Because we have Holocaust Denial laws, we can deduce that the existence of the State of Israel remains controversial and that Western governments wish to censor debate on Israel. It is of course the proles whose grandfathers and great grandfathers died who are understandably asking the purpose of the two ruinous imperial world wars. Did their ancestors die for foreigners to come and take over and for the status of their male descendants to be lowered in their own country?
The point to note is that it was the Zionists who won WW2. Jews won at the expense of gentiles both Christian and Muslim. There is a reason why we shouldn't fight amongst ourselves: because others will exploit our differences to their advantage. It is not even that Jews are all that cunning as is generally supposed. Anyone could see that the argument for a Jewish homeland would be undeniable after Hitler's pogrom, after robbing Peter Arab to pay Paul Jew.
So, after 2000 years of being without a homeland, Jews got back their homeland after WW2.
Christians affirm the existence of Israel because first Britain and then America - Christian countries - wanted Israel as part of their empire.
Having Israel as part of your empire is a form of imperial prestige, like a billionaire owning a yacht or a luxury car. Before the British took over, Israel was part of the Ottoman Empire.
Obviously, having a colonial outpost surrounded by hostile neighbours is a kind of "in your face expression" of Western imperialism and military superiority which Muslims have understandably always resented.
However, instead of keeping Muslims out of the West, the West in a fit of dementia has allowed them into the West in large numbers in the greatest unforced error of all. Now, democratic politicians fear the wrath of their voters who resent sharing their resources and social services with these Muslims and who resent dying over yet more imperialistic wars against Muslims in Muslim countries.
However, since Christianity and liberal democracy are now acknowledged to have failed and a one party theocracy as its most rational replacement looms, there is now room for maneuver as regards Western foreign policy and domestic policy, since we are now living in pre-revolutionary times.
Western Man is suffering from the effects of matriarchal oppression that established itself after the Sex Revolution of the 1970s. What is being proposed is a Counter-Revolution and the rest of humanity can get back on an even keel after the West rights itself. It need not be violent or bloody and can take place soon after the US midterm elections.
"Why a one-party theocracy?" you ask. Because it is the antithesis of the status quo.
If the problem is matriarchy, then the solution must be patriarchy. If the destination is patriarchy, then the vehicle must be theocracy, because only the established laws of an eternal and supreme Abrahamic God would ensure the observance of the prohibition against extramarital sex from generation to generation.
If God exists, He would expect Israel to be a theocracy. It does not matter that merely biological Jews outnumber observant Jews, God if He exists would favour observant Jews, particularly those brave enough to speak truth to power.
The truth that must be spoken to power is that Israel of all the places in the world should be a theocracy, if Jews still believe in God. Judaism is not in any way about sexual liberation. Therefore liberal assimilated Jews who claim Judaism is in any way in harmony with feminism, gay marriage and the single motherhood which produces widespread bastardy as well as racial and national degeneracy have got it completely wrong.
If Judaism is divine ethno-nationalism, then Islam must be divine civic nationalism.
If Islam is "Judaism Lite", then Secular Koranism is "Islam Lite".
Those who want to try Nazism again a second time by proposing a pogrom to expel Jews, Muslims and non-whites from their land should note that neither Nazism nor democracy lasted for any length of time in human history compared to the established world religions.
As for what form of political system the West should adopt after deciding on its laws that support patriarchal moral values ie marriage and family values, the one party state seems the most advanced form of concentrating political talent into one party and choosing a leader. The current system of each party waiting its turn after the party in office has made enough mistakes to become repellent to voters is clearly unsustainable.
The point to note is that it was the Zionists who won WW2. Jews won at the expense of gentiles both Christian and Muslim. There is a reason why we shouldn't fight amongst ourselves: because others will exploit our differences to their advantage. It is not even that Jews are all that cunning as is generally supposed. Anyone could see that the argument for a Jewish homeland would be undeniable after Hitler's pogrom, after robbing Peter Arab to pay Paul Jew.
So, after 2000 years of being without a homeland, Jews got back their homeland after WW2.
Christians affirm the existence of Israel because first Britain and then America - Christian countries - wanted Israel as part of their empire.
Having Israel as part of your empire is a form of imperial prestige, like a billionaire owning a yacht or a luxury car. Before the British took over, Israel was part of the Ottoman Empire.
Obviously, having a colonial outpost surrounded by hostile neighbours is a kind of "in your face expression" of Western imperialism and military superiority which Muslims have understandably always resented.
However, instead of keeping Muslims out of the West, the West in a fit of dementia has allowed them into the West in large numbers in the greatest unforced error of all. Now, democratic politicians fear the wrath of their voters who resent sharing their resources and social services with these Muslims and who resent dying over yet more imperialistic wars against Muslims in Muslim countries.
However, since Christianity and liberal democracy are now acknowledged to have failed and a one party theocracy as its most rational replacement looms, there is now room for maneuver as regards Western foreign policy and domestic policy, since we are now living in pre-revolutionary times.
Western Man is suffering from the effects of matriarchal oppression that established itself after the Sex Revolution of the 1970s. What is being proposed is a Counter-Revolution and the rest of humanity can get back on an even keel after the West rights itself. It need not be violent or bloody and can take place soon after the US midterm elections.
"Why a one-party theocracy?" you ask. Because it is the antithesis of the status quo.
If the problem is matriarchy, then the solution must be patriarchy. If the destination is patriarchy, then the vehicle must be theocracy, because only the established laws of an eternal and supreme Abrahamic God would ensure the observance of the prohibition against extramarital sex from generation to generation.
If God exists, He would expect Israel to be a theocracy. It does not matter that merely biological Jews outnumber observant Jews, God if He exists would favour observant Jews, particularly those brave enough to speak truth to power.
The truth that must be spoken to power is that Israel of all the places in the world should be a theocracy, if Jews still believe in God. Judaism is not in any way about sexual liberation. Therefore liberal assimilated Jews who claim Judaism is in any way in harmony with feminism, gay marriage and the single motherhood which produces widespread bastardy as well as racial and national degeneracy have got it completely wrong.
If Judaism is divine ethno-nationalism, then Islam must be divine civic nationalism.
If Islam is "Judaism Lite", then Secular Koranism is "Islam Lite".
Those who want to try Nazism again a second time by proposing a pogrom to expel Jews, Muslims and non-whites from their land should note that neither Nazism nor democracy lasted for any length of time in human history compared to the established world religions.
As for what form of political system the West should adopt after deciding on its laws that support patriarchal moral values ie marriage and family values, the one party state seems the most advanced form of concentrating political talent into one party and choosing a leader. The current system of each party waiting its turn after the party in office has made enough mistakes to become repellent to voters is clearly unsustainable.
No comments:
Post a Comment