Donnadogsoth

There are no "emergent" properties, they all originate from the Creator. Human creativity is the discovery and application of principle to change the nature of the visible Universe, but, this strikes me as the opposite of emergent properties. We might call it "submergent" properties: the delving into the ontological muck to pull out an irregular silvery object of remarkable beauty and utility.

Could Marxism have arisen outside a Christian culture?

Are you deducting YHWH from Judaism?

A plausible and popular idea, but, which rests consciousness only on an inexplicable "brute fact". An æternal substance which is the repository of the essence of consciousness and which necessarily exists solves this problem.

...according to Jay Fayza from the Rebel Media. Any challengers to this view? Two REAL reasons the West accepts so many migrants

Confucius say, It is easier to destroy than to create--except a mess.

The African democratic experience in a nutshell.

Trump Being Trapped By London and Wall Street—He Must Be Protected "As Donald Trump begins his first week in office as President of the United States, the Western world is in a dangerous state of tumult and indecision, but one of extraordinary potential. The direction the Trump presidency will take is uncertain. While Trump campaigned against the role of Wall Street over Obama and Hillary, and explicitly called for restoring Glass Steagall to end the power of Wall Street over government, his choice for Secretary of the Treasury, Steven Mnuchin, claimed in his Congressional confirmation hearing that neither he nor Trump want to restore Glass Steagall, since, he said, it would disrupt "liquidity and the capital markets." This is particularly absurd, since it comes as the entire western financial system is facing a catastrophic collapse of the $2 quadrillion (that is, 2 and 15 zeros) derivative bubble — gambling debts sucking the blood out of the real economy. " "Trump is in trouble," Lyndon LaRouche asserted today, pointing to his exposure to huge debts and creditors who are trying to hold him to account on behalf of the City of London and Wall Street. "We need to clean out the dirty operators — we need a clean operation in the U.S., that will protect Trump and protect the country." LaRouche has called on the Congress to reject Mnuchin's appointment to Treasury, and to immediately restore Glass Steagall as the necessary first step to restoring the nation's real economy. "The Wall Street power over leading elements of both political parties is now exposed, as the right wing Republican's and their fellow Obama Democrats have joined forces to instigate the removal of Trump from office by any means necessary. Members of Congress and elements in the intelligence community are "investigating" connections between Trump and his cabinet appointees with the Russian government, playing on the absolute hysteria against Russia and Vladimir Putin by the Obama circle (who, as Putin said last week, "keep saying goodbye but don't leave")."

Population A believes man is made in the image of God and thereby rational, principled, and loving, but also damaged by Original Sin and so inclined towards evil. Population B believes man is merely an animal of no consequence in the Universe. What kinds of societies will A and B respectively create? Individual actions may vary widely, but the general thrust of A will be to create a society that looks towards the future, develops its economy, and educates its young to discover the principles upon which the survival of the whole depends. That would give the society the equivalent of a living organism's physical geometry, and it would discover and employ principle, and survive. B's thrust would be to take its cue from the animal world. Again, individual actions, including those inspired by a legacy of an A-society, now overwhelmed by B-thinking, may vary widely, but the general thrust would be towards today. Being an ant is so much work, better to be a grasshopper and hop about in the Summertime. Why not screw animals? There is no such thing as human dignity. Why donate to charity?--everything ends in the Heat Death anyway. Why not commit suicide if your life sucks, there will be no penalty and the people around you will thank you for ridding them of your depressing presence. Such a society would not be able to discover principle as a mandate, it would not be able to muster the courage to defend itself from other societies, such as a dedicated and aggressive religious colonisation movement. Such a society would have the geometry of an inorganic thing--a dead thing. So, it will die.

Good cannot mean that which destroys mankind, by malice or neglect, for then Good would destroy itself by destroying the only Earthly beings capable of goodness. Therefore Good must mean that which contributes to the successful survival of mankind, in general and in particular, which means applying reason and agape to advance those ends.

Millions of coloured people continue to pour into the West, whether as refugees or as economic migrants. These people don't just look different from white Westerners, they act different as well. Why is this? Obviously, it's because they have different brains, which guide how they act. But, what makes their brains different? Some would say it is because of nature, that the coloured people's genetic differences give rise to different brains which in turn give rise to different types of societies and different actions. Others would say it is because of nurture, that the coloured people's cultural differences give rise to different brains which in turn give rise to different types of societies and different actions. Still others would say it is a bit of both. So, which is it? It doesn't matter. If genes are the controlling factor, then that's that. If culture is, then that's that. Either way, we have a person who is wired differently than we are. Some will object, “But, they can assimilate into our culture,” and that's true—for a tiny amount of them. A single coloured in white society--healthy, functioning, self-asserting white society--is going to be the nicest, most genteel, most circumspect coloured you ever saw. Any differences in his mind are going to be lying fallow within him. A million coloureds, however, will begin tilling the soil, to so speak. They will not be the nicest and most genteel. They will not be the best and the brightest. They will imitate the ways of their fellows from coloured countries, and where they live will end up, shortly, to be a colony of where they came from. A Pakistani immigrant was overheard in England recently saying “This is not England, this is Pakistan!” and why shouldn't we believe him? Are we that stupid? The individual coloured is not the problem as such, but he is a beachhead for colonialist coloureds who want to, and will, given the chance, turn their host Western country into their own country. It doesn't matter where their actions are coming from, whether culture or blood. Either way or a mixture of both generates a mighty avalanche of neurological programming--whereby, the more of them there are, the more they will resist assimilating into Western culture, and will instead displace it and replace it with their own culture.

Yes, identity or ego if you prefer. "What I am" is the fundamental personal question and rule. There is no getting away from identity. So, if we want a society to commit suicide, we convince it that its own identity is bad, and so its members look elsewhere for identity. For heterosexuals heterosexuality in the big sense of there being distinct sexes who have distinct employment and pastime preferences, who mate with their counterpart and raise families, is bad, so we have been shifting towards government-supported single motherhood, legal abortion, and rainbowism. Men, masculinity, heterosexuality, etc., are all suspect, bastards, rapists in waiting, to be rejected until they pay obeisance to the new order. If you don't pay for a woman's abortion with a glad heart, you're a SEXIST.

PHOTOS: ANTI-TRUMP PROTESTER DISPLAYS ISIS FLAG, BEHEADING VIDEO Uses jihadist propaganda to intimidate Trump supporters [Note: link doesn't lead to a beheading video, it leads to an InfoWars article about someone displaying a beheading video to Trump supporters] Aside from the issue of the ongoing coarsening of society with shock after informational shock--what's next? What tops this?--Nicolaus of Cusa used the "coincidata oppositorum" to describe how opposite things like being and nonbeing, straight and curved find themselves meeting in God's nature. I suppose this article is proof Satan, too, operates on the same principle. It makes sense, really. The extreme Left, Islam, they're both culture-wreckers, they both want to annihilate the White race, they both want to end Euro-American hegemony, and they both hate Israel. Trump's victory is sticking in their craw because they know they are so close to achieving all four goals...whereupon they will set upon each other.

Maybe a tangent, but isn't Identity the primary need? If one acts to satisfy physical hunger, then one is doing so because one has an identity of doesn't-deserve-to-be-hungry. So with drink, sex, land-occupation, and nature of death. It all revolves around identity.

1a. Substance is efficient cause, efficient cause requires will. For something to exist without being an efficient cause of some effect in the world, would mean that that thing is a predicate of a subject, a mere appearance in a soul's mind, a substance's mind, not a soul or substance in of itself. So, all substances are willing souls, all predicates are neither substances nor souls, but associates of them. 1b. That presumes the lack of an entelechy guiding the process towards an omega state. Stefan is misreading the situation by presuming that the arrow of time applies to æternity, destroying æternity. If it does not, we can consider Æternity, or Truth, to be that which the temporal is striving towards, and therefore we have the phenomenon of physical, biological, and noëtic evolution. 1c. The expression of self-love compares to agape as a sticky-fingered baby reaching for more grape jelly compares to the sacrifice of Joan of Arc. Silk would be the Spider race's primary metaphor, for certain. They would conceive of a Universe that was spun. And, in a way, they'd be right. Eventually they would arrive at the principle of learned ignorance and realise that the Universe is different in its nature of making, but they would not, unless they were Atheist spiders, fail to acknowledge that there was an intelligence behind said making, that the Truth encircled them like a perfect orb web's circumference, and that no matter how well they spun they would never spin a web of knowledge that would exactly equal the perfection of said Truth. On the hammer issue, my point was that I don't need to know a fig's worth of physics, mathematics, metallurgy, or anything else to know that the hammer has the virtue of hammering, which none of those aforementioned disciplines can in any way detract from.

"If the present situation can be attributed to difficulties of various kinds, it is not out of place to speak of "structures of sin," which. . . are rooted in personal sin and thus always linked to the concrete acts of individuals who introduce these structures, consolidate them, and make them difficult to remove. And thus they grow stronger, spread, and become the source of other sins, and so influence people's behavior. "Sin" and "structures of sin" are categories which are seldom applied to the situation of the contemporary world. However, one cannot easily gain a profound understanding of the reality that confronts us unless we give a name to the root of the evils which afflict us." --Pope John Paul II, Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, 36. The late, great JRR Tolkien once asserted that his The Lord of the Rings sextilogy contained nothing by the way of allegory. It was not about Hitler, or the Great Wars, or anything else. It was purely a work imagination, and, if we accept the master's word on it, that's that. Except I don't accept it. I believe that Tolkien did not intentionally put symbolism into his masterpiece, but that such symbolism couldn't help but work its way in like an hexagonal pattern working its way into a compressed layer of children's marbles. A work as popular as Rings could not have been that popular unless it spoke profoundly to the archetypal soul of mankind, and to the European folk-soul in particular. That said, I present something that has been said before, but never here: that the One Ring in these books is a metaphor for something, something Christian, something philosophical, and something profound and shattering in its implications for the individual, for his social sphere, for the Western world, and for Terra in its entirety. It's something that shouldn't come as a complete surprise... It is this: the One Ring is the love of money, which is the root of all evil, including love of force and the force-like nature of money, the tendency of its worshippers to create “structures of sin”. The perfect, gold-coin-like physical form of the Ring itself testifies symbolically to 1 Timothy 6:10 which says, “For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.” (NIV) If we look closer at money and its god, Mammon, we find that it is at the centre of worship for a “ring” of power called the oligarchy or world power elite. This ring is deeply involved in the accumulation and use of money to buy whatever they wish, including land, resources, power over others, and especially to accrue more money. Their goal is to have the last dollar, and thereby control the world utterly. This is not capitalism as such. This is stacking the deck using war, fraud, bribery, and other forms of physical violence and intimidation in favour of the conspirators of wealth for the sake of their own benefit and at the expense of everything and everyone else, who are, to them, mere livestock, to be bred and, ultimately, culled as needed. The love of money is original to even the Angels. Even Lucifer had a money-loving mind, for would he not have simply bought the Throne of the Most High if he had the chance? The fact that money proper was a later creation of mankind doesn't matter, the potential was there, the dirty-mindedness. Love of money is the root of all evil? But, is it? Rather, isn't greed the root of all evil, greed for status, for the unbuyable--another man's wife, a famous painting, prized land, æternal life, love? Yet what are all these things but that which the money-loving man would buy with his money if only he were able? Money is the ultimate labour-saving device, and the money-loving man wishes both that he had unlimited money and that that money could buy all he desires. And all the better if his money were irresistible, that it had force-like power over other men, and so love of money leads spiritually to physical force. Tolkien named the One Ring, “The Doom of Man”. Apposite terminology, for the true “doom” or fate of man is to be controlled by philosophy, by ideas, by the force-like magic of words, including the word “money”. “Mount Doom” from whence the One Ring came, is therefore the Mountain of Philosophy. And, to destroy the One Ring, love of money, force, including the force-like nature of money, the structures of sin, by throwing it back into its igneous origins, one must first scale the mountain of philosophy. And at the precipice, with love of money—with that secret desire one has for possession-power rather than righteousness, with the preciousness of physical force, and the spiritual presumption that Mammon is the true god of this world, with greed and fraud and theft and taxation and the State and preemptive war and vengeance and even physical self-defence in one's hand, who can let it go freely? If the proposition were just “stop taxing me,” that would be relatively easy for all. If it were merely, “don't exact vengeance against he who assaults my family,” that would be harder, but doable for most. But, if it is “don't use force against anyone, ever,” that's almost impossible. I have met in the flesh only one person in my life who appeared to live by that credo. Thus, the love of money, a kind of mental dirtiness, is irresistible to the spiritually impoverished “gollums” of the world, of which there are many. And the use of any force, for any reason, is par for the psychological course for such creatures. Jesus prayed and sweated blood over this. His only recorded “forceful” action was in bloodlessly “driving” the money-changers from the Temple, a symbolic act against Mammon. But, he never used force to defend himself or others, and told his followers not to resist evil, holding onto this precept unto death. Jesus was offered the kingdoms of the world by Satan and forsook it all for a put-upon life and a criminal's death. As Plato says in his Republic, “Let him be the best of men, and let him be thought the worst; then he will have been put to the proof; and we shall see whether he will be affected by the fear of infamy and its consequences. And let him continue thus to the hour of death; being just and seeming to be unjust. When both have reached the uttermost extreme, the one of justice and the other of injustice, let judgment be given which of them is the happier of the two.” and “Let me put them into the mouths of the eulogists of injustice: They will tell you that the just man who is thought unjust will be scourged, racked, bound --will have his eyes burnt out; and, at last, after suffering every kind of evil, he will be impaled: Then he will understand that he ought to seem only, and not to be, just;” As in Tolkien, The Ring has a double nature. The Ring for him is both itself as a magic vessel and also the soul of the Dark Lord Sauron, who has bound his soul into it in order to magnify his power. In real life, the double nature is both the lovableness of money, its possibilities, and symbolism and also the lovableness of force and money's force-like nature, its compulsive, magical nature, its grandeur and capacity to facilitate the constructions of the Structures of Sin. Worshipping Mammon drains the soul of its love, addicts it to gain, and those precious people and things of one's past pale, just as the lives of those caught in unjust social systems pale. And, force begets force, force teaches that force is good, is acceptable, is useful, is thinkable. We cannot destroy the love of money without destroying the love of force. How can these tendencies, these loves, be fought? They get the blood up, they are primal, lurking like evil seeds in our stomachs, sending up shoots to entangle our honour, and our intellect. It's painful and angering to consider that we shouldn't love the violence that preserves our own lives, and in that sense the Church responds with Just War theory, that violence must be met with the minimum of counterforce, and always as a last resort. The aim is to starve the seeds, do not feed them violent thoughts, do not cater to fantasies of vengeance, do not go looking for trouble and then “defend yourself” when it arrives. And the virtue of charity should always supplant the love of money, by seeking to realise the humanity of our neighbours. Who can climb the Mountain of Doom and destroy it? In Tolkien, no one could. It was only a kind of luck that cast the Ring back into the Cracks of Doom along with the gollum and brought about the Fourth Age, the Age of Reason, the Return of the King. We cannot do it as a society alone, we cannot expect individual human virtue to bring about what Tolkien coined as the “eucatastrophe” or sudden, dramatic turn for the better, we cannot replace the role of Providence, but we can through action, thought, speech, and prayer make ourselves and our society more prone to being so “lucky” through our fellowship and wilful, dedicated ascent up the slopes of the Mountain of Philosophy. [EDIT: corrected and updated]

Confucius say, There are three methods that we may learn wisdom: by reflection, which is noblest; by imitation; which is the easiest; and by experience, which is the bitterest.

That's like saying you need to know the atomic structure of a hammer before you can use it to build a house.

At least they're wearing dresses. People dress so slouchy these days.

Alright, I have to hand it to the Iberians, but, even if modern Europe is in the same situation it would be better to apply the oz. of prevention rather than wage a lb. of cure. It's not like the Spanish and the Portuguese lost nothing of value in the process of invasion, occupation, and revolt. If we can spare our children that so much the better.

Will it matter? The culture will be dead at that point, Sharia will be in place, massive miscegenation will have happened, and Christianity will be a joke. And, I don't think the neo-janissaries will be in the mood to revolt against and expel their Moslem brothers. It really comes down to this generation stopping the tide or nothing.

THE RING OF POLYCRATES by Friedrich Schiller (1759-1805) PON his battlements he stood, And downward gazed in joyous mood, On Samos' Isle, that owned his sway. "All this is subject to my yoke;" To Egypt's monarch thus he spoke,-- "That I am truly blest, then, say!" "The immortals' favor thou hast known! Thy sceptre's might has overthrown All those who once were like to thee. Yet to avenge them one lives still; I cannot call thee blest, until That dreaded foe has ceased to be." While to these words the king gave vent, A herald from Miletus sent, Appeared before the tyrant there: "Lord, let thy incense rise to-day, And with the laurel branches gay Thou well may'st crown thy festive hair! "Thy foe has sunk beneath the spear,-- I'm sent to bear the glad news here, By thy true marshal Polydore." Then from a basin black he takes-- The fearful sight their terror wakes-- A well-known head besmeared with gore. The king with horror stepped aside, And then with anxious look replied: "Thy bliss to fortune ne'er commit. On faithless waves, bethink thee how Thy fleet with doubtful fate swims now-- How soon the storm may scatter it!" But ere he yet had spoke the word, A shout of jubilee is heard Resounding from the distant strand. With foreign treasures teeming o'er, The vessels' mast-rich wood once more Returns home to its native land. The guest then speaks with startled mind: "Fortune to-day, in truth, seems kind; But thou her fickleness shouldst fear: The Cretan hordes, well skilled in arms, Now threaten thee with war's alarms; E'en now they are approaching here." And, ere the word has 'scaped his lips, A stir is seen amongst the ships, And thousand voices" Victory!"cry: We are delivered from our foe, The storm has laid the Cretan low, The war is ended, is gone by!" The shout with horror hears the guest: "In truth, I must esteem thee blest! Yet dread I the decrees of heaven. The envy of the gods I fear; To taste of unmixed rapture here Is never to a mortal given. "With me, too, everything succeeds; In all my sovereign acts and deeds The grace of Heaven is ever by; And yet I had a well-loved heir-- I paid my debt to fortune there-- God took him hence--I saw him die. "Wouldst thou from sorrow, then, be free Pray to each unseen Deity, For thy well-being, grief to send; The man on whom the Gods bestow Their gifts with hands that overflow, Comes never to a happy end. "And if the Gods thy prayer resist, Then to a friend's instruction list,-- Invoke thyself adversity; And what, of all thy treasures bright, Gives to thy heart the most delight-- That take and cast thou in the sea!" Then speaks the other, moved by fear: "This ring to me is far most dear Of all this isle within it knows-- I to the furies pledge it now, If they will happiness allow"-- And in the flood the gem he throws. And with the morrow's earliest light, Appeared before the monarch's sight A fisherman, all joyously; "Lord, I this fish just now have caught, No net before e'er held the sort; And as a gift I bring it thee." The fish was opened by the cook, Who suddenly, with wondering look, Runs up, and utters these glad sounds: "Within the fish's maw, behold, I've found, great lord, thy ring of gold! Thy fortune truly knows no bounds!" The guest with terror turned away. "I cannot here, then, longer stay,-- My friend thou canst no longer be! The gods have willed that thou shouldst die Lest I, too, perish, I must fly"-- He spoke,--and sailed thence hastily. [This anonymous translation of "The Ring of Polycrates" was originally published in 1902.] [Courtesy poetry-archive.com]

Of course it's a threat, it's cutting into our identity as White Westerners. Identity is the power house of human behaviour, and undercutting that is a great way to conquer someone. Make them feel racist, wormy, ashamed, afraid to look any Coloured people in the eye, afraid to use the subway system, afraid to talk about the oppressive, anti-White atmosphere that is descending like a nauseating smog onto our countries. The video is true and ridiculous simultaneously: True because the political economy of the West, as directed by the essential type of the London-Wall Street axis, has, in various forms throughout modern history, been responsible for the controlled take-down of attempts at opposing its system of usurious monetarism. The good news is this is not intrinsic to the West and, as a parasitical entity, can be shrugged off and replaced with the American System of political economy based on national sovereignty and sound money. Ridiculous because if Whites are so powerful, why are they letting the Coloureds pour in and turn their country upside down? Why are they melting before all opposition culturally? The Whites must not be so powerful after all, but instead must merely be the residual “hicks” from the old racism bottle. What is promising is the possibility of the Left overplaying their hand by using the word “racism,” “racism,” “racism” over and over again, applied to the tiniest things— “I think Daffy Duck is racist! He's Black but he's coded for White!” “White Zombie is a racist name for a band!” “Casting for period pieces set in 1830s England is racist!” “The Wizard of Id has a huge White nose, that's racist!” As Anita Sarkeesian has taught us, “everything is racist”. Is it? Then I suppose racism—preferring the company of one's own kind, in one's country, in one's clubs, in one's newspapers, and in one's matrimonial bed and in the faces of one's children--is natural and normal and good. No need to be rude, but get real.

That's what I realised. I did my best, though.