Many of these girls are unmarried, many are deserted or divorced or soon will be. Some are of low intelligence, most of low educational attainment. They are unlikely to be able to give children the stable emotional background, the consistent combination of love and firmness which are more important than riches. They are producing problem children, the future unmarried mothers, delinquents, denizens of our borstals, sub-normal educational establishments, prisons, hostels for drifters.

Yet these mothers, the under-twenties in many cases, single parents, from classes 4 and 5, are now producing a third of all births. A high proportion of these births are a tragedy for the mother, the child and for us.

I do not see how anyone can deny this, but I wonder if Rabbi Sacks will continue to remain tight-lipped on the subject, perhaps out of fear of upsetting his wife, his two daughters or any granddaughters he may have.

My political activism consists of taking the problem to the person most in a position to address the problem of the West. I had an eureka moment when I arrived on Rabbi Sacks, but perhaps I should go over him and approach his wife, so she will give him permission to discuss the problem publicly and frankly.

After all, in important matters of morality, moral and reasonable men and women should have no disagreement and I have no doubt that the Rabbi Sacks' wife is not only moral, but in fact saintly. It is probably because he knows how blessed he is to have her as a wife that he does not wish to offend or upset her.

Rabbi Sacks discussing female moral development with two Jewesses one of whom is a feminist

The talk was supposed to be about moral education for Jewish women, but even Rabbi Sacks bottled out of discussing it, or the topic was changed at the last minute.

If anyone asks what Jews are for, then the answer must surely be that they are her to set moral standards for the rest of us by reminding us of the Seven Noahide laws. Perhaps Rabbi Sacks will consider discussing how many of these the errant British government has transgressed. It is after all a religious duty of Jews to repair the world under the principle of tikkun olam while Muslims have theirs of enjoining good and forbidding evil or waging jihad against the injustice, evil, degeneracy and dementia of feminist oppression.

https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-teshuvah-2076801

Why democracy and feminism should be taken out with the trash in conformity with the principles of teshuvah

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-5347071/Centenary-votes-women-used-galvanise-fight-equality-campaigners-say.html

How chasing the female vote increased our taxes and the size of the state while reducing our liberties and lowered our IQ

https://www.yahoo.com/news/blogs/sideshow/researchers-western-iqs-dropped-14-points-over-last-180634194.html

Pisa tests: UK lags behind in global school rankings

Christianity is now a moral vacuum filled by the disease of the mind that is feminism that bribes men and women with sexual freedom to distract them from maintaining and defending the patriarchy. For their own sakes, Jews should point out the failure of Christianity and suggest a replacement religion bearing in mind that not everyone is a Jew or is capable of adhering to its high-maintenance practices. The answer seems obvious to me, anyway, just as if it were a mathematical problem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enjoining_good_and_forbidding_wrong

Rabbi Sacks and the consequences of his support for women's rights

Nationalist men will always be keener to blame Jews and Muslims than their own treacherous women in positions of influence who don't care about them

What are the limits of Jewish responsibility?

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/secular-koranism.html

https://www.crisismagazine.com/2018/judaisms-sexual-revolution-judaism-christianity-rejected-homosexuality#at_pco=smlwn-1.0&at_si=5a79929bbedf948b&at_ab=per-2&at_pos=0&at_tot=1

The late Jonathan Bowden explaining the importance of marriage and family in the context of nationalism

The late Jonathan Bowden on biology, feminism and traditional societies

Why aren't feminists interested in nationalism?

Swedish woman is now Western woman, therefore Swedish man is now Western man  

Pastor Mark Burns Speaks At Donald Trump Rally in Jacksonville, FL [8/3/16]

How dare race-baiting Democrats forbid black people from voting for Trump? How very dare they!

"We love marriage, the family and babies!" 

Catholic Church embarks on the same road to perdition as the Anglican Church

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04l03fb From 35:45

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/anglican-church-moves-towards.html

Vatican: homosexuals have "gifts and qualities to offer" could Church accept gays, recognize same-sex couples? http://t.co/tPfniX5bua
— Reza Aslan (@rezaaslan) October 13, 2014

@sweet_coloosh @rezaaslan I wonder how many Catholics will now convert to Islam. @TheConWom @LPerrins @kathycps @blondpidge @LouiseMensch
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) October 13, 2014

@ntfem @rezaaslan @TheConWom @LPerrins @kathycps @blondpidge @LouiseMensch Is @Pontifex this desperate to get bums in empty pews?
— Colisha Harris (@sweet_coloosh) October 13, 2014

@sweet_coloosh @rezaaslan @TheConWom @LPerrins @kathycps @blondpidge @LouiseMensch Wot r viable sources of social conservatism in the West?
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) October 13, 2014

@sweet_coloosh @rezaaslan @LPerrins @kathycps @blondpidge @LouiseMensch r there viable sources of social conservatism anywhere in the West?
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) October 13, 2014

@sweet_coloosh @rezaaslan @TheConWom @LPerrins @kathycps @blondpidge @LouiseMensch @CristinaOhq The design flaws of Xtianity now revealed.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) October 13, 2014

@sweet_coloosh @rezaaslan @TheConWom @LPerrins @kathycps @blondpidge @LouiseMensch Islam doesn't need a corrupt clergy to respect marriage.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) October 13, 2014

@sweet_coloosh @rezaaslan @TheConWom @LPerrins @kathycps @blondpidge @LouiseMensch Islam doesn't need a corrupt clergy to fight feminism.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) October 13, 2014

@sweet_coloosh @rezaaslan @TheConWom @LPerrins @kathycps @blondpidge @LouiseMensch Muslims rely on law 2 protect morality Xtians the Trinity
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) October 13, 2014

@sweet_coloosh @rezaaslan @LPerrins @kathycps @blondpidge @LouiseMensch How is belief in Trinity going to protect Xtians from immorality?
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) October 13, 2014

How marriage civilised society

Imagine you were an attractive female in a pre-marriage society. You would just have sex with all the men you fancied and play them off against each other, wouldn't you? And what you would not do is have sex with any males you don't fancy. Amongst the men you do fancy they might just agree to share you and share the burden of feeding you and the children they think they sired through you. That would be how a matriarchy worked.

What would probably happen is that any of the beta males you refused to have sex with might just rape you if they got half the chance, and you would therefore rely on the men who you do want to have sex with to protect you from being raped by the ones you don't want to have sex with.

When you got too old to be sexually interesting to the men, you would be just cast aside.

Under a patriarchal system of monogamy, you and your husband would just have each other, but you would have children who would look after you in your old age.

Although you would still produce offspring by various men under the matriarchal system, it is less likely that these children would look after you because, once these men stopped fancying you and transferred their attention to a younger and more attractive female, they just wouldn't bother telling their children to look after you.

Under a patriarchy, both parents would exert equal influence over their children, which means their children are more likely to love them and look after them in old age.

Because under the patriarchal system men and women would live longer and be respected and looked after more, more knowledge and wisdom would be passed on than under the matriarchal system.

Under the matriarchal system, life for men would also be brutish and short and would end when they got old and frail, because the children they sired would have no particular loyalty to them either. No man would really be sure which child belonged to them and their emotional investment in a child who may just be their offspring would be low and their children would feel no particular connection to them. There would not be much natural feeling of the affection a parent and child would feel for each other under the patriarchal system.
This was how marriage first worked to improve the quality of human relationships and maintain the transmission of knowledge from one generation to the next.

Once we return to the old system of allowing woman to have sex with whoever they pleased, we will go back to the old system of human relationships.

Now, those of you who keep saying that marriage is just a piece of paper, which system do you prefer and which system is to be preferred if you care about preserving the existence and health of your civilisation?

David Jones campaigns for election: polling day 25 October 2012

By David Jones, Independent Pennine Nationalist,

Todmorden, East Lancashire

With a great deal of pleasure I announce that I have submitted a valid nomination form for a snap Town Council by-election scheduled (for October 25th), as an Independent.

I shall be fighting the "Central" ward of Todmorden Town Centre on some matters held very dear to me that I did not emphasise so much as a four-time candidate for a small nationalist party, ie the decline of the traditional family, the betrayal of our war veterans, small, limited governance, as well as my better known platform nationalism of fighting corruption.

My vote has been rising fast in Todmorden and I am announcing it here as this blog has tirelessly advocated many principles similar to my own."




Message from Claire Khaw:

I am indeed delighted to support what David Jones supports: the institutions of the marriage and the family, which apparently no political party in the land now dares to support.

Have you seen a single policy in the LibLabCon manifesto that supports marriage?  Or in the UKIP, BNP, English Democrats or the NF for that matter?

UKIP mentioned marriage at their recent Birmingham conference, but, guess what, they only mentioned gay marriage.

http://www.ukip.org/page/conference-schedule

Saturday 22 September
12.45 ON THE FRINGE
YI: Gay Marriage (Birmingham Conservatoire)

So cowed are they by extremist feminism that they no longer dare support marriage.

Is this not a shocking state of affairs?

It would seem that David Jones is the only political activist in the land who is not religious and yet dares to support the institutions of marriage and family.

The family is our only protection from the state.  Perhaps that is why the state is so anxious to dismantle it by desecrating marriage without which the family would break up, children deprived of their fathers and their paternal side of the family.

No wonder so many fatherless children are now behaviourally, socially and educationally challenged.  The longer we allow the state to continue desecrating marriage the worse things will be for you and the next generation.

Protest now against liberal and feminist extremism by voting for and supporting David Jones and protect your family, your liberty and property from the nanny state.

HOW THE OLD ORDER OF COMMUNITY WAS DESTROYED by David Jones

(By David Jones, Independent Nationalist,
Todmorden, East Lancashire)

In my hometown of Todmorden, a small, once prosperous town of 14,000 of productive inhabitants, the town where I was raised all my life and which I love dearlym we have seen many changes, most of them for the worse. I have had many a conversation in the course of my political activity, including with former members of its old borough council. Being only 27 years young I have only heard about the town my voters remember dearly.

That town, I am constantly told, was a town without drug-problems, deadbeat dads, slapper mothers, wastrel youths smashing up the bus shelters , race problems or waste of space ‘community groups’ run by liberal colonisers. It used to have four major strengths that kept it so strong that it was the only on of ten boroughs that was not “in the red” when it went into Calderdale Council (i.e. In debt);

1. Elected members of the old Todmorden Corporation, may have been members of different political parties, but they were first and foremost “True Todmorden”, that is to say they put the interests, order, peace and productivity of the town at heart. It could almost be considered a “one-party” council, because the councillors of the three main parties were loyal to the town. The corruption of the national political parties had not yet filtered down to local politics until the 1970’s. One former 1970’s councillor said to me that we “had three parties loyal to one town”.

2. These Councillors were also successful businessmen and family-oriented people. The stigma of being a deadbeat, runaway father or a loose woman still prevented people of questionable morality from getting elected to positions of trust, power and responsibility. Compare that to the plethora of workshy layabouts that fill our Town Halls today.

3. Those that had the power were usually of from families that had built themselves up and worked hard, they owned businesses and employed people, they had grandparents who started from humble beginnings and raised their children to marry the right kind of women who would not destroy the wealth their forefathers amassed or lose it in a divorce to an unsuitable wife.

4. This culture, the true culture that made is great as a nation not ‘tolerance and fair play’ as we are taught, filtered down to the rest of the families in the town and encouraged them to work hard and form strong families. People did not “put number one first” but tried to honour their families and their trades, and those that didn’t were simply allowed to go to the wall. Families took hard decisions and ostracised their losers and wasters.

All this I know because I come from a fourth-generation farming family, a family that I am proud to call just that, as I grew up I learned from other farming families and customers (our family ran a dairy and delivered our own milk). Our customers on the Avenues of Dinely and Longfield also came from strong families. These were often rough families, but they still knew how to raise their families properly, and it is they and their children who I am proud to say make up my voting base. I respect the names of families who stayed strong, and that has always been my inspiration.

Of course the Todmorden Corporation of 36 United Todmordians is long gone, in their place is 51 Calderdale Councillors (of which only Northowram & Shelf, and a Ryburn councillor—both Conservatives) fit the description of being rooted in a tradition of local hardworking families serving their localities. And we have eighteen Town Councillors, sixteen of whom who again have not done a productive days work in their lives.

In short, the destruction of real and genuine community values lies not in the lack of superficial ‘patriotism of coming together’ to wave the flag, on royal occasions, at football matches or increasingly to cheer the troops off to some god-forsaken foreign hell hole! No! it was when families were weakened and undermined by transient liberals, feminists, yuppies, public sector Marxist trades unionists.

If you want to take your country back, first you must take control of your family, then your neighbourhood, then your community back from the evils of liberal feminism and degenerate consumerism being imposed by national political parties.

Otherwise you are just wasting your time.

Why I am really more tolerant and forgiving than people who call themselves liberals

I come from a political family not in the sense that my family occupy positions in government but that they regularly discuss politics and frequently disagree with each other.

Sunday is the day they would all meet at my grandparents house and inevitably politics would be discussed after family gossip has been dealt with.

My parents vote quite differently from each other. I am therefore used to a range of opinion being expressed with varying degrees of fanaticism and reasonableness.

Perhaps this is one of the advantages of a large extended family. You just get used to a wider range of views and human behaviour.

Why the Family and Marriage are called "Institutions"

The institutions of human society are Marriage and Family.

What is an "institution"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institution

"An institution is any structure or mechanism of social order and cooperation governing the behavior of a set of individuals within a given human community. Institutions are identified with a social purpose and permanence, transcending individual human lives and intentions, and with the making and enforcing of rules governing cooperative human behavior."

The institution of Marriage keeps humans distinct from animals, and we desecrate it at our peril.  Once we have desecrated Marriage, then a Matriarchy that will mean the death of your culture, society and civilisation follows inevitably.

Marriage is a patriarchal idea, by the way, and that is why Feminism - an ideology of the Matriarchy - has systematically eroded the institutions of Marriage and thereby the Family and thereby Western societies and thereby Western civilisation itself.

And that is why the only good matriarchy is a dead matriarchy.  It is the totalitarian statist matriarchy that encourages Slut Single Mums to breed at the expense of the taxpayer and forbids the criticism of Slut Single Mums.

Remember: lower animals are either single-parents or have harems.  Only humans have the institutions of Marriage and Family that comes between the two extremes.

Why would we want to live like animals when we can live like humans?

Why White Nationalism should demand the reconsecration of the institutions of Marriage and Family

I live in the West amongst white people. I therefore feel that what is good for white people would be good for me, and that civic nationalism is enough to give white nationalists a foot in the door, who should use any means available wisely to have the kind of society that they want that would give them the liberty to influence whom their offspring mate with.

This would be done by reconsecrating the desecrated institutions of Family and Marriage.

Just ask for this and everything else will follow.

This means, I'm afraid, challenging feminism, which some of you may not be quite up to.

Feminism means easy divorce and divorce settlements that usually cripple men. This means men are afraid of women. When men are afraid of their women the moral and educational standards of that society suffer.

Challenging feminism means you have to give up the benefits of feminism ie cheap sex and easy women.

Brothels would be legal again, but prostitutes who are not a burden on the state will be officially declared a degree above never married single mothers who are.


There is no need to for further acts of violence by the likes of Anders Breivik or pray for a race war or widespread civil disorder or anything like that. Just ask for what I suggest above, in reasonable tones, and there will be a gender war of ideas of the patriarchy adn the matriarchy. It is not that hard for men to win the argument, if you make the arguments in your favour widely available.

What you offer women to give up feminism is a better quality of white man who will be a good husband and father instead of the losers and paedophiles created by feminism.

The losers created by feminism are the illegitimate, criminal, under-achieving and singly-parented.  In other words, men who are skint, scared and stupid, some of them even middle class and professional, who have had their homes confiscated by their wives after she has become bored and irritated by them when they have grown old and boring, when she has decided it would be quite nice to live in his house without having the annoyance of him in it.  


I see no harm in saying, in response to the acts and words of the Anders Breivik, things like: 

"We told you so, it was all your fault for suppressing debate on immigration for so long. Why don't we have a referendum on immigration then if you are all so bloody democratic? Then you will find out whether the voters want more immigration or not. Go on, we dare you."

"Fascism" and "Nazism" these days is often really only genuine Conservatism demonised by liberals and feminists.