Saturday, May 26, 2012

The 39 Articles

James Burnham listed these in his book on liberalism. The more of them you agree with, the more liberal you are.

1. All forms of racial segregation and discrimination are wrong.
2. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion.
3. Everyone has a right to free, public education.
4. Political, economic or social discrimination based on religious belief is wrong.
5. In political or military conflict it is wrong to use methods of torture and physical terror.
6. A popular movement or revolt against a tyranny or dictatorship is right, and deserves approval.
7. The government has a duty to provide for the ill, aged, unemployed and poor if they cannot take care of themselves.
8. Progressive income and inheritance taxes are the fairest form of taxation.
9. If reasonable compensation is made, the government of a nation has the legal and moral right to expropriate private property within its borders, whether owned by citizens or foreigners.
10. We have a duty to mankind; that is, to men in general.
11. The United Nations, even if limited in accomplishment, is a step in the right direction.
12. Any interference with free speech and free assembly, except for cases of immediate public danger or juvenile corruption, is wrong.
13. Wealthy nations, like the United States, have a duty to aid the less privileged portions of mankind.
14. Colonialism and imperialism are wrong.
15. Hotels, motels, stores and restaurants in southern United States ought to be obliged by law to allow Negroes to use all of their facilities on the same basis as whites.
16. The chief sources of delinquency and crime are ignorance, discrimination, poverty and exploitation.
17. Communists have a right to express their opinions.
18. We should always be ready to negotiate with the Soviet Union and other communist nations.
19. Corporal punishment, except possibly for small children, is wrong.
20. All nations and peoples, including the nations and peoples of Asia and Africa, have a right to political independence when a majority of the population wants it.
21. We always ought to respect the religious beliefs of others.
22. The primary goal of international policy in the nuclear age ought to be peace.
23. Except in cases of a clear threat to national security or, possibly, to juvenile morals, censorship is wrong.
24. Congressional investigating committees are dangerous institutions, and need to be watched and curbed if they are not to become a serious threat to freedom.
25. The money amount of school and university scholarships ought to be decided primarily by need.
26. Qualified teachers, at least at the university level, are entitled to academic freedom: that is, the right to express their own beliefs and opinions, in or out of the classroom, without interference from administrators, trustees, parents or public bodies.
27. In determining who is to be admitted to schools and universities, quota systems based on color, religion, family or similar factors are wrong.
28. The national government should guarantee that all adult citizens, except for criminals and the insane, should have the right to vote.
29. Joseph McCarthy was probably the most dangerous man in American public life during the fifteen years following the Second World War.
30. There are no significant differences in intellectual, moral or civilizing capacity among human races and ethnic types.
31. Steps toward world disarmament would be a good thing.
32. Everyone is entitled to political and social rights without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
33. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and expression.
34. Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression.
35. The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government.
36. Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security.
37. Everyone has the right to equal pay for equal work.
38. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions.
39. Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.


Anonymous said...

100% of desublimational liberalism's wishful-thinking and demandingness was devised by whites. ... If Anglo-Saxony's new 39 Articles are entirely without merit, the problem would be solved since the class of whites who devised this statement aren't having any children -- except for the curious reality that the children of conservative whites as they drift or climb northward tend to obediently reject "conservative values" and take up with critical theory etc.

Desublimation theory and activism rejects the reality principle on grounds that reality is unfair and oppressive. But since disaster is imposed on the ego (or non-ego) whose infantile-omnipotence-fantasy superego demands a rejection of reality, it shouldn't be difficult to refute desublimation and critical theory.

Critical theory academics would flee in utter panic if Buchanan attach'd biblical meaning label manna to race, gender and homophobia. ...

I just read about a black or African American athlete named Lolo Jones, who says she is still a virgin because she won't have sex until she marries. The primarily white MSM have been mocking and excoriating her for this value system. She should belong to any master race or ruling folk that accepts the reality principle and thus deserves to rule.

It's the white Mennonite Central Committee, the white Maryknoll nuns, the white UCC leadership et al who ought to be segregated into their own reality-free fantasy republic in a bit of Idaho.

Maybe the rest of the republic would bow to the NCCB as meriting the right to rule religion since the almost all white bishops have the charism of progressiveness on immigration and social spending, and accordingly in awe for this heroic sacrificial progressiveness the rest of the progressives ought to let them remove gay marriage, gay ordination, women's ordination from the progressive agenda for church and society. (Good plan, "heralds of the truth"!)

If, as Thomas Sowell suspects, there's a war in the race or root -- south-north axis -- it's between lower man 'white' 'pale' (canaanite) and higher man 'reds.' That America's conservative states are said to be red (Shem's colour: from the blood in the genealogical threads given by Ham; makes the pale or yellow Phoenicians or Canaanites seem red or perhaps orange in the light) is only one indication that the 'war' isn't serious.

Formerly the left (or north) attack'd the past and thus the 'right' in a certain way on grounds that the pretentious of the conservatives were historically unreal -- e.g. trying to maintain the trappings of Christian monarchy and feudalism when capitalist production no longer bother'd with Christian doctrine.

If the conservatives of throne and altar had retorted to the Left in the manner of our left or desublimational liberals, these old conservatives would have complain'd "the real course of History is unfair!"

What would Marx sputter if he found that his purported heirs rejected reality as unfair?

It would be entirely different if liberals proposed a "tragic" meaning for their agenda:

»We know that reality makes equality of results impossible, but striving for such equalness of gender and other population groups is our most noble possibility anyway!

»Let us destroy the Anglo-Saxon system in a grand Quixotic gesture. The resulting misery and ruin will testify that this was our finest hour!

»And in the meantime we can enjoy our dachas on Martha's Vinyard and gratify our amour-propre sneer at the conservative philistines who have no sense of the lofty grandeur of driving the Anglo-Saxony system off a cliff and perceiving the Sophoclean beauty of our attitude!«

Anonymous said...

Apparently the pledge of the Muslim Students Association (MSA) states:
»Allah is my lord.  Islam is my life.  The Koran is my guide.  The Sunna is my practice.  Jihad is my spirit.  Righteousness is my character.  Paradise is my goal.  I enjoin what is right.  I forbid what is wrong.  I will fight against oppression.  And I will die to establish Islam.«

Last line: the Ego sum or God (Exodus 3:15) shall be dead thanks to the establishment of neo-Islam.

BTW the theses perhaps occur in planetary sequence, beginning with Allah the unconscious sun who estins Hermes Nebo "my lord." Super-duper knowledgeability in semiotics from Nebo shall be as if life. Koran recitation is for Ishtar or her marriage sacrament. The Sunna tradition is from the moon (who feigns to be the dark sun, dark sunna?). Jihad for the day of mars Nergal. Adhering to one's characterization into the firmament system of Merodach Jupiter. Saturn as paradise (js6508 PRDS orchard as of Eden) -- holy orders, circumcision, as if valuational understanding but actually a 'gaol'. ?

The next theses: from Ham male, from Shem female, Japheth (that's us), Canaan (that's also us).

Anonymous said...

Further re a "black apocalypse" in contrast to the bogus "white apocalypse" that demands freedom for white nationalists to restore us to woad and blood feuds and bowing down to mumbo-jumbos (the entirety of northern european culture prior to the Roman empire and conversion to Christianity):

The president gives us a hint of just such a black apocalypse in his connection with the very dark (not bi- dualistic racial etc) Alan Keyes in "The Audacity of Hope" (23, 57, 247-253, 264).

It is indeed "inexplicable" that the Republican party selected Mr Keyes to campaign against Mr Obama for Illinois senatorship (p. 23). In biblical terms improvement comes to Egypt (gypsies, Roma/ns) from Cush or Ethiopia, and "Ambassador" (n.b.) p. 247 Keyes as a Roman Catholic posed the possibility of dominion founded in grace or the understanding of biblical revelation.

"That guy's a piece of work" p. 57 sc that (going there, vs 'this' evasion) Giza (locale of Sphinx and three pyramids) or maybe Geisha (Japh[ethic] woman consort] + peace Islam LS i am + bkw krow (prophetic bird even in daylight, black bird in broad daylight anticipating the night; cf "crows" between pentecostal preacher and Wm F. Buckley p. 249.

dog-ed(ucational) logic p. 249. attentive to genealogy re 'african american' descent, ibid. the opponent of the 'ideal' (Nietzsche: 'ideal' is our idol -- misleading use of platonism for purported intentions that alas can be said to cause unintended consequences).

could get under skin (cloakings) p. 250. via the statement of an "Old Testament prophet" p. 251. The president did not wish to stand against this prophecy by a counter-prophesy drawn on the Bible with perhaps more consistency and prophetic power, but instead dismiss'd political Christianity as unjust on grounds that "pluralism" means Christian religion must not be imposed (separation of church and state qua separation of politics from religion [which forms politics]) p. 251f.

Does the president give Mr Keyes' chest (location of the heart of darkness, says Luther) the E.T. gesture? p. 250. ("alpha-male" sc "the phamale" the female) (Since Spain was the conduit of Islam into western Europe from the south, we must suppose that perhaps a sort of S.J. Islam enters the USA with Hispanics.)

Anonymous said...

I end with a remark on the president's statement vs Mr Keyes: "nor am I willing to accept a reading of the Bible that considers an obscure line in Romans to be more defining of Christianity than the Sermon on the Mount" (p. 264)

The main difficulty is that the Sermon on the Mount -- Jesus' kerygma strictly speaking -- would give zilch to Caesar but money personnel. Give no thought for the morrow, don't resist evil (even by non-violent moral intimidation and shaming of authorities) because a Self isn't "good" and valuing should seem to begin from the Father), treat official religious institutions with contempt, etc.

If as it seems Paul began the application of the kerygma to civil society (whereas Jesus would remove even such labelling as Satan had apply'd Matthew 4, Luke 4), then the Letter to the Romans is much more important for us Romans than advice to live like flowers.

Secondly, whatever "marriage" specifically means, Jesus evidently considers it to occur between a "man" and a "woman" (Mark 10:6-9). We can't even say that he is "heteronormative" (arrogant assumptions that gay relationships must adhere to hetero monogamy marriage patterns), though the monogamous point of man-and-woman according to Torah (Genesis 2:24) and Jesus presumably also defies Islamic marriage norms.

This isn't sufficient to prove that Christians must be "haters" of alternative sexual relationships. I suppose we must try to understand what gay and lesbian partners are intending to write re transcendence in their relationships. (If it weren't for the odious principle that instruction in knowledge, weaponry expertise and even virtue must be paid for by the youngster with sexual favours, I could suppose that Jonathan's relationship with his armour bearer as presented in the O.T. is view'd favourably by the O.T. As Nietzsche informs us in his letter to Erwin Rhode 23 May 1876, improvement began in such relationships and was only transfer'd to the love between "man" and "woman" -- because of the envy woman had of such eros.

Also "Keyes" sc KYS cup js3559 (suggestion of suit of hearts, whose king is Melchizedek) and obviously a hint at "Cush."

"Alan" celtic for harmony, tiferet. "nalA" js5239 complete, make and end

Anonymous said...

Well, here's something -- is the alternative for the West either Plato's or Muhammad's legislation for "establishing nomoi great and small and nominally the daily way of life for each man of the everything system" (Nietzsche, Dawn of Morning ¶496 "The evil principle")?

Plato's tentative politicking in Sicily [js5483 +Leah?], the base of the north-south root of Europe, threaten'd a "state" that would begin the "Platonization of the European south" (ibid). Plato still constitutes the "evil principle" (ibid) if we can see through all the platonisms and neo-platonisms, mystical, moralistic-edifying, Great Books contemplative, utopian hope-and-change idealistic, etc.

Perhaps certain traditionalist Selfs feel that compliant Muslim Sufi overlords would be preferable to Plato's philosopher-kings. Luckily for traditionalists, Straussians have proved beyond all doubt that "philosopher-king" is a mere witticism since true philosophers are far too super-busy trying to figure out stuff to be bother'd with ruling non-philosophers, and kings or politicians who ruled for the sake of philosophers will long to simply let philosophers screw around in pretended unconnection with the city's myths rather than enhancing philosophers' selfs by for instance revealing that it is more philosophic to use Thomas Aquinas to give a biblical interpretation of Aristotle, than to use Thomas Aquinas to give an Aristotelian interpretation of the Bible.

Plato is still the evil principle for us because he would never permit the Democrats or the Republicans to have Christian morals without Christian doctrine.

Democrats feign to want the Good Samaritan as mandate for social spending and whatnot, but not with the biblical understanding that makes sense of the prophets of the 'slave revolt in morality.' Domination of law and public policy by Christian values don't violate the separation of church and state, but somehow revealing the meaning of "Christian values" is forbidden by the First Amendment (even though Muslims, Darwinians, Mormons, Hindus, et al would remain free to make what they will of this revelation).

Republicans want a slightly different version of Christian values without Christian doctrine. Any type of guff deem'd relevant to "religion" that supports 'family values' is welcomed -- but not understanding the Institutes of the Christian Religion.

One of Nietzsche's widely enjoy'd definitions is that Christianity is "platonism for the Volk" (BGE preface) who are, I suppose, the "Arabs" [js 693; 6148, 6151] mention'd in Dawn ¶496.

Quite welcome for the ongoing enthusiastic ruin of the West could be Islam insistent on declaring "shirk" the entirety of "platonism" and also Ezra's constituting a "Jewish church" by giving the Torah (Koran 9:30 "Uzair"). The Traditionalist Self likes a free lynch. Earthly bread. And no wine (no Plato-enhanced speeches on Eros at the banquet Koran 78:35)

Admittedly, it isn't supposed to happen this way. The fist inroads of Islam into the West compel'd Christian clerics to raise up legitimated kings who understood "platonism for the Volk" in some measure. Presumably the inroads of Islam into the West today should be prompting Mark Steyn to support a new Christian rulership, rather than to go on about Cole Porter and Peggy Lee et al.

Goes without saying that the books of Nietzsche will be proscribed. Shirking Allah with "death" is presumably the most threatening sort of shirk ever devised by the evil principle in philosophy!

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...