[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.
An internal intelligence report from the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) in state of Bavaria has warned of the growing security threat posed by Muslim Brotherhood.
The report states that Muslim Brotherhood in Germany seeks to establish a comprehensive system of government which does not guarantee the sovereignty of the people, the principles of freedom, or equality.
Transforming German society
In its report, the BfV added that “the Brotherhood’s primary goal is to form a system of government and many of the Muslim Brotherhood’s principles are hostile to the German Constitution, especially the principles of democracy, the rule of law and a political system based on human dignity.”
The report emphasizes that the essence of the Brotherhood’s anti-constitution principles and goals are stipulated in the “general system of the Muslim Brotherhood,” the general rules of the Muslim Brotherhood which were put forward by first generation of the founding fathers and Hassan al-Banna (the founder of the group in Egypt in the 1920s).
The report also notes that “the Islamic Community Organization is the basic organizational structure of the Muslim Brotherhood in Germany, and this organization is a member of the Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe, which is the mother organization of the Muslim Brotherhood in Europe, and is based in Brussels.”
Organizations affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood are dangerous
The intelligence report warns of another umbrella organization in Europe, the European council for fatwa and research, which was established in 1997 in Dublin, Ireland, and aims to control the fatwa for Muslims residing in Europe. Yusuf al-Qaradawi is considered the spiritual leader of the group.
Plans for a new Baltic–Black Sea waterway, passing through Ukraine, Belarus and Poland, have the potential to revolutionize the geopolitics of Europe’s East as well as exacerbate East-West tensions (see EDM, February 18). The European Union has labeled the project “E40,” and the United States has signaled its support. And were the E40 waterway to be incorporated within the broader regional framework of the Three Seas Initiative (3SI), the transit project would not only help the economies of all three participating countries and their neighbors but also promote trilateral cooperation on other issues, including security, and make each one of them more attractive partners for the West. This development would thus transform the frequently dismissed “countries in between” Russia and Western Europe—the geopolitical equivalent of “flyover states”—into a unified, collective player in its own right. Not surprisingly, such prospects are gaining support in the US and part of the EU but generating ever more opposition in Moscow. Russia rightfully views E40 as a threat to its influence in the region and even, according to some analysts, as an existential threat to Russia itself. Nonetheless, Moscow faces increasing difficulty in blocking the project by using the means it has employed in the past (Ura.news, Sept 14, 2019; Deutsche Welle—Russian service, Sept 14, 2019).
For a century, Moscow has been leery of any efforts to promote East European unity, viewing them as an attempt to erect a cordon sanitaire against it and as a Polish plot against Russia. Indeed, Poland took the lead in such projects in the 1920s and 1930s with its Promethean League and regional confederal arrangements (Marek Chodakiewicz, Intermarium: The Land Between the Black and Baltic Seas, 2012). After World War II, however, the idea faded due to Soviet occupation and the division of Europe, which prompted all involved to think only in East-West terms rather than in the potential for North-South cooperation. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the notion again became realistic but gained relatively little traction at first because Central and Eastern Europeans saw their salvation in joining the West. In addition, many Westerners drew a new line between the former Eastern Bloc countries (including the three Baltic States and the former Yugoslavia) and the new republics that emerged from the disintegration of the Soviet Empire. Few in the West gave much consideration to the notion of there existing a larger region straddling both sides of this new dividing line.
Hence their program to characterize (stereotype) and vilify “The left”, misdefined as necessarily being in international Marxist, anti-ethnonational or Cultural Marxist, anti White terms.
Disclaimer: This post is on sensitive topics of sex and power. I try to make it clear when I make a claim; beware drawing indirect inferences; I rarely value signal.
As promised in my last post, I now return after a civility pause to the topic of comparing sex and income inequality and redistribution. This post will be unusually long, as I’m trying harder to speak carefully.
If a feature of individuals can be compared across individuals, and ranked, then we can say that some people have more of it than others. We can then talk about how equally or unequally this feature is distributed across a population. Some features are seen as good things, where most people like to have more of it, all else equal. And the values that people place on some good things exhibit diminishing marginal utility (DMU). That is, people put a higher value on getting a bit more of it when they don’t have much, relative to when they have more.
For good things, we usually seek policies (including informal social norms and formal programs by government, charities, and other organizations) that can raise its distribution, all else equal, and get more of it to more people. And for good things with DMU, unequal distributions are regrettable, all else equal, as any one unit is worth more to those who have less. Any policy that changes a distribution is by definition said to “redistribute” that thing. (If you doubt me, consult a dictionary.) A policy that reduces inequality more might be said to do “more” redistribution.
Eddie Murphy has how many children with how many different women?
Of course all else is usually not equal. People vary in their ability to produce things, in the value they place on things, and in how much those people are valued by their society. Both the things that people value, and the arrangements that produce them, tend to be complex, multi-dimensional, and context-dependent. “Income” and “sex” are both labels that point to such complex, multi-dimensional and context-dependent good things. Both are usually produced via unique pairings, sex between a man and a woman, and income between an employer and an employee. The value of these pairings vary greatly across possible pairings, and also with a lot of other context.
Welfare not only provides money, but frees up the precious resource of time, for people like Desmond Hatchet to have 30 children with 11 different women.
For income, centuries of effort has resulted in several simple accounting methods by which we can define each person’s “income”, though we know that these measures miss a lot of what we care about. For example, regions vary in living expenses, people vary in their health-induced medical expenses, some jobs are easier and more enjoyable than others, some people have more expensive tastes than others, some assets are illiquid and unique, and there’s a key difference between what people own and what they consume. All these issues make it hard to say exactly who has more “income”.
This complexity makes it harder to analyze policies that influence income. Even so, when arguing about policy, people often mention income redistribution advantages or disadvantages of policies, such as regarding taxes, schools, medicine, housing, immigration, and much more. (Such policies usually let either side veto each particular employee-employer pairing.) Reducing income inequality is widely seen as a legitimate policy goal, even if people don’t agree on its priority relative to other goals. Income, and our related informal norms and formal policies, have changed greatly over the last few centuries, though less so over the last half century.
On sex, we might in principle compare individual counts of simple sex acts to get a rough indication of sex inequality, though we know that such a measure would miss a lot that matters. But even though sex is complex, hard to specify, and varied, it is also clearly important to many (both male and female). As is income. People often explicitly mention effects on sex when arguing for and against policies in many areas, such as marriage, prostitution, dating, birth control, nudity, pornography, drugs, child care, housing, and recreation. In the last half century, we’ve seen big changes in both informal norms and formal policies related to sex. People seem to be more sensitive today on the topic of policies related to sex, relative to those related to income, perhaps in part due to recent changes being bigger.
In my April 26 post, I noted that recently some people (self-labelled “incels”) have explicitly and publicly sought less sex inequality, a few via violence, and I wondered why they are so few relative to, and overlap so little with, those seeking less income inequality. I mentioned a few specific possible policies, such as cash transfers conditional on individual sex rates, legalized prostitution, and stronger support for monogamy and marriage. (I did not support or oppose any specific policies.)
But these were just examples; the fact that sex is so complex and integrated into so many social practices implies that a great many policy levers must exist. Who has how much sex with who is influenced by what we count as status and beauty, where people live, where and how they meet, how they talk to each other, what they can learn about each other, and especially by where and when they can talk and meet privately.
I’m far from the first person to consider such policies. Historically, societies have passed laws to discourage premarital and extramarital sex, and to limit how many wives or concubines each man could have. Informal gossip and propaganda has tried to lower the sex appeal of rakes, foreigners, and the promiscuous, and to raise that of soldiers. Policies have limited where and when people might meet in privately, such as segregating student dorms by gender, and prohibiting unmarried couples from renting hotel rooms.
Joel Davis, Richard Spencer et al. in a recent podcast (not the podcasts referenced in this article).
Or would they prefer to take it up the ass?
We have long followed the Jewish op called “the Alt-Right”, a stewarding of Whites reacting to Political Correctness and its hyperbolic activist groups and coalitions deemed “social justice warriors.” Though these “social justice warriors”, themselves, were an anti White orchestration by Jewish academia, that is a fact glossed-over in this stewarding of Whites by contrast, broadly conducted along the crypo kosher devised platform of paleoconservativsm, but spearheaded pointedly by Paul Gottfried; who saw the need circa 2008, to head off the intersectionality of a necessarily growing consciousness that Jews were not exactly a downtrodden group, but to the contrary, occupying elite niches in society, often unjustly and wielding that power unjustly. Hence the need, from a Jewish perspective, to divert that nascent awareness, the logical counter of White unionization (a leftist thing) and coalition building; and to promote instead a characterology of “The Left” as the enemy, “Social Justice Warriors” its deluded minions. ... we don’t want any of that social justice now that Jews are on top (in more hegemony than ever) ...along with any scummy Whites who are willing to sell out to Jewish interests, now do we?
No, this un-kosher intersectionality could be headed off by moving Whites from false Jewish opposition number one - NeoConservatism - and reviving false Jewish opposition number two - Paleoconserativism - updated 2.0, to appeal to a younger (and naive) audience to include a broader variety of reactionaries, not trying to fit all right wing reactionaries under one tent, but rather create a tentosphere, a loose coalition divide and conquer juggling act that could allow for Christians, Jewish right wingers, neo-Nazis and the scientistic generally, along with nutty conspiracy theorists. Membership seemed to require at least one socially stigmatizing attachment - then you could be a minor e-celebrity, arguing against “the left” and “social justice warriors”, equipped directly by Madison Ave marketing firms with memes and narratives to absolve you (and YKW) from responsibility and accountability, narratives provided for the “Alt-Right”, of pure scientific objectivity, facts of nature as the sole reason that you are on top and the sheer natural injustice of the world, the reason that you are not accountable, “the reason that things are not equal, like THE left character always unnaturally insists upon.”
Richard Spencer is apparently happy to go along with the Jewish misdirection to promote the “SJW’s are the problem” meme ...take the bribe and pay off of this Jewish, Madison Ave marketing campaign, where it originated, focusing on the vastly distorted, hyperbolic anti White “social justice warrior”, really a Jewish academic creation, and talk about it instead, as if it is an organic phenomenon stemming from religious origin, ether, in order to divert Whites from organizing themselves and pursuing their social justice; which would bring into full view Jewish elite niches, their injustice along with right wing/liberal sell outs - seeing them clearly as out-groups:
Is it really necessary, Richard, to go along with memes convenient to (((them))), a meme like this having obviousy been put out by (((their))) Madison Ave. marketing machine? Sure, let’s be against Social Justice now that (((they))) are unjustly on top of everything and right wing sell outs like you, Richard, are perfectly willing to sell out ethnonationalism; contributing to the marketing of this meme, taking (((their))) hyperbolic, anti-White coalitions as being The thing that social justice is about, whereas “reality” and White advocacy can supposedly have no part in social justice. But then, I guess it is convenient to a blue blood like yourself, one with no character. Typical right wing, anti-social bullshit, treacherous, sell out.
And about philosophy student, Joel Davis, with whom you do philosophical hangouts now…
He is the one who necessitated a rebut from me for his conversation with Josh Neal. I believe the discussion between Josh Neal and Joel Davis is off line (I’ll try to find it), but Joel Davis was saying unequivocally that “Israel is our friend.” ...not that it is some kind of supremacist cluster fuck trying to extend its reach over the whole world as “the shining beacon” to the “down trodden masses” - downtrodden because the tribe blends us down and grinds us down.
Joel Davis, who for some interesting reason keeps speaking of Mencius Moldbug (((Curtis Yarvin))) as if he someone authoritative to refer-to, to look up to, when in fact, Yarvin is clearly operating in Jewish interests, misdirecting Whites with his Ops, “Dark Enlightenment” and into “Neo Reaction” etc., ops focusing on co-opting STEM types especially, those who tend to be naive about the machinations as opposed to proper uses of social sciences and the humanities.
Here is Joel Davis in the chat of a Paul Gottfried stream, apparently very interested in getting in with Gottfried:
First, I will give you the excerpts of Joel, followed by the whole chat:
joeldavis
Cotto, where do you think institutional support could possibly come from for a legitimate paradigm shift to occur away from the Neoliberal/Neocon binary?
Right Ruminations
My point is that you can’t understand to how Catholics deal with this history until you understand the particulars of Catholics doctrine. A term applied to Mary may be historical but that “Star of the Sea” is not doctrine.
Ohm 7
Is Christianity invented by Jewish Elites of Old Time or a development of Old European Religion?
orabell
invention of Paul
joeldavis
According to this analysis, wouldn’t that render Protestantism to be a ‘de-paganization’ of Christianity?
Ultra Testosterone
Protestant is closer but it still depends on gospels
orabell
yes.. it moved them farther away from their pre-Abrahamist , pagan, roots..
joeldavis
Cotto, do you believe Christianity will remain culturally dominant for the forseeable or have we passed the point of no return?
joeldavis
The dissident right’s inability to find coherence seems to be a consequence of a lack of religious convergence as much as anything.
joeldavis
Good call Imperius, as long as we remain alienated (post)protestants we lack the ability to build coherent moral language.
Oswald Spengler
@joeldavis hey joel loved your chat with keith woods
Ultra Testosterone
Cotto should do stream labs so he gets more of the money
Oswald Spengler
also john david ebert
joeldavis
@Oswald Spengler thanks man, would love to get on this program or have these guys on my channel sometime as well.
Oswald Spengler
that’d be great
joeldavis I tried emailing Gottfried recently, but no response this far, i’ll keep trying.
Ultra Testosterone
Gottfried is a good guy but he didn’t get some of top tier scholarship jokes
Ultra Testosterone
Cotto is more aware of the jokes
Brando Calrissian
The demographics look pretty good for non-mainline-Protestant churches. Kaufmann’s book, Shall the Religious Inherit the Earth, and the religious anthropology/population studies work of Ed Dutton
Ultra Testosterone
Different generation
Brando Calrissian
suggest that religions with high TFR and high retention will outbreed moderate religions and nones even in the developed west.
joeldavis i’d love to get their thoughts on building institutional support for the cutting edge ideas spinning out of the dissident right particularly.
Oswald Spengler
@joeldavis you should hook up with justin murphy too
joeldavis
@Oswald Spengler i’ve been on his channel already once before, i’ve been trying to organize an interview with him on my channel recently, hopefully we can organize that soon.
Oswald Spengler
@joeldavis sent you an invite on FB, i’m “joseph ducreux”
Luke Avedon
@Cotto-Gottfried When is @Right Ruminations coming on by the way?
Right Ruminations
@Luke Avedon I am well. A sub of mind just made a new channel - Terminal Philosophy - and had me as his first guest. I think he his channel has promise for the Rumisphere as it were.
Schizo Ric AKA Quantrell Bishop
@joeldavis is the MAN!
Oswald Spengler
@Cotto-Gottfried would it be a good thing for economics as a field to be destroyed by intersectionality?
Schizo Ric AKA Quantrell Bishop
@Cotto-Gottfried get @joeldavis on your channel for an interview
joeldavis
Cheers Schizo, i’d love to.
Curious Cretin
Are Mormons pagan?
Oswald Spengler
lol^
joeldavis
“i’ve never been called a nerd before”
joeldavis
high-T
joeldavis
response
Oswald Spengler
cotto is 6 6
Ultra Testosterone
lol
Ultra Testosterone
Truth
Oswald Spengler
@Cotto-Gottfried thoughts on the now-not-so-new atheists?
Imperius
There’s way more money we can give. I’ve been hard at work setting the infrastructure. Just let me know the channel where you will get more of it, like PayPal.
joeldavis
Cheers Cotto, i’ll try the outlook address.
Luke Avedon
@Cotto-Gottfried Nice! I will check it out.
Ohm 7
Yo I went to take a bath and missed the answer about if Christianity has descended from Jewish Elites of the Hellenic Times or from the Old European Religion?
Imperius
We’re moving into phase two the end of this year, which is why I tried seeking out Gottfried and found that there was even this Cotto guy, lol. Solid guy.
Luke Avedon
@Right Ruminations I like that he has a Blade Runner avatar. My favorite film of all time.
Ultra Testosterone
Trump 2020
Imperius
So many factions aren’t talking to each other as much as they should. It’s left to younger guys to have less hesitation.
Ohm 7
Cotto, I’d highly recommend having Keith Woods on, he’s one of the most interesting Leftists on the internet right now I think, he’s an Irish Nationalist
Imperius
Keith Woods isn’t a leftist.
Imperius
He’s a folk nativist. Most of intellectual history, leftism has been anti-nativist.
Imperius
Yeah, there’s cross-over, but don’t simply call him a leftist.
Right Ruminations
@Luke Avedon I like that he had set a specific atmosphere from the outset. I am afraid that the atmosphere of my channel had been too haphazard.
Finally, Joel Davis shows how he wants to co-opt the ultimate move of left nationalism, which by his idea would include Jews:
joeldavis
Misconceiving a Nationalist as a Leftist is a symptom of the post-Cold War propaganda hangover. The Right should be unapologetic about subordinating Capital to the National interest.
However, Gottfried man Right Ruminations pushes back, not wanting to share the wealth, of course ..
Right Ruminations
@joeldavis The neoliberals support both globalism and heavy intervention in the market. I don’t agree with the implication that nationalism and economic individualism are mutually exclusive
.jpg?r=1586936888)
Clinton sell-out, Maxwell’s Judeo-supremacism and the hoarding of sexual resource.
Joel Davis, Richard Spencer et al. in a recent podcast (not the podcasts referenced in this article).
Eddie Murphy has how many children with how many different women?
Welfare not only provides money, but frees up the precious resource of time, for people like