one American identity

There was a time that what was emphasized was one American identity. But that was altered slowly in the 1960's when what teachers emphasized was to "find your roots." That was the beginning of diversity.  Eventually the very idea of a common American identity began to seem ridiculous since it was just a hodge podge of conflicting groups. (Especially victim groups.)

To me this seems sad, since American identity was founded on very important principles, not on geography.


What was important to the founding fathers of the human experiment called the USA was freedom. To deliver the human race from a condition of tyranny to one of freedom. That is not the same thing as going back to an Athenian form of government. The founding fathers were well aware the major cause of the Peloponnesian war between Sparta and Athens was the fact that Athens was trying to build up its empire much like Rome would do later. That meant basically subjugating all other cities in Hellas. Rather the founding fathers sought to form a government that would guarantee human freedom.


Freedom has been an ideal for thousands of years but it has been notoriously difficult to find a way to accomplish it in a way that does not dissolve into chaos and then tyranny all over again.

For people that seek tyranny over others the American system is a nightmare. The attacks on the basic values of  America came from one school of thought the Fabian school which later became the Frankfurt school. But these utilized different systems of thought to accomplish the goal of tearing down American society and replace it with Socialism (Marxism). One very major and successful tool was Psychology, but it was not the only one. The problem is that no one recognized the problem. The religious authorities were on the front lines to destroy American morality and they still are.

I was looking for a blog post or PDF that discussed why men should not get married. I could not find it but found some substitutes with roughly the same idea

http://www.avoiceformen.com--This might be the original essay that I saw



Important blog about how feminism has ruined marriage.

comments from here


[I should mention a good deal of the problems come from not listening to the holy Torah. But even religious teachers are infamous nowadays for ruining every marriage they get their hands on.]


"American women are selfish self-serving creatures. I use to believe marriage was necessary for having children and raising a family, not so. Marriage is death of manhood thanks to our divorce and family law. That being said there is some good women but it's like trying to find a needle in a haystack."

"Marriage as the worst thing a man can do. I was divorced in 2011. My Ex got the house even though she couldn't make the payments along with utilities. Now that is getting foreclosed on and she never refinanced in her name. The loan was still in our names jointly. I was fortunate to buy a home of my own 2 years ago before the home we lived in became foreclosed on. A major overhaul of divorce laws need to be taken. I should have been given the house due to the fact that I could afford to make payments and could have even sold it to avoid the mess. It's as if she had a certain sense of pride and wouldn't admit she couldn't do it. If there are any women reading this let it be known that i didn't cheat on her or touch her in anger. When she hit her 30's, she snapped. Cut her hair off started getting multiple tattoos right after her father passed away. Then began a facebook page at that point I knew my days were numbered. Talking about how she had never been on her own or independent. I had seen it with other men whose wives hit their 30's and 40's and go through the same thing. These men including myself worked hard, paid the bills but that wasn't good enough. It's when I saw a photo of a guy with sleeve tattoo, hair with frosted tips
she said she saw the photo on line and liked it. Which later turned out to be a Facebook friend that she reunited with that she knew when she was 15. Basically, don't get married it's a three ring circus, the engagement ring, the wedding ring, and the suffer"ring"."


"respect?...sex is very material, its not a thought its physical, and married or not, you have no particular right to it, and if you leave yourself open to blackmail with it, it probably isn't worth having...respect through marriage comes from your "empire" of family, Space is about possession and if you let your spouse keep on taking up the space, then that's your material failure. Being weak will lead to someone, anyone, walking on you...probably as you present no challenge to them and once you have provided all the material she needs, then really, if you don't entertain each other, what is left.

"

One world government under Socialism

 deterioration of USA society.   there was a well known group of people that were determined to delete American morality and values, and replace-them with Marxist-Freudian values.

 the connection between the Fabians and later psychology to eliminate traditional american values.  the connection to the Frankfurt school that got transplanted from Germany to Columbia University in NYC.

Fabians believed in one world government under Socialism and that happiness is the standard by which a society ought to be judged not Law, neither Divine Law nor Natural Law.
They did not believe in private property. They also understood to make these changes would be gradual. 

They drew from Utopians, John Stuart Mill, Karl Marx, Gradualism.

The problem was economic change was not popular [because people were doing well under free markets societies]. So they combined Freud with Marx to create a cultural revolution [that would lead to economic change.] The goal was to detach culture from moral values. The way to do this was by using Psychology and Freud to undermine morals. [Freud tried to show moral values have no objective basis.]
The key strategy was to influence the conscious and unconscious  mind. The academic world welcomed Socialism, Marxism and Psychology.  The problem was Christian and Jewish people in the USA were happy with Free Market society. So the idea was to tear down Western values, father knows best, family and replace it with G-d is dead, fathers are oppressive, tear down the system.
The way to accomplish their goals was to divide the USA by making victim groups 


[Religious teachers pretended and still pretend to be for family values but in fact went along with the Fabians and psychology and socialism because they think they will gain power.]
They played the victim card.
To have a classless society you need to get rid of freedom of choice, property ownership, and to wipe out white supremacy [White, Anglo Saxon Protestants].

The 1990's was when political correctness came into its own. That is obligation to be politically correct, [that is not just tolerate it.] [Disagreement not allowed.] Individual rights were understood to be obstacles to this.


Western Civilization is essentially in its basic essence Throne and Altar. But I admit that Altar (the Catholic faith) seems to have problems. In fact, the entire Christian Faith seems to have a couple of basic difficulties. 

My own approach is a kind of patchwork of ideas from my parents, and the Oral and Written Law, with a kind of paradigm based on Maimonides, the Gra, Reb Israel Salanter, Rav  Shach from Ponovitch.

s37 E flat major   e37 midi  e37 nwc

learning fast

1) Along with the idea you find in Chazal [the sages] of learning fast you could add the idea of finishing Shas and the entire Oral Law the work of Creation and מעשה בראשית מעשה מרכבה.

2) The way the Rambam understands these last to they refer to the Physics (eight books) and Metaphysics (14 books) of Aristotle.

3) The way the Rambam understood the Oral Law was such that he considered the entire Oral law to be contained in his major work the Mishne Torah. Thus the basic program of the Rambam would be easily done by going through this small set: Physics, Metaphysics, and Mishne Torah.

4) Though this is commendable, I would like to make a slight modification of this program of the Rambam. That is I think the actual Oral Law really ought to be learned in its entirety -that is the actual books that contained the Oral Law as known to the Chazal [Sages] -- (The Two Talmuds, with the Midrashei Halacha and Midrashei Agada.) Plus I think Physics has gone a bit further since the days of Aristotle. There is no exact set, but I think one should at least get through Relativity, QM, Field Theory,  String Theory. Abstract Algebra, and Algebraic Topology.

5) This might sound like a lot but it is not at all hard if one follows the program set by the Chazal, לעלם לגרס איניש אף על גב דמשכח ואף על גב דלא ידע נאי קאמר= "Say the words in order and go on."

6] Review I do like this. I finish ch 1., then I go back to review from the end to the beginning. Then I do ch 2. Then I go back and review ch 2 and ch 1.  etc . The review I usually do thus. Let's say ch 2 is divided into 10 subsections. Then I do 2.10, and then 2,9  then 2.8 etc. That means by the time I get to chapter 10 I have don ch. 1 a lot of times. But not ever subject requires this. You need to see which subject can just go straight with and which ones require more review. It is highly individual.

Several wives.If something is not forbidden then why say it is? You want to be more strict than Moses?

Not everyone with several wives in the Bible had trouble. With Jacob there was some trouble, but overall I think he did pretty well. King David’s son Solomon came from Bat Sheva who was not David’s first or only wife. Caleb Ben Yefuna had a few wives and few girls friend simultaneously and the Bible says about him the most unique phrase it uses anywhere וימלא אחרי השם He walked totally with God. “Totally” here means “completely,” or 100%.


[Nature abhors a vacuum. I see this a lot. People don't like the Law of Moses so they make up their own prohibitions, and ignore things that are clearly forbidden in the Law of God.]
The general way to understand the Law of Moses is thus: There are things that are forbidden. These always  come with the words, "Thou shalt not do such and such." There are things one must do. They always come with the words, "Thou shalt do such and such." Then there are things that are neither forbidden nor obligated.   They might be good to do but they are not obligated. There might be things that are not prudent, but they are not forbidden.

Christians try to argue that two wives is not prudent and therefore must be forbidden. However that does not follow. Also the entire existence of the Jewish people is the result of Jacob having four wives. Plus Caleb Ben Yefuna is not a minor figure in the Bible. He is well known as the friend of Joshua and the fact that he had a few wives and girl friends is not ignoble.
I am simply trying to make a difference between what the Law of Moses  forbids and that which it does not forbid. The cases of multiple wives that I know about are usually quite happy. The women are attached to some Alpha Male and are willing to put up with anything in order to be with him. And I never saw anything to indicate that the children were worse off. But people that are more familiar with Mormons might have different observations--I admit.

s35 C Major  s35 midi  s35 nwc