MERKEL: Wait, you won’t spend 20B on the Catholic countries, but you’ll spend it importing people who aren’t Christian?
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-25 14:14:00 UTC
Source: Facebook
-
TOM HOLLAND ON THE HISTORICAL ORIGIN OF THE KORAN
TOM HOLLAND ON THE HISTORICAL ORIGIN OF THE KORAN
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwo5xpO390k
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-25 14:00:00 UTC
-
CAN WE SUPPRESS FALSEHOODS IN RELIGION? It may be true that our women and our un
CAN WE SUPPRESS FALSEHOODS IN RELIGION?
It may be true that our women and our underclasses do not like aristocracy unless it is visible to them that their kin-aristocracy carries them better than the alternatives.
Our women and our underclasses cannot really be seduced by hinduism without vast importing of their numbers.
Our women and our underclasses have little reason and little interest be seduction of confucianism or the rituals of japan – although it would be good if they did. It’s not seductive. It’s merely true. But it is rational and political, leaving open sinic society’s underclasses and women for the personal comforts of buddhism.
Our women and our underclasses can be seduced by Buddhism without much harm as long our aristocracy is not. Buddhism is androgynous in its emphasis on the self, and abandonment of the political.
Our women and our underclasses however have profound reason to be seduced by Abrahamism: the feminine surrender to un-reason in jewish, christian, islamic, marxist, and postmodern versions.
Why? Because unlike judaism, christianity, and islam, (anglo) egalitarian liberalism, (jewish) marxism, and (french) postmodernism, all tell comforting lies that have adapted to modernity by wishful thinking and pseudoscience, the same way that judaism, christianity, and islam, adapted to the ancient empires by wishful thinking using pseudo-reason of literary mysticism.
So the question is, if we can prevent fraud in goods, service, and court, then why not in the commons?
There is no reason, except for the same anger of criminals who we suppressed fraud in goods, services, and court. And the same criminals we suppressed in the church with their lies. And the same criminals we suppressed in our governments because of their lies – particularly ‘divine right’.
No more lies.
It’s not complicated.
No lies. No excuses. The commons must be protected.
Those that cannot tolerate full reciprocity must be denied full liberty.
Sovereignty, Liberty, Freedom, Serfdom, Slavery, and the caging or killing of beasts.
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-25 13:54:00 UTC
-
Untitled
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-25 13:19:00 UTC
-
YES, I AM CREATING DECIDABILITY USUALLY LIMITED TO QUANTITATIVE, FOR THAT WHICH
YES, I AM CREATING DECIDABILITY USUALLY LIMITED TO QUANTITATIVE, FOR THAT WHICH WE CONSIDER QUALITATIVE.
—“My impression of Curts work is that is precisely what he’s trying to do – develop a means of quantifying data that has been traditionally regarded as qualitative so that it can be evaluated more objectively and applied as absolute law.
Am I incorrect?” — John Derbyshire
Technically, I’m making it *decidable* by binary where necessary, qualitative where possible, and quantitative where possible. So the term you’re looking for is ‘decidable’. It’s just conventional that we use the word ‘quantifiable’ because so much of science has been dependent upon scale measurement.
But yes, you are correct John.
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-25 13:05:00 UTC
-
DERBYSHIRE ON QUALIFICATION (COMPARABILITY) —“When attempting to quantify huma
DERBYSHIRE ON QUALIFICATION (COMPARABILITY)
—“When attempting to quantify human activities for evaluation on a larger scale, there’s a certain fullness of the experience that will be lost..(the immaterial emotional bonds involved in a relationship, for instance). That doesn’t mean that the party engaging in the quantification doesn’t acknowledge the discarded aspects, but rather that they aren’t necessary to forming a model of the general experience to be applied on scales larger than the individual level. The emotional aspect is present in most relationships, but it is subjective in that no two pairings can share exactly identical immaterial bonds, though there are material (measurable) bonds that exist which can be evaluated more objectively.”—John Derbyshire
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-25 12:55:00 UTC
-
Put it this way. if islam doesn’t reform, it is just a confirmation that religio
Put it this way. if islam doesn’t reform, it is just a confirmation that religion is done for all but those people unfit to survive into the future.
Yes. that’s harsh. That’s true. That is what it is.
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-25 12:47:00 UTC
-
ISLAM = DYSGENIA. THATS THE HONEST ARGUMENT. We are allowing our elites to creat
ISLAM = DYSGENIA. THATS THE HONEST ARGUMENT.
We are allowing our elites to create the argument that islam is an arbitrary personal choice rather than the import of underclasses we have struggled to eliminate, and the success of which has made our achievements possible.
Require IQ 125+ for immigration. Period.
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-25 12:40:00 UTC
-
THE VARIOUS CIVILIZATIONAL STRATEGIES I mean, we have only so many basic strateg
THE VARIOUS CIVILIZATIONAL STRATEGIES
I mean, we have only so many basic strategies in our world wisdom literatures(philosophies).
1 – Western corporate militia, meritocracy, and truth (and expansionism)
2 – Eastern extended familialism, hierarchy, and balance (non-conflict). (not expansionism but defensive)
3 – Hindu castes, non aggression, and ‘escapism’. (non expansionary)
4 – Buddhist equalitarian abandonment of reality.(non expansionary)
5 – Semitic (underclass) tribal preservation, resistance, and deception. (Jihadic expansionism)
6 – Gypsy ( underclass ) tribal preservation and parasitism.
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-25 12:28:00 UTC
-
MODESTY AS MEANS OF ADMITTING CULTURAL FAILURE Islam, christianity, and judaism
MODESTY AS MEANS OF ADMITTING CULTURAL FAILURE
Islam, christianity, and judaism requires different degrees of modesty. Aristocracy requires display, just non imposition.
in other words, they could not solve the problem of non imposition, so they denied people expression.
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-25 12:15:00 UTC