[Majorityrights News] KP interview with James Gilmore, former diplomat and insider from first Trump administration Posted by Guessedworker on Sunday, 05 January 2025 00:35.
[Majorityrights News] Trump will ‘arm Ukraine to the teeth’ if Putin won’t negotiate ceasefire Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 12 November 2024 16:20.
[Majorityrights News] Alex Navalny, born 4th June, 1976; died at Yamalo-Nenets penitentiary 16th February, 2024 Posted by Guessedworker on Friday, 16 February 2024 23:43.
[Majorityrights Central] A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity’s origin Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 25 July 2023 22:19.
[Majorityrights News] Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine? Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, 18 May 2023 18:55.
The European Union’s leaders really don’t want to sacrifice their mass migration agenda or their austerity agenda in order to save the union itself. They want to have their cake and eat it, and the only way they can do that is to try to convince the broad mass of the European population that the root problem is somehow actually the opposite of what it really is.
So instead, everyone will be told that somehow the reason for Brexit is because the EU itself somehow stoked ‘Islamophobic tendencies’ by implicitly approving of [those tendencies]—astonishingly—because it somehow didn’t prostrate itself to the needs and concerns of Turks as well as Arabs and North Africans quite enough for their liking, and that by not prostrating itself it somehow gave the signal that it was okay to not prostrate oneself, which somehow led to Brexit.
A senior Turkish politician has said right-wing extremism is threatening “European civilisation” and that following Brexit, the EU needs a “fresh start with a fresh vision”, which must include Turkey.
Omer Celik, Turkey’s chief negotiator in the process of the country’s proposed accession to the EU, also condemned the “anti-Turkish sentiments” expressed during the recent referendum campaign.
He was speaking at a media conference in Brussels following a meeting between EU officials and a delegation from Turkey that also included the country’s foreign, finance and justice ministers.
The substance of the meeting was the opening of the latest phase of convergence reforms, known as ‘chapters’, that a state must fulfil before accession to the EU.
So far, of the 35 chapters that must be completed and ratified, 16 have been opened but only one - on science research - has been closed.
During the media conference, the Turkish delegation exchanged polite, but pointed barbs with EU officials.
Dutch foreign minister Bert Koenders and EU commissioner Johannes Hahn both called on Turkey to address concerns over “short-comings” on human rights, the rule of law, freedom of expression and the independence of the judiciary, indicating these were major sticking points to progress.
Mr Celik responded by saying it was Europe - not just Turkey - that needed to change.
“Without sorting out its problems it cannot give hope to its members or its neighbours… it needs a fresh start with a fresh vision. Such a start will have to include Turkey,” he said.
“There are extreme right wing movements, there is anti-semitism and racism. These are the main threats against European civilisation,” Mr Celik added.
Turkey joining the EU became a major topic of debate in the UK referendum, with the Leave campaign regularly voicing their alarm about the prospect of visa-free travel for “79 million” Turkish citizens - a point dismissed by David Cameron and Remain campaigners, who insisted that Turkey was “decades” away from joining.
Mr Celik condemned the tone of the debate in the UK, saying anti-Turkish rhetoric masked deeper problems across Europe.
“The extreme right are expressing themselves with anti-Turkish sentiment but these are all products of the same mentality,” he said.
“The mainstream politics should stand up to this, not be weakened in the face of the extremist movements.
“When mainstream parties use these arguments against Turkey, they are making a mistake, they have to take responsibility, they have to stop this tendency.”
No. We won’t stop saying unkind things about Turkey. Not ever.
Posted by DanielS on Thursday, 23 June 2016 15:04.
Way down in the profound gears of ship’s engine room, we were given the shaft: YKW misdirection of “left” as our enemy as opposed to potential utility of a White Left - unionization of Whites against liberalism come by any means, Jews or otherwise.
Andrew Joyce demonstrates that as opposed to “the left”, the more descriptive and useful term for what our enemies are prescribing for us - viz. liberalism - can be used with perfect coherence. He even alludes to the profound significance of it by article’s end - likening the matter of our course as directed by Jewish interests and their liberal minions to an issue way down in the engine-room of the ship - the implicit matter of “liberalism” as the prescription of the enemy as opposed to “leftism” as our key affliction - like a gear being controlled by YKW way down there, on a level normally taken for granted, about which we normally suspend disbelief, but where a very fundamental change in bias needs to occur for the sake of our racial solidarity and defense.
We had previously observed Tobias Langdon (at TOO) making this transformation and now Joyce is doing it too - a very good move.
“The blindness of the masses, their readiness to surrender to that resounding but empty eloquence that fills the public squares, make them an easy prey. … We will have no difficulty in finding as much eloquence among our people for the expression of false sentiments as Christians find in their sincerity and enthusiasm.”
‘The Rabbi’s Speech’ Hermann Goedsche, Biarritz (1868)
I’ve never really enjoyed horror movies. I don’t mind the gore, the violence, or even the bad acting. What I can’t forgive is the mind-numbing predictability that typifies the genre. While many of its fans might preach about the fun to be had with the ‘suspension of disbelief,’ I’ve often been the annoying fellow in the movie theatre asking “Why don’t they just turn on the light/leave the house/stay out of the basement?” Being frightened or shocked requires a lowered level of anticipation, and a lowered level of anticipation requires the viewer to ignore surrounding patterns, cues and clues and, above all, to ‘suspend disbelief.’ To partake in the horror experience, we need to set aside not only our tendency to perceive an unfolding formula, but also the fact that we may have seen such a formula many times previously. And although we are aware that what we are observing is a complete fiction, we must undertake efforts on a subconscious or conscious level to convince ourselves that it is, or could be, true.
As a very rational thinker with an eye for patterns, I find it difficult to partake in the horror experience. It takes a lot to shock me and, for much the same reason, I was left largely untroubled by the recent events in Orlando and Yorkshire. I certainly didn’t feel any sense of surprise at either instance of violence. Like every horror franchise that runs for too long, acts of Muslim terror on our soil started losing their shock value around a decade ago (or at least they should have). And England has been undergoing such a level of dispossession, murder and child rape that a violent response, even from the fringes of White society, was an unfortunate inevitability. Since our movement is greatly concerned with monitoring the facts and the reality of our unfolding racial horror, we anticipated these ‘scares’ with no less certainty than we anticipated the rising of the sun. We knew the likely places from which these events would emanate, and we know that more will follow.
[...]
Barack Obama described shocked communities “grasping for answers with broken hearts.” Meanwhile, in an astonishing piece of emotional projection by liberals, NBC reported that Afghan-Americans (an absurd label) are “grappling with shock, shame and the taboo topics of homophobia and religious intolerance in their community.”
[...]
...shocked liberals of the NBC variety are comforting themselves with the delusion that Muslims are just as shocked and horrified as they are.
Self-deceiving liberals have achieved one of their greatest tricks of journalistic magic by ensuring the disappearance of religion and ethnicity from their commentary on Islamic violence.
[....]
Liberal sociologist, and self-styled expert on ‘guns and gender,’ Jennifer Carlson has written in the Washington Post that
Actor, activist and author George Takei has described the fight for gun control as “the next chapter of LGBT history.”
[...]
By offering their support for mass immigration, and thus the introduction of such a social problem into our nations, liberals have played a key role in making our societies more violent, less trusting, and economically weaker — all while under the delusion that they were making “the world” a better place.
[...]
In much the same way, our modern liberals exist in a world in which they have suspended disbelief in the ideological fantasies they have been indoctrinated with. Their ideology thus becomes immune to reality. The young creatives in our movement have actually popularized a very intelligent meme ridiculing this pernicious liberal trait: “No-one could have predicted that…” One could then complete the sentence with something like “…Black African migrants would do poorly in school and be highly prone to crime,” or “…Arab migrants would rape European women” The meme highlights that these behaviors are actually very predictable while also pouring scathing sarcasm on the real or feigned shock of liberals when such events occur.
[...]
Liberals have neglected to fully interrogate their own arguments because their entire ideology is built on the suspension of disbelief. They are capable of persisting in their delusion only because they ignore the patterns around them, sacrificing an understanding of ‘the plot’ for an emotionally exciting journey on the edge of their seats. The left-liberal existence is lived out on the ‘fun’ of pro-immigration rallies, the thrill of being morally righteous, and the equally emotionally heightened atmosphere of the candle-lit vigils that accompany the ‘shocks’ and ‘scares’ of the dreadful world they have helped to create. Much like that of a young child, theirs is an emotive world where adrenaline, novelty and stimulation are the most significant landmarks. It is a world where Antifa placards mingle with crocodile tears, in which ‘love’ can overcome physical realities and genetic limitations, in which pop concerts can reverse famines, and in which the only enemy is that amorphous but ever-present ideological bogeyman — ‘hate.’
The husband of Jo Cox has apparently urged everyone “to fight against the hate that killed her.” As far as soundbites go, few could be more attuned to the irrational spirit of modern liberalism. Liberalism, wallowing in the conceit that it is the last bastion of rationality, paradoxically imbues ‘hate’ with the same supernatural aura once reserved for poltergeists and demons. Mr Cox and his fellow liberals would do well to remember that ‘hate’ did not kill Jo Cox any more than it killed anyone at the Pulse nightclub. Men undertook these grim endeavors — human beings with social and ethnic connections and identities, grievances, agendas and interests. However, like a horror bogeyman, ‘hate’ is significantly less intellectually demanding and thus more appealing to ‘the scriptwriters’ who believe it is best not to have the audience think too much. Faced with ‘hate’ rather than three-dimensional individuals and ethnic groups, the childish liberal need not attempt to understand its history, its motivations, or even what it wants. It suffices to simply scream when it pops up.
[...]
We certainly weren’t informed by our liberal moral superiors that our failure to provide financial benefits as well as living space to these settlers would result in destruction, violence, and murder on our streets. Instead, chattering liberals claimed ‘shock’ that the new houses didn’t build themselves, that an incoherent thug represented a poor option for employment in an industrial nation, and that their beloved refugees brought with them vice, crime, disease and more than enough of their own home-grown prejudices.
Just as viewers of horror movies can be kept on the edge of their seats, so can they also be deeply misled. Although they may still be spooked along the way, viewers can possess a smug satisfaction that they have the plot figured out entirely, ignorant of the final twist that ultimately looms on the horizon. In the same way, and in marked contrast to responses to events in Orlando, liberals have adopted a smug and self-satisfied approach to the assassination of Jo Cox in Yorkshire.
[...]
I await the advent of a single piece of journalism suggesting that the violence of Thomas Mair was linked to economic deprivation, social isolation, or any other excuses that would have been tenderly laid at his feet had he possessed a little more melanin.
Posted by Kumiko Oumae on Monday, 20 June 2016 05:30.
Vote Leave on 23 June.
Summary:This interview was hosted by Henrik Palmgren at Red Ice Radio, and the roundtable discussion was about Brexit and its significance for Europe and the world.
The first hour is freely available for all to download, the second hour is available with a subscription to Red Ice Radio.
The participants on the roundtable were:
Henrik Palmgren: Henrik Palmgren was born in Götaland, Sweden, the land of the Goths. He is the founder and Editor-and-Chief of Red Ice. Henrik is best known as the host of Red Ice Radio and TV, producing most of its content. He is primarily concerned with European heritage, culture and counteracting global internationalists.
Guessedworker (GW): An English nationalist in favour of international nationalism. Having lived in 1950s era Britain, he has since seen his nation undermined by neo-liberalism and Jewish-inspired leftism. He created Majorityrights.com in 2004 as a forum to find solutions for the myriad of problems facing not only the British people, but all European peoples as well.
Kumiko Oumae: The Eurasian affairs contributor for Majorityrights.com. She believes that in order for Europe to control its own destiny – and for it to be a good trade and global development partner for Asian countries – there must be a serious dialogue on Europe’s historical role in the world and the justification of that role, as well as how the European states can resolve the crisis of legitimacy that their governments are presently facing. Kumiko also works in the security and defence sector in the United Kingdom.
Daniel Sienkiewicz: An ex-pat American of European descent, living in Europe. He has been troubled by the implications of “anti-racism” and has been testing various means to advocate for European peoples for as long as he can remember. Daniel rejects many common approaches, including all characteristically Cartesian attempts, such as scientism, as ineffective means to solve the problems that currently threaten ethnic Europeans.
We were honoured to have the opportunity to link up with Red Ice Radio in this way, they have our thanks.
We begin by discussing Brexit and its significance in the ongoing struggle between nationalism and internationalism. Kumiko argues that, in many ways, the current economic paradigm in the West isn’t quite internationalism proper, but rather the United States being allowed to dominate due to passivity on behalf of the European Union. Despite a few minor disagreements, all three guests adamantly support withdrawal from the European Union. We then discuss the original vision of the European Union – that of a unified, more prosperous Europe – and how the elites therein have sabotaged that vision by allowing in millions of non-European immigrants. Later, we talk about the unfortunate lack of patriotism within certain European countries. We conclude this episode with a discussion on the manner in which the mainstream media has used the murder of Jo Cox as an excuse to those in favor of Brexit.
UK politics - US politics - liberalism - Obama - Judaism - Christianity - Islam - Orlando - Cox - Rigby - immigration - EU - Bataclan - Brexit
We know what Merkel, her policies on immigration and Islam are worth. Obama’s support for “remain” is clear, and his immigration policies and stance regarding Islam are coherent with Merkel as well.
Inasmuch as EU membership reflects America’s propositional notion of nationhood, immigration, citizenship and Visa policy, to “remain” is either to allow yourselves as native British to be murdered or to be compelled to a suicide mission at the behest of ruthless elites who have no concern for your genetic inheritance.
US President Obama on the Jo Cox assassination: he condemns the act but not the religions and those who impose immigrants upon European peoples; nor the genocide it entails for the native British. On the contrary, he telephoned Cox’s husband to express condolences and released a statement praising her commitment and service…
For what Obama is worth: Did Obama call the family of Lee Rigby? In that event, did he so much as implicate Islam, the responsibility of migrants and those, including the other Abrahamic religions, which impose migration upon the UK?
Did Obama recognize the necessity for moratorium on immigration, repatriation, criminalization of Islam - an ememy political action group dedicated to sedition and insurrectionist overthrow of non-Muslim governments? Would his backers recognize our need to overcome liberal imposition of non-natives upon Europeans, whether upon us as native nationals or in diaspora? Would he care? Quite the opposite:
“The greatest danger of all is to allow new walls to divide us from one another. The walls between old allies on either side of the Atlantic cannot stand. The walls between the countries with the most and those with the least cannot stand. The walls between races and tribes, natives and immigrants, Christians and Muslims and Jews, cannot stand. These now are the walls we must tear down!” - Barack Obama addresses Berlin in 2008
That was to call for opening the floodgates which would genocide European peoples.
And the walls of Rotherham, the walls between adult Muslims and under aged girls in the UK?
Britain needs to Brexit, and watch out for what the YKW, their objectivist dupes and sell outs will do by means of their proxy, The US, whether with Hillary or Trump in the Presidency; they will try to have us follow the agenda for which Obama acted as just another conduit. For them we can die: through subjection to, or by fighting, the cataclysm they’ve imposed.
The Orlando massacre was just the latest incarnation of an Isis sympathizer who had a little help form his friends. ... this will be the summer of Isis. Isis has infiltrated our country and infiltrated into much of Europe. They have done this in large part through this Refugee Resettlement program that continues, in this country unabated by a President who appears, from what I can see, to be a Muslim sympathizer… who is more concerned that American citizens might upset the sensibilities of these so called moderate Muslims… I have no idea who these people are, or where they exist. Islam is Islam and in Islam they make no room at all for anybody outside of their faith. I don’t know where these moderate Muslims are that we keep hearing about. I don’t see that any have emerged to condemn these attacks; and it looks to me from my perspective that this country is sitting on a time bomb that was set in motion by our own President Barrack Obama: he has, up until this point in his Presidency issued nearly one million green cards for people from Muslim countries to come and resettle in this country. With this Refugee Resettlement program that’s happening out of Syria right now - just since the attack in Orlando - another 49 Syrians have been placed in the Orlando area.
UK politics - US politics - liberalism - Obama - Judaism - Christianity - Islam - Orlando - Cox - Rigby - immigration - EU - Bataclan - Brexit
This is not a call to passivity, but rather to make sure that we are not used by the YKW and objectivist sell-outs for the fact that we are not well sorted and coordinated - for the fact that our enemy list is not complete; and for the fact that our friend and in-group list is not sufficiently organized and coordinated.
Brexit and in-gathering of European peoples is a necessary first step to proper sorting. Clearly we have to do it for ourselves. We cannot rely on the US, a propositional nation, to facilitate our sorting requirements - even if Trump is the lesser of evils and supports Brexit, is he really capable of deviating sufficiently from Jewish interests? Let him help if he will, but don’t trust him to do it for us - certainly not when it comes to drawing the lines of us - them - friends and enemies.
Our enemies such as Schulz and Merkel obligate us to accept immigration and servitude to foreigners and to them unto our death. EP President Schulz: Germany exists only in order to ensure the existence of the Jewish people.
Our enemies, such as former French President, Sarkozy, in 2008, and Merkel in 2016, obligate the native Europeans to breed themselves out of existence with non-Whites.
While the minions of EU welcome its people’s death…
Russian President Vladimir Putin speaks with Russia’s Chief Rabbi Berel Lazar in the Jewish Museum in Moscow, Thursday, June 13, 2013. (AP Photo/Alexander Zemlianichenko)
MOSCOW – Israeli-Russian relations are reaching unprecedented heights, Russia’s chief rabbi said Tuesday, positing that the countries are rapidly improving ties because they are each “snubbed” by the international community.
“There’s never been a time when the ties were so close,” Rabbi Berel Lazar told The Times of Israel. “There’s no question that if you think back 40, 50 years — even 25 years ago when the relations started, it was still very cold. Israel was taboo. I remember those days when we dreamed of the Russian president visiting Israel; it was something nobody thought would be possible.”
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited Moscow this week for his fourth meeting with President Vladimir Putin in less than 12 months. The Israeli leader was received with many official honors, a welcome he called “exceptional.”
Lazar, who was born in Italy, received his rabbinic ordination in the US and has been serving as Russia’s chief rabbi since 2000, is scheduled to meet Netanyahu Wednesday morning together with other senior leaders of the local Jewish community.
The improving ties between Moscow and Jerusalem can, in part, be attributed to the common experience of terrorism but also to shared cultural and economic goals, Lazar said.
“It’s also because today Russia is being snubbed by others, and Israel is more or less in same situation, they found each other,” he said. “Some countries in the world like to feel they’re the policemen of the world. They’re the ones to tell Russia and Israel what they should do. I think the time has come for world leaders to sit around the table and understand we’re all equal. There shouldn’t be different standards for different countries. You can’t expect from Israel more than from any other country.”
Said to be close to Putin, Lazar — who belongs to the Chabad Lubavitch Hasidic movement — is sometimes criticized as too uncritical of the Kremlin’s policies.
While Moscow does not seek to replace the United States’ as Jerusalem’s most important ally, Netanyahu is taking a “risk” by getting closer to Putin, the chief rabbi surmised.
“Israel has a simple message: we don’t put all our eggs in one basket. We don’t rely only on America. There are a lot of other countries in the world, Russia is one of them, and we’re going to build a relationship with as many countries as possible,” he said.
“In past years, Israel was much closer to the US than to Russia, but that was when America listened to Israel more. And today when America is not listening to Israel and is not realistic about the problems Israel is facing, I think that Israel has all the right to turn to other countries, find more friends and supporters, including Russia.” he added.
“In past years, Israel was much closer to the US than to Russia, but that was when America listened to Israel more. And today when America is not listening to Israel and is not realistic about the problems Israel is facing, I think that Israel has all the right to turn to other countries, find more friends and supporters, including Russia.” he added.
Some countries will not be thrilled about Israel getting closer to Russia and therefore Netanyahu “is taking a risk by coming here” so regularly, he said, adding that he has only been in Washington once in the last year.
The last time an Israeli leader was received in the Russian capital with such honors is over a decade ago, Lazar said.
“It’s really showing the world how much Israel is viewed in a positive way in Russia today. Look at the press in Europe; look at the press in Russia. Look at anti-Semitism in Europe; look at anti-Semitism in Russia. Look at how the president [Putin] is really involved in what’s going on in the Jewish community and how in other places in the world, [the leaders] don’t care about the Jews.”
Despite his lavish praise for Putin, Lazar did not deny that Russia often votes against Israel in international forums and sells weapons to Israel’s enemies in the region.
However, he argued that Moscow considers Israel’s security as “of utmost importance.”
“After every meeting they [Putin and Netanyahu] had in the past, Prime Minister Netanyahu walks out and says, ‘I got enough assurances, I have nothing serious to worry about; we feel Russia really understands our issues and cooperates with us,’” said Lazar.
As opposed to the US and Europe, Russia has friendly relations with some Arab states and Iran, the chief rabbi said. “And sometimes because of these relations [the Russians] have leverage that other countries don’t have. They feel it’s important for them to keep a certain kind of balance.”
The implications of this should be fairly obvious to everyone, and needs no long elaboration. All of this captures the essence of what we at Majorityrights have been trying to warn the pro-Russia crowd about all along.
The Jewish lobby doesn’t place all their eggs in one basket, and Russia’s economic and military connections to the Arab world can always be used as leverage to produce outcomes that are favourable to Israel.
Posted by DanielS on Thursday, 09 June 2016 07:33.
Supreme Court until Scalia (bottom row, second from the left) died and left one vacancy. Note that there are three of (((them: Breyer, Ginsburg and Kagan))) on this court and no W.A.S.P.s.
(((Brandeis))) was (((first))) - (1916 - 1939). He met with resistance but made his way in with Jeffersonian objectivism, not actively invoking race, but focusing rather on economic injustice.
(((Benjamin Cardozo was the second on the Court (1932 - 1938)))
(((Frankfurter))) was the third on the Court (1939 - 1962))). He was interested in more active advocacy of non-Whites, but needed a shabbos goy to act as the “activist” maverick: hence he birthed the strategy and the term, “activist court,” by contrast to “restrained court.” Frankfurter would pose as “restrained;” and then incite the gentiles to “heroic activism” through an “activist” Court - spearheaded by Earl Warren, who Frankfurter called “the dumb Swede”, concerned that Warren would take the bait too eagerly and cause reaction to his headlong activist court. Earl Warren did take the bait headlong but there was no successful reaction - most of the really significant anti-White laws were passed under his activist court: 54 Brown, 64 Civil Rights, 65 Immigration, 68 Housing Act.
(((Arthur Goldberg (1962 - 1965)))
(((Abe Fortas (1965 - 1969)))
The three sitting members are:
(((Ginsburg (1993 - ))). How many Jews are enough? A tearful Bill Clinton nominated her - first Jewish woman on the Court. Her first statement was in regard to her ((Brandeis-like objectivism))) - “nobody should be discriminated against on the basis of immutable characteristics.”
(((Breyer (1994 - )))
The Supremely unqualified (((Kagan (2010 - ))) got there by way of (((nepotism))).
......
The President nominates Supreme Court candidates - when confirmed, they occupy one of the most powerful positions in the world.
Scalia’s passing has left one Supreme Court vacancy of the 9 seats. At least two other, but perhaps three more Justices, are likely to change during the next Presidential term.
These facts give the next President a great deal of influence to determine the direction of 9 of the most powerful people in the world - it can swing the court to a more thoroughly liberal direction not known since the Warren court; or it can take a more “conservative tone” - although really, The Constitution binds the court to liberalism in the form of civil individual rights as opposed to group rights. (((The media))) and neo-liberals frame the discourse of Supreme Court Justice selection as representing an important choice between liberalism and “conservatism.”
However, there are still some significant decisions even though the overall discourse is liberal.
Obama nominee, (((Merrick Garland))) - Garland’s family were persecuted for ‘no good reason’ what-so-ever, so they fled to The U.S.
At (((NPR))), (((Jeffrey Rosen))) discusses the (((first Jewish Supreme Court Justice))), (((Brandeis))), and the importance of the coming Presidential election on the make-up of the Supreme Court - as many as 4 of the 9 seats can change in the next Presidential term.
It’s impossible to underestimate the importance of this election on the Supreme Court - vote for the candidate whose vision of Constitution most coincides with your own.
There is a potential for a Court with a liberal make-up not seen since the Warren Court.
The Sermon on The Mount Ensconces The Golden Rule of Altruism
Majorityrights prefers to deal with verifiable reality as opposed to speculative theory and faith based systems of rules as we look after the interests of our people. We are looking after genetic groupings and genetic interests as key criteria, even if these are not the only important verifiable criteria to keep track of our peoplehood and that of others. Rationale and rule structures are another criteria for that purpose.
While existence is of course equiprimordial to genetic interests, to secure it for any span and legacy requires rationale and varying degrees of sophistication to negotiate complex rule structures of interaction. “Rules” (1) are the term of common currency that we will use for the logics of meaning and action that people use to negotiate interaction and these complex, protracted exchanges beyond episode, close personal relationships in yield to maturity of their full social system; and its relation to other social systems.
For those of us who are coming from this kind of perspective, where we perceive ourselves as rationally and empirically grounded, it is difficult to understand someone like pastor David Blackburn, his love of Jesus that would have him not only forgive, but want to share his love of Jesus with the men who raped and murdered his wife and unborn child; but to my knowledge, he is at least not hoping to get them released from prison.
It is even more difficult to understand European peoples allowing, even welcoming foreign incursions into The U.K., Sweden, France and Germany - it is difficult to fathom the mindset of a Merkel, who would destroy our European peoples in service to non-Europeans. But there is one rule, convoluted rule, that they have in common and makes their position intelligible to us despite their apparent irrationality.
The Golden Rule is a part of the Sermon on the Mount, which is a central text in the Christian faith. It states: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”. There are similar instructions in many other cultures.
Despite receiving high respect and wide popularity, the rule raises critical questions. What is the recommendation more exactly, and is it good advice?
This post will prepare a discussion of the work of Jan Tullberg - viz., the difference between the golden rule of benevolence as opposed to the silver rule of reciprocity - as it applies to assist in the reconstruction of a necessary consensus of moral rules among European peoples and for coordinating our relations to others.
____________
There is a consensus among advocates of European peoples that in essence we seek to secure the existence of our people. There is much dispute over how that is to be done…
The Sermon on The Mount Ensconces The Golden Rule of Altruism
