Neocons as a Figment of Imagination: Criticizing their thuggery is anti-Semitism?

Philip Giraldi

…Significant policies like those relating to war and peace, healthcare and immigration were rarely seriously challenged prior to Trump because there is a broad agreement regarding what the Establishment will allow to take place. That is how the Deep State operates.

When it comes to foreign and national security policy the neocons are most definitely an integral part of the Deep State, using money and access to politicians to influence what is taking place without anyone seriously challenging their role. They are an essential cog in a system that is completely corrupt: it exists to sell out the public interest, and includes both major political parties as well as government officials. (Source)

IMO, Giraldi is right. Well-worth reading. ABN

Christian universal love is a dubious concept

As practiced today by many, I don’t think it works.

An example I know in detail is the story of a woman whose second husband was a closet alcoholic. After she discovered his problem and divorced him for other reasons, which were profoundly complicated by the booze, she continued to believe that he just needed more Christian love. Long story short, eventually she came to understand that you cannot love someone away from alcoholism. That tactic only enables them in too many cases.

A second example appears in the video below, Wilders’ opponent uses many abstractions, including Christian love, to defend his position. His defense reminds me of the woman in the story above. It is an a priori defense, an application of a rule that obviously cannot be right every time.

Why is wisdom thought to run counter to universal love in Christianity? Why can’t loving your neighbor be tempered with a wise understanding of your neighbor?

Here is the vid, which is interesting in and of itself.

By the way, I favor love and kindness as much as reasonably possible. I also favor erring on the side of mercy and kindness as much as reasonably possible. But there is a line there that I believe it is stupid to cross.

Most of the arguments about immigration in the US and Europe today are arguments about degree. Often those arguments get mixed in with “universals” like constitutional law, Christian love, fairness, rights, and so on.

Reasonable minds may differ, but all factors need to be considered, including the factors of the traditional culture of the region and the needs and desires of the citizens who are of that traditional culture.

In my view, some new people is good. Too many new people is not good.

______________

Edit 3/18/17: I am a distant foreign observer, but my guess is Wilders lost at least partly because he says things about Islam that there is no need to say. A simple cultural-demographic argument is all that is needed.

Excellent short video on “the narrative” used by the left

The short video below provides an excellent overview of where “the narrative” comes from and how it relates to PC culture and the behavior of the left today.

If you are not fully aware of “cultural Marxism,” where it comes from, and how it has shaped American (and European) society for many decades, this video is a very good place to begin.

If this video piques your interest, I highly recommend The Culture of Critique, which delves more deeply into this subject. The Kindle version of this book is available for free today, so download now to read later. In my opinion, it is not possible to understand modern American and European history without reading this book.

Most Europeans want immigration ban from Muslim-majority countries, poll reveals

A majority of Europeans want a ban on immigration from Muslim-majority countries, a poll has revealed. 

An average of 55 per cent of people across the 10 European countries surveyed wanted to stop all future immigration from mainly Muslim countries. (Source)

God Exists, the Rest Is Speculation

Kevin Barrett

David Ray Griffin is one of the world’s most important thinkers. I first encountered his work in the mid-1990s while preparing a Ph.D. on Moroccan Sufi legends. It quickly dawned on me that Griffin’s analysis of postmodernism was more sensible than most of the trendier literature on the subject, while his work on such empirical topics as the scientific evidence for psi showed him to be an uncommonly flexible yet rigorous thinker who followed logic and evidence wherever it led. So while most contemporary Christian theologians were not terribly relevant to my Islamic Studies related Ph.D., Griffin and his mentor, John Cobb, the two biggest names in Process Theology, could not be ignored. (Source)

Zionist Extremism as Outcome of the Internal Dynamics of Judaism, Part 1 of 5

Kevin MacDonald

…The overall argument here is that Zionism is an example of the trajectory of Jewish radicalism. The radical movement begins among the more committed segments of the Jewish community, then spreads and eventually becomes mainstream within the Jewish community; then the most extreme continue to push the envelope (e.g., the settlement movement on the West Bank), and other Jews eventually follow because the more extreme positions come to define the essence of Jewish identity. An important part of the dynamic is that Jewish radicalism tends to result in conflicts with non-Jews, with the result that Jews feel threatened, become more group-oriented, and close ranks against the enemy—an enemy seen as irrationally and incomprehensibly anti-Jewish. Jews who fail to go along with what is now a mainstream position are pushed out of the community, labeled “self-hating Jews” or worse, and relegated to impotence. (Source)

US religious freedom law protects atheists and non-theistic beliefs

This is a good thing. Many consider Buddhism a non-theistic belief system.

Besides this law’s (probably insignificant) effect on Buddhism, which is generally considered a religion, it’s good because belief systems professed or adhered to by individuals should all be protected by the first amendment.

This law will also affect US policy toward nations that have regulations requiring citizens to belong to state approved religions.