THE VOICE OF REASON
Solon, (born c. 630 BCE—died c. 560 BCE), Athenian statesman, known as one of the Seven Wise Men of Greece (the others were Chilon of Sparta, Thales of Miletus, Bias of Priene, Cleobulus of Lindos, Pittacus of Mytilene, and Periander of Corinth). Solon ended exclusive aristocratic control of the government, substituted a system of control by the wealthy, and introduced a new and more humane law code. He was also a noted poet.
Patriarchy cannot exist without marriage, and the practice of marriage will not be respected from generation to generation without a theocracy ie a society governed by God's laws.
You don't have to believe in God to understand this, since it is quite easy to understand that all five world religions use the Gold Standard of Marriage as a measure of sexual morality and all secular political ideologies deviate from this.
The West is now a matriarchy and feminists have already equated patriarchy with domestic violence. They now control the terms of the debate and men are now too frightened to challenge this. Men in senior political politicians know that any woman can accuse them of a historic sexual offence to destroy their lives, credibility and career. They can do this without the corroborating testimony required by Deuteronomy 19:15.
Americans harp on about this thing called "paleoconservatism" which I understand to be social conservatism. This means marriage and family values which the law in the West no longer supports. A feature of matriarchy is that it has created all kinds of marriage substitutes in order to undermine marriage and destroy the patriarchy.
However, talking about restoring the patriarchy even in the alt-right will cause men to scuttle away like cockroaches in case their matriarchy accuses them of heresy and guilt by association of being in the company of someone who preaches heresy.
Perhaps it will help to make the point that patriarchy is not synonymous with domestic violence but married fathers and marriageable men. Matriarchy, on the other hand, is demonstrably synonymous with unmarried mothers whose offspring become unmarriageable men and women.
People who want to live in a patriarchy would want to believe in God. You would want to live in a patriarchy if you wanted to be a married parent and properly parent your legitimate offspring.
Affluent and high status married fathers in the West do not feel a moral imperative to condemn unmarried parents because they are mostly morally compromised slut-fuckers or afraid of their wives like Lord Rothermere and the Murdoch brothers who have left-wing feminist wives. They are afraid of their wives divorcing them under the rules of no fault divorce and taking half their stuff.
Even Jordan Peterson dares not discuss slut-shaming, but I do.
Because most men are bachelors living in a gig economy and can easily find a slut to fuck, they will not be supporting marriage. Because Western men refuse to contemplate making the sacrifices required of them to support marriage and patriarchy or even discuss it honestly, Western degeneracy continues apace.
While the West slides deeper into degeneracy and dysgenics, they will be blaming Jews, Muslims, immigrants, foreigners and China for their troubles whom they will attack with increasing virulence.
Because they are mostly sufferers of Narcissistic Personality Disorder or are sociopaths, psychopaths and people who would shoot the messenger rather than accept correction with humility after submitting to Truth, Logic and Morality, minorities such as Jews should expect to be blamed, victimised, as well as verbally and physically attacked with increasing frequency and violence.
In the Brexit referendum that took place in the United Kingdom on June 23, 2016, 55 percent of men voted to leave the European Union, compared with 49 percent of women. The referendum itself was won by the leave side, after they won 51.9 percent of the vote overall.
We live in a society dominated by the female preference. This means we live in a matriarchy. To discover that your society is a matriarchy is the equivalent of discovering that your society has cancer. Even after this preference was expressed in 2016 and confirmed in two subsequent General Elections, the British male Brexiteer is still having his stated preference marginalised by the matriarchy. A matriarchy is a society that condones extramarital sex and discovering that your society is a matriarchy is the civilisational equivalent of discovering you have cancer. Does anyone know exactly how many illegitimate offspring the current British Prime Minister has sired?
If you want patriarchy, you must logically and necessarily choose a theocracy to restore, protect or establish it. Deciding whether you want to live in a matriarchy or a patriarchy is therefore a political and moral choice requiring the sacrifice of what you think is your human right to have sex with anyone who is not your spouse of the opposite sex.
10:00 People who think they are too cool for rules are most likely to die without issue or with illegitimate children who are a disgrace to them, but they won't care because they are shameless nihilists.
21:00 Heresy and taboo to challenge the matriarchy if we live in one or live with an Arch-Feminist eg Ann Furedi.
22:00 Culture War
24:00 The warlike Europeans and their European wars
26:00 How about a number instead of your name?
28:00 Our beliefs and experiences are sacred to us.
29:00 Individuality and identity
30:00 Our associates are our identity.
31:00 Being modern
34:00 The Aztecs
35:00 Modernism
36:00 Intersectionality and inversion
37:00 Openness trumps democracy?
38:00 The rule of law v the law of the jungle
39:00 Whynottery
40:00 The censorship of the so-called open society
41:00 Companies submit to the matriarchy when they know they won't be protected by the state.
42:00 The moral compass of a religion
43:00 Religious principles are the strongest principles.
44:00 The culture war in Israel
45:00 Sociopaths and psychopaths
46:00 Multinationals will do what profit-seeking organisations were created to do: maximise their profit in however the law allows.
47:00 Democracy is asking stupid people stupid questions.
48:00 "Cancel culture" is censorship.
49:00 Changing national identity through changing the historical narrative of the nation.
52:00 Conservatism is a purely defensive ideology and cannot fight the degeneracy.
53:00 Cascades/Coin Pusher
1:01:00 Jews and Muslims must call out Christianity since Christians remain in denial.
1:02:00 If Christianity is a coach, the driver is dead at the wheel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bystander_effect
"small radical group to an international movement" Andrew Young, 88, BLM royalty
2:50:00
Not sure who the leaders are. "It is a spiritual emotional movement." "Extremely deliberate" "womanist" Inception in 2013 Those driving it have been women eg Professor Molina Abdullah. Intersectional LGBTQ+ Leaders "Group centred leadership. We want people to step into the leadership rather than being a leader-centred group."
"Culture change" is mentioned. So, our culture will change without so much as a discussion even by our feeble politicians, into what exactly we do not know.
However, "womanist" and "intersectional" are big clues.
Matthew 20:16:
"So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen."
Society will be turned upside down: the stable pyramid of the patriarchy will be replaced by the inverted pyramid of the matriarchy spinning on its apex, and will collapse like a top when it has exhausted its energy, crushing whoever wherever in its path when it falls.
Why is no opposition even being organised? Because both the religion and political system of the West have failed. Our unprincipled politicians cannot bring themselves to act because they do not know which way to jump, for they only do the right thing if they are sure it benefits them. If they were principled, they would have done the right thing already. Is it time for the West to acknowledge that its religion and political system have failed?
1) Ask childless women if they regret not becoming mothers of legitimate children.
2) Ask these childless women expressing regret at not being mothers what prevented them from becoming married mothers.
Once the results are in, I think the case for Secular Koranism will have been made.
Selling it to men will be easy once women are sold on it.
Once the childless women from this sample most capable of displaying the qualities of honesty, reason and good character are identified, they can be trusted to vote on whether
a) government should prioritise the preferences of women of good character who want to be married mothers (ie patriarchy which would produce rise in the number of marriageable men capable of supporting a wife and family on one income) or
b) government should prioritise the preferences of women who do not care if they are mothers or married mothers prepared to perform degrading sexual acts for men who are not their husband for the purposes of dating or recreation (ie matriarchy which would maintain the status quo of the welfare state, maternity pay, equal pay, the Equality Act 2010, globohomo etc)
Is Colin Colenso whom I have now appointed as the Archetype of Western Man who is a science graduate doing the same thing as Jay who previously held this title?
They are both confusing what is deeply unpopular with what is unsound in principle.
It is no surprise that Secular Koranism would be unpopular with Islamophobes.
It is no surprise that antisemites would reject the Noahide laws just because they are Jewish.
My arguments are as follows:
Out of all the five world religions, Islam is the most Noahide-observant and Christianity the least because it falls foul of the prohibitions against idolatry and blasphemy.
We know the patriarchy has been destroyed by the fact that we live in a matriarchy.
We know Christianity has failed because it has allowed the matriarchy to establish itself.
The perfect patriarchy - 100% married parents
The perfect matriarchy - 100% unmarried parents
The illegitimacy rates of Western nations is evidence that they are matriarchies.
All advanced civilisations are patriarchies.
All declining, primitive, extinct and soon to be extinct societies are matriarchies.
A patriarchy is a society that prioritises the preferences of married fathers.
A matriarchy is a society that prioritises the preferences of unmarried mothers.
Marriage is eugenic, bastardy dysgenic.
All men in a matriarchy are lower in status than the unmarried mother.
It is almost unimaginable that Trump would now criticise the unmarried mother in election year.
By refusing to discuss whether the West is in fact a matriarchy, Western politicians are implicitly admitting their subjugation.
When Western politicians collectively admit their subjugation to the matriarchy, their internal and external enemies will notice and be encouraged.
Men who refuse out of fear to criticise groups that they know to be weaker, stupider and less wealthy than they are out of a desire to take the line of least resistance deserve the contempt they receive.
Men who could easily win the debate using Truth, Logic and Morality but who refrain from formulating arguments out of cowardice do not deserve to live in an advanced civilisation and very soon won't.
The failure of Christianity and the extinction of the patriarchy perfectly explains why even national leaders are now too afraid to challenge the preferences of the irresponsible woman who is also an unmarried mother badly parenting her illegitimate offspring she casually conceived. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_(slang) Karen is of course the stereotype of the over-entitled female voter who is usually a single mother angry and disappointed with men after a string of failed relationships. The fact that Karen is middle aged means she now represents the stereotype of White Western Woman. Interestingly, the national average age of the West is currently 40.
Unprincipled Western Man is the perfect illustration of how educated and intelligent men make the category error of confusing what is unpopular with what is unsound in principle. Secular Koranism may be deeply unpopular because it proposes to slay the Sacred Cow of Cheap Sex, but it is sound in principle in that if implemented, it would work to restore the patriarchy by treating unmarried parents as sex offenders as prescribed by quran.com/24/2.
The only reason why Western Man makes this category error is to avoid having to do what he does not wish to do: make the sacrifices necessary to restore the patriarchy, neatly proving that patriarchy was never easy on men either.
Because Western Man lives in a matriarchy, most men of fighting age now were brought up in fatherless homes orphaned from their traditions, history and masculine identity. Instead of using Truth, Logic and Morality to solve and avoid problems, they only use the feminine stratagems they learned from their unmarried mother in an attempt to manipulate the emotions of others while being unable even to control their own emotions.
Because they will be thirsty for sex, they will join political movements in order to have sex with women and allow themselves to be manipulated through hope of gaining sexual access or fear of losing sexual access to women they are not married to.
These women will incite them to intimidate men whose views they disapprove, particularly older men who are no longer sexy with views they dislike eg Peter Hitchens until the weak, flabby and frightened middle aged and elderly men who are no longer men of fighting age convince themselves that they never cared about the statues anyway.
"All happy families are alike; each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way." Do all civilisations rise in the same way and fall in a different way? But it seems to me that they rise in virtue ie patriarchy and fall in effeminacy ie matriarchy.
Patriarchy is a society that prioritises the preferences of married fathers, matriarchy a society that prioritises the preferences of unmarried mothers who casually conceived and parented their illegitimate offspring.
Are we not obliged to choose the lesser evil if we are rational and moral human beings?
Is there no one prepared to discuss these matters even though they call themselves philosophers, rabbis or religious leaders?
The West is now suffering from a crisis in masculinity - a state of mind prepared to defend patriarchal moral values. In general, it can be said that women are content with lockdown while men are going crazy with cabin fever. Is now the time for feminism to be debunked when men and women react so differently to the same thing?
The cause of effeminacy is sexual liberation. Men will do anything for sex, including become women. They will also yield like women if submitting to immoral women gives them access to sex when previously they were warriors. It is now time to ask ourselves how civilisations fall.
1:00 The American Declaration of Independence is mere puffery, as the Victorians would say.
The US constitution was written a whole decade after the American Declaration of Independence.
4:00 The proposition that all men are created equal comes from the French Revolution.
5:00 The pursuit of happiness was the second draft after it was thought that the pursuit of property made Americans seem like a bunch of unprincipled landgrabbers. However, it was the idea that the pursuit of happiness was in some way acceptable led to America becoming a land of hedonism steeped in sin. Why not substitute "justice" for "happiness"? That could turn America into a nation of moral and political philosophers away from the morbidly obese transgender and gaily married people they have now become.
5:30 The American Civil War was an American War of Unification. That is why Lincoln is now deified and sits like Zeus upon his throne in the Lincoln Memorial. Will future archaeologists one day conclude that the Americans worshipped their presidents when they discover the enormous idols at Mount Rushmore? "The ones we have found were the good ones, we suppose, but after indulging in their sin of President Worship, their Presidents got worse and worse until their civilisation became extinct after they all died of the Chinese flu."
7:00 Is equality democracy? Equal before God, was all it meant when the declaration said men were created equal, surely? Does either the Bible or the Koran deny the moral validity of patriarchal hierarchy? (Patriarchy is a society that prioritises the preferences of married fathers where beta males choose an alpha male to be their leader to protect their interests as married fathers. Suffrage is denied to women because they already get to choose their husbands who will provide and protect them. Otherwise, their fathers are to protect and provide for them. A matriarchy is a society that prioritises the preferences of unmarried mothers who casually conceived and parented their illegitimate offspring. As you can imagine, such a society would be dysgenic, rife with social parasites and NEETs that need to be bribed with UBI, extramarital sex and the option of becoming transgender to keep them quiescent and sexually occupied under their matriarchy. The sexually sated male is politically inert. This explains why no white man in a senior position in the Western political establishment will raise the alarm against the matriarchy or even use the term. The perfect patriarchy - 100% married parents. The perfect matriarchy - 100% unmarried parents. The West is now a matriarchy.)
9:00 How many times has the US constitution been amended?
9:30 Have you considered using the Koran as the basis of your constitution?
13:00 Legal positivism
14:00 Should the Overton Window be smashed?
15:00 Natural law is divine law and divine law is God's law. This can only mean the Abrahamic God and there are only two revelations: the Torah for Jews and the Koran for gentiles. The New Testament is clearly insufficient for any society to base its laws on. This was clearly the message Thomas Jefferson intended to convey when he compiled the Jefferson Bible.
17:00 Rights can only be legal rights and legal rights can be created or destroyed overnight. The only legal rights that have divine protection are divine laws and to have the benefit of divine laws we would have to live in a theocracy where belief in God is general.
18:00 " ... all men are created equal" [by God, if you believe in Him]. If you don't believe in God, then you wouldn't obey His laws. God's laws are contained in the Torah which is for Jews, and in the Koran which is for gentiles. If Americans believe in equality, then they must also logically and necessarily believe in God who created them equal. If they do indeed believe in God, then they must also believe that He made laws for them to follow. Therefore any law in America that is not in harmony with God's laws for gentiles should be repealed. The First Amendment was based on quran.com/2/256
As Nietzsche says, interpretation is not a function of truth but that of power.
21:00 Entailed rights are traditional rights and traditions become sacred with the passage of time.
24:00 Neo-liberalism is the economic arm of the American empire and neoconservatism its military arm.
29:00 "Interpretation is not a function of truth, but that of power." Why are Conservatives incapable of formulating arguments against Liberal positions? Or is it cowardice that prevents them from articulating these arguments?
33:00 The matriarchy is irrational, which is why it is a danger to itself. It is time to admit that the West is now a matriarchy.
43:00 Fox News ain't what it was.
48:00 Is it time to admit that both Conservatism and Christianity are kaput?
When most men who complain about the government cannot discuss solutions because they fear each other too much to do so, you know the political system is broken. If your religion is broken then your politicians will be corrupt and cowardly voted into office by even more corrupt and cowardly voters who are in denial about the state of their nation.
Marriage is eugenic, bastardy dysgenic. White Nationalists won't discuss restoring the patriarchy with marriage using slut-shaming Secular Koranism. Yet when I ask them what they think religion is for or what solution they propose other than kicking out and killing people, they fall mysteriously silent. What could be the matter with them?
Centuries of Christianity has rotted their minds away.
Christians either really believe that an executed revolutionary is the co-equal of the supreme and eternal Abrahamic God, or only pretend to do so.
If they really believe this absurdity, they are stupid and weak.
If they only pretend to believe it, they are corrupt and weak.
That is why Western Man is morally rotten.
It is a toxic mixture of arrogance and ignorance and their innate chauvinism, of course. Because they think they have nukes and have nuked Japan twice, they think they are superior. But military superiority is not permanent. They don't seem to understand that either, or do not wish to discuss it, because they are cowardly and dishonest. The ones who think they are superior because they used to rule the world are only living on borrowed time, borrowed money and are a dead man walking.
And there are some who use the fact that God has not appeared before them like a genie in a lamp as an excuse to deny the necessity of theocracy.
Faith is very simple really: we just choose to believe.
If you see the wisdom of God's laws, you would feel morally obliged to obey them. If you obey them, you incline towards belief and want the rest of society to obey them and therefore the solution of theocracy is both moral and logical.
If you wish to flout His laws, you would deny God's existence because it makes no sense at all to believe in God while flouting His laws and fearing His punishment.
There are those who affect to be intelligent and sceptical, who studied philosophy as undergraduates, but who cannot answer me when I ask them what they think religion is for. I suppose they intend to go to their graves refusing to answer the question. When your religion no longer works, grown men who have studied philosophy as undergraduates refuse to answer philosophical questions because they refuse to acknowledge that their idolatrous and blasphemous religion and their apparently inerrant political system is at fault. Apparently, it is not their job as thinking political activists to consider such questions.
If black people do have lower IQ than white people, it is because more of them are the product of unmarried parenthood.
White men in denial that they are living in a degenerate matriarchy cannot bear to discuss restoring the patriarchy. If they disagree that restoring the patriarchy is not the answer to the oppression of living in a matriarchy, what better idea do they have other than killing and kicking people out which most of them, want deep down, but dare not say it?
The fact that the West is a matriarchy means Christianity is kaput. So the next question arises: should Christianity be replaced if it is kaput?
Presumably they don't want to admit that Christianity is kaput because they don't want to consider whether it should be replaced.
They don't want to discuss whether it should be replaced because they have already heard of my solution, which they cannot bring themselves to discuss because they already know Christianity is kaput.
These men are often political activists with degrees, not ignorant folk who never consider such things. Some of them have even studied philosophy as undergraduates. It would appear that not only is Christianity kaput, Western philosophy is also a heap of hooey because it offers no solutions.
Are they taking the position that white people don't need a religion effective at maintaining minimum standards of sexual morality because their magic white skin is going to save them from degeneracy and the matriarchy? It would appear so.
Do such men who have retreated into infantilism deserve to live in an advanced civilisation? I would say not.
If people deserve their government, what does a nation of men afraid to offend unmarried mothers deserve, especially if they are hypocrites who once pretend that they cared about their own racial hygiene?
A matriarchy is a society that prioritises the preferences of unmarried mothers indifferent to the parenting of their casually conceived illegitimate offspring. Britain is undeniably matriarchy. In a matriarchy, all men are lower in status than the unmarried mother. Andrew Sabisky is now gone because he offended unmarried mothers and their representatives.
What self-respecting man lives in a matriarchy without protest?
But if he protests he would be immediately crushed and ostracised by his slut-fucking associates. So even if a man agreed with me, he would be too cowardly to be seen to agree with me.
Only under a patriarchy would enough good strong men be produced to defend the national interest and the men I speak to cannot bear for the obvious to be pointed out. This means they cannot accept the truth, much less logic or morality.
One of the reasons why fewer and fewer men are married now is because marriage is no longer a good bargain for men. Men, being primarily motivated by sex, will do anything for sex, including marry and pay for the children of their wife. Since they no longer need to marry in order to have sex with women, they ask themselves "Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?" The only way to make marriage a good bargain for men again is to abolish no fault divorce and shame sluts with quran.com/24/2 but lily-livered men who have no investment in the next generation or concern for posterity prefer to keep quiet to avoid upsetting their political associates who will invariably be other slut-fucking men who will have sired bastards.
Not only is Christianity kaput and Britain no longer a God-fearing country, it is now a matriarchy and its men overwhelmingly slut-fearing.
Have you noticed how not even men who complain about feminism even want to restore the patriarchy by reintroducing slut-shaming? It is because even discussing the subject honestly and rationally is more trouble than its worth to these men. They will not engage with me on the subject other than to say that their collective tactic of refusing to engage with me on the subject means it will never be discussed, let alone addressed.
These men refuse to risk anything to address the most urgent issue of the day, presumably because they think they stand a reasonable chance of going to their graves without having to admit the error and disaster of feminism. Do such men deserve to live in advanced civilisation?
The reason why they are so indifferent to the interests of the next generation is because most of them are not married fathers. There are even those of them who are married fathers who won't discuss that either, presumably because they do not feel they owe their legitimate children even the trouble of discussing the importance of the institution of marriage in oiling the wheels of your civilisation to keep your civilisation going.
This has happened before, for it was Livy the Roman historian who said "We can neither bear our vices nor their cure."
0:01 I didn't manage to get the sound of the Aaron "party" stream after all. Apologies. This Neo-Nazi/alt-right house party in Jerusalem has been deleted.
2:00 Aaron Amihud won't let me on his streams because he hates and fears Secular Koranism. If you asked him for a reason, he would pretend it is for reasons of restoring the patriarchy, but that is just nonsense, and restoring the patriarchy does not mean not allowing Claire Khaw - who wants to restore the patriarchy - on your streams. My position is that only Secular Koranism would restore the patriarchy in Western nations and Aaron in his cowardice cannot accept that nor can he argue against it. Christianity is kaput and is in any case idolatrous, so as a Jew Aaron cannot tell Western nations to be more Christian. He knows he is conflicted, and he knows I know he is conflicted and that is the real reason why he bans me from his streams. In fact, I tried to ask him about his views on Chabad's Jew-administered Noahidism, but he ended a stream rather than answer my question, because he feared my forensic questioning. We presented five streams together at his suggestion and you can hear them all at https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLLiyerKd2Lcq7G082L7Ua182pWqkHNSyp It seems he gave up trying to demonstrate that Secular Koranism was not viable or moral and wants to deprive me of the oxygen of publicity by excluding me from the conversation, just like liberal media.
4:00 The irony of Jewish Aaron allowing White Nationalists and larping Nazis to take over his stream
6:00 My exchanges with Chabad rabbis on the Noahide laws
8:00 The medium of the written word is more subject to analysis than the spoken word.
10:00 Our religion defines our politics.
11:00 Religion is a standard of behaviour.
12:00 Unprincipled people make society unstable and life unpredictable.
13:00 A political system with a high turnover means the velocity of buck-passing is high and government unaccountable.
14:00 We prefer to deal with people we know and trust.
15:00 We want our leader to be the same person for as long as possible if we already trust him.
16:00 The obvious solution of a one party theocracy
17:00 All political parties should promote the national interest, and nationalism is government in the national interest.
18:00 Wisdom is long-term thinking with a goal in mind, and with the discipline of postponing pleasure, to the extent of waiting until the afterlife to enjoy guilty pleasures.
19:00 Time and energy is wasted in political rallies, making false promises and telling lies in liberal democracies.
20:00 Just govern the country properly already!
21:00 Democracy and Christianity is really stupid so it was always bound to crash and burn anyway. Antisemites attribute the indifference, incompetence and corruption of their governments to Jewish subversion and refuse to believe that their kaput religion that they themselves don't even believe in and the democracy that they now reject for a White Nationalist Dictator were anything less than perfect, until the Jews came along. They are like a householder whose roof is leaking going around beating up other members of the household after falsely accusing them of causing the roof to leak and evicting them rather than calling the roofer. Things will only get worse for the White Man if he does not adopt Secular Koranism pronto.
22:00 The bloody history of schismatic Christianity and the European Wars of Religion
23:00 People of the same race and religion can be horrid to each other eg European Wars of Religion, War of the Roses, the Highland Clearances, the American Civil War, WW1, WW2,
24:00 The in-fighting of echo chambers and the splintering of echo chambers into mini-echo chambers
25:00 Patriarchy is more likely to endure in a theocracy that promotes patriarchal moral values.
26:00 Even murderers can see the point of laws against homicide.
27:00 The New Testament is not a good enough document to base your theocracy on, but the Koran is. The Torah is far too harsh even for Jews, which is why over the centuries they have interpreted away most of it with the Talmud.
28:00 The defective scripture of Buddhism and Hindus explains why they have never achieved empire. The Chinese government is wise enough not to identify China with Buddhism because it is useless for statecraft. For statecraft, the Chinese government has always used political philosophers operating on legalism. Legalism would have a field day with Secular Koranism and I look forward to the day when I hear the Chinese government proclaiming that it is operating "Secular Koranisim with Chinese characteristics". It is envisaged that there will be many varieties of Secular Koranism eg American, French, Italian, German, Polish, Hungarian, Austrian, Russian, Irish etc and last but not least, one with British characteristics, whatever that will mean by then.
29:00 There is a natural and logical hierarchy of everything.
30:00 The impracticable ideas of the French Revolution
31:00 Egalitarianism is the greatest injustice of treating unequal things equally, but the caste system is too rigid. Secular Koranism will bring about a socially mobile meritocracy that is intended to benefit the traditionally despised lower middle classes.
32:00 A meritocracy logically and necessarily has class mobility and Secular Koranism would bring this about by giving society a formal hierarchy while allowing for class mobility. In practice, Secular Koranism would favour the lower middle classes that have been traditionally despised by those above and below them. Islamic inheritance rules and freedom of disposition
33:00 The eugenic nature of marriage and how it is the indispensable ingredient of patriarchy
34:00 I have been asking white people to take me to their leader for years but nobody can tell me who it is really because the velocity of the buck-passing is increasing ie the buck was being passed around faster and faster until it is now just a blur. Harry Truman was saying as long ago as the 1950s that the buck stops at the White House, but that didn't happen, did it? Perhaps it is time for America to have a more Chinese political system. This would stop them from being always angry and envious of the Chinese and I think this is what the Chinese are hoping the Americans will do, eventually. Presumably, this is why the Chinese are producing their helpful and tuneful propaganda videos with catchy songs sung in American accents about how China is run so much better with its much cleverer politicians because it just has a much more rational political system run by people who are not completely intellectually crippled through indoctrination by feminism and Political Correctness.
35:00 The long term national interest, national identity and how history is being taught
36:00 Female masochism
37:00 BBC Radio 4 dumbed down by feminism.
38:00 Perhaps 2020 will be the year my genius is nationally and perhaps internationally acknowledged. This is not just for my own aggrandisement and I am thinking of my dear parents. Currently, they think I am just a crank, so it would be so nice if they could feel proud of me after all they have done for me, having paid for my expensive education.
39:00 Phatic expressions of antisemitism are an emotional release for emasculated and helpless men like OV and his associates who know their matriarchy only wants them to become women and will provide them with the means to mutilate their sex organs and sterilise themselves, further morally crippling the men and making it impossible for them to even aspire to become a society of married fathers that is a patriarchy. Make no mistake: a matriarchy is in fact satanic, and, dare I say it, Amalekite. I am not saying they should be exterminated by Jews, of course. In any case, Jews are only a very small minority of humanity and lack the personnel to do so even if they wanted to.
"As of 2010, there were about 14 million Jews around the world, representing 0.2% of the global population."
The problem is that there is an Amalekite in each of us in the form of the Yetzer Hara, the evil inclination. It was Muhammad who said that the Greater Jihad is the struggle with oneself.
If Jews have a duty to the gentile, the it must be to denounce Christianity as being kaput, idolatrous and blasphemous to monotheism and to raise the status of Islam by being declared it Noahide-compliant.
My communications with a Chabad Rabbi Michael Schulman https://asknoah.org/wp-content/uploads/rebuttal-of-claims-that-secular-koranism-is-noahide-compliant.pdf have revealed that Chabadniks are not about to endorse Secular Koranism as Noahide-compliant because they are themselves pushing a Jew-administered Noahidism on ex-Christians who are presumably Islamophobic and dim-witted. Indeed, they do not regard Muslims or Islam or the Koran as being Noahide -compliant. The reason they give is that the Koran does not punish idolatry or blasphemy as harshly as Jews ie with the death penalty.
Why would any gentile subject himself to a religion run by rabbis who would execute gentiles for idolatry if they could rather than trust other gentiles to run their society properly without infringing the First Amendment as Secular Koranism is guaranteed to do? One has to wonder at the as yet unplumbed depths of human stupidity.
40:00 Why I like discussing religion with rabbis
41:00 Why is child prostitution not being run by white men but by non-white and foreign gangs?
44:00 Condoning underage sex plays into the hands of child prostitution gangs
45:00 If child prostitution gangs were run by white men, Islamophobic white men would be shrugging their shoulders.
46:00 White sex predators work alone because they lack male solidarity having never met their unmarried fathers and were "educated" in their co-ed schools by female teachers. Non-white men tend to come from married parents which means they are more likely to have the male solidarity and male co-operation necessary to share information and resources with each other to run an enterprise, criminal or otherwise.
48:00 No British philosopher will even discuss the definition of masculinity, certainly not the late of Roger Scruton who pointedly refused to discuss feminism with me. Indeed, I recently heard a rumour that he was known to be bisexual. https://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2013/03/roger-scruton-conservative-philosopher.html While my own morals have not been perfect, I have no difficulty at all discussing what the law should be as regards sexual morality and propose to treat unmarried parents as sex offenders attracting the punishment of quran.com/24/2.
50:00 I define a Christian as someone who has been confirmed. There are not that many of them.
Does this mean there is a vacancy for Claire Khaw as a Philosopher of National Conservatism?
Conservatism is really about social conservatism.
Social conservatism is about supporting marriage and family values.
Marriage and family values are the indispensable ingredient of patriarchy.
Only a patriarchy would produce enough good strong men to defend the national interest.
Nationalism is government in the national interest - the only kind of government worth having.
I am a moral and political philosopher with a blueprint for a post-liberal and post-democratic West, prepared to take on all challengers as long as they are prepared to use Truth, Logic and Morality to decide the winner of this debate.
Will my challengers be prepared to discuss the indispensable ingredients of Truth, Logic and Morality?
This is absolutely necessary if we are to go back to basics about the fundamental meaning of important words and build up again the Pyramid of Patriarchy to replace the inverted pyramid of our intersectional matriarchy which is currently spinning on its apex and about to fall on its side, as spinning tops do.
Let us at least have a contingency plan if and when the worst happens. Let us hold Secular Koranism in reserve like a life vest and a lifeboat. In the meantime, let us do the safety drill.
The atomisation and porous nature of the Matriarchy, easily infiltrated and subverted with everyone acting in their narrow and short term interests, easily bribed and threatened with the most powerful people being the young, sexy, stupid, arrogant and corrupt.
I am very disappointed that none of my questions I hoped Andy Nowicki would be asked in the chat were either asked or answered.
1) Pogroms can be avoided by good laws under good government. Perhaps you and Andy can discuss what good laws might be. The law under a patriarchy is fairer than under a matriarchy, I would suggest. Would you ask Andy what laws he would change if he could and whether he is in favour of a one party state?
2) Could you ask Andy what is the most radical change of law he would contemplate publicly advocating?
3) Would Andy agree that the West is now a matriarchy?
4) How would Andy feel about restoring the patriarchy and if he were to go about restoring the patriarchy, which laws would be the most necessary to effect this restoration?
5) How does Andy feel about slut-shaming?
6) Does Andy think there are too many female undergraduates?
7) Does Andy think SJWs are male undergraduates thirsty for sexual access to entitled middle class female undergraduates?
8) Is masculinity negatively affected by female promiscuity?
9) Has Andy warned his children about presenting him with any surprise illegitimate grandchildren?
10) Would Andy disown or disinherit his offspring if either of them presented him with surprise illegitimate grandchildren?
11) Would Andy support the abolition of no fault divorce?
12) Has Andy noticed any notable developments in the alt-right recently?
13) Would Andy agree that masculinity is a state of mind prepared to and capable of defending patriarchal moral values?
14) What does Andy consider to be masculine values?
15) Has anyone told Andy that ambiguity is a feminine trait and a feminine stratagem that I have noticed he is using?
From 1:28:00
I confront these Christian men about their failure to discuss restoring the patriarchy and am told that Andy Nowicki actually refuses to acknowledge the existence of the patriarchy.
