Translate

Showing posts with label libertarianism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label libertarianism. Show all posts

Wednesday, 6 June 2018

Curt Doolittle's sayings and doings on Propertarianism



Curt Doolittle:

How do men argue differently from women? Men argue strategically and women argue tactically. Men argue empirically and women argue emotionally. Men worry about the long term, women only care about the short term. The feminine method of argument has a structure and grammar.  Male argument is about science and law, female argument is about morality.

Western males have invented truth, apparently. This is very ethno-centric and obviously untrue suggesting that non-Western males cannot tell the different between falsehood and truth. Doolittle says men will speak the truth though the heavens fall, but women will do the opposite. Women will make an excuse for anything and have no sense of reciprocity. But this is not true, is it? You can also tell that a male politician is lying by the fact that his lips are moving.

We compromise with our women because we have to reproduce. We could do what the Muslims do to their women. We just have to put violence on the table and say 'Well, the end result is that this is no longer good for us. Conservatives have these values and they are better than your values empirically. Our values are eugenic, productive and evolutionary. Yours are dysgenic and unproductive and also damaging to the planet for that matter, so I don't see why we should co-operate any more. So the idea that we should keep the government of the United States or any of our governments intact rather than break them up so the people who want to go right go right and the people who want to go left go left and libertarians go wherever they choose is a great idea, but the idea that we are going to tolerate this any more, it's just off the table, so we'll just take it off the table. The eugenic people can go one way and the dysgenic people can go another. And we're able to do that. We no longer have to compromise, so we can separate. 

ARISTOCRATIC EGALITARIANISM sounds an oxymoron. Why not say meritocracy?

Naval powers get excessively libertarian and commit suicide, military powers tend to get excessively Conservative and fail to compete technologically.

Thalossocracies are by definition scattered empires and harder to keep together. Compare Britain to Russia and China.

Wednesday, 23 May 2018

Alt-right YouTubers invite libertarian on their show. I am a libertarian theocrat prepared to have my ideas challenged.



I would like to discuss the following, which I think should be of interest to the alt-right:

Has Christianity failed?

If Christianity has not failed, why are most Westerners Post-Christians complaining about being exploited by Jews and invaded by Muslims?

Is it not obvious that religion is crucial to social cohesion and male solidarity enabling men to co-operate with each other to defend their nation against the eternal enemies of civilisation: sluts and socialists?

Is it not obvious that the purpose of patriarchy is to support marriage?

Marriage is the rearing of the next generation in optimum conditions, not something to be given to LGBT couples to use as a piece of paper to give to each other as love tokens to their current object of love.

Is it not obvious that patriarchy can only be supported by theocracy?

Only in a patriarchy would enough good strong men be produced to defend the national interest.

If you agree with me about the failure of Christianity, do you think it needs to be replaced?

If you agree with me that Christianity needs to be replaced, what do you think it should be replaced with?

If you disagree with me that the religion that should replace failed Christianity is Islam, then what do you think is the religion that should replace it?

Judaism?

Hinduism?

Buddhism?

Bahaiism?

Scientology?

Rastafarianism?

The worship of white Nordic gods?

The worship of Greek or Roman gods?

If  Islam is "Judaism Lite" and the thought of submitting to Islam is oppressive, this seems to suggest that Judaism would be much too hard for white nationalists.  After all, the Koran does not prescribe the death penalty for breaking the Sabbath.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers+15%3A32-36&version=NKJV
http://biblehub.com/exodus/31-14.htm

Nor does the Koran prescribe the stoning of disobedient sons who are drunkards and gluttons.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/rebellious-son

Islam is in fact the easier option. As long as we are clear about this.

If it is none of the above, then can I assume that you are planning to start a new religion?  If this is your plan, may I point out the following:

As we all know, Judaism - the first Abrahamic faith - has had its ups and downs: Jews have been kicked out of their homeland three times.  Also, it must be remembered that ancient of kingdom of Israel was in decline as soon as King Solomon died.

Christianity took about 350 years to be successful, from Christians being thrown to the lions and the Roman emperor Constantine converting to Christianity. Not having a plan means condemning your children, grandchildren and descendants to a New Dark Age of several centuries.

The Islamic empire was acquired with relatively ease, presumably because it seemed such an obviously good idea that the pagans of Arabia didn't fight that hard against it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/history/earlyrise_1.shtml

Muslims are already here with their shops, post offices, mosques and curry restaurants everywhere in the UK as it is.

If Westerners want to reform Islam, then this can only be done by Westerners adopting Islam itself.

These are the points I would most like to discuss on these guys.

If you would like to my ideas being scrutinised and challenged by a panel of the alt-right, please make your feelings known to Mark Collett http://www.thefallofwesternman.com/ and the host at https://ask.fm/NoWhiteGuilt

Monday, 30 April 2018

Have a smaller state, have a theocracy that will eradicate feminism


Saturday, 9 September 2017

Why libertarianism is shit and Secular Koranism is the answer if you want good government and a rationally small state

Libertarians are basically men who want sexual liberation but with fewer laws and lower taxes, but this is impossible because sexual liberation turns men into the slaves of fornicating sluts whose demands will be unreasonable, irresponsible and excessive.

I am afraid men who want a smaller state rationally governed under principles that are recognisably in the national interest must opt for a theocracy and patriarchy which prioritises the preferences of married fathers.

Otherwise, we continue living in our matriarchy that prioritises the preferences of unmarried mothers with female voters voting for Keir Starmer to be Britain's next Prime Minister rather than Jacob Rees-Mogg who said on TV that he would still not have an abortion even if he were raped and knocked up.

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

“Women usually vote for the more handsome man.”

The Koran is silent on abortion and what is not forbidden is allowed.

A Koranic theocracy would give citizens of an Islamic State the right not to be taxed more than a flat rate income tax of 20% under verse 8:41, the right of men to be a degree over women if they protect and provide for them under 2:228 while guaranteeing freedom of belief with 2:256. Prostitution would be legal under 24:33 and no fault divorce implicitly abolished because marriage would be treated as a contract and divorce would be breach of the terms of this contract.

Under this system those convicted of having had extramarital sex beyond all reasonable doubt would be treated as sex offenders under 4:15, 4:16 and 24:2.

I know it sounds a bit restrictive, but that is the price men have to pay for living in a patriarchy and getting their country back.

You can't say fairer than that, can you?

Millennial Woes makes some surprising comments about the Chinese in his critique of libertarianism



Comments I made under his video:

Libertarians are such cowards unable to agree on libertarian principles let alone organise a piss-up in a brewery.
You could have said that an ethno-state is likely to have fewer laws because it could be that most white men would in theory agree about kicking out Jews, Muslims and non-whites and not have to deal with their culture or worry about hurting their feelings with anti-Semitic, Islamophobic, racist, and LGBT-phobic comments white heterosexual men might want to make about these minorities. On the other hand, if white men don't have a religion the overwhelming majority of them are agreed on, they could be burning heretics, fighting the European Wars of Religion, and the English Civil War all over again.

Are the Chinese known for having a tendency to vote for bigger government? This is the first I have heard about it.
The danger of limited government is that it would have too few laws and public services eg schools, hospitals, armed forces, police, law courts etc and the danger of tyrannical government is that it could lead to rebellion. Government should therefore aspire to having only the necessary laws required to bring about human flourishing and the free speech required to have these philosophical discussions. Obviously, all viable and stable nations would have a dominant culture that does not tolerate degenerate practices and policies that undermine the national interest. Once Western Man kicks out the real cause of his malaise - his thraldom to feminism and its systematic destruction of the institutions of marriage and the family - he will stop feeling quite so angry and upset about being a second class citizen in his own land, once he gets his women to behave decently under a New Settlement and new system of government. I have a few ideas that nationalists may find helpful.
"The Chinese will want our innovations and our money?" They already know the British are skint and are buying up the British family silver the British are so happy to sell to them. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/aug/10/chinese-investors-pump-money-into-the-uk-but-what-big-brands-do-they-own
"The Chinese have been very very statist for a very long time." Please cite your authority for this proposition. I really have never heard of this being said about them. I have heard of them being called the Yellow Peril but that it is their "cultural inheritance" to be the most "statist"? Well, knock me down with a feather! Do you know any Chinese people at all?
Non-whites vote for the left for the same reasons women vote for the left: because Labour bribes them with them with state handouts and tell them scare stories about Tories whom they say will send them on the first banana boat home. When minorities feel secure enough about their status in their new country and have acquired some success, they will vote for lower taxes and limited government too and even UKIP and BNP when they too are fed up with immigration.
You really shouldn't get so sensitive and over-defensive about people trying to catch you out with "gotcha" questions. It is all part of the rough and tumble of politics. I wait for interesting, intelligent and difficult questions on https://ask.fm/oneparty4all and hardly ever get them. Have you any questions you can't answer, Woes? Happy to help!

Saturday, 3 June 2017

Only a theocracy would give us a minimal state as well as good government and patriarchy



Please see the comments we have sent to HOPE not hate:
'Ladies for Philip Davies founding member Elizabeth Hobson was invited to deliver her infant male circumcision presentation at the forum after appearing at the free speech discussion club, the extremists club. She did not know that they are associated with people such as Irving at the time.
Her presentation has excellent research into the area of male genital mutilation and at the time she was happy to have any public platform to discuss a controversial issue, such as the abuse of consent and bodily autonomy of infant baby boys.
As staunch free speech supporters we respect the right of the forum to exist, but we do not agree with all the views expressed at the forum. Especially those of ethno nationalist nature and those who deny aspects of or if the holocaust happened.
The extremists club is a forum for free speech and has a variety of views which vary across the political and philosophical spectrum.
Unfortunately, we live in a ridiculously politically correct culture that anything that doesn't fit in with the mainstream media which is domainated by the ideology of the progressive left and centre right.
We also have people, such as yourself (hope not hate) who claim to be 'anti fascist' yet you support denying people with views you disagree with platform's to speak to the public. We believe that the public have enough common sense to judge arguments when presented fairly and without smear. This article is yet another attempt to smear Philip Davies, who has pointed out real inaccuracies in the focus on gender and the absurdity of political correctness.
Also, we would like to add that the liberty belles do not agree with Claire Khaws view that the UK needs a 'Theocracy'. This goes against the very foundation of libertarian philosophy.
For those of you who like to read 'hope not hate' please use your internet search engine to fine out what libertarianianism is. If you are a mature adult capabale of listening to opposing arguments and able to handle conflict without having a melt down, it might just make some sense to you, we found it very empowering as individuals and especially, as women.'
X
Comments
Claire Khaw The only way to have a minimum state now is to have a theocracy

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/.../the-only...
Reply · Storify24 minsEdited
Claire Khaw How a theocracy could be useful for atheists

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/.../an...
Reply · Storify19 mins
Claire Khaw Man's Greatest Achievement is the Creation of God

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/.../mans...
Reply · Storify15 mins
Claire Khaw There are only two kinds of morality because there are only two sexes

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/.../there-are...
Reply · Storify12 mins
Claire Khaw Atheism + Feminism = Matriarchy 

Monotheism + Marriage = Patriarchy

Marriage is an indispensable ingredient of patriarchy. 

The most important thing about marriage is the rule that everyone should only have sex with the other parent of their offspring. 

This is undeniably a very high standard of sexual morality and this understandably dismays the degenerate who have had their character fatally weakened after over half a century of moral laxity. 

Because it is such a very high standard of morality, God was created and then conscripted into protecting this institution. 

If you are complaining about the craziness of our degenerate matriarchy, the solution is patriarchy. 

If you want patriarchy, you have to practice marriage. 

If you want a society that respects the rules of marriage, you have to obey the laws of God which forbid extramarital sex because this is the only way to respect the most important rule of marriage and carry on this civilising human tradition.


Monday, 12 January 2015

Some questions for libertarians about thoughtcrime legislation in the UK and why Nigel Farage hasn't noticed


  1. Why hasn't Nigel Farage noticed that the Equality Act 2010 satisfies all the conditions of thoughtcrime?
  2.  Is Nigel Farage afraid of alienating the female vote if he proposes to repeal the Equality Act 2010?
  3. Are all political parties in the UK afraid of alienating the female vote?
  4. What does it say about British men if they are all afraid of women who want thoughtcrime legislation unrepealed?
  5. Is there a masculinity crisis in Britain, and if so, when did it begin?
  6. Could it be said that the crisis of masculinity began when Maggie Thatcher became Prime Minister, because it meant that there were no real men in the British political establishment at all as long ago as 1979?
  7. Have all the political parties of Britain and the West chasing the female vote increased our taxes and restricted our liberties? http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.co.uk/2010/10/case-for-disenfranchsing-women-or-why.html
  8. Would proposing to narrow the franchise to taxpayers only solve the problem of the socially parasitical voting for higher taxes to fund public spending at the expense of the productive?
  9. How likely is any leader of any political party prepared to admit these truths when all the men in the West have turned into women in denial where cowardice, avoidance and self-censorship is normal and congenital?
  10. If the problems are not acknowledged, how likely are they to be addressed, let alone solved?
  11. If the problems will neither be acknowledged nor addressed because all the gelded men in the West have lost their guts, brains and balls, will things just get worse and worse until the government collapses and ISIS take over?
  12. "The only way to have a rationally small government is to impose a theocracy." What could this possibly mean?
  13. Are libertarians pussy-whipped beta males who are charisma-free zones too afraid to discuss feminism let alone challenge the feminazis already in charge of the ship of state?  
  14. If leaders of political parties are afraid of omega females - and Slut Single Mothers are indeed omega females because they are the least desirable female partner a man would want if he were looking for a wife and mother of his legitimate children - then Britain does not have an alpha male. Does a country with no alpha male whose men are afraid of the lowest of its women deserve any respect?


Listen to a bunch of libertarian talking heads wittering on about libertarianism not answering any of the above questions

https://www.facebook.com/events/710097192421883/?source=1


Maronite Christian ⁨@GBkishere⁩ tells us the story of his life

1:00  Sharia is the bitter medicine Westerners must take.  2:00  Maronite Christianity explained.  3:00  Adam and Eve 4:00 Phoenicians and z...