1:32:30 when everything is delegated to the state their is no accountability... seems to me women didn't use to just manage the household accounts, they held the household to account.

They've already broken down the in-group preference of the largest ethnic group in the US (whites), by emphasizing and promoting different groups. The second stage will attempt to break those in-group preferences down after they're done using them. The goal is to create an in-group preference for the state. The Bolsheviks attempted to do this in Russia.

Yes! We have brought/encouraged/allowed what was once on the fringes of society smack dab into the normal. And it has resulted in chaos.

It seems to me that Kruptos, Dave, and PVK may have something to talk about. The convo you hosted with Dave and PVK last time was a touch chaotic. Perhaps a good topic would be: how can politics support and protect the Church, and how can the Church legitimize politics? It seems that Peterson taught people to start thinking religiously again, and Yarvin got people thinking politically again. PVK and Dave's respective projects are to incarnate the online energy. The TLC needs the DR and the DR needs the TLC.

Why would we pretend that accommodating and adapting to the culture is something new? When Christianity came to the "New World" it did exactly that, to avoid being shut out completely.

Interesting (perhaps surprising) to hear this perspective from a Calvinist. The little I know of the Ellulian critique of society has come from Paul Kingsnorth who converted to Orthodox.

I hat that word, community, now! The left has ruined that idea for me! The trans ‘community’, the gay ‘community’, the school ‘community’, etc, etc.!! Just TOO much! Here’s my community, AMERICA!!!!

Excellent thanks

"I am a calvinist" And I clicked on stop

Ben should get Khalid from Subliminal Jihad on..

Why would you both pretend 1. That Dawkins statement on being a cultural Christian is something new (despite him saying it years ago), and 2. Christianity is somehow required to have a desirable civilization? Mormons do it, and although they are based on Christianity, they definitely aren't. Similarly, there can be an atheist society based on themes considered (rightly or wrongly) to be Christian.

Why do they always destroy the monastery? England, France, Germany, Mexico.

Ginger Toms are the best - give him some biffo ginger!

Ironically, though a non-Nietzschean, Nietzsche said that same thing as Kruptos abt not conforming to the worker's lifestyle prescribed by the regime.

Here's what I think defines religion, explains how it's tied into, and largely synonymous historically with society and culture, also how/why it served an adaptive function: I think it's a set of rituals, customs etc., that is reflective of the predominant traits and behaviors, of particular ethnic groups in particular environments, or a collection of probably no more than a few ethnic groups. Referring to some sort of "gang" might seem like a bad analogy, but tbh it's what comes to mind when discussing group membership, ppl banning together for practical purposes, and a feeling of security, accompanying shared rituals and signaling of solidarity plus allegiance against enemy groups in a neighboring territory, at least as a hyperbolic illustrative example (no offense). However, there's more to the story, because the externally codified representation of shared characteristics, served also to incorporate outsiders, and thus to grow the group's size which was also advantageous. So, how did that work, if a religion was mostly associated with an ethnic group? (A similar question: how are ppl assimilated into a new society today? Does it rly work, and what's it entail?) I think the answer is that, ethnicities mostly tended to hold groups together, but when we begin to define ethnicities, we find that they involve bundles of traits. Outsiders would usually have, at least relatively different bundles of traits. However, there's always variation within groups. So for example, if there's a nearby group that's mostly neurotic, but some of its members happen to be more conscientious than usual, and your own ethno-religious group is mostly higher in conscientiousness, then those particular outsiders would likely constitute 'viable converts'. They would be good candidates to allow to marry into your 'tribe,' share in similar behaviors, and grow the size of your group for defensive purposes. Also quick thoughts on the greater or lesser prevalence of supernatural beliefs, plus things like visions, in a particular religion: Things like visuospatial reasoning, and abstraction, are also heritable within groups, this might have been in large part, another way of signaling membership, shared similar tendencies, thus facilitating 'belonging' and mutual identification (security within group by proving you're similar, and you belong).

The comparison to the Supreme Court is flawed at a fundamental level. The Law is written in the court's basis. The situations that are being weighed against the law are subjective. The court's job is to decide which version of the subjective evidence best aligns with demonstrable facts and then to weigh those facts against a fixed law. A court that 'interprets' law is a super-legislative judicial oligarchy.

Body of 'people of god'? If one person is a person of god, we all are. And of course, we all came from the same source, whatever that may be. (2) Dawkins is an atheist, he does not degrade Christianity specifically. (3) I am a cradle Catholic who has struggled mightily with the Church, like Dawkins, I believe in the spirit of religion. Can't stand evangelicals or Jesus thumpers.

.

Ms. 🐾is 1st comment 🏆

this sounds stupid. he says wisdom is recognizing what is happening and reacting accordingly. intelligence is recognizing what is happening. knowledge is the compendium of potential reactions one or more may be appropriate. people who call themselves wise tend to be stupid, arrogant, and incorrigible. you can give them authority conditional to their recognition that they are responcible for the results and if the results dont match their ascriptions, then they are at fault. so they make their prophecy, you write it down, make them sign it, store it with a party they claim is trustworthy, do what they suggest, then you take out the prophecy and compare it with the results, and share the comparison with the 'wise' man. often, the prophecy will be wrong, and they will reject that they were wrong. maybe they will say that the pact was meddled with. maybe they will say that they proclaimed something would happen and it did but the observers are the truely dishonest ones. sometimes they will neither attack the measurement results, or the integrity of the document, but the relation of the tools for measurement relating to the prescription. rarely will they accept responcibility. some this relates to dementia. yes, litteral dementia. when someone has dementia they will have a corrupted sense of the past and present. you can ask someone with dementia to hold a glass of water, and then you can ask them why they are holding a glass of water, and they will say that they were thirsty. posthoc rationalization aka dementia leads these people to have a very inflated sense of their competence. beyond those semantics, what saul demonstrates in suggesting they cut a baby in two isnt wisdom. it is callousness, impatience, and a sense of humor. he said something horrible and it was remembered because it worked out, but how many times did he bluff monstrous behavior only for it to occur? he raped his daughter in law, and killed his son for confronting him about it. suggesting a guard cut a baby in two has a risk of the baby being cut in two, which he doesnt care about, and creates an opportunity to resolve the case swiftly so he no longer has to deal with these people. win-win. people calling saul wise for coming up with a callous riddle, when he clearly didnt care, are showing a lack of 'wisdom'. they are showing a lack of learning from experiance and instead are posturing book knowledge which may not have even been originally understood. and on top of that, it is coming from a highly edited and editorialized mythic cannon copied by hand and changed to represent reproducer-ial biases. it is a telephone game. 'he is in one sense under the law, and in another sense he is expected to pronounce law.' this is a bizzare authoritarian wetdream. there is subtext i am picking up of envy, and desiring to be this arbitrary dictator. in a good system, laws come not from individuals but the needs of communities. if you empower an individual, no matter how pure, corruption will flow because they will do what they think is best. and what an individual thinks is best will enfranchise those ideologically alligned with him or factionally alligned, and will disenfranchise those who are dis-amenable and vexatious. 'he is not accountable to the people he is accountable to god' by means of the people. you can go full thomas aquinas and tell the people to burn their crops cause the rapture is coming, but you cant tell them to unburn them. and they will hold you to account. 'when the dictator comes and you have severed the connection with god, he acts with power' you act with power and corruption when you proclaim god is on your side as well. whether you proclaim god to be on your side will not change the results. god's authority comes from power as well. 'the rational system has to be based on something' 'but it is not' 'but it is based on reason' 'it is based on nothing' okay grandpa. take your dementia medicine. 'we are going to build a new morality based on rationality' you dont need to have a morality for a system to be reasoned or rational. you can look to what works and what doesnt and that is a decent heuristic at a short time scale. then you can repeatly increase the sense of timescale to be able to reason about ever greater time horizons. you are right that reason doesnt work in times of rapid technological change, but also tradition doesnt work either. this is especially true for corrupted new religions like christianity. when one thing changes, the context around it changes. so when you change one thing you change the universe. when you decide to make tomatos not rot as quickly, you reduce their sugar content as well, and their flavor. you get unforeseen consequences when you solve for one value and neglect to measure the rest. when you rapidly change a bunch of values all together, reason does fail but only from the instability of the system. does wisdom do better than reason, or do the young turn away from churches because the message is made for pensioners and women and not the youth?

>Canadian Gross. See you for the next show Mr. Boyce!

Sounds like Nietzsche, but with a Christian flavor.

Yuck!! I listened to 28:00, can't stand more.

be careful with that "Christ is King" thing. he got a cross not a crown when he showed up. crown of thorns. the government will be upon his shoulder one day but not yet. isnt that more than obvious to anyone other than Calvinists? theres a "christ" coming who will claim to be king but it will be the wrong one. the right one will throw him out after a short time but the wrong one is on his way.

*feels slightly bad for trwling, yet feels urge to continue trwling*

Third

De-industrialization. So. Dumb.

intuitive sense of reimagining forevevr. blah blah

Hey Ben, once you get a clue you might actually stop indulging far-left nonsense- l certainly won't be holding my breath. It's hilarious tho in the meantime...

I didn't need to be convinced, I already knew that religion was the medieval version of government, and that we're regressing.

As a Christian, I'm absolutely horrified that this so-called "pastor" doesn't understand that Catholicism has absolutely nothing to do with Christianity. I'm sure he's read Revelations countless times and yet has the hide to call himself a pastor without really having any clue what he's talking about. He's extremely uninteresting to listen to as well.

The woman problem....? Watch some tradwives videos. The kids are unsupervised while she is making sourdough bread for her man baby. One baby with his fingers in an electric power point and another toddler heading to the farm dam.

This guy shows no originality