Degentrification

Degentrification is ethnic cleansing of whites.

The politically correct account of the inner cities is that white people made them into shitholes in order to hurt black people.

But, if you look at the ruins, there are a bunch of really nice buildings which were obviously once inhabited by the better sort of people, middle class whites, upper class whites.

What happened of course, is that in the 1950s and 1960s, the Warren Court period, whites were dispossessed, ethnically cleansed out of the inner cities, by black racial violence, violence supported by the state, in that whites were denied the right of collective self defense. A few Jewish communities remained, because Jews, in an unprincipled exception, were allowed collective self defense.

After the sixties, the left backed away from ethnically cleansing whites, and we got gentrification. But, after gays and trannies, what is the next big cause? They are casting around for something, and one of the things they are trying on is renewed ethnic cleansing, where once again black people take stuff that whites built away from whites. Hence Baltimore and this poolside party.

The current state of Detroit, and what is happening to Johannesburg, tells us that were it not for whites, blacks would be living in the jungle, carrying pointy sticks, and eating each other. Blacks can be civilized, but only if subject to firm, and substantially white, authority. America lacks the hard hand necessary to keep black people from reverting to their natural condition.

With America close to a nonwhite majority, and single women, as always, voting for the victors, there is no natural stopping point for the latest round of ethnic cleansing short of complete removal of whites from everything they have built that is worth having.

Resistance to this process is fundamentally incompatible with democracy with universal franchise. If it does not happen in this coming round of movement ever leftwards, will happen in the next or the one after that. If you oppose this outcome, you have to reject democracy with universal franchise. If you reject democracy with universal franchise, have to deny that all men were created, and that women are equal to men. The eradication of white people was inherent in the enlightenment, and our continued existence has only been possible by one unprincipled exception to the enlightenment after another. In the end, unprincipled exceptions always yield to superior holiness.

Tags:

115 Responses to “Degentrification”

  1. Dr. Faust says:

    I dig Jesus.

  2. peppermint says:

    see also http://www.dailystormer.com/all-female-ranger-candidates-fail-calls-to-change-standard/

    well anyway. Our parents and grandparents had the responsibility to raise us as well as they could while mouthing platitudes about how much they hate themselves and us. For those of us who made it here, it appears that they did their job.

    It’s not the sins of the fathers that are visited on the sons by an angry G-d, but the mistakes of the fathers that are passed on to the sons. The Church and the English nobility were infiltrated by Judenpest and had to be discarded, one thing led to another, and, well, now we have a different responsibility: we must take back what is ours, or be destroyed.

    • jim says:

      You cannot blame the Jews for all the crap that happened before the mid twentieth century.

      Lord Howe was not a Jew.

      • Dr. Faust says:

        Oh I bet he can. Where there’s a will there’s a way.

      • B says:

        But Jesus was, as were the apostles. Check and mate!

        Like the Russian song goes, “we hate the Jews because one of them tried to kill Lenin/and also because she missed”.

        • Alan J. Perrick says:

          “But Jesus was [a Talmudic Jew], as were the apostles. Check and mate!”

          Troll comment noted and discarded…

          • B says:

            Of course he was a Talmudic Jew, you idiot. When the Rabbis rebuked his disciples for picking grain on Shabbat, his answer was that they were picking it to eat immediately, and thus exempt. This is a Talmudic distinction.

      • Thrasymachus says:

        People from Protestant backgrounds have a hard time seeing the progressive political implications of Protestant theology. They have a hard time seeing Protestant social movements as other than originally billed, so we get “we have to get back to the Constitution” for mainstream politics and “it’s all the Jews” for fringe politics.

        • Mark Citadel says:

          Protestantism’s main problem is it denies any political authority or hierarchy to the priestly caste. One can say the same thing about Sunni Islam vis-a-vis Shi’ite Islam, the former being much less hierarchical. Anybody can declare themselves a Sunni imam. However, in Islam it is actually the Shi’ites who have become more Modern than the Sunnis, largely owing to a focus on consensus among Sunnis which retards reforms. The Shiite clerics for example have given the green light to embryo donation.

          One needs to have a priestly caste, that is certain, but how one prevents a situation where they try to force their own progressive reforms, seems to be rooted in having another power in the mix, dare I say a monarch interested in the status quo?

          • Alan J. Perrick says:

            Protestantism’s main problem is that, in many places such as the Americas, it is the white man’s religion. Therefore, Protestant Christianity is under attack from anti-whites, which are a very powerful group in the year 2015. “Mark Citadel”, you are justifying genocide.

            A.J.P.

          • Mark Citadel says:

            AJP – Please explain where here I justify genocide? This seems totally unrelated. And I have never and will never advocate genocide, sterilization, or anything of the sort.

            The most extremist position I have on foreigners is that they be returned to their ethnic homelands.

      • peppermint says:

        (1) northern europeans don’t go by kinship as much, but form social ties based on other bonding criteria including social signaling.

        (2) how do we tell where white weakness ends and jew corruption begins?

        Spain tried to expel the Jews. Instead, they had the Jews running the Inquisition, whose goal was to police the crypto-jews. Jews were buying their way into the English aristocracy, and so Jefferson complained that the official aristocracy was not the same as the natural aristocracy, and tried to build a university system to as Carlyle said “let England breathe”.

        Might it have worked? Did Lothrop Stoddard’s effeminacy go before Boas’ subversion and Margaret Mead’s whoring?

        The corruption of the West took a long time, and if it was all Jews we would expect the termites to spend centuries eating away at the foundations until we end up with a traitor general. But there’s also factors like the need for men of leisure to engage in social signaling, and the particular need of northern europeans to.

        Churchill wasn’t a Jew, but he was paid for by Jews.

        • jim says:

          (2) how do we tell where white weakness ends and jew corruption begins?

          I see the causation the other way around. I keep telling B that his religion is being swallowed and digested by progressivism, and he does not believe me. We, or rather our puritan descended progressive elites, are corrupting them.

          • Jefferson says:

            I agree whole heartedly, at least wrt American Jewry. We moved from a “conservative” shul to an orthodox one because the conservatives replaced torah with progressivism, but probably 1/4 of our orthodox congregation are prog. We desperately need a king who can exorcize prog thought wherever it creeps up.

          • Sam says:

            “…We, or rather our puritan descended progressive elites, are corrupting them…”

            Incorrect. The Jews as a group always take corruption, on what ever form it is in any society, and amplify it. To say there’s a certain corruption in a society and Jews are not responsible for this corruption is a subtle lie. Yes there are corruptions in ANY society. The sin of the Jew is to enforce and amplify that corruption so that a small problem becomes a large one.

            Jews are at war with any society they are are part of. The reason is they are a tribe of psychopaths. Not all and not even the majority but lots. You may say I’m wrong but if you assume the Jews are a tribe of psychopaths their motivations become transparent and they make sense. All the other explanations the Jews provide are just more mind jedi confusination. All designed to confuse not enlighten.

            What kind of people every where they go change their names and take each and every side of every issue? Thereby corrupting each and every viewpoint. What kind of people are homosexual pedophiles who run Nazi parties and are Jewish? I’ll tell you. Psychopaths. A good guide showing this kind of behavior is a chapter from the book “The Mask of Sanity” on psychopaths. It’s a short chapter on Stanley and his bizarre behavior.

            http://www.energyenhancement.org/Psychopath/psychopath-Hervey-Cleckley-the-mask-of-sanity-SECTION-TWO-THE-MATERIAL-Part-1-The-disorder-in-full-clinical-manifestations-19-Stanley.html

            Once you become familiar with this type behavior you begin to see the Jews are just one big Stanley spouting nonsense all over the planet.

            This is difficult for people to believe because they couldn’t see themselves spending all this time spouting bullshit but you aren’t them. They have their own psychopathic reasons for this. If you just notice it and fail to be moved by their bullshit it’s half the battle. Jews are constantly telling us that they aren’t like us. Well I believe them.

      • R7_Rocket says:

        Instead of going to AlphaGamePlan and learning how to cure his affliction of being a gamma male Scalzi-clone, Peppermint would rather blame the Jews for everything.

        • peppermint says:

          No matter how much time I devote to degenerate sex acts that make baby Hitler cry, there are these questions of the deeper meaning of human existence that I return to.

          I believe that we live in a universe of particles in a spacetime that shapes their destinies and is shapes by their actions, that since reproduction began life has always been a race war, and our part as individuals of the white heron volk is to secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.

          The Jews are biologically and culturally programmed with a particular strategy in this race war, and the last 100 years should teach us that biological strategies can’t be erased by jackbooted oppression or various brainwashing schemes.

        • peppermint says:

          The Jewish strategy is the entire meaning of their peoplehood, more fully than the mosquito’s strategy is the meaning of the mosquito, because mosquitoes prey on all manner of larger animals, but only to extract blood to reproduce. If the Jews only needed blood for their rituals, and did not otherwise disrupt White civilization, well, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

          Four thousand years of interaction between Whites and Jews, seen from within an evolutionary framework – but why bother? Stick it to the feminists by practicing alpha game, and praise the man who was god and died for your sins to remind you to, if a dindu steals your bike, give him also your cell phone.

          How and why did this happen? Doesn’t matter, had sex.

          • jim says:

            Jews have not been a market dominant minority except in the last several hundred years in Europe.

            For the Romans, they were a pain in the ass the way Muslims are today – violent religious fanatics. Completely different problem.

          • peppermint says:

            Ask Revilo Oliver about how the Jewish community behaved in Greek Egypt under Roman rule.

            Why was there a Jewish community there anyway?

            The Jews have always lived among others more or less secretly, have always claimed to be persecuted, which works best on Whites. They have never mostly lived in Israel. In the future, when we deport them to Israel, B and his friends will figure out, for the first time in Jewish history, how to have a Jewish community with no outsiders around.

          • peppermint says:

            Market-dominant minority is a stupid word because minority is a stupid word. Being the Other or the privileged default is not the most important thing, race is, which is why race is an older word.

            Jews aren’t a market-dominant minority, they are Jews. It’s in their DNA, and if you spend time around them, you can come to understand that.

            • jim says:

              People are irrational about Jewish misdeeds, real and imaginary, the same way they are irrational about the real and imaginary misdeeds of other market dominant minorities.

          • Dr. Faust says:

            Regardless of the veracity of your argument this a very eloquent piece of writing. Well said. Good enough to make your own blog.

          • B says:

            >Jews have not been a market dominant minority except in the last several hundred years in Europe.

            This is untrue.

            Jews ran the port in Algiers.

            Jews were the tax farmers for the Spanish monarchy throughout the Middle Ages.

            In Yemen, Jews were apparently essential to the economy; when the king (forget what his title was) exiled them (Exile of Mawza,) the Yemenite economy shut down and in a year he was forced to bring the survivors back.

            Universal literacy and numeracy, and the capacity/inclination for abstract and far-ranging thought automatically give you a leg up in commerce and business, where you have to read, write and do math, but more importantly see the big picture and derive workable economic models, then take calculated risks.

            Obviously, dumbshits who see you prosper by selling them the things they were too stupid to forecast needing/wanting, and selling them on credit since they spent their money on khat/vodka, eventually get upset-they feel robbed.

            They want to have all that nice stuff you sold them AND the money that they bought it with. This is obviously a stupid sentiment, but then again, they are dumbshits. Since there are a lot of them, and like I said, they’re dumbshits, they decide that the best way to address the situation is by looting you, maybe killing you, taking all your money and stuff and perhaps a bit of rape.

            After some time, the dumbshits look around and go, “hey, I’d like some nice stuff. Where are those Jews that used to sell it to us?”

            It’s not a very good way to live, but that’s why exile is a punishment.

            As for the Overseas Chinese who have the same exact problem, I sympathize, and wish they could make a decent living in their own country without having to service monkey-faced Indonesians who are waiting for the next rioting and looting opportunities.

          • Sam says:

            peppermint says,”Ask Revilo Oliver about how the Jewish community behaved in Greek Egypt under Roman rule…”

            peppermint is correct.

            “There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root.” – Henry David Thoreau

            The Jews are not the disorder but they are the root of it. Without them many, not all, but many problems would never begin to fester the way they have.

            The Jews are smarter because they have no empathy which takes up a large portion of the brains of normal people. Without empathy they use this extra brain power for raw processing. It makes them less humane.

  3. TeenagerinPublicSchoolHell says:

    Jim What’s your opinion of the American Founders in general and specific people, Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison, Franklin, Thomas Paine Patrick Henry, and Charles Carrol, to name a few. Who was your favorite and who was you least favorite?

  4. B says:

    >What happened of course, is that in the 1950s and 1960s, the Warren Court period, whites were dispossessed, ethnically cleansed out of the inner cities, by black racial violence, violence supported by the state, in that whites were denied the right of collective self defense.

    Per the Slaughter of Cities, the process started earlier, in the 1930s.

    >A few Jewish communities remained, because Jews, in an unprincipled exception, were allowed collective self defense.

    This is actually not true.

    One of the first Supreme Court cases dealing with the forced integration of neighborhood was in the 1930s and involved a Jewish business owner whose small department store was taken and destroyed through eminent domain to build, I believe, projects. I think this was in Chicago. It’s in the beginning of the Slaughter of Cities, and I don’t have a copy on hand. The interesting thing was that the Supreme Court decided that the state didn’t have to show a very compelling case that they would have a use for the land that would be more productive than the store currently was. I am a bit fuzzy on the particulars-maybe someone with a copy of the book could correct me.

    Those Jewish communities which decided to defend themselves stayed, though were attrited. Some of the bigger ones that did not defend themselves in a very cohesive manner were able to survive just through size and cohesion (Boro Park in Brooklyn.) The Chicago Jewish community has moved neighborhoods three times. Right now, they are surrounded by Arabs and Pakis, who’ve been moved in by the benevolent government, and are waiting for pogroms.

    Likewise, those working class white communities that defended themselves were often successful. See: the Irish and Italian neighborhoods in New York. I would say that Bay Ridge and Bensonhurst were more successful than Crown Heights-there are no black families living in Bay Ridge and Bensonhurst, while Crown Heights has blacks and Jews living on the same blocks. Was there an Irish-Italian conspiracy, where Irish and Italians working in media and finance brought their leverage to bear on behalf of their co-ethnics? Or is it that balls and refusal to snitch on your neighbors can yield results in even a hostile environment?

    • jim says:

      >What happened of course, is that in the 1950s and 1960s, the Warren Court period, whites were dispossessed, ethnically cleansed out of the inner cities, by black racial violence, violence supported by the state, in that whites were denied the right of collective self defense.

      Per the Slaughter of Cities, the process started earlier, in the 1930s.

      Not seeing it. Googled “inner city” in Google books. References to the American inner city as a dark and scary place do not appear until the Warren court.

      Urban renewal knocked down crap buildings, poor people housing, working class housing. The inner cities were full of rich people and middle class housing. Urban renewal was a dismal failure, but it did not create terrifying black neighborhoods until the Warren court. What created the scary inner city was not bungling bureaucrats knocking down white working class housing, it was black thugs driving white people out of middle and upper class housing. Bureaucrats might build a housing project for poor (aka black) people in a middle class, (aka white) neighborhood. But the whites were not driven out of that neighborhood by the housing project until the Warren court.

      • B says:

        I recommend you read the Slaughter of Cities (I came across it on UR, if that matters.)

        It says white ethnic cleansing started in the 1930s, was paused in the 40s and 50s and picked back up in the 1960s.

        • jim says:

          As I said, not what I see when grepping through published books for references to the inner city as dark, poor, and scary.

          • B says:

            As I said, read the book and then we’ll talk.

            The inner city at the time was not dark and scary. It had not been integrated. But everyone knew that an integrated neighborhood exists only in the time between the first black family moving in and the last white family moving out.

    • jim says:

      Right now, they are surrounded by Arabs and Pakis, who’ve been moved in by the benevolent government, and are waiting for pogroms.

      Jews in the ruling elite are largely progressive Jews, and less and less inclined to identify with those old fashioned Jews who live in Jewish neighborhoods.

      But let us consider your beloved Israel. Sharon did what it took to get the “palestinians” out of Lebanon. Could he have done that today?

      Nazis complain because Israel is allowed to turn the blacks back, while Europe is taking them. Of course Australia has distinctly Israeli like behavior towards illegal immigrants, and though it comes under a great deal of pressure, just blows off the pressure. Australia has a special diplomat for dealing with complaints about Australia’s illegal immigrant policy, or, as progressives call it, asylum seeker policy. In his previous diplomatic posting in Iraq, he wore a flak jacket, because people kept shooting at him.

      The weakness is internal. Everyone succumbs to Cathedral soft power. Israelis feel bad about being an unprincipled exception – they are more guilty than Australians.

      • B says:

        >Jews in the ruling elite are largely progressive Jews, and less and less inclined to identify with those old fashioned Jews who live in Jewish neighborhoods.

        They couldn’t possibly be less inclined than FDR’s court Jews like Felix Frankfurter. To an elite converso of that day, religious Jews were a living reproach, reminiscent of his embarrassing grandparents who wouldn’t eat at his parents house. They had to actively repudiate them. Today’s elite conversos are much further removed.

        >But let us consider your beloved Israel. Sharon did what it took to get the “palestinians” out of Lebanon. Could he have done that today?

        Irrelevant. Sharon did not do what it took to get them out of Judah, Shomron and Gaza (although he did a bang-up job making Gaza Judenrein.)

        He couldn’t make Gaza Judenrein today. And the public is much more right-leaning today than it was in his day, and moving to the right all the time. We see that tolerance for the “palestinians” directly correlates with religiosity, and we’re becoming more religious all the time. And even the secular Jews tend to quietly agree in private conversations with me that it would be better if the Arabs were to go: http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/06/25/mounting-pessimism-about-two-state-israeli-palestinian-solution/

        > Israelis feel bad about being an unprincipled exception – they are more guilty than Australians.

        I think about one percent of Israelis feel bad. Maybe half that if you take out all the ones working for US and European NGOs and other organs.

        • Mark Citadel says:

          I would generally agree that Israel is becoming more religious, but then why are the rights of faggots advancing in the country? Tel Aviv especially is a cesspool of sodomy. When will this be remedied?

          • B says:

            Thanks for your concern! We all appreciate it that someone is looking out for our faggots. I understand that we are all about to be massacred by scary brown people with swords, but you want us to enjoy a gay-free existence until then, amirite?

            Well, in the words of a noted 21st century philosopher, I want to tell you:

            In Israel, we dont have homosexuals like in your country.

            We don’t have that in our country.

            In Israel, we do not have this phenomenon. I don’t know who’s told you we have it.

            Seriously: Central and Northern Tel Aviv is a wealthy, secular area, though it is becoming more religious-gradually but inexorably.

            Secular Israelis tend to believe the localized version of whatever the Cathedral is peddling, although this is moderated by their personal experience (everyone has served in the military in some capacity) and relatives (everyone has some religious relatives.)

            The Cathedral peddles love of homosexuals. Secular Israelis tend to be indifferent to homosexuals (the religious are generally disgusted by them in a non-demonstrative way). The very Westernized elite (a small percentage, hipsters, academe, etc.) tend to flaunt their love for them.

            Since North and Central Tel Aviv is the richest and most secular urban area in the country, and since most of the people who like homosexuals live there, this is where the homosexuals tend to live. There is about a kilometer of boulevard where you might see a rainbow flag or something like that. This Friday, they are having their parade there.

            I haven’t seen, even there, the kind of shit I used to see in NYC on a regular basis 15 years ago (shirtless musclefags rollerblading down the middle of the street mid-day, showing off their nipple piercings to the passerby.)

          • Mark Citadel says:

            In Holy Russia they are not able to have a parade, because they get the sh** kicked out of them by both police and nationalists. This is the standard that all nations should aspire to, even a Jewish one, which if it lives according to its religious Law, should be meting out far worse punishments, at least to Jews themselves.

          • B says:

            >This is the standard that all nations should aspire to, even a Jewish one, which if it lives according to its religious Law, should be meting out far worse punishments, at least to Jews themselves.

            I do not think that this is the standard we should aspire to.

            The standard we should aspire is that Jews hold up the Law willingly and joyfully. And that those Jews who violate the Law knowingly should make repentance and not sin anymore. Not through fear of punishments but through love of and awe of G-d.

            The path to that goal is long. It does not lie through Jews beating the shit out of other Jews.

          • B says:

            Our religious Law on this, by the way, is: the act of homosexual penetration is forbidden and punishable by death if those who were doing it 1) were warned by two witnesses that what they were doing was punishable by death, 2) responded that they knew and didn’t care (as opposed to “I can’t stop because it feels too good”, 3) the witnesses have to testify against them in a court which is empowered to issue the death penalty (we have no such court for now,) 4) the witnesses have to be the ones to put them to death.

            Everything else is, at most, punishable by stripes for rebelliousness. We don’t have, right now, a court empowered to issue stripes.

            The only situation where a Jew can take the Law into his own hands that I know of is that of a rodef, a pursuer, who is intent on killing someone else, and we are commanded to kill such a person first (without regard to his station or that of the pursued). This also extends to informers, since they are legally considered to be endangering people’s lives.

            In this situation, if the cops or bystanders were to physically attack the parading homosexuals, they would be violating the Law themselves (perhaps the cops wouldn’t be if they were acting on the orders of a King, since a King is empowered to do whatever he needs to maintain order, without the standards a court is bound by-but we presently lack a King).

            I don’t see the way to the Law being upheld as lying through the public violation of that Law by thugs.

            I also don’t believe those publicly violating Shabbat (punishable by death in the exact same way as homosexuality is,) should be assaulted by cops or passerby.

            • jim says:

              Our religious Law on this, by the way, is: the act of homosexual penetration is forbidden and punishable by death if those who were doing it 1) were warned by two witnesses that what they were doing was punishable by death, 2) responded that they knew and didn’t care (as opposed to “I can’t stop because it feels too good”, 3) the witnesses have to testify against them in a court which is empowered to issue the death penalty (we have no such court for now,) 4) the witnesses have to be the ones to put them to death.

              Typical Talmudic weaseling. Your law changes all the time and you pretend it does not, by making inconvenient parts of the law unenforceable and loopholing them to death, while coming up with never ending elaborations on convenient laws.

              It is now not only a violation of Jewish law to punish homosexuality, it now, as of 2015, is a violation of Jewish law to make homosexuals feel unwelcome, or feel bad about homosexuality, to undermine their precious self esteem.

              I suppose Jews can get by while welcoming gays, but they cannot get by while providing welfare to terrorists. Do you think that in the Israel of 2015 could do the Qibya reprisal?

          • pdimov says:

            “In this situation, if the cops or bystanders were to physically attack the parading homosexuals, they would be violating the Law themselves…”

            In practice what tends to happen (as far as I can see) is either (1) no parade because gays are too scared to do it, or (2) a parade organized by the American embassy with police protection.

            It could be that Israel is that rare case of genuine tolerance, but I somehow doubt it.

          • peppermint says:

            — I also don’t believe those publicly violating Shabbat (punishable by death in the exact same way as homosexuality is,)

            homosexuality is no more serious than cooking a whole chicken in a gas oven and then eating it on Saturday?

          • B says:

            >Your law changes all the time and you pretend it does not, by making inconvenient parts of the law unenforceable and loopholing them to death, while coming up with never ending elaborations on convenient laws.

            I’d like to point out that even the worst king of Israel, when he wanted to kill one of his subjects, had enough respect for the Law that he didn’t have someone stab him but got two false witnesses to accuse him of a capital crime in an established court.

            When you start deciding what parts are the letter of the law and what parts are the spirit, you’re now a Protestant. Which is how we got here. Doing more of the same is not the way to get out of here.

            >Do you think that in the Israel of 2015 could do the Qibya reprisal?

            No. But I suspect the Israel of 2045 will be able to do a whole lot more than that. Anyway, am doing the best I can to make it so.

            >homosexuality is no more serious than cooking a whole chicken in a gas oven and then eating it on Saturday?

            If you knew the Law at all, you’d have said something like “than clipping your nails on Saturday.” Or “gathering sticks.”

            They both bring the death penalty if done out of spite in front of witnesses. So in terms of legal ramifications, they are equal.

            The chicken is probably worse, since most people are not tempted to homosexual behavior or presented an easy opportunity for it, and since it’s really hard to make the case that gay sex is no big deal.

            Also, keeping the Shabbat is equivalent to keeping all of the Commandments, so someone violating it is like someone violating all of the Commandments.

        • jim says:

          >But let us consider your beloved Israel. Sharon did what it took to get the “palestinians” out of Lebanon. Could he have done that today?

          Irrelevant. Sharon did not do what it took to get them out of Judah, Shomron and Gaza (although he did a bang-up job making Gaza Judenrein.)

          The times were changing against him, and he had to move with the times. And the times are still changing in the same direction.

          You need to check out the gay parade in Tel Aviv. A nation with a gay parade like that will not live. If God does not destroy it, Gnon will.

          • jay says:

            Gnon is the inbuilt mechanism of judgment that activates when a nation sinks into depravity. Just as the land of canaan vomited out its inhabitants because ot their sins.

          • B says:

            The gay parade in Tel Aviv is the least of my worries.

            Those people do not have kids and they do not live long. They need recruitment.

            The more religious (I mean Judaism here) a society is, the more resilient it is to recruitment.

            The reason that your superiors are constantly using the gays and other sexual degenerates as a stick with which to poke you people is that they want your reaction-snarling, lunging at the stick, hitting the fence. They thrive on that visceral reaction, both using it to make you look ridiculous (see: Westboro Baptist) to facilitate recruitment away from you, and also channeling your attention and behavior into a course that is manifestly harmless to them. You know, clickbait. A feint to get you focused on the wrong thing, stupid, angry and vulnerable.

            Note that the same exact people who are telling Americans to worship tranny Bruce Jenner are the ones who were telling them that masses of Satanist pedophiles were secretly raping their kids at daycare centers (and who’d previously told them that a woman should focus on her career and put her kids in daycare.)

            The proper response to homosexuality and its promotion by people who have a system of values that stands on its own, instead of conservakin, is indifference tinged with mild disgust and bemusement. Not lunging at the stick. Focusing on constructive measures.

            • jim says:

              The reason that your superiors are constantly using the gays and other sexual degenerates as a stick with which to poke you people is that they want your reaction-snarling, lunging at the stick, hitting the fence. They thrive on that visceral reaction

              There is a connection between the gay parade in Tel Aviv and Gaza being judenrein.

              The proper response to homosexuality and its promotion by people who have a system of values that stands on its own, instead of conservakin, is indifference tinged with mild disgust and bemusement. Not lunging at the stick. Focusing on constructive measures.

              Holier than Moses, I see.

              >Do you think that the Israel of 2015 could do the Qibya reprisal?

              No. But I suspect the Israel of 2045 …

              The trend is running the other way. And you yourself, being holier than Moses, would have a problem defending the Qibya reprisal to those around you. It is yet another unprincipled exception to your superior holiness.

          • B says:

            >There is a connection between the gay parade in Tel Aviv and Gaza being judenrein.

            The connection is not that the gay pride in TA caused the ethnic cleansing of Gaza. The timeline doesn’t work out.

            There is a connection between the poking stick and the fence that makes your snarls and lunges futile, but it is not that the stick built the fence.

            >Holier than Moses, I see.

            The essence of Protestantism is to say “any asshole can decide and explain what Moses would have wanted done in a given situation, and demand that it be done-and I intend to be that asshole!”

            Moses established a court system led by a Sanhedrin and a legal procedure where to put someone to death, you need to bring them to the court which is properly constituted and sitting in its proper place, and you need two witnesses of the actual act. We don’t have such a court. We will have such a court. The way to having such a court is not through random assholes appointing themselves the modern-day equivalent of such a court and imposing what they decide that court would have imposed through brute force.

            For some reason, you don’t seem to mind that we’re not currently beating up or executing public Shabbat violators, even though the death penalty for violating Shabbat is in the same place as the death penalty for homosexuality.

            >The trend is running the other way.

            Not from where I sit.

            >And you yourself, being holier than Moses, would have a problem defending the Qibya reprisal to those around you.

            As usual, you presume and assume and put words in my mouth. I have no problem defending Jews killing their enemies, whether in reprisal or, preferably, preemptively.

            • jim says:

              >There is a connection between the gay parade in Tel Aviv and Gaza being judenrein.

              The connection is not that the gay pride in TA caused the ethnic cleansing of Gaza. The timeline doesn’t work out.

              First Gay Pride parade in Tel Aviv 1997. First spectacularly and shockingly obscene Gay Pride parade in Tel Aviv arguably 2000 – 2002. Israeli withdrawal from Gaza commanded in 2004, carried out in 2005.

              >Holier than Moses, I see.

              The essence of Protestantism is to say “any asshole can decide and explain what Moses would have wanted done in a given situation, and demand that it be done-and I intend to be that asshole!”

              What Moses did was to condemn male homosexuality in the strongest possible terms, and what he wanted done was to completely eliminate any public and open male homosexuality.

              >The trend is running the other way.

              Not from where I sit.

              When you said that the Israel of 2015 could not do the Qibya reprisal you admitted which way the wind blows.

          • B says:

            >First Gay Pride parade in Tel Aviv 1997. First spectacularly and shockingly obscene Gay Pride parade in Tel Aviv arguably 2000 – 2002. Israeli withdrawal from Gaza commanded in 2004, carried out in 2005.

            When was the Israeli withdrawal from Sinai?

            When was the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon?

            When was the Israeli withdrawal from Ramallah and the return of the aged homosexual Arafat from Tunisia, and his installation in Ramallah, with training and weapons provided for his thugs by the US and Israel?

            >What Moses did was to condemn male homosexuality in the strongest possible terms, and what he wanted done was to completely eliminate any public and open male homosexuality.

            Moses established a legal code, a legal system and a set of legal procedures. There is a context. The context is that we don’t put people to death except via a court empowered to do so and two kosher witnesses to the act. Just the same way that we know G-d told Moses that gay sex is an abomination (along with crooked weights) and is punishable by death (along with violating Shabbat,) we know that He told Moses that there is a procedure for trying and punishing people.

            Now, along come you and say, yeah, but the really important thing here is gay sex (and not crooked weights or violating Shabbat,) and the procedure is unimportant.

            This is Protestantism.

            >When you said that the Israel of 2015 could not do the Qibya reprisal you admitted which way the wind blows.

            No. Qibya was the secular Israeli Zionist movement at the peak of its asabiyyah. Today, the secular Israeli Zionist movement is out of asabiyyah and on its way out (though still in charge for now, and not willing to do any Qibyas) and a religious Zionist mindset is slowly gaining dominance.

            • jim says:

              >First Gay Pride parade in Tel Aviv 1997. First spectacularly and shockingly obscene Gay Pride parade in Tel Aviv arguably 2000 – 2002. Israeli withdrawal from Gaza commanded in 2004, carried out in 2005.

              When was the Israeli withdrawal from Sinai?

              Did not involve dragging out Jewish settlers.

              When you allow aggressive public obscenity on the main street, you are losing your immune system, losing the barrier between self and not self, losing the sense of “us”, so wind up treating enemies as friends and friends as enemies.

              >What Moses did was to condemn male homosexuality in the strongest possible terms, and what he wanted done was to completely eliminate any public and open male homosexuality.

              Moses established a legal code, a legal system and a set of legal procedures.

              Which code and procedures you have loopholed to death.

              Qibya was the secular Israeli Zionist movement at the peak of its asabiyyah. Today, the secular Israeli Zionist movement is out of asabiyyah and on its way out (though still in charge for now, and not willing to do any Qibyas) and a religious Zionist mindset is slowly gaining dominance.

              The secular Zionist movement and the religious Zionist are alike being dragged along by progressivism.

          • B says:

            >Did not involve dragging out Jewish settlers.

            There were Jewish settlers in Sinai-Yamit, etc.

            >When you allow aggressive public obscenity on the main street, you are losing your immune system, losing the barrier between self and not self, losing the sense of “us”, so wind up treating enemies as friends and friends as enemies.

            To me, a Jew driving around or having a cigarette on Shabbat is as obscene as one walking down the street in a rainbow colored t-shirt. The second is advocating something which is punishable by death, the first actually doing it. Nonetheless, they are both Jews, and the idea is to have them and other Jews return to observing the Law. Odds are good that they are actually categorized as “tinok shenishbu,” like an infant kidnapped by non-Jews and raised in ignorance, who is not responsible for his behavior as an adult. The way to make them observant is not through attacking them.

            >Which code and procedures you have loopholed to death.

            To loophole a law, you have to understand it. In our case, the Laws being divine, the loopholes are built right in. It is much preferable to saying, anyone can see what it means. Look where that got you people.

            >The secular Zionist movement and the religious Zionist are alike being dragged along by progressivism.

            Not seeing it. The first sign of being dragged along by progressivism is falling birthrates. Our birthrates are rising.

            • jim says:

              >When you allow aggressive public obscenity on the main street, you are losing your immune system, losing the barrier between self and not self, losing the sense of “us”, so wind up treating enemies as friends and friends as enemies.

              To me, a Jew driving around or having a cigarette on Shabbat is as obscene as one walking down the street in a rainbow colored t-shirt.

              How about a Jew parading in bondage gear and waving his erect penis around. How about a ten year old boy dancing the twerk?

              To loophole a law, you have to understand it. In our case, the Laws being divine, the loopholes are built right in.

              I am pretty sure Moses would have absolutely no difficulty putting a very final stop to small boys dancing the twerk in the middle of the marketplace.

          • B says:

            >How about a Jew parading in bondage gear and waving his erect penis around. How about a ten year old boy dancing the twerk?

            Nauseating. But, again, public and willful violation of Shabbat is worse.

            >I am pretty sure Moses would have absolutely no difficulty putting a very final stop to small boys dancing the twerk in the middle of the marketplace.

            Moses was operating in a reality where the Jews had all received the Torah at Mount Sinai and had committed themselves to it. And where they all knew he was G-d’s prophet. And where he had a system of courts and leaders. We do not live in such a reality, or a comparable one, yet.

            Further, how does Moses deal with rebellion? We see in last week’s Torah portion that the people rebel against Moses and wish to put him to death. We see in this week’s Torah portion Korach and 250 of the leaders of the people rebel against Moses again. In neither of these situations does Moses pull his sword out and start hacking people down.

            Further, when Moses comes back from Midian to Egypt, the Jewish people are mentally broken and enslaved. Moses does not start forcing them to keep the Commandments, launch a guerrilla movement to kill and intimidate Egyptian collaborators or apply force to them. He leads them by example. This situation is a lot closer to what we have now-people are broken by 2000 years of exile and occupation. They are only starting to wake up to the reality, which is that they are sovereign in their land and must answer only to G-d to keep that sovereignty.

            The question is how to help them to wake up to that reality. I suggest that it is not by focusing on the poky homo stick which our enemies are using against us.

            I suspect that to understand what our enemies are vulnerable to, we should look at their sources of funding, their internal power nexi and what they worry about among themselves. Their funding comes from foreign NGOs, i.e., State and the Euros. Their internal power is in their grasp of the judicial and educational system. They worry about increasing Religious Zionist presence in combat units, in academia and in the police.

            The homosexuals putting on their vile and provocative displays in some part of Tel Aviv are not germane to any of these. It would probably feel good to point and sputter at how vile they are. But it would be charging the cape.

      • Sam says:

        Jim said,”…The weakness is internal. Everyone succumbs to Cathedral soft power…”

        Weakness is internal but WHAT DO THE JEWS REINFORCE? We all know the answer. They reinforce with financial, psychological and propaganda the ideas that reinforce the weaknesses. It’s no good to say a society has weaknesses. ALL do. This is no big revelation. The problem is the Jews, who control the elections and finances of the US, multiply the internal weaknesses of the US’s society. They do so on purpose. They do so with their money, their papers, their TV stations, control of electronic voting machines and their campaign contributions.

        All this “Cathedral” talk is Stanley obfuscation and verbal slight of hand. It’s just magic on a large scale. Magicians point where they want you to look as they pull stuff from their sleeve. The whole “Cathedral” talk and labeling is just more verbal bullshit to put you off the track that the Jews run the damn country and are driving it into the ground. Everyone knows this. If it’s a surprise to you then you’re an idiot. All this talk about Puritans is just silly. If “The Council of Puritans” demanded congress do something what would happen? Nothing. They’d be laughed out of Washington but if NuttyYahoo demanded something do you think the response would be the same?

        The Jews have put massive money, resources, propaganda and personal into the “Cathedral”. Except it’s not a “Cathedral” it’s a #Neo-Synagogue.

        • peppermint says:

          This is why I wish people had stuck with Moldbug’s original name, the Polygon.

          Not all countries have such bureaucratized, informal governance. We are officially ruled by Science, and, where Science hasn’t made a ruling (as with transracialism; Science has already announced that some transsexuals show some brain activity similar to their chosen sex), either law, or democracy.

          In practice, democracy means rule by Jews, but it’s an ostensibly egalitarian doctrine and historically was introduced in Greece to facilitate demagogues centralizing authority that had been shared by the aristoi, and elsewhere because the middle class was commanding more resources than the military class.

  5. Michael says:

    you know its really here nor there at what point jews influence leftward became significant the fact is it is significant because despite their numbers they are significant.
    the question is can they be made useful citizens or should they be packed off to Israel if no one else will allow them to emigrate.and whether they should be allowed to take their booty with them i say no if they are so bad to have to leave they should forfeit ill gotten gains. thats not to say i think thats the case. That they are quite intelligent and could be an asset is without doubt the question is can they can ever assimilated to the extent that they can no longer identify as jews nor act as jews do regarding multiculturalism. i do not care if they make tons of money if they are marrying gentiles and supporting conservative causes with it. This may already be happening with progressive jews who are the smart ashkenazis are less and less jewish both genetically and culturally the others i think are harmless. If we could be sure the ashkenazi were being outbred the remaining question would be how to change all elite thinking. Given the extraordinary accomplishments of jews i think id rather breed them out then have them circle the wagons against me in nigeria or hong kong not that i think whites freed from progressive thinking need fear jews asians or anyone but recent evidence suggests ashkenazi are already 50% european from the middle ages forward and since other jews are not smart while Europeans are i claim their intelligence as an euro breeding program that i intend to capitalize on.
    now progressivism was bound to happen but Christianity exacerbates and gives cover to it as does Judaism traditionalist must come to terms that these religions are just inherently leftist period. sorry im romantically attached to to my catholic upbringing but trust me its not simply luther was demotic christ was a fucking commie ya dig period the end and any attempt to put lipstick on that pig will always be susceptible to leftist attack its the last religion you’d want to ever build a conservative society on frankly Judaism is a much much better candidate.
    please spare me any youre soft on jews attacks im not if you can convince me they are not salvageable i have no problem finishing the job finally i love my people that much and im a path i actually think we could lay quite a lot at their door i could make a good case tto get rid of them but unlike a lot of DENRX i actually want to get this solved not just talk about it so ideas are ranked according to likelihood of actual implementation as well as other things.I think its a lot easier to assimilate jews then exterminate them if you read about nazi studies on the matter it wasnt that easy to expel them which was why they started to kill them. do you think if elites started to think conservatively without an antisemitic color jews would fall on their swords and exit polite society if you do you dont know jews. i think all their multiculturalism has been a clever but ultimately miscalculated attempt buffer themselves from otherness attack. give them a chance to really safely assimilate and i think they jump at it. unlike say blacks they can look at western civilization with a feeling of shared ownership and pride and pretty soon i think they wont even know they are jewish and neither will we.

    • B says:

      > since other jews are not smart while Europeans are i claim their intelligence as an euro breeding program that i intend to capitalize on.

      You’d do us all a favor by capitalizing.

      You know, non-Jews have debated whether it would be better to kill us or assimilate us repeatedly over the last 3000+ years.

      They are all dead and gone.

      Even their descendants don’t remember them. The only people who remember them today are we: a few times a year, we have holidays where we remember the time those stupid Amalekites/Egyptians/Greeks tried to wipe us out or assimilate us and failed. I assume that in 1000 years, we’ll be the only people (aside from history nerds) who remember the Nazis, the Soviets and the Arabs of the 20th-21st century.

      I’ve always been amazed-didn’t those guys read anything? How did they not learn? You’d think after the fifth or six time, but, no. Thanks for the demonstration.

      • Michael says:

        personally i like jews but ive had to admit youre a problem i think though if i wasnt clear i would keep you.apart from the hasids you wont even know youre a jew in another 50 years. in my life time almost all jews i know have become non religious and half have married outside the faith, of course this is true for all of us except whites wont marry blacks the way jews do. as this Palestine issue heats up we shall see which way it breaks doesnt look like your circling the wagons from brooklyn though
        I even like the hasids in a different way but most jews hate them.They are not a problem except things like welfare fraud.

    • jim says:

      People obsess over the misdeeds of the Jews, which though entirely real, but nonetheless trivial and subtle, unlike the misdeeds of blacks – or indeed almost any other minority. The reason they obsess is hostility to a market dominant minority – the socialism of fools.

      Socialism never works, it always fucks up the economy, and getting rid of market dominant minorities never works, it always fucks up the economy.

      Someone pointed out that Jewish penny pinching at other people’s expense is what brought AIDS from Haiti to America. And someone else pointed out that what spread AIDS in Africa was progressive do gooding, primarily by post Christian, Christian derived progressves. When people do good to far away strangers, they always do good horribly badly with dreadful consequences.

      You attribute to Jews mystic powers of mind control. Whites have never been one people. We are always cutting each other’s throats, and elites have been disloyal, to their subjects and to each other, with great regularity. They don’t need Jews to make them disloyal, rather they hire Jews to do their dirty work, and when trouble ensues, blame the Jews. When you go after the Jews, you attack the matador’s cape, and miss the matador.

      Jews should go to Israel, or be assimilated, and over a long period they will, some to Israel, some assimilated, but if you want to avoid fucking up the economy, they need to do it under their own power.

      • Mark Citadel says:

        What if you assume by the time this would happen, the economy will already be fucked up beyond repair, and so little consequence would be incurred by simply sending the Jews along with other minorities (i.e – particularly the blacks) back to their homelands. It’s not like they don’t have a homeland any more.

      • Greg says:

        > You attribute to Jews mystic powers of mind control

        “With natural selection working on the problem, who would be so presumptuous as to guess what feats of mind control might not be achieved?” — Richard Dawkins

      • Michael says:

        Jim
        Not sure where you get mind control or socialism in my post. Media control, academic control, financial control maybe; how much and to what extent it influences and in which direction is of course the jewish question. I don’t think its unreasonable to say quite a lot in the wrong direction.Id be willing to bet if you subtracted them from the equation the situation would not be so dire.We would still have a confident culture and no immigrant problem,less socialism and a lot less social theory.
        Obviously they have also contributed a lot. And they are pretty much white in my opinion.I think they should be assimilated but thoroughly so, to stop them from implementing these defense strategies that undermine western civilization. And yeah I think its happening. I even think they may turn the tide on what they have wrought. They are the most racist people youll ever meet privately and as multiculturalism turns on them i expect they will get suddenly quite rational.
        While i completely agree socialism is evil, I do not agree about market dominant minorities, oh im aware of the work done on them but i think a culture can not afford to have a competing culture within it let alone one that is economically dominant.maybe a greatly inferior one might benefit at great cultural cost but in our case im sure we could survive if it came to it. In our case its particularly egregious as we are squeezes from below and above. Sure a country where Jews and Chinese rule over whites browns and blacks might be marginally more efficient Im one to think I like capitalism not because of the beauty of its self regulating efficiency which is of course pretty neat. But because what that efficiency can do for me as a human being as a European American. In short Ill trade a little inefficiency for keeping my culture,and I may not be trading any efficiency if we look at the per capita GDP figures across the world these smarter cultures are not out producing us.I know there are those out there who would be fine replacing not just Europeans but all humans with AI just to satisfy their fetish for efficiency. I find that baffling.
        I also agree at least as big a problem as Jews has been whites fighting amongst themselves. This is only natural Nigeria is a mess because [among other things] they dont see themselves as a single people but as several tribes. I hope one of the things we are doing is teaching whites that while our individual cultures are to be preserved we are one race and must pull together from now on or become extinct perhaps taking humanity with us. I think though at this point with a few notable exceptions that problem is mostly manufactured as you imply by elites pursuing their own goals.They would have a harder time doing this if Europeans became racially aware. Obviously this has been historically fraught.

      • Sam says:

        “…they hire Jews to do their dirty work, and when trouble ensues, blame the Jews…”

        This is silly. What group of Whites run the news media or the banks or the schools or the electoral process or the electronic voting machines or etc. behind the scenes? None. You might as well blame our problems on the Gnomes in people’s front yards as to look for these mythical White people calling the shots from behind the scenes.

        What this is, is the same old story and why Jews have been kicked out of every single country they have been in in any significant numbers. They purposely cause dissension and manipulate behind the scenes as much as possible and when caught always make up some ridiculous story. Psychopaths are always making up stupid crazy stories. The truth seems to cause them pain, so they avoid it.

        • peppermint says:

          Jim still doesn’t truly believe in race. His view on race is the same as in Star Trek: The Next Generation, where different races have different average IQs and levels of aggressiveness, but those, and maybe a few others, are the only variations.

          On Earth, the races can’t be compared like that, especially the races that have spent thousands and thousands of years living with other races. Biologists should expect some races to arise with strategies for dealing with other races other than simply slaughtering them. And we see Jews and Gypsies.

        • Joe says:

          “What group of Whites run the news media or the banks or the schools or the electoral process or the electronic voting machines or etc. behind the scenes? None.”

          That’s ridiculous. Do you seriously deny Whites all agency, and are you claiming that Jews run absolutely everything? (But “behind the scenes”, which makes it difficult to prove or bring to light.) In other words, every single University and every single mass-media outlet is run by Jews, without exception.

          That is, unless you’re saying that when Whites do things, it’s as individuals, whereas when Jews do things, it’s as a hive-mind. Hence they do things “as a group.” This is, again, ridiculous.

          I loathe the American Jewish community — and it’s plain as day that they have had an disproportionately negative influence on life in America — but they’re not the entire problem. Far from it. And, in fact, they’re not going to be a problem for very much longer. Intermarriage is at, what, 80%? They’ll all be gone within a few generations. Our problems will remain, and may even get worse.

          • Sam says:

            They don’t have to run everything. They plant themselves at crucial points in the media, economy and finance. From these points there is an amplification effect. For a simplistic example. Travon Martin. If the Jewish owned media had not drilled it into our foreheads would we have heard of him. What were the long term effects of this? I would say they were substantial compared to the significance of his death alone.

            Another trivial example. No group called for the mass immigration of people not of the same race as the White Americans in the 50’s except the Jews. They worked on this for years and finally got it passed. You know what the result is. Ross Perot stated it as “The grain of sand that irritates the oyster to make a pearl”. The Jews are the ex-lax that makes everyone shit all over the country.

            My point is the Jews say, if you listen, that it’s our fault if we don’t watch them. So I do. I believe they should all be deported. They have caused my country great harm and I believe in the “do unto others as you would have them do unto” you it’s time for us to do unto them.

            In the long run people will realize that the Jews are a tribe of psychopaths. There’s no reforming psychopaths. The only way to deal with them is to keep them away from you and allow them no control over you.

            “A good time for the Jews is not a good time for mankind. The blessing of the Jews is a curse for others. The regimes that are “good for Jews” are rarely good for anybody else.” — Israel Shamir

            “Any people who have been persecuted for two thousand years must be doing something wrong”-Henry Kissinger

            • jim says:

              Who is behind the policy of unlimited illegal immigration? The person who is most directly and visibly responsible is Obama, who does not much like Jews.

              Right now there is one white country that openly, overtly, and proudly opposes and prevents illegal immigration, and that is Australia. (Israel semi furtively and shamefacedly opposes and prevents illegal immigration. New Zealand, in alliance with Australia, covertly and shamefacedly opposes and prevents illegal immigration.)

              Look at the people attacking Australia’s policy. Most of them do not seem all that Jewish.

  6. Dave says:

    Whites have adapted to the Civil Rights Era by adopting a semi-nomadic existence. We no longer build the stately brick homes of old Detroit or modern Germany. Instead, we build cheap greenfield developments of pressboard and vinyl siding, and abandon them to rot as soon as the diversity moves in.

    Where whites are too poor to move, like Buffalo, they have another system. When vibrants move into a white neighborhood, the house burns down. If anyone snitches, their house burns down too.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdwSJIbomAw

    • Sam says:

      “…Where whites are too poor to move, like Buffalo, they have another system. When vibrants move into a white neighborhood, the house burns down. If anyone snitches, their house burns down too…”

      Vast improvement.

  7. Red says:

    When an area developments a black problem the solution is to import Mexicans to take care of the problem.

    • Michael says:

      biology is full of examples of this having bad unintended consequences. if theres a collapse and civil war i think the mexicans will self deport. unfortunately the blacks will have to go and the nazis found this next ro impossible without most dying during transport so they decided instead to quietly kill them , today sterilization might work but you would end with 50 years of riots. its not going to be pretty and sadly most blacks are decent people but too many are not and of course mean reversion and tribal solidarity make the situation untenable.

      • peppermint says:

        One plane ticket to Liberia costs 250 dollars. So if we can find a million Whites who don’t like commuting and are willing to donate 10,000 dollars, we can ship the niggers back to Africa. The cost of shipping them all back is less than we spend on their food stamps alone each year.

        Since we could ship the turdworlders back whenever, we instead talk endlessly about the new small world with its inevitable social changes, like internet networking replacing hanging out in real life, and DNA confirmation replacing knowing what village someone’s folks are from.

        • Michael says:

          yeah i actually did a back of envelope calculation it takes about four 747s a day to just get the newborns out, then to move the 39M in a year at 500 per flight you’d need to do about 213 loads more per day.Fed ex could easily handle it, but we should probably go brown.Oprah and Cosby could probably afford the 10 billion costs lol. seriously they wont go willingly and even liberia will not take them. I suppose we could first invade liberia but duping 100K people in the jungle every day well you might as well just drop them from the plane without landing. we could offer to swap them for white south africans each getting the others real estate but thats only 5 million If we rescinded the foreign born blacks immigration status and citizenship for themselves and their progeny we could probably repatriate another 5 million but I kind of want to clear the Caribbean of blacks in fact Africa might be pretty cool without blacks. African population expected to double over next 30 years that will be the end of all the African animals personally I would rather have the lions and elephants.sterilization is the only humane solution

      • Dr. Faust says:

        I think sterilization may be effective if done through a mostly voluntary manner. The oddity of it is that the leftist environmentalists could easily fall behind it as population control. Instead of paying minorities 30k a year to have as many children as they can we could do the opposite. Through a voluntary process anyone who was eligible would be sterilized permanently for a guaranteed yearly income.

        • Steve Johnson says:

          “The oddity of it is that the leftist environmentalists could easily fall behind it as population control.”

          It’s only an oddity if you believe the surface rationalizations of the left. There are a billion better ways to achieve the goals of the left than the methods they actually pick and only the chump Republicans (well, flavors of libertarian do it too) are stupid enough to think that calling them out for it is a possible successful strategy.

          Every argument that begins “if you really wanted to [insert progressive goal here] you’d …” is simply ignored – for good reason.

  8. Mycroft Jones says:

    Question for Rabbi B: pertaining to your comments about gays in Israel. Henry Makow posted an article on adultery in Israel, especially how IDF service is a slut-fest where most of the countries young women are whores for the army officers, and where Jewish women commit adultery with great frequency. I’ve heard stories about the family courts in Israel being even worse (anti-male) than the ones in the Western world.

    Do you have similar rebuttals or clarifications? It is nice to hear that things aren’t as bad as they’ve been reported. I hope you have good news.

    • B says:

      I’m not a rabbi.

      I haven’t served here, so have no first hand knowledge. The handful of women I know here who’ve been in the military do not give off that military slut vibe. I know that on one hand, it used to be considered normal for military officers in staff positions to sleep with their secretaries, back in the 50s and 60s (according to Ezer Weizmann’s autobiography and common knowledge about Moshe Dayan.) On the other hand, Judith Strick Dribben, my friend’s wife, was a military intelligence officer here in the 40s/50s, and from her autobiography, I don’t get such a sense (and she’s quite frank as these things go-time in the partisans and then Nazi prison and the camps will do that to you.) So I assume that it is like everywhere else, dependent on who and where you are.

      Family courts-here, sadly, I do have personal experience. I did not notice a particular antimale bias. The religious court did not impress me much. The secular court, where the judge was a 30-something year old with a knit kippah, impressed me as being remarkably fair and impartial. We don’t have alimony here. We do have child support, which is relatively high. A couple of years ago, they passed a law cancelling the Tender Years doctrine and establishing joint custody as the default. I have heard nightmarish stories about family court here, but fortunately my experience was different.

      • Eli says:

        I lived in Israel in mid-80’s to early-’90’s, as a kid. My parents were going through divorce. My brother and I wanted to stay with our (technically) half-Jewish father. We had a bad mother.

        Ironically, although the secular family courts usually side with women, she tried to secure the support of rabbinic courts, arguing that she as “true Jew” could bring up her children as Jewish (although my father, an otkaznik, was the one who brought us to Israel).

        Fortunately, my father was able to win this one via the secular system. Apparently, he was also the first man in the city of Haifa to win custody, by itself a notable occurrence, not to mention the fact that he didn’t hire a lawyer, while she had one. I was about 10 at the time. Again, however, according to the Western practice, the custody rights almost always went to women — at least, during those years.

        • Mycroft Jones says:

          I believe according to Torah, the woman should get custody 99% of the time. However, there should be 0% child support. Or at most, a one time payout enough for her to set up a small household or make her way to her next destination. Women misbehaving shouldn’t be rewarded. Making a child fatherless is a severe type of misbehavior.

          • B says:

            According to the Torah, the man is responsible for his children’s upkeep entirely. Until age six, this counts as an obligation, after age six, it’s in the category of charity (still not optional, but can be deducted from his total charity.)

            The woman is entitled to her ketubah if the divorce was not by her agreement (which is irrelevant today.)

            In general, the ideal is not to incentivize divorce artificially for either side (which is what the West does) but to make it an option (because life is not ideal, sadly,) and to make sure that children get access to both parents.

        • B says:

          Sorry about your experience.

          A father’s rights lobby has emerged in recent years and seen notable success. Israel is a much smaller and tighter-knit society than the US, so everyone has someone close who’s been affected by the system, whether as a husband or a child.

          • Eli says:

            B:

            Amen!

            Actually, after the divorce, my father was approached by a men’s rights group. I don’t know the specifics, but I think they wanted to learn more about how he was able to achieve what he did.

            Despite all, he is a very convinced supporter of Israel. As am I, too, but from a distance (for now, at least).

      • Mycroft Jones says:

        Thank you, I mistook you for “Rabbi B” on the Vox Day blog. Here is the Henry Makow article I was referencing:

        Quote:

        Israeli men and women learn during their mandatory military service how to keep “what goes on in Vegas, staying in Vegas.” What I mean by this is, both Israeli men and women are VERY good at extramarital affairs — keeping these things secret — and indeed, I think it’s fair to say they expect it of each other, the opposite sex. For instance, a young man or young woman will enter the army at age 18, most having a girlfriend or boyfriend on the “outside.” But, on the inside, sexual activity is rampant. The Israeli army is a very loose knit thing, soldiers clothes are not worn “crisply,” it’s actually quite lax relative to my experience with the American voluntary army — though I never served, I had plenty of friends who did. The concept of sexual harassment is far different in this country than in America, largely because both women and men here love to flirt and from their army experience, don’t consider it a big deal to “hook up.”

        The law literally encourages women to divorce AFTER they have kids. It’s just terribly unfair to the kids, and I think criminal to create these situations where the father is impoverished and can barely afford to see his children, while the slutty mother is rewarded and living high on the hog, albeit unmarried and in 99.99% of the cases done having children.

        Source: http://henrymakow.com/2013/11/Israel-a-prison.html

        • Mycroft Jones says:

          These statements are consistent with Victor Ostrovsky’s book about the Mossad, “By Way of Deception”. When I read it, I thought: this book is like “Liar’s Poker”; not an expose, but a recruiting tool. After reading those books, who wouldn’t want to be a Wall Street broker or a Mossad officer? 🙂

        • B says:

          Yeah, I read that article. Makow is being pretty sensationalistic here. I do not think that it’s fair to say, for instance, that extramarital affairs are standard here.

  9. Dr. Faust says:

    B wrote: “Satanist pedophiles were secretly raping their kids at daycare centers (and who’d previously told them ”

    What? When did this happen?

    • jim says:

      Outbreak of witchfinding in the 1980s and 1990s.

      Christians are of course blamed, but it was actually progressives. The basis of the Satanic child abuse allegations were two pseudo scientific breakthroughs:

      1. That a child could be raped, and yet retain an intact hymen, which is still official doctrine among progressives today. Doubting it will get one called a rapist even today.

      2. Recovered memories. It discovered that children, especially children younger than eight, tended to forget sex, perhaps because it just did not make sense to them or have meaning to them. Then the pseudo scientific “discovery”was made that these memories could be “recovered”. Needless to say the methods for “recovering”memories consist of startlingly brutal brainwashing methods, and the “memories”are recovered with equal effectiveness regardless of whether the incident remembered actually happened or not.

      The tendency to forget is a perfectly real phenomenon, which likely indicates that sex really is not a big deal for children. “Recovery” of these lost memories is always and invariably a totally fake phenomenon.

      Armed with these two supposedly scientific discoveries, it was possible to find that anyone had raped any child.

      A pipeline was set up where people with money were accused child rape, but allowed to get off provided they made large payments to “therapists”, which “”therapists” were in cahoots with those “discovering” sexual child abuse.

      Eventually people became increasingly cynical about these incidents, but no one was ever punished for manufacturing false evidence, nor was any of the money they extorted returned.

      And the resistance to compensating the victims of these false rape allegations come from the same people who don’t want any adverse consequences to those who make false rape allegations today.

      From time to time this method is used today, but it tends to run into a lot of quiet, and politically incorrect, cynicism, so is kept within tolerable bounds.

      • Hidden Author says:

        The problem with punishing people who make false accusations is what do you do in cases of likely guilty but not “beyond reasonable doubt”?

        • jim says:

          Well, similarly, the problem with punishing people for rape is that it is pretty rare for a rape to be beyond reasonable doubt.

          Indeed, I have elsewhere argued that the nature of women makes it impractical to punish men for rape. On the reasonable doubt standard, it is pretty much impossible to honestly and realistically convict anyone. We should employ the old testament standard of punishing people for having sex in violation of man’s property rights over the sexual services of a woman, in which case reasonable doubt about the possibility of rape is grounds for letting the woman off, but irrelevant to the guilt of the male participant.

      • Samseau (@Sam_seau) says:

        “The tendency to forget is a perfectly real phenomenon, which likely indicates that sex really is not a big deal for children.”

        Very unlikely. How do you know it doesn’t mess them up subconsciously?

        • jim says:

          If there was evidence that it messed them up subconsciously, the pious would be on it like flies on dogshit.

          There is however plenty of evidence that being ass raped in early puberty messes up boys, but that is well past the age where children tend to forget sex.

          • Samseau (@Sam_seau) says:

            What evidence would there be? Young children are rarely exposed to that sort of thing because parents are extremely protective of them at that age. And if people did do that sort of things they wouldn’t tell anyone about it in fear of reprisal.

            That said, what we do know about children is that they learn subconsciously extremely quickly of many things:

            – Language
            – Reading
            – Social cues
            – The meanings of voice tonality

            And many other basic animalistic things. Therefore why wouldn’t sexual behavior impact them negatively as well?

            At bare minimum, you shouldn’t say “it’s not a big deal for children,” but instead, “it is unclear if it is a big deal for children.” At most you must admit you do not know. My hypothesis is in the other direction: sex for young children will fuck them up subconsciously and make them into deviants later.

            • jim says:

              What evidence would there be? Young children are rarely exposed to that sort of thing b

              Divorced women do not commonly protect their children against being screwed – if anything they frequently view their children as an additional inducement to keep their boyfriends from disappearing in the morning with the child support money.

          • Samseau (@Sam_seau) says:

            “Divorced women do not commonly protect their children against being screwed”

            And what do we know about children with shitty divorced moms letting a parade of men go in and out while they are in infancy? A majority of these kids grow up to be completely broken. How do we know at least some of these broken kids aren’t from sexual abuse as an infant?

      • Sam says:

        The outbreaks of child molestation were cast as “witch hunts” but at Presidio Army base some of the children had sexual diseases. How does that square with “witch hunts”? Could it be the child molesters were pretending to be Satanist? You know there are people who fervently believe in Christ and God. Couldn’t there be people who believe just as much in Satanism?

        http://articles.latimes.com/1987-08-11/news/mn-846_1_child-molestation

        • jim says:

          at Presidio Army base some of the children had sexual diseases.

          Supposedly four children had chlamydia. How do you know that any of the children had chlamydia?

          Chlamydia is not transmissible orally. Since the children were virgins, hard to see how they could have gotten it.

          We know that large amounts of evidence was manufactured by those profiting from child abuse accusations. Thus the unexplained claim that four children had chlamydia is like arguing that “Uri Geller may have been caught bending some spoons with his hands, but what about all those other spoons he bent only with his mind?”

          • Sam says:

            “Supposedly four children had chlamydia. How do you know that any of the children had chlamydia?”

            The FBI.

            “Chlamydia is not transmissible orally. Since the children were virgins, hard to see how they could have gotten it.”

            “…How is chlamydia spread?

            You can get chlamydia by having vaginal, anal, or oral sex with someone who has chlamydia. If your sex partner is male you can still get chlamydia even if he does not ejaculate (cum)…”

            http://www.cdc.gov/std/chlamydia/stdfact-chlamydia.htm

            “We know that large amounts of evidence was manufactured by those profiting from child abuse accusations.”

            Says who? We don’t know that. It could be very well that you’re just making things up like the rest of your post.

            “Thus the unexplained claim that four children had chlamydia…”

            Explained.

            • jim says:

              “Supposedly four children had chlamydia. How do you know that any of the children had chlamydia?”

              The FBI.

              And how does the FBI know? Given that much of the evidence turned out to prove things that were physically impossible, why do you have confidence this evidence? Where does it come from? Is there a doctor who actually had access to the children and says “I did these tests and I got these results”? Who is this doctor, and how and when did he have access to the children?

          • Sam says:

            My main point is that many people are poo-pooing the idea that there was any sexual abuse at all. This is not true. It is a lie. An interesting side story to this is the psychiatrist that are pushing the “It’s all a lie” hardest are Jews. Hmm…wonder why?

            • jim says:

              Yes, I poo poo the idea that there was any sex at all because ALL OF THE FEMALE CHILDREN WERE VIRGINS. Every single one.

              Arguing that there was some sex is like arguing that Uri Geller bent some spoons with his mind even though he was sometimes caught bending them with his hands. We know that there was massive falsification and fabrication of evidence, and we know that the girls were virgins.

          • B says:

            You know, the guy claiming Uri Geller was a telepath the hardest was Uri Geller. And Uri Geller is a Jew.

            Makes you think, doesn’t it?

            (you can get some idea of how deep down the rabbit hole this goes by examining the Jewish coverup of the Multan Affair. Everyone knows about the Beilis affair, where Beilis was conveniently exonerated of ritual sacrifice of Christian children, but nobody knows about the Multan Affair, where a bunch of Udmurts were conveniently exonerated of ritual sacrifice of a Christian peasants: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C%D1%83%D0%BB%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B5_%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%BE . There’s not even an English Wikipedia article. Nobody even knows who the Udmurts are. The Jews are wily, my friend, wily and devious indeed.)

          • Sam says:

            Jim said,”…Yes, I poo poo the idea that there was any sex at all…”

            You sound just like Bill Clinton.

            I think you should change your blog’s name to “The Stanley”.

            Stanley one time told a girl his wife was dead and then tried to get her to write a recommendation letter to his wife.

            Your method of argumentation is very similar. Deny everything and just carry on as if facts never exist. Maybe it’s quantum thing. If you don’t acknowledge it doesn’t exist. Not to be tried with trains.

  10. Mycroft Jones says:

    Jim, did you set this blog so there can’t be any replies more than 5 levels deep?

    • jim says:

      Yes, slides off the page otherwise.

      Maybe when see worthwhile topics going deep, should make a post about the topic, but the blog form, unlike usenet, is not set up to sustain endless threads, but to terminate them.

  11. Mycroft Jones says:

    To continue a thread upstream that hit the 5-deep limit: B, I should have said Tanakh, not Torah. I follow a more primitive halakha. In the case of Moshe and Abraham, when they got rid of disrespectful wives, a) children went with them and b) they paid no child support. What is sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander. Paying child support incentivizes women to blow up marriages and families; without child support, an irresponsible woman is more likely to leave the children with the father.

    On the gay issue, you weren’t loopholing when you brought up the judge, jury, and community involvement. But if you pass up any opportunity to change the system to the one outlined in Tanakh, is that really good Torah living?

    http://loveandtruth.net/dr-laura-answers.html

    • B says:

      If it’s more primitive, it’s not halakha. When it says that you are put to death for violating Shabbat, or other violations, or when there are instructions to keep holidays and that one who does not, his soul is cut off, there is not enough there to understand what you actually should or should not do in actuality. What is hametz? It just means “sour.” But we see that there’s a prohibition on having it in your dwelling on Pesach, on penalty of your soul being cut off. Well, can I have lemons or olives? Can I have pickles or wine? What about vegetables with a sour taste? What about if it’s not in my house but in a storage unit I rent across town? I mean, assuming I actually believe that there’s a soul, that there’s a G-d, that the Torah is actually what he wants from me, I need to understand what, in practice, I should be doing.

      So we see that the Karaites, who held your viewpoint (which I myself used to share) still end up with a massive SOP corpus, most of which does not directly and intuitively follow from the Tanakh, which they claim is binding. Is it valid Torah? We see that the Karaites, who followed this approach, have almost died out. And the Torah says “by this shall you live,” and the Rabbis tell us that this means, “not die.”

      Moshe did not send off his wife because she was disrespectful to him. She came back to him eventually, by the way, and there was a very heavy punishment for Aaron and Miriam who spoke against him for marrying her.

      Hagar was not Avraham’s wife, and in any case his behavior is before the giving of the Torah and so we can’t really make a conclusion as to the law from it. Similarly, Jacob married two sisters, which the Torah expressly prohibits.

      >But if you pass up any opportunity to change the system to the one outlined in Tanakh, is that really good Torah living?

      It depends. This stuff is path-dependent. If the way in which you attempt to change the system drives people away from Torah, you are arguably violating the Torah-you are placing a stumbling block before the blind.

      In Ezekiel, we see that someone who sees his brother going astray and does not rebuke him bears his brother’s sin. The rabbis explain that this is true when there is a reasonable chance that the rebuke will be listened to. But if there is no such chance, then you are better off not rebuking him-it is better that he sins without knowledge than with knowledge. You need to find another way to reach him.

      If you find someone who is ignorant of the Law, who’s been raised in a 20th/21st century society which reassures him that the Law is a bunch of Bronze Age nonsense and superstition followed by lunatics and fanatics, and that to follow it means a life of suffering, ignorance, deprivation, welfare cheating, deep uncoolness and so forth, and this person is having a ham sandwich, smoking on Shabbat or engaging in sexually forbidden relations, and you start in with the line that this person is a piece of garbage, what they are doing makes them liable for death, it’s an abomination, etc., etc., what have you accomplished? You’ve made yourself feel good, while actually assuring that this Jew will continue doing what he was doing, but now with a sense of deep self-righteousness (to balance out his moral unease)-now he’s sticking it to that asshole with his stupid hat and medieval superstitions!

      • Mycroft Jones says:

        Halakha literally means “walking”. The more primitive halakha I follow are still halakha. What prompted you to try such a disqualification?

        You say that in the case of a “soul being cut off” there isn’t enough information to know what to do? I think there is enough information. You yourself referenced the judge, jury, stoning by the entire community, and in rare cases burning at the stake. Is this selective blindness?

        You say what is hametz? It doesn’t mean sour. Sour means sour. The Hebrew word Sour for Leaven is where the English “Sourdough” comes from. After several years of meditation, I was able to see the answer; wine and beer are not hametz, because the daily offering had to continue, and it required beer and wine every day. Therefore, hametz isn’t yeast, it is sourdough. Wine, vinegar, lemons, olives, are all fine. Funny what a fresh pair of eyes can see…

        It is true the Karaim and Shomronim have almost died out. And yet now they surge in numbers. This raises the question: if the Bible a hoax, why even bother, if the Talmud is what keeps people strong and intelligent, and leads to life?

        The successful communities like the Amish (and belatedly, the Shomronim are adopting these tactics) is to maintain a certain flexibility. I call this the JPEG principle. An image is made of pixel, a book is made of words. If you zoom too far into the image, you see nothing. If you insist that the image still has meaning, even when a single pixel fills the entire screen, then you are “reading into” the image anything your heart desires, not what the image itself actually shows.

        In my path, where there is ambiguity, I mark it as such and leave it to the individual. Why be stricter than God? This way, instead of a Talmud or Veda or Church Fathers that takes up an entire bookshelf, the book itself is sufficient; where it is ambiguous, there isn’t sufficient cause for action.

        Saying that Hagar was not Abraham’s wife is hair splitting, considering that the son of a pilyegesh was to get an equal inheritance with the son of a regular aisha mi’ketubah. As for Torah, it existed since creation. Right and wrong don’t change.

        Saying that Moses didn’t send his wife away because of disrespect is highly speculative and doesn’t fit the narrative in Tanakh. What other way is there to read it? She threw foreskins at Moshe’s feet and said “You bloody man!” And suddenly he sends her home to papa. She didn’t return to him; Her papa brought her back and begged Moshe “please, take this woman off my hands, *I* don’t want her!” Ok, I ad-libbed a (tiny) bit. But look at the sequence of events, your version doesn’t fit. Mine does. How could Moshe be an effective leader to Israel when he had a foreign wife that didn’t fear to shame him in public?

        Rebuke is an interesting word. It doesn’t mean yelling and name calling, necessarily. I’ve pondered the question of turning people to Torah, reaping the blessing of Daniel 12. The best answer I’ve seen so far is the one the Orthodox and the Amish have in common; form communities and live out the Law in them. Psalms 37:11; the meek will inherit the earth. It may take hundreds of years, but it is assured.

        In short, if you read “rebuke” as self-righteousness and pride, arrogance, and conceit… you will definitely go wrong. If you seek ways to rebuke out of love, then it is as you say; see where people are at. A famous Rabbi coopted by the Romans said “don’t cast your pearls before swine”. But always, moving the flock of sheep in the proper direction.

        If Jehu became king today, and asked for a volunteer militia to help guard a great feast, would you join? Why not?

        • B says:

          >Halakha literally means “walking”.

          It actually means “the way.” Torah literally means “instruction.” Is a crotcheting class or an archery lesson “Torah”?

          >You say that in the case of a “soul being cut off” there isn’t enough information to know what to do? I think there is enough information.

          There isn’t, as we see below.

          >You yourself referenced the judge, jury, stoning by the entire community, and in rare cases burning at the stake.

          I referenced this stuff largely because it’s a prime example of how what’s in the Torah is not an SOP. And your reading is plain evidence that it’s not an SOP, and you CAN’T derive an SOP just from looking at it.

          There is no judge, there is a panel of judges. And there is certainly no jury. And nobody gets burned at the stake. The punishment by burning involved pouring molten lead down the throat.

          >You say what is hametz? It doesn’t mean sour.

          Yes, it does. H-M-Tz always means sour. Hence, humtza is acid, mahmetzeth is sourdough, pickles are humutzim, etc. And this is why the Karaites avoided lemons on Pesach and don’t drink alcohol during the holiday:
          https://midlifebatmitzvah.wordpress.com/2011/04/12/a-karaite-seder/
          and avoid cheese and yogurt:
          http://www.karaiteinsights.com/article/faq.html
          as well as kitniyot:
          http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3699507,00.html
          (you can see that they themselves don’t agree what is hametz, and this is something that brings kareth, the worst punishment!)

          >Sour means sour.

          You’re thinking of “seor.” Seor is leaven. But the prohibition also explicitly states hametz.

          >After several years of meditation, I was able to see the answer; wine and beer are not hametz, because the daily offering had to continue, and it required beer and wine every day.

          Your meditation is off. Leaven is explicitly forbidden by the Torah from being offered as part of the burnt offering: “All meal-offerings that you bring to G-d are not to me made leavened, for all yeast [heb. se’or – alt. trans. ‘sourdough’ or ‘leaven’] and all honey you shall not burn from them a fire-offering to G-d. You shall bring them as a first [fruit-] offering to G-d but they shall not be placed upon the altar as a pleasing fragrance. You shall salt all your meal-offerings with salt and you shall not omit salt from [being placed] upon your meal-offerings. On all your offerings you shall bring salt.” (Vayik. 2:11-13)

          >Therefore, hametz isn’t yeast, it is sourdough. Wine, vinegar, lemons, olives, are all fine. Funny what a fresh pair of eyes can see…

          Seor is sourdough. Hametz is hametz. A fresh pair of eyes needs context and the ability to read Hebrew.

          >It is true the Karaim and Shomronim have almost died out. And yet now they surge in numbers.

          I last visited the Shomronim on Har Gerizim about a year ago. I haven’t noticed any surge whatsoever-they were a sad and raggedy little bunch, same as when I saw them in 2010. I have not seen ANY Karaim, although I guess there are some in Holon. No surge visible.

          >This raises the question: if the Bible a hoax, why even bother, if the Talmud is what keeps people strong and intelligent, and leads to life?

          The Bible is not a hoax, G-d forbid. But it is like a Haynes manual for your car. You can’t use it unless you already know more or less what you’re doing and what you’re looking at. You need tools and skills that the Haynes manual can’t teach you-that’s not its job.

          For instance, the Torah says “thou shalt kill of thy herd and of thy flock, which the LORD hath given thee, as I have commanded thee.” But we don’t see any explicit instruction on how to slaughter anywhere else in the Torah! Yet we have an unequivocal and extensive oral tradition on how to do shechita. In the earliest record of how Jews actually do things, the SOP, the Mishna, we see that there is a process, with laws. What’s the alternative-everyone kills as he sees fit?

          >In my path, where there is ambiguity, I mark it as such and leave it to the individual.

          Ambiguity is a matter of context and information. Torah means “instruction.” We are instructed to follow this instruction diligently. It is not logical that G-d made this instruction vague and up for interpretation by every uninformed individual based on their whims, especially when the Torah explicitly says to do something and that there is a punishment/consequence for not doing it. And indeed we see that people are commanded to go to experts when they don’t know what the law is/means, and that one of the first things Moses does is to create a hierarchy of such experts.

          >Saying that Hagar was not Abraham’s wife is hair splitting, considering that the son of a pilyegesh was to get an equal inheritance with the son of a regular aisha mi’ketubah. As for Torah, it existed since creation. Right and wrong don’t change.

          There was a giving of the Torah at Sinai. It was a big deal. We are commanded to celebrate Shavuoth to celebrate it yearly, for instance. Until that point, the Hebrews kept the Noahide Commandments but did not keep the Torah per se. Tthere are rabbis that say the Patriarchs did, but generally they mean this in some general way, that they in some way kept the spirit of each commandment, but not its letter. So we see Jacob marrying two sisters (forbidden by the Torah,) Abraham sacrificing outside the Tabernacle (forbidden by the Torah,) and obviously nobody did the prescribed commandments like writing a Torah scroll, celebrating the holidays, etc., etc.

          The son of a pilegesh gets an inheritance, because that is his right as a son. But the pilegesh does not have equal rights with a wife. And as I said, we can’t learn practical halacha from this episode.

          Right and wrong do change based on context. The Law is unchanging, but its application must be dynamic. That is why we have courts, Torah scholars, etc. It is not enough to know what the Law says-knowing how to use it is essential. It’s this way with any human endeavor-you get sick, you go to a doctor, even though you have access to all the same literature. Your pipes leak, you get a plumber. Obviously, you can learn yourself and decide whether you can fix it yourself or not. But you can’t just crack a book and learn plumbing or medicine.

          >Saying that Moses didn’t send his wife away because of disrespect is highly speculative and doesn’t fit the narrative in Tanakh. What other way is there to read it? She threw foreskins at Moshe’s feet and said “You bloody man!”

          That is not the case. Moshe was about to be killed by an angel (presumably for not circumcising his sons). She saved his life.

          >And suddenly he sends her home to papa.

          Generally, when you are in a situation where your life and the life of your people are in jeopardy, you might consider sending your wife and kids to a safe place.

          >She didn’t return to him; Her papa brought her back and begged Moshe “please, take this woman off my hands, *I* don’t want her!”

          That’s not in the text. Anywhere.

          >How could Moshe be an effective leader to Israel when he had a foreign wife that didn’t fear to shame him in public?

          She did not shame him in public, anywhere. When Moshe’s brother and sister speak against him for having her for a wife, G-d punishes them severely.

          >In short, if you read “rebuke” as self-righteousness and pride, arrogance, and conceit… you will definitely go wrong.

          Rebbe Nahman says, I believe, that in our days nobody has the standing to rebuke. It’s a complicated question.

          >If Jehu became king today, and asked for a volunteer militia to help guard a great feast, would you join? Why not?

          I would probably go to Judah, seeing as the Kingdom of Israel had no future. But in general, Jehu was G-d’s anointed, so barring going to Judah, I would support him in all he did.

  12. […] Speaking of pools and who builds them for whom, Jim is excellent on the subject of Degentrification: […]

  13. […] Degentrification. Related: Not your pool. Related: The actual story is different from the official version. Related: Baltimore: Arrests are down, crime is up. […]

Leave a Reply