LOGICAL MINDS ONLY: Recent Episodes
Robert Burk
Logic is not opinion nor is it moved by assumptions. Logic follows its own course and rules. Logic cannot be rescinded, reconfigured or reformed. Logic is implacable and absolute. LOGICAL MINDS ONLY follow logic to where it leads. Those who do not follow logic to wherever it leads end up in a place that is demonstrably irrational. LOGICAL MINDS ONLY is a podcast for those whose commitment to logic is absolute. Those whose commitment is to an ideology, or particular worldview, or set of assumptions or who want to find factoids to support an assumption are wasting their time here.
There is an evil proposition, a proposition that if followed destroys its own premise. The world tells us it only matters where we end up, it only matters what we have and that wealth is defined by the ownership of property, but wealth is defined by what a person can give, not by what they can take. The ability to steal a store does not make you rich, the ability to give a store defines true wealth.
The Ten Great Evils are unemployment, debt, poverty, inflation, pollution, waste, taxation, homelessness, war, and injustice. All can be eliminated by science, if we use the right science with the most basic of all units of measure. This essay is not about the meta science of Syndicatology nor specifically about eliminating the Ten Great Evils, it is about how mankind has created the conditions under which it has been impossible to eliminate these evils. The solution is simple when we stop avoiding it. But what might be more important, this small essay demonstrates there is no justification for blaming the state or a lack of money on our failure to implement the solution. Anyone could start the process. If it is not begun one has no one to blame but the one you will discover in the mirror, that same person you know with the beam in their eye. So look no where else for the solution.
There are many proofs of God. None have been widely accepted as proofs by anyone other than Christians. This ought to be understandable. A proof normally is limited to empirical demonstrations. Logical proofs while important in philosophy and mathematics are generally limited to proving analytical claims. Not many suggest that every logical argument proves something about physical reality. But therein is the crux of the problem, because it is universally assumed, God is not amenable to being proved by empirical means. It is true we cannot probable or sample God. We cannot test His composition or measure His features. However, there is a way around this dilemma and business opens the door to an empirical experiment that not only proves God Exists but proves which God (and religion) is the viable option.
Apriorian is contrasted with induction or phenomenology. In other words, it is a system and world-view which serves as a mirror-image to what this present world believes. Whereas people think this world or universe is all there is, Apriorians know this world is as the experts say it is, but we know there must be a further reality. Your reality proves this other reality must exist. This also means everything in this present world view, which does not work, has its mirror image that does work. In other words if this world is dysfunctional, corrupted by the Ten Great Evils of unemployment, debt, poverty, inflation, pollution, waste, taxation, homelessness, war, and injustice. It only takes a new way of thinking to eliminate these evils.
Good and evil are as we all know, conceptual opposites. They are, as ideas, as incompatible as oil and water. So, how do both exist, or do neither exist? In this essay we explain why evil came to be and why evil can exist without conflicting with what is known about God being untrue. God as a perfectly just and good being is not contradicted by the presence of Satan, his demons or the presence of evil in the world.
Morality is either an absolute, or it is a legal system and part of ethics. However, for morality to be absolute there must be a line between good and evil, that is discernable. In this podcast we make the line visible and the moral good, quantifiable. The line between good and evil is as clear and distinct as that between profit and loss. This is an edited version of a podcast made in 2022.
Absolutism is not a political theory concerning tyranny. Humans are not capable of absolutist structures. Absolutes are analytical and metaphysical, not economic or political. Absolutism is a philosophical position that concerns God and His authority over all things.
What does it take to create a modern society? It cannot be easy otherwise more nations would do it. We have listened to the blame game, we have heard all the excuses. We know all the reasons why a country cannot develop, but that assumes that if we remove all these influences every nation would spontaneously develop, and that is just not feasible. Obviously, the explanations given as to why nations do not develop are along the lines of the dog ate my homework, as an excuse for why the kids project was not turned in. Everyone can make excuses, but not everyone knows how to create prosperity, we explain why this is.
Faith Responds
In Part Two, faith responds to the devils claims that democracy gives power to the voter; at best democracy is the illusion of power. Faith demonstrates that relying on the judgement and goodness of man, is not Biblical and not entirely rational.
The Devil Speaks
In Part One, the devil presents the case for democracy.
An edited update from 2022
When we say we support freedom or want freedom, it is usually of a particular kind. Sometimes it refers to freedom of speech, freedom to associate, or freedom to abort babies, but behind this call for freedom is the expectation it will curtail some other freedom. We do not want people to be free to cry fire in crowded theaters or be permitted to call our wives in the middle of the night to say obscene things to her. We claim we love freedom but mostly we love freedom for us, but we fear it for others. This is why we have the state and permit it to legislate our freedom away. We would rather lose our freedoms than permit too much of it, to others.
People think that making money is the same thing as earning money. Banks and the state make money, the rest of us earn it or try to. Businesses and labor do not make money, they earn it. To earn money, we must do what the owners of money expect and require. We might work for years on a property or idea and if it does not fit the requirements of the credit issuing institutions, the work has no value. You might find a way to end unemployment, but if the program cannot produce a profit for a bank, it has no value. Work does not make money, in this world. Banks make money. The state makes money, and because they make money, they have access to everything money can buy. This means what it sounds like. Those who make the money have access to the goods and services of the market, whereas those who try to earn money has only that level of access they earn. In this short piece you will be shown how those who are now earning money can learn to make it, in the same sense that banks and the state make money. Needless to say, there is no risk to this program because you do not have to have money earned from banks or the state. You make the money you use. What is less risky than that?
Rationalism is the belief that reality is logical and analytical and that deductive logic is sufficient for arriving at the truth. When ones thoughts cease to be incoherent, contradictory or irrelevant, one has acquired the truth. This manifesto is a few preliminary notes outlining the framework of Apriorian thought.
This is an edited and updated video of a podcast first issued in 2022. It speaks to the satanic nature of democracy and its relationship to Babylon.
Living in community has costs, when the cost becomes too high, the community disintegrates. Its not complicated, if your life consumes resources valued at $300.00 a week your labor must produce goods and services equal to at least this amount, or you are increasing the cost of community.
Pay It Forward is an idea that seems to have largely faded from memory, yet it can serve as a model for a new kind of corporation, one that everyone can participate in without risk and without permitting the richer to take advantage of the poorer.
The Bible talks about Babylon as an historic place, but it also speaks of it as a place-holder for all that is evil. Babylon is spoken about in Revelations as a place that still exists at the end times, it is a place we are to get out of. If Babylon arose in the distant path and its features remain at the end, then we can assume it is present with us, today. In fact, Babylon is used to illustrate the empire of the flesh. If we are to separate, where do we go, if the world is under the rule of the Babylonian mandate? Apologon is a term developed to give us something to refer to when speaking of what it would be like to be outside of Babylon, to live in a different way than the world of the flesh does. Apologon in this sense, is a city of the spirit as Babylon is the city of the flesh.
What is evidence? Who decides? What criteria must a piece of information fulfill to be considered a piece of evidence? When it comes to evidence there is a sharp division between what an atheist considers valid and what a theologian thinks is legitimate. How can anything be proven if there is no objective standard for what constitutes proof?
Atheists have stumbled upon an effective ploy that derails all hope of an intelligent conversation about God. They demand Christians prove the existence of God, to the atheists satisfaction, before any discussion can begin. To even engage them on this issue legitimizes their position. They do not get to determine if God exceeds their minimal conditions of existence. Name one thing atheists have proven or are able to prove. Do not get yoked unequally with the unbeliever by being held to a higher standard than they hold themselves.
Despite what is commonly supposed, only two viewpoints are possible. These perspectives are so diametrically opposed to one another, they are mirror images and constitute two distinct and irreconcilable realities. Each reality is supported by a different race of people. The Apriorian View models the alternative to what you think reality is.
If we were in a room in which there was a diamond and twenty men and they all wanted to buy the diamond, the price could go to any amount yet there would be no more diamonds at the end of the bidding than at the start. This seems obvious yet this obvious truth does not seem to get transferred over to the housing market or our food supply. Society, in the form of bank debt, can keep bidding up the price of things by increasing the money supply. Debt does not increase the supply of real goods and services.
There is an easy way to eliminate poverty however it requires we eliminate the cause, which is waste. If we stop wasting what we have, poverty will not exist, it is that simple. The path is divided into nine steps to make the process easier to understand.
There are two equations which illustrate two different ways of thinking about reality. The one is on the ascendant the other is pretty much ignored. However, until we understand the second, the problems created by venerating the first, will never be corrected.
There appears to be a conflict amounting to a paradox between the existence of an omniscient being who is in every way good, and the possession of free will by a creature who is obviously not capable of being good. But perhaps the problem lays more in the observation already made that mankind is obviously incapable of being good, far more than in the actual situation.
Charity means we ought to be able to give to those in need without worry. This program permits this.
The power of God is expressed in the power to do good. Evil is encompassed by those things that destroy what is good. What is good is that which has value, and so the power of God is expressed as the value of what He does. Destroying this value and these things of value then imposes a debt on the one harming the things of God and destroying the value that God created.
The volunteer is celebrated for his and her selflessness. In this world they need to exist, so much would not work without the input of volunteers. But what is a volunteer but a volunteer slave. We like to think of volunteers as contributing to the economy, but in many ways, they perpetuate communism and distort market values. Surely, the nurse who cares for the sick and dying has value. Even housewives have economic value, but only when doing the same work she does at home, for strangers. In this essay we do not say volunteers are not needed. We argue that any economy that needs volunteers or which cannot pay people for the work they do, is not much of an economy. If the market cannot at minimum pay for the work done, it has lost the right to exist.
No one needs to be told how to think because we are all born with that capacity. Yet we know some persons are insane, others very troubled. There are people who are career criminals, and we all make mistakes. Lots of people ruin their lives by the number of bad choices they make. Every day people die from drugs and more begin taking them knowing the path they are on. We also know some people are geniuses, some are creative and others well organized. So, then the question becomes, do those who believe we all know how to reason, know how to evaluate the data they are faced with? If you think everyone knows you to reason, perhaps you do not know how to reason correctly. How would you know?
Apriorian is a Christian apologetics. We believe which means we have faith. We strive to honor that faith and to be true to it, which indicates we have or strive to have, fidelity. We are Apriorian Fides which might be translated logical faith or a faith we strive to be faithful to. We have, singularly and corporately, nothing but faith. Without faith we are nothing, or less than nothing. Without faith our civilizations collapse, as they are in the process of doing.
The Protestant Reformation took us from Catholicism to a more Fundamentalist understanding of Scripture, but it failed in one regard. The Protestant Reformation did not separate us from the state. Separation from the hierarchical Papacy was not enough. The Reformation simply replaced the Papacy with the king, or equivalent. The 2nd Reformation separates church from state.
Credit Unions are not banks despite being imbedded in the monetary systems of the West. They can play a larger role in the community if they adopt the guise of a Christian Mission. Sounds odd, perhaps but then maybe there is more you need to learn.
The West and perhaps the world, think unemployment is fixed, akin to a natural phenomenon. Unemployment is as much a part of the human reality as gravity is a part of nature. It’s a lie, pure and simple and like all lies it is promulgated for a specific purpose. If you know who the lie benefits you will know why it was started.
Labor produces the goods and services. Everything we see was produced by working persons unless produced by God. Would labor not have rights then?
People who skim the Bible looking for offensive passages are traumatized by their wild imaginations triggered by what they read in Scripture. It is all a figment of their over-wrought imaginations of course. Minds full of hate have no room for logical thought. In this talk we discuss what the Bible actually says when one reads it devoid of an agenda.
There are six characteristics of a church. Compare them to the church you belong and see how the traditional church measures up to what the Bible requires of a church.
One has no right to rule what they have no right to. To exercise power illegitimately is to rule by the law of the jungle. In the law of the jungle might makes right and the end justifies the means. Only the worker earns the value and therefore the right, to rule. We own what we create, and no one created the natural world but God. No one has a right to dominate and rule the world by God. Labor creates and owns everything else. The right belongs to us, not the state.
The reader probably thinks he or she does not want to know how to drive down wages and make a nation poor, yet it is pretty obvious there are a lot of people who do know how to do this and make use of the knowledge, otherwise wages would not be declining relative to prices and nations would not be suffering under ever mounting debt loads. Perhaps if you learned what they know you would understand what they are doing and put a stop to it.
Socialism is considered to produce less efficient results than a market. Regardless, of how one may argue the point, no one has actually established a mechanism for eliminating the need or preference for at least some public sector engagement; until now. Socialism can be utterly eliminated by eliminating the need for the public sector. And it is not as difficult as you think.
There is not one infinitely complex world that contains and encompasses everything. Such a reality cannot contain absolute truth for absolute truth is incompatible with a world in which truth is relative and man is free to follow any path of his or her choosing. This essay sets out the other option.
Christians have been readier to embrace the politics of peace than the scripture of war. Militarism is considered a sin in many Christian pulpits. But the language and motifs of war are found everywhere in the Bible.
The Golden Age is often mocked but refuses to die. Few people of any maturity do not feel the past was somehow better, even when considering such things as the primitive level of medicine. Is this desire for a past Golden Age just a longing for childhood or is there something more to our looking back with some regret. When we talk of the Golden Age of Rome, Athens or Islam, we are not fantasizing, so what if there was something more substantial about the Wests reminiscing, than a dream of childhood? What makes for a Golden Age and can we start to dream of a future Golden Age, rather than one viewed in hindsight.
It is not only economists who are victimized by these errors, our Western Civilizations used them for the foundation of their cultures. If things shaky now it is because the faults upon which our cultures are based, are starting to crumble.
It is not only economists who are victimized by these errors, our Western Civilizations used them for the foundation of their cultures. If things shaky now it is because the faults upon which our cultures are based, are starting to crumble.
The fall of Babylon is only possible if the church rises, they hold an inverse relationship. There is not a third or fourth alternative organizational model to follow. There is no range of possibilities. We are either in the church obeying God or we are in Babylon and building it up.
Poverty cannot be solved by greed nor by force. We cannot expect the most ruthless and selfish of men become altruistic, especially when part of a system that rewards selfish, self-interest and penalizes anyone motivated by pity. But it does not help much if the state steps in and attempts to bury the worst effects of greed by systematic expropriations and handouts. Indeed, the socialism of the state is likely only to worsen things in the long run, as the rich fight harder to retain what is theirs and the poor get used to going to the state for the things they need.
It may be impossible to eliminate crime and sin but it is possible to separate from it by making it too expensive to engage in it, at least where we are. Learn how to separate from crime, as a church.
Universalism is a form of apologetics that argues that if a belief is true, it is universal, if a solution is a solution, is applies to all cases and situations. There is no singular or partial truth nor disassociated solution without relevance to the single, all-encompassing solution. In short, Universalism points to the origin of truth. If you know one truth, you know all truth. If you have a solution, you have all solutions. By the same token, you embrace one lie you embrace all lies. If you have one problem, you have all problems. Many like to think they know mostly truth but are infected with a few partial truths, or that they have some problems but mostly the problems are only the solution improperly implemented. But lies and truth cannot be reconciled or made compatible in some way. Universalism is the truth and is the whole, all-encompassing truth that wipes out all problems, including unemployment, debt, poverty, inflation, pollution, waste, taxation, homelessness, war, property crime and the cost of the state generally. The reality is, if you do not embrace the truth, you have these problems. If you have these problems you have rejected the truth.
Many people think there are an infinite number of universes, others say there is but one. But the theory of many universes means the metaverse is the true universe and all the versions of the universe are really parts of a larger universal whole. Those who claim there is one universe acknowledge there are many different ways of thinking about what this universe looks like. The one universe is composed of an infinite number of actual ways of thinking what the universe looks like. So the one universe has an infinite number of version. These two extremes then are the same theory expressed in two different ways. We call this the One Reality Hypothesis because in this theory there are many related versions about what is real, but they all assume reality is relative to the observer. Those who subscribe to The One Reality Hypothesis thinks reality is real, but reality is contingent upon the observer. There is no absolute, non-contingent truths in this way of thinking about what is real. But if this reality is valid, where do absolute truths come from. If numbers and truth are not real things, why do they exist?
Is there no truth and no source of truth. Ultimately, is there no meaning in the universe? That cannot be or we would cease to be rational, as there would be no meaning to the idea. If there is reason and truth in this universe it has to be identifiable, meaning, lies cannot be true and bad cannot be good. There must be a type of thing we can know as being true and good that is separate from all the many other things we can identify as being lies and bad. But the source of truth must be a mind and this mind must encompass all that is true and good, otherwise it would not be true and good, as nature cannot produce truth or meaning. All truth and meaning and all that is good must come from a Universal Mind, a Mind that contains all that is good and true, because it is this mind that defines what is true and what is good.
There is a reason why we talk of the church and state as if they were polar opposites and why there is an ongoing discussion over which institution has the greater right when it comes to education and the nature of morality. In our hearts we know there is a conflict between them even if we may not understand it in our heads. However, in this regard atheists tend to be far more aware of the incompatibility of church and state than Christians. The latter seem always hopeful for some kind of reconciliation or negotiated settlement. Atheists seem well aware that the two are incompatible and ultimately what the two sides are engaged in, is a fight to the death.
This world has many disciplines but there is only one science. This has to be so or there is not but one, all-encompassing truth. If this was so and there is but one science, there cannot be more than one all-encompassing experiment. But agreeing to this also means that there is but one Control Group and since this Control Group encompasses the world, it must leave us with one problem: how do we construct the Test Group? Who is in it and how is its performance quantified? Ultimately, one truth leads to another, if there is any truth at all, the conclusion must be reality is an experiment between those who live right and those who live in error. The details of the experiment tells us where the line must be drawn. In fact, the experiment must already exist, we only need to formalize it with the development of the Test Group.
The church is incompatible with the state. They exist in an inverse relationship. Most Christians would argue that their first love is the church and that while they obey the law they do so only from necessity. Christian would summarily reject they are the main contributor to the state and the main reason why the state persists. Yet, it is the sin of the Christian that gives the state its power.
Every nation is a pyramid and every pyramid focuses power onto the center. These pyramids all seek to concentrate power at the center. Over time the centers will learn to cooperate to further consolidate their power. This gives rise to globalism. Globalism is the inevitable outcome of nations organized pyramidically. There is no pyramidal structure that can serve as an alternative to and antidote for, globalism. No nation can defeat globalism as there is no nation that opposes globalism.
If truth exists it cannot contradict itself or it is not truth. There must be a way to reconcile all sciences and if there is a true religion, it must also be reconcilable with all other truth. If there is a truth, then truth would result in the elimination of all problems, at least in the theoretical sense. There would be solutions to unemployment, debt, poverty, inflation, pollution, waste, taxation, homelessness, war, property crime and the cost of the state generally. Even if not used the solution would have to be there. Which means, if we have social problems, it is because we choose to have them and we have chosen, for our own reasons, not to eliminate them. The Christian Theory of Everything proves this is true, also it proves Christianity is one hundred percent consistent with the truth and contains solutions to every problem, implicitly and explicitly and the only reason the church has problems is because of our failure to embrace the truths of Scripture.
If we stated it is impossible to eliminate crime, no one would notice.
If we claimed crime could be eliminated, a storm of criticism would emerge. Those who did not respond, would be convinced it was a police state that was being promoted. The problem is we live in a monochrome world, in which every issue is black and white and every solution, a shade of grey.
What is good and evil if not subjective? But if good and evil are what we each decide, the very idea of there being a good and evil is invalidated. There must be an objective good, measurable and quantifiable, if it is to be real and divisible from evil.
It seems a given that unions are obsolete. But change their name to an association and they become vital players in workers rights, at least if the worker is a tradesperson or professional. Unions seem to have lost relevance only for the poorer and less powerful category of employee.
The Ecumenical Hardline is a response to the ecumenical compromises that has been the path the Christian churches have followed to date. Ecumenical compromise is the equivalent of Chamberlains policy of appeasement. We never negotiate with evil; we do not attempt to reconcile with the devil.
In this essay we make the argument that poor persons may manifest God but to demonstrate the existence of God in a scientific and replicable way, there has to be a manifestation of economic superiority. Man cannot live right, in obedience to God, without living a better life, this requires property. The pious individual is a real thing but the obedient community living in poverty is unbiblical. This is not about the prosperity gospel; it is about God being in charge.
Ecumenicalism is usually considered a process of bringing the churches together. It is this but it is more about dealing with the wolves among us.
We cannot solve problems by embracing the symptoms. The symptoms are the worlds system. Jesus did not for nothing reject the devils offer of food, security and power. We need to do the same.
There is only one solution and that is the one in the Bible. We must separate from evil; it is not up to us to solve it nor to subsidize it. We need to start an ecumenical movement that not only brings the faithful together, it also divides us from the problem, which is the world.
Technically everyone agrees there ought to be a meritocracy but since there is not, we do with the next best thing, which might be communism, socialism or capitalism though there are also other options. But no one pretends these are real meritocracies that reward solely on merit. Which naturally leads to the question if a meritocracy is even possible and if it is, what would it look like. We say it looks like the church which leads us to suppose a church is actually a meritocracy not the school or club it has become. So, what reforms need to be implemented and what impact has this on the second best choices we are using at present?
An alegalist is a person without the law. Normally this might be associated with Christians. In fact many Christians have chosen to live in the law and in fact, if one observes how Christians actually live, in contradistinction to what they say, they look as much under the law as any secularist. Yet, there is a group that lives beyond the law and it is probably not whom you might think. Even Jesus says not all who call Lord, Lord are known to him, yet those who do not know him but who are a law unto themselves, live as a Christian would. So, perhaps salvation is more nuanced than most of us think, which means the church more not be all we think it is, either.
The world has not be successful in finding a third way, as an alternative to the left and right political spectrum or as an alternative to capitalism and communism, because our minds visualize the left and right as two extremes, when this is not what they are. These extremes as we think of them, are two faces of the same evil. The problem is, by the time most of you will have figured this out we will be in a globalist One World Government that owns and controls everything. On the plus side the left and the right we have become amalgamated into this single globalist hegemony. Then we will realize the war was always about good versus evil.
This is an early expression of the fundamental truths of Apriorian Apologetics. However, these rules are still valid.
What is a meritocracy and what defines merit? Does the state define the level of merit a person or act has? Does a business, or can we ask our family and friends? Perhaps merit is defined by popularity or the amount of money one earns. In any case what we think has merit and who we think has merit tells everyone a lot about us, not so much about the person rated or even our rating system. However, all that being said and true, there is a way to determine a persons merit.
What is the purpose of man? Can we create our own reason for being or is there something we are specifically designed for, and what happens when we decide to try and do something or be something we were not designed to be or do? The results ought to be predictable. If we do what we are not purposed to do, we fail.
We all want freedom, it seems, but it seems a far way off. But have we ever described the freedom we are after? Do we know what it looks like. In this essay we strive to look at the paths to freedom and determine how many steps it takes to reach the goal of freedom. The findings will surprise you, the journey is no where as long as you think, assuming you are on the right path, but no worries, we tell you how to get there.
The Bible has solutions for every problem, without exception. Some solutions are implicit others explicit, regardless, the Bible does solve every problem. The vehicle for the implementation of these solutions is the church. Therefore, it follows the church properly constructed is the answer to all problems humans have encountered. Apologetics, the science that constructs the church from the lies of the world, makes the church manifest. If there are problems not fixed by the church the only possible conclusion is, we are not the church described in the Bible, particularly the church of Matt. 18:15-19.
To be rational we have to privatize. One cannot be rational in a socialist environment. Rationality has to be accompanied by consequences an unless consequences are private, they have no impact. Faith is rational because it is necessary to have faith in one another and irrational to fear one another, because we cannot live like that for long. Christianity is rational because it is a faith that requires us to trust one another and to be trustworthy, before God.
It seems everyone is convinced something has gone wrong, if it had not gone wrong before, it is going wrong now. But the consensus is, what has been going wrong for a long time, has started to bear fruit. But what is behind all this that is happening? It was going wrong before any cabal was formed, before a politician was elected or any family or race had gained any real power. So, the problem, at its most basic, has to be closer to what the Bible calls, principalities and powers and spiritual wickedness. But that being said, the more important question is. Has this evil gone too far or is there a way back from this chaos?
What is time in its relationship to faith? How does time factor in when it comes to building the church? These questions are answered in the activity called ecumenicalism.
Time is not imaginary, nor is it totally subjective. Speed is not something one can hold in one’s hand or feel, but it is real. In this same sense, time is real. An odometer measures speed as a thermometer measures heat. These things are not the measurement, but they are real as anything else. So is time real. Clocks measure time as scales measure weight. Modernism is the phenomenon of travelling through time under power, rather than like a stone rolling down hill. Scientific Temporalism is a way to put man in the drivers seat and control our passage through time in a way never before possible.
Western people observe a shift in power that has come from a hand stretched out in friendship. A desire for peace is interpreted as a fear of war. But we have won enough wars to know victory through warfare is not a permanent solution, so we look for other ways based on a different analysis of the data. There is an alternative path to war the West could take and indeed must take but it is unlikely to be the one you are ready to take.
What if Africa could be developed? What if we could invalidate all the arguments against the possibility of a third world nation lifting itself up using its own resources? What if a nation or region did not need the support of international bankers or the global economy? What if even a tribe could begin the process of economic development with only itself to rely on? Would this not give hope to the rest of us? This short piece shows how any group, anywhere, can develop using only one thing and one thing only, faith. You either have it or you do not. If not, all is lost. If you do, all things are possible.
What is Activism and when is it appropriate and when does it lack legitimacy? Social justice warriors are energetic activists always protesting one wrong or the other and demands the wrong be made right. But who can a wrong be made right if one is protesting from a leftist perspective? Words actually have meaning. There is something inherently wrong with the protests and activism of the left. It’s a problem that only the right can make right.
Whites engage in charity, at home and abroad. We fund missions and Non Govermental Organizations as well as public agencies created to assist other nations and peoples, regardless of the circumstance. We even go to war or operate peace keeping missions where conflicts erupt. But there is a cost to all of these missions and charitable operations.
Would you like to know why all debates end up with the protagonists taking opposite positions, and why the longer the debate, the more polarized the positions become? No debate can erase the division or even lesson the distance between the two sides. Indeed, debate always worsens the division. The right and left express a feminine and masculine perspective. Both masculine and feminism have extremist positions. When masculine becomes political extremism, we have absolutism. When feminism becomes extremist, politics becomes the cradle to grave welfare state. Both extremes are wrong because they express a lie. The two extremes of right and left are two responses to the same lie, that people cannot be trusted. The truth is liars cannot be trusted, but not all people are liars. The reason for the polarization is simple, both sides fear the other. People respond to fear in either a masculine or feminine way. Each way only exacerbates the fears of the other side, so the more you defend your position the more you excite fear in the other side, deepening the division.
Are you confused about who to love? Do you love your enemies and are they your neighbor? The conventional interpretation does not make sense. We know this and no one lives by it. So what did God actually order us to do, when He told us to fulfill the Great Commission? In this essay we look at:
The Great Commission, The Two Greatest Commandments and The Golden Rule; to discover the thread that holds them together.
We are familiar with the division of science into hard and soft. The hard sciences are able to quantify data and therefore impose a level of accuracy on their findings not possible in the humanities. But number and measurement systems are not natural. Physics is not found to have mathematical equations. A mile is not observed in nature. It took a high level of sophistication to devise our metrics. It is one thing to invent numbers. It is another thing to invent an inch or degrees Celsius.
What use would numbers be if we could not use feet and inches to measure dimensional lumber? A board foot is a length. Length is a dimension. But what is there in human life that can be quantified? To create a science that solves social problems we first need to find the thing in human life that can be quantified.
Human rights are technically speaking, legal rights. Human rights are null and void without the courts. We claim we have the right of free speech but it is a right modified and regulated by the legal system. It can be rescinded at any time. We may claim to have equal rights but we have only the expectation of what the law provides. If the law cannot define it, it does not exist at least as an administrative right. A man has the right to be a woman because the law has decreed it. A man can play sports on the women’s team and older men can shower with young girls, if the law agrees to this and if the man fulfills the conditions set out in the law. The law can declare a protest is a revolution and character assassination is rape. Nothing exists in a legal sense until the courts say so. On the other hand, if the court says it is so, it is so. But is there another source of rights other than the heavy and often biased hand of the law?
There is an assumption that a Golden Age never existed as history never provides us a time when there were no problems. But the Golden Age is not necessarily a utopia, in the conventional understanding of the term. The Golden Age only needs to be better than all the periods before it, and all of the times following it. The Golden Age harkens back to the time when we came closest to fulfilling our destiny.
The story of Peter is the story of Christianity, particularly the rift between Catholics and Protestants. Is the church built on Christ, or Peter? Until this is settled, we cannot build the church. The church is not buildings or persons, that is true, but it is ecumenical. We cannot permit doctrine to divide us and remain one body.
This is a selection of Biblical versus mentioning the requirement of the church to separate from the world. Most Christians are of course, well-aware of this doctrine but pass it off as just one more thing Christ was either wrong about or exaggerated the importance of. Nevertheless, the passages are quoted here in the hopes that some might see Jesus did mean what he said and did expect us to take his words seriously.
Poverty is the direct result of idolatry. The poor are not victims of circumstance nor even collateral damage. The poor have always been portrayed as the victim. These are the forgotten in a system that favors the rich and powerful. The solution has always been to challenge the rich and powerful to share the wealth. But the problem is darker and more sinister than what greed as the modus operandi suggests. The problem of poverty is the problem of evil. Poverty being just one of the many symptoms of a people in the middle of spiritual warfare. If we serve the devil there are consequences. If we wish to eliminate poverty, and the other social problems, we need to defeat our spiritual enemies.
The height of hypocrisy is man’s attempt to evaluate the morality of God. What possible standard has man, that would enable him to morally evaluate his own actions, let alone God’s? Is there something in nature that provides us with a moral standard? Do our emotions give us a reliable guide to what is right and wrong? We cannot even decide if it is right to live or not, or if it is evil to maintain human life; and now we want to branch out and put God under our moral microscope?
Right or wrong, at one time Whites were strong, our societies were strong because they were united. We had peace and prosperity and we have permitted this to be removed from our jurisdictions. A thousand reasons could be given. Hundreds of points of error could be listed. This change from peaceful prosperous community to degraded hellhole has been a long transformation accompanied by a myriad of significant alterations to the social fabric. No doubt a lot of reasons could be given for why all of this has happened. The change is not simple and not without a multitude of suspects. But there ought to be one fact that is obvious to all, whatever Whites were doing that made them successful, is certainly no longer working.
There are an almost infinite number of problems but only one possible solution. If there were others they could not rightfully be understood as solutions. They might modify or alleviate the symptoms, but a solution would need to solve all the possible problems all at the same time. There are innumerable theories and hypothesis about what the causes of our problems are and what might alleviate some of the symptoms, but no one has ventured a single, all-encompassing solution to all of our social problems. This includes the problem of the soft or social sciences themselves, which have to date, no empirical validation of the various claims they make. The single solution would of necessity remedy this fault of the humanities and provide a way for us to harden the soft sciences. What is more, is if this is really being done, it would needed to be done in the form of an experiment. The solutions would be affixed to a Test Group which would have their data compared to that of the Control Group, the findings would substantiate the claim made here, that there is a solution to all problems. What this essay does is map out the parameters of the solution and give it a name, that is, The Ecumenical Movement. Bringing the faithful together under one umbrella, is commensurate with eliminating the problems that plague the aliens, that attempt to discredit the church.
Everything leads to globalism, whether it is on the right or the left. Every political party and economic theory culminate in a fascism that pushes the world towards a globalist one world government that owns and controls everything. Fascism rose in Eden and was formalized in Babylon, and it has been with us ever since. Only one organizational model stands outside of this paradigm and offers us a way off of this universal path. There is only one solution to fascism for it cannot be defeated from the inside.
Tolerance leads to a One World Government. The speed at which we get there is determined by the degree to which we are tolerant of their agenda.
For the most part, the anti-globalist movement is fighting shadows. Often those in the movement either do not know they are in it or what they are fighting against. Needless to say, if we go broad and consider the first salvo was fired 6,000 years ago in Eden, the opposition to globalism, has not eliminated the enemy. Indeed, even the most causal overview would conclude globalism has steadily gained ground. The reason for this is disheartening simple. For 6,000 years mankind has been jousting windmills. The enemy, as Pogo famously said, is us. We are the globalists. We are what we most hate.
Migrants are not immigrants nor are they settlers, the conditions for these groups are not the same. But not even a clear understanding of the differences between the three groups will help us fully understand what is going on and why. If you feel something much deeper is going on that what the media and the politician is telling you, you are right.
If we love our child, we protect them from things that would harm them. Parental care cannot be made consistent with a progressive tolerant mindset. The person who is tolerant of sin is uncommitted and irresponsible. We see this more clearly when it comes to caring for a child, but to be blasé about sin is to be blasé about the condition of society, and this invariably impacts our children’s lives.
Equality was a big thing at one time but now the accent is on equity. There is a reason why equality has fallen out of favor and it is not because it did not produce good outcomes, as some memes suggest. The equality agenda failed, because this world operates under a federalist system and equality is impossible if federalism is the operational constant. We need to get rid of federalism to make it possible to have equality, otherwise we are dealing with two different things which are logically incompatible.
There are two management systems or systems of organization. There is the common pyramidal model that is known as federalism. In this model power is concentrated at the top and control of property is closely linked with political and economic power. The other model has never been utilized but is describe in the Bible. The Biblical church is based on the regional organizational model and is administratively flat. Power is shifted to the base. The principle of subsidiarity is utilized, and the labor theory of value determines prices. These are two very distinct models of organization. Equality is possible only in a regional organization. Federalism cannot permit equality because the federalist model cannot operate without a steep gradient of power. Equality cannot be reached in a federalist system, nor can regionalism be developed within the stratified hierarchies of federalism. Regionalism must be birthed the way the church is formed, by people of faith coming together to build the church. Only in a regional organization is equality possible.
Armies are the most hardcore federalist organizations there are and the least amenable to decentralization efforts. Even private armies are highly federated. It was therefore considered important to make at least a short video demonstrating how federalism can be defeated even within the most highly federated organization known, the military. In this admittedly short overview, the Apriorian demonstrates that the military can be decentralized and remain effective.
The following is a discussion regarding a constant that unifies the hard and soft sciences, giving them a single measure by which to standardize investigations. The utilization of this universal constant requires a new organizational model based on a regional structure, incompatible with the federalist system in place the world over. We are talking about a global shift in how we think and operate and indeed a new kind of consciousness. If we go from one system to another and from a divided way of investigating reality to a unified methodology, we are talking about epochal changes in how we live and think and do civilization. In under 3000 words a universal science is outlined, solutions to all social problems are given in brief and a universal constant that governs the universe is presented. This one essay provides the basis for Regional Theory, the end of globalism and the wrapping up of the Federalist experiment. In its implementation, the Universal Science culminates in a conclusive experiment that verifies absolutely, The God Hypothesis.
Socialism has struggled to gain acceptance because it has been too lame for communist and too far left for libertarians. Yet, if looked at from a different angle it can be viewed as a prototype of a new organizational model. Conventional structures are all federal in their design, which means regardless of if they are on the right or the left, the trend is towards globalism and the centralization of power in fewer and fewer hands. This has proved frustrating for freedom loving persons because regardless of which way they turn, nothing seems to alter the trajectory in which we are headed. Socialism attempted to change this without success, because it was tied to the federalist system. In this essay we look at regionalism, which separates the ideas of socialism from the tools and structures of federalism, creating a whole new ball game and a whole new future for those who are willing to change direction.
What is the universe built on? The question reveals if we think the universal substance is without form or void or has an absoluteness, an identity. Physics has fluctuated between the idea of forces and a particulate substrate for eons. In this essay we consider the possibility that the fundamental structure of reality is a value, similar to the inch or degree. What is more interesting the fundamental structure of reality is thought to be consistent with the idea of a unit of value like a dollar or guinea. It is likened to a unit of faith that builds the church, which is an uncomfortable conclusion for many but that is the problem with logic, it leads to where its premise directs.
The modern world being what it is and modern peoples being what they are, the effort is constantly towards making time something one can see or feel. We liken it to a river or a force or even something like another dimension of space. A better analogy would be to think of time as a dollar or unity of value. Obviously, there is no actual unit of value even though things do have value. But we artificially divide values into units so as to universalize our transactions. Everything can be given a dollar value and then exchanged according to their dollar value. Time is the context in which events take place but without a unit of time these events cannot be communicated. Time exists as value exists, but it is just the context in which events occur.
That we have problems is not debated. That our problems is a result of the system we use is not difficult to accept. But the idea that there are two unique and incompatible world views and only one of them is able to eliminate these problems, is more controversial. Yet, the argument must be given some credibility considering that no one has even come close to solving a single social problem despite all of the advances made in the hard sciences. But then the reality is that no matter how long we embrace the present world view or what steps we take within it, we will never come any closer to fixing the problems of debt, unemployment, poverty, war and other problems than we already have. Which means we have to change the system or expect to suffer under these same problems until we do. But then, you may not like the solution as it falls under the umbrella of apologetics.
Atheists prove God is required for morality. It is possible to be evil without God and to live a slave to sin, without God. It is not possible to live a morally perfect live without God. Atheists by proving God is not necessary do it at the expense of their morality and therefore, at a cost to their humanity. Given the assumption normal persons wish to be moral it can be concluded that atheists by their modelling as to what happens when God is rejected, serve as a positive proof that God is necessary to be morally good.
Your world of liberalism is a moral inversion of what God Created. The worlds political systems are ethics based and ethics inverts the moral world created by God. The state makes the subject dependent on the state in an inverted truth, when the state is the true parasite and the people the producers of value. But so corrupt is the system erected by Satan that the people are terrified of losing the state and will sacrifice anything to keep it in power. This is why we have food banks, taxation, and charities of all kinds. The people do everything possible to keep the parasitic state afloat and remain its subjects, despite it being the state that is the cause of their problems. The morally perfect citizen does not need the state, nor do we engage in parasitism or support parasitic behavior.
There is a claim that is universally rejected academically but in practice is verified. It is the claim implicit in Scripture that God has given mankind a path to perfection. We all know and accept we are in sin even if we voice it different ways. But the Bible says we are to be perfect as our Father in Heaven is perfect. This means all these social problems we create as a consequence of our error prone lives ought to be solvable. Our own common sense tells us these are problems and if they are problems it assumes that is because technically, we know there is a solution to them, even if for the most part we have given up trying to find it. But the solutions are Biblical and if Christians are exposed to the same problems their non-believing counterparts are, it indicates we are not following the Bible. We are and remain, blind to His leading.
We have division in the church because we choose to divide from God to side with the world, that is the bottom line. If we were aligned with God there would not be a division in the church.
If you want to know what is wrong with the world and how to fix it, all you need to do is read the story of Eden. This small event contains the answer to every question every asked compacted into an event akin to the anomaly of the Big Bang. From this tiniest of beginnings all the problems of the world emerge. If you do not understand the events of Eden you will never be able to deconstruct all the things that happened after, as a consequence of this one event.
There is no faith with works that bear fruit without a universal church. The error is the churches have sought reconciliation using a top-down process. Reconciliation has to come from the bottom. We need to come together as the body of Christ, in a unity of faith that top-heavy, administrated processes, cannot achieve.
Free speech either pertains to every guttural utterance formed by the human larynx or does not exist – at least in the way we are conditioned to think about it. Which means, the ‘but’ in the phrase, “I believe in free speech .. but”, is where the bigotry and hypocrisy begin. One either believes in free speech or one does not. There is no qualifier in an absolute declaration. However, that does not prevent us from asking what actually constitutes speech. Does it truly encompass every verbalization made possible by the human vocal cords?
Perfection is a moral attribute not a human one. We are not morally perfect beings and moral perfection is not an attainable goal for individual human beings. However God is morally perfect and has equipped us for moral perfection spiritually, that is in the guise of the church. Man achieves moral perfection in his corporate identity as the church. Aprioron is a model of what this moral perfection looks like as well as an explanation of the steps required to acquire this moral overlay.
Is there a hidden knowledge and if there is, what is the knowledge that is hid, why is it hidden, and how is it hidden?
The paradox is not about God’s Existence it is attached to the realization that if God Exists why are their atheists or even more troublesome, why are there social problems created by atheists when God by implication has provided an alternative to the Babylonian crises. It’s a paradox of faith. If God Exists why is faith lacking as evidenced by the prevalence of serious social problems which, theoretically, ought not exist at least in and for the church.
The most misused and misinterpreted verse in the Bible is Ephesians 2:8. We are saved by faith but not of ourselves, so it is not our faith that saves us. Our faith is not a ‘get out of any duty or responsibility to God or His church,’ card. If we are saved by our faith on our terms then surely we can sin with impunity and whatever fight there is, is not our concern. After-all, does not God say vengeance is His? If so let Him get at it while we are busy here on earth getting as many gadgets as we can before the end comes.
A hate crime is a type of crime that turns a run of the mill act of violence into something especially odious. Robbery to support a drug habit is socially acceptable, robbery to hurt a group that has protected status, is an attack on the social order. The state wants the rapist to simply rape women because they have been objectified, not because they are Black or Muslim. Common assault is understood. Things happen, emotions get the better of us. But to assault someone because they have on the clothes of a particular minority or the skin tones of a darker race, that is something society cannot tolerate. But hate is as much in the eye of the beholder as anywhere else. If we can hate the hater with such unbridled passion, hate itself is not wrong. It is wise to look at just where it is directed and by whom.
The God Hypothesis has always been considered irrelevant as it was assumed to not be open to the scientific method. In this short piece abstracted from the book of the same name, it is demonstrated that the God Hypothesis gives rise to 25 propositions all which are amenable to scientific validation.
The prefer is the Universal Constant. It is the tool we use to harden the humanities and make a universal theory possible. Without s Universal Constant a solution to humanities problems is not possible. If the units of quantification enable physics and chemistry to make predictions then the prefer is the unit of account that makes it possible for the humanities to perform at the same level of quantified validation as the physical sciences.
What is this system that is systemically racists, privileges white supremacists and the Jews apparently control, yet allows the historic enemies of the Jews to enter en masse and push aside the very group it was supposedly designed to privilege? Does it even exist and if it does, what is it constructed of, what is it meant to achieve, and who actually controls it, if anyone does.
One does not need to be an anglophile to notice there is something different about Britain. No one is surprised at the power of the United States, the influence of Russia or the reach of China. These are large countries with a lot of resources. But Britain is a small island that fights even with its closest neighbors. It has taken on and beaten some of the largest nations in the world and some of the most powerful armies, even several at a time. Yet, it has left behind the most democratic, peaceful and enlightened colonies. Even nations that are alien to the peoples of Britain, such as India and Jamaica, have benefitted greatly from its culture, politics and economic systems. If one country can be said to be central to the modern world it would be Britain. Had it not existed it is all but impossible to imagine what the modern world would be like. It would be immeasurably poorer and far less advanced. But that being said, what is the key ingredient that led Britain to make such a notable impact on the planet?
Canada is built on a lie but it is a lie common to all nations. A people cannot own what they did not create, and no one created the land on which the nation sits. People fight over land because they think the ability to kill people and destroy what was built proves they have the right to what they take. All criminals think the same way, that is why we have trouble telling the difference between the taxman and the robber. One has more power than the other.
Science is founded on a lie. It is why there are the hard sciences and the soft ones, or the humanities. This lie is not a misunderstanding or a technical error. The lie is quite deliberate and spread for a specific purpose. Of course no one is going to believe scientists deliberately lie or cover up the lie but if they do not know what the lie is they do not want to know, in the way some women will not admit to themselves the nature of their husband. Yet, in the same way the beaten housewife will use makeup and long sleeves to cover bruises scientists use many tactics and narratives to explain away why the truth is not the truth and the lie is the reality we ought to hang on to. But lies always have inconsistencies. Lies never make sense when looked at objectively. An honest person cannot lie because he cannot do evil to himself. One has to be willing to do evil to lie and even more evil to live a lie. The Big Lie of science is a cover for moral depravity. One is never a consistent liar without having destroyed ones moral character.
There are five empires we can learn from. They can be broken down into three groups. The five we look at are the Roman, Islamic, Chinese, Spanish and British Empires. The lessons we learn from their failures and successes is that despite their differences, one thing is common to them all and this commonality has a real lesson for us even if we are less interested in empire building.
Atheists are right, one cannot prove a negative, especially when one cannot prove a positive. If one cannot prove one, it is impossible to prove the other. But since atheists claim to know God does not exist and have such absolute certainty no argument will make it impossible to doubt the negative, we have assembled eight ways that atheists could prove God does not exist.
We have papers that say we own land given to us by a government that claims it owns the natural resources within its borders. But the nation must stand ready to defend this claim against all enemies foreign and domestic with guns and other appliances of terror. How credible are claims of ownership to what is found? Is ownership simply a matter of finder’s keepers or is there a deeper meaning to the idea of ownership?
What is the difference between the two armies, where is the line between them and what is the ground, they fight over? How do they see or understand rules and laws? Why must at least one God exist and why can there not be more than one God? What about all those peoples and groups that deny god or embrace a multitude of gods? How do we know which side of the conflict the other person is on and more importantly, how do we know which side we are on?
Who are we to fight? Where is the battle line drawn? Who is on our side and who on the other? Christians know we are to fight principalities and powers, but this takes on the form of a civil war where friend and enemy are mixed up and sides seem to change frequently. Is there a way to make sense of this fight?
Everyone knows something is wrong. Everyone can and does point to things which need to change, yet an almost neurotic paralyse has gipped the right. We all want change, but the way forward is not clear. This paralyse is not natural and it is not accidental. It comes with a process no one even notices. Evil destroys the commons, and without the existence of a commons we lose our sense of community. Apriorian Security restores the sanctity of the commons. We teach clients to rebuild and secure the commons. Without it the church is an illusion.
Racism is a condition attached to a persons feelings and has many correlates to what I said about gender identity. In the mind of Progressives there is nothing objective about gender and the same can be said about race. But if race is about how one feels about Blackness and Whiteness it is not about what one is born with. It is about how one feels. Being Black has more to do with the mystical experience of feeling Blackness than what might be empirically established. What is systemic racism in a culture that understands Black as an attribute of a cult?
Many of the problems of mankind begin with the belief of so many that they know what reality is because they can see, hear, taste, feel and smell it, not realizing that this begs the question, it does not answer it. What are these emotions because this is what our senses are. There is nothing objective or quantifiable nor analytical about our sense impressions. They are emotional which is why they so often elicit emotions. We see a tree, but it is not the eyes that see it is the body that feels something because of the mental activity taking place. It is not a true perception it is the same thing as a feeling. So what do we really know when we say we know what reality is? What do we feel about what we say we know? We know our spouse is a good person because he makes us feel he is a good person, but we do not actually know nor can we ever know because in the end all we can do is feel. So what is reality or better, what are the realities that are available to us?
The problems we have are fixable because the liberal system we embrace is replaceable. But a system is really nothing more than the symptoms of a process used to produce an outcome. Liberals use fear to control the population and in extreme cases, terrorism. Terrorism seems to solve problems in the short term but it is not a long term solution and creates more problems than it seems to solve. Our social problems are fixable only because terrorism can be defeated by a Conservative Kingdom.
On the face of it, the spread of Islam is unexplainable. Its adoption by the otherwise atheist and secular liberals of the West, is nothing short of a paradox. But Christianity has shown an odd aversion to dealing with Islam. Its not that Christian have been expressly inviting, but their tolerance of their main competitor is puzzling. However, if we see the ultimate end of Islam expansion is a Caliphate the failure of Christendom to mount a common front against this threat is nothing short of satanic. Why would the church look with such apathetic passivity at its own demise. Apriorian provides the answer.
The church was not created to be everyman’s friend. The church was no designed to turn a blind eye to hate, sin and evil. The church has a definition and a description it is not a chameleon that takes on the image of everyone who comes into contact with it. Tolerance is not part of the churches job description nor a precondition for those who would become Christian. But we take the love of Christ as tolerance of sin. Jesus was never tolerant. Being long suffering is not tolerance it is merely patience being exercised. The penalty remains regardless of how long it takes for justice to be served.
Affluence does not solve every problem and is not the answer to every situation that arises. Charity and endowments work when the problem is symptomatic of Western greed, but it does not suffice when the problem arises from the Caliphate. But the West, driven as it is by greed, assumes every problem is caused by frustrated avarice. We think everyone and everything has a price. But what is worse, we think the West has enough prosperity to pay the price, whatever it is.
How does the devil manage to corrupt so many people when he is not in the flesh nor yet, omnipresent? How has Satan convinced so many people he does not exist while causing the Bible to be taken out of public spaces? Is the devil a conspiracy theory, an explanation for evil that prefers to blame an evil agency for the crime and violence, rather than our own nature? Why have people fallen away from the Bible if the devil does not exist and if the devil exists, how could have managed the feat? Are people waking up on their own to the fact the Bible has no meaning to their life, or is something more sinister going on?
Citizenship is not a gift of the state or a reward gifted to those who have pledged fealty to the state. Nor does it signify that one is a member in good standing of a class of persons attached to a political jurisdiction. A citizen is not a subject. A subject is a legal class of persons defined and regulated by the state. Subjects compose the state but citizens are separate. This is not a physical division but a logical one. The citizen contains different information than that which constructs a subject. The state determines the nature of a subject. The citizen is a natural category created by God. One is a citizen of the kingdom of God regardless of if one is a subject of a state or not and regardless of the nation one is a subject of.
If we start with a lie the lies will multiply no matter how white those lies are or how intentioned they may be. This world we know and accept as being real is a lie. Its institutions do not work because they are manifestations of the original lie. We cannot fix these institutions nor any of our social problems because we are lying about the problems, we say we want to solve. The reality is all who say they want to solve social problems just want to lie their way out of them. These social activists and social engineers are looking for a way to cover up their lies, but they only have more lies to cover up the earlier ones. The truth is simple, it is not what you wish to hear, but it will not go away. It will always be there, under the lies and that is true no matter how big the mountain of lies become.
The answer as to if there is a genocide directed at whites is a yes and no answer because it depends on what we mean by the question. It is superficially a simple question but if not asked right the answer is difficult to pin down. It is much more important, therefore, to look at the question itself than the answer. The answer, indeed, is in the question rightfully asked.
For far too long atheists have escaped the obligation of defending their redoubt of skepticism. Their doubt has been an unassailable position, a dogmatic absolutism missing since the fall of the Divine Right of Kings. The atheist has, according to their world view, a religious obligation to doubt without restraint or reservation, even when there is no evidence to justify their doubt. However, their existence is not doubted by them and this posses a problem for them, for their skepticism requires doubt without reservation. If the atheists can exist, then so can God. But the problem for atheists is that if the choose to not doubt their existence, then what are the conditions that gave rise to them? There are no conditions sufficient to give rise to their skepticism. Atheists and the material reality in which they are immersed, would have to be Ontologically Independent, i.e., sufficient for itself as God is. But regardless of what one postulates, atheism will always fail to be a sufficient cause to explain its origins. And this insufficiency, by the principles of causality, is a chain reaction that goes back to the very beginning. Reality itself is an insufficient cause because it lacks Ontological Independence.
Protestantism is not the same as other religions and philosophies, but how does it differ from these other group ideologies and what relevance has this difference to the state of the world and the conflict between good and evil?
There is a style of leadership based on the performative arts, such as drama that many modern liberals subscribe to, the ultimate example of this being Canada’s Justin Trudeau. Performative leaders rely on drama and empathy to stir their followers, eliminating the need for analysis and logic and clear solutions.
As time goes on the division between the right and left deepens. The difference in perspective is no where more obvious than the different reactions to the Black Liberation Movement. We look at the deeper reasons why the two responses exist. By deeper we mean explanations that do not depend solely on assuming all white people are racists, fragile and jealous of all the privilege they enjoy.
Christians are forgiven their sins by the death of Christ. The last thing Christians would need to worry about is Unforgiveable Sin. But then on the face of it, the idea of there being a sin that is unforgiveable, seems alien to the mercy and power of God. If God can and will forgive sin how is there a sin that is not forgivable and how could Christians be susceptible to it?
Nothing is more misunderstood than the Omniscience of God., which leads to confusion over what the Unforgivable Sin. In fact if we accept the Omniscience of God as tantamount to ttotal responsibility for every event made possible in this world, it is difficult to even that an Unforgiveable Sin is possible. We must then clarify what omniscience means and then establish why the Unforgiveable Sin exists and indeed must exist even given the Omniscience of God.
People think they can understand phrases and versus in the Bible as they pluck fruits from a tree and eat them. There are parallels with the story of Eden. We cannot understand the teaching of the Unforgiveable Sin unless we understand the story of Eden, unless we understand the nature of sin, unless we understand the teachings of being reborn in the spirit, unless we understand what living in the flesh means and its association with Babylon. There are two paths in Scripture, and they constitute two distinct realities that in application are peopled by two very distinct races. We cannot straddle the divide or keep our options open. If we do not understand the teachings in an absolute way that results in us living in a way distinct from the way the world lives, we are still living in the flesh. If you do not know what the unforgiveable sin is or how it relates to free loading, how do you know you are not engaging in it even as you read this?
If anything is to make sense then at some point we must stop lying, cheating and stealing. If we continue to permit lies and cheats our very humanity and civilizations will cease to exist. Nothing can be sustained if everyone lies and cheats and steals without consequences. This is what Pastoralism is all about, the elimination of the morally corrupt.
Mankind is a mystery to himself. What is man is both a taxonomical and philosophical mystery. We look at ourselves and it seems obvious what a human is, nothing is more visible or obvious. It is not that we cannot identify who we are visually, but who are we conceptually? What makes us human because it is not our physical appearance.
Pastorates have no social costs. Pastorates do not need the state. Because the state is not needed the need for taxation is eliminate. Because taxation is eliminated freeloading is not possible. The people through their work have the power. Those who have responsibility have power over the things they assume responsibility for, this is the church. Pastorates create a church under the sovereign jurisdiction of those who have faith.
There are not half truths or partial solutions. These are lies and problems. This world is rocked by business closures and personal bankruptcies, but a perfect business cannot exist in a corrupt culture. The perfect business creates a perfect culture. If we do not think a perfect life is possible then the idea of a perfect business will be dismissed. But in the interests of full disclosure, it needs to be mentioned, a perfect life is one lived without sin. For those who are immersed in sin and have no interest in living a perfect life, forming a perfect business is not something you ought to be considering.
When it is asked if rationalism is possible what is being asked is if human beings are truly capable of reason, or if our emotional natures preclude rational thought. In this video we look at what reason is and what it would take to have a rational nature.
Theocracy is naturally assumed to be nothing more than a people governed by religious fanatics. It is contrasted with democracy which is presented as a people enjoying self-government. But this self-serving way of presenting the alternatives neither makes sense or reflects the reality. There is no we the people and there is no consensus that would permit a people to govern themselves. There is always a small elite that manipulates the vote and exercises the real power. We have two choices, we can try and moderate the symptoms and make the situation a bit more tolerable, or we can aim for perfection, meaning a literal utopia. But what does that mean and is this even possible? In this video we demonstrate a utopia is possible but only if perfection exists. If it does, by definition perfection is God.
There are three things conservatives need to be conservative:
•a currency based on equity, not assets.
•An ownership model that does not permit exploitation of owners.
•A political system that does not pander to free riders.
Secularists and even Christians appear to be torn between their reliance on democracy or the resort to revolution as they see democracy fails them. No one likes the division because it means they are losing influence over the other side. That would be less of a worry if the prospect of the other side creating a revolution before they do did not haunt both left and right. There is a third and better option but so far people on both left and right have pinned their hopes on democracy and if things get too bad, revolution.
All social problems can be solved if we assume the Bible is literal and true. But if we do not take this first step, there is no way to solve problems such as debt, poverty, unemployment, taxation, inflation, etc. If this is true, it means we are not following Scripture. Life is an experiment with Test and Control Groups. Babylon and its institutions form the Control Group, but who is the Test Group? To answer this we created Apologia.
Is time a river or something mankind imagines? Is it real like the force of gravity or a word with nothing that can be felt or seen to tell us what it is we are talking about? Or have we tried to understand time from a wrong foundation? Is the idea of a river of time in which physical elements are embedded a incoherent idea that not only confuses what time is but makes it impossible to deal with time in a rational manner?
Is Protestantism just a small correction of Catholic excesses or something more significant? Is Catholicism a model of something that requires exposing and is Protestantism a modification of this model or a total refutation of it?
Christians are to separate; we are to come out of Babylon. That much is made clear, but come out to go where? In this latest podcast the question is answered. As Christians we must inhabit a new place equal to but the opposite of, Babylon. But is Babylon a city as was the historical city, or a nation as Babylon was also, or a world system, which is what Babylon has proved to be. The major institutions and ideologies can be traced back to Babylon. So, where is there for a Christian to go if we are to separate from this world dominating force. The question is answered by Apologia.
Apologia is a word coined to contrast what the church is to what Babylon is. Babylon has its historical antecedents in a city state, but it also stands in for the empire of Satan. Apologia is the diametrical opposite of everything Babylon is. Apologia is not based on freedom nor governed by laws, it lacks a state and the regulatory apparatus the state uses to maintain order. On the other hand, Apologia eliminates all social costs such as unemployment, debt, inflation, taxation and bureaucratic overreach. Because Apologia is overtly distinct from Babylon, its formation is verifiable in a scientific sense. It could not be the opposite of Babylon unless the validation was based on a quantifiable method of comparison. Thus, in application the formation of Apologia consists of a scientific experiment in which the people who build the church do so as a Test Group and those who continue to live as they have, form a Control Group.
Perhaps the greatest indicator of man taking a wrong turn is the plethora of sciences. The sciences are so reminiscent of seven blind men each feeling a different part of the elephant and concluding it is as the part they are in contact with. Actually science is worse than that for they are not all even feeling the same beast. But if reality is as science assumes it to be, where are there so many different often disconnected disciplines and why are they further divided into the hard and the soft sciences? In this discussion the author suggests the experiments of empirical science are divorced from reality because science itself, is divorced from reality. Life is an experiment and the life we are accustomed to is a Control Group. The formation of a single, universal, all-encompassing science is also the initiation of a single, all-encompassing experiment conducted by a Test Group. The two groups apart from anything else, proves science works better when universalized.
Diversity is their strength and their power because it pits us against each other. The good are not diverse. A society is not heterogenous. If a community is granular, it is not technically a single entity. The good hold to a standard. A community has something in common. It is not that there are not differences but the thing that binds is more significant that the things which divide. The more diverse the community the greater the incidence and preponderance of evil. The greater the diversity in a community, the greater the influence evil has on its operation. Diversity is not our strength; it is their strength. Diversity is the backdoor through which evil enters into a community. Diversity is the measure of the success, of the tactic of evil, which is to divide and conquer.
If the state controls the monetary system directly or indirectly it controls those who use the monetary system. Sovereignty requires privacy especially when it comes to money. How To Privatize The Monetary Systems Of The West explains how the right can make its own private currency that reduces and eventually eliminates freeloading, particularly the freeloading state.
Science is more a methodology than a coherent way of seeing the world. It has always been divided into the hard and soft science with very little to connect them or their findings. Apologetics is a way to amalgamate all these sciences, both hard and soft, into one over arching theory and approach. Apologetics is a universal science utilizing triple verification. The findings of Apologetics are verified logically by the coherence of the arguments, their consistency with the truths of scripture and by empirical science. Apologetics is an experimental science with one ongoing, universal experiment that proves the existence of God, the validity of scripture and its solutions and the superiority of the Apologetic method in creating economic development. The experiment demonstrates people with faith vastly outperform the control group. The Apologetic Experiment divides the world into those of the Test Group and those in the Control Group. If one is not in the Test Group one is by default, in the Control Group.
There is no ‘we the people' except when the state needs us to cooperate with whatever new policy it has developed. The state is either threatened by outside enemies in which it needs the cooperation of the entire nation, or it is pandering to one jurisdiction by imposing more restraints and extortions on another. We are ‘the people’ only when it suits the interests of the state. Other than that, we are divided constituencies kept divided to benefit the state. In the final analysis there are the people who compose the state and benefit from the activities of the state, and those who are marginalized, because the state needs to fund its operations by turning what is rightfully private, into public property. We the people are composed of those who create private property and those who create public property. Our interests are not the same.
There are several different polar opposites contained in our language. Good and evil is an often used comparison. Flesh and spirit is a contrast mentioned over and over again in the Bible. But in economics the terms private and public and more likely to be found. Oddly, perhaps, there is a lot that is common with these and other contrasts. This is important because a discussion on what a private market looks like as contrasted with a public one, is also a reference to how can we live in faith, rather than as flesh. It also refers to what it means to be good, rather than evil. The converse is also true, if we wish to understand what it means to live in the spirit and embrace good, we need to understand privatization when seen as an absolute opposite of public ownership by the state.
It is easy to destroy a lie but impossible to destroy a truth. If there is a God then the only way to discredit faith is by means of association. Atheists claim that if 3999 claims are proved to be false then all 4000 claims must be false. Thee devil never bothered to try and disprove the existence of God, he simply proved all lies were lies and let mankind use this proposition to make the assumption that if all other gods were false then all gods are fictitious. But the logic does not follow. In this essay we look at where and how this plethora of gods came about.
The church and state is not the equivalent of business and the state even though many will equate the latter to the phrase, the private and public sectors. Business is not private and cannot be made private in the fullest extent of the word. State and church have the same meaning as flesh and spirit and private is simply a different way of talking about that which is separate from the state and those of the flesh. But that begs the question of how does a church that is divided from the state operate?
The following is a guide in the form of an algorithm. It is not a detailed guide to privatization. What we have tried to do here is focus on how simple and elegant the process of privatization is. For more detailed information on privatization visit our website, https://apriorian.com.
Church and state are not nested in one another. They are not equals but they are technical opposites. As such, they cannot be reconciled. The church is not a protected part of the state nor a favored agent of the state. Church and state are in a spiritual war. The church is not the birth mother of the state and the state is not the protector or originator of the church.
Race is not based on skin color; the difference is not significant enough nor are skin colors sufficiently unique to create different classes of things. Nor is the culture of left and right anything more than a diversion. The biggest problem in the world is that the enemy has us fighting a proxy war. We are turned against each other in battles over race and culture that are irrelevant and are unwinnable. In this essay we pinpoint the true issue, the true enemy and the path we must take to engage in a winnable war.
You can get people to vote for you if you have something to give them. Unfortunately, the only thing a politician has is things that belong to other people. The politician must be willing and able to promise a sizeable number of voters they will receive a large chunk of resources from the nation. If a politician is only willing to allow us to keep what we earn, we have no need for them. And so every politician is and always be a supporter of democracy and will never, ever, promote a true meritocracy.
Science is a search for information, but information is contained in our language which is composed of words syntaxial arranged as per the rules of grammar. When scientists research a disease, they mine the meaning of a word. By means of science and analytical investigation, researchers develop a description of what the concept or word refers to. Apologetics looks at words as the bricks of meaning. If a person claims God does not exist, what is he saying? What do these words mean to him? How often when we are talking issues, we seem to be talking at cross purposes? Are the words we use the same for those on the opposite sides of an argument? Perhaps god does not exist as defined by atheists. Perhaps residential schools were evil, if we define evil in the way natives use the word. Apriorian Apologists look at words as God would have us use them. Apologists’ endeavor to perfect word use, utilizing the tools of logic and science. Every word has a mission, and its purpose is defined by its most perfect incarnation.
Equity is inherently evil as an idea because it takes the granular product of individuals and homogenizes it into a conformity devoid of values. When everyone gets everything regardless of effort there is no value attached to anything because rights prevail over justice.
Is personal development achievable in a social vacuum. Can we become exceptional human beings divorced from the rest of humanity? In this short video Logical Apologetics demonstrates that we are fully human only in a civilized community. On the other hand, civilization is the result of a personal development program that works.
We could look over the universe and not find Zeus but as this is not possible atheists claim we cannot disprove that Zeus does not exist. But this assumption is the result of circular reasoning. We cannot prove Zeus does not exist in a physical world, if and only if a physical world exists. But what if we suspend our disbelief in metaphysics for a moment and look only at what can be proven? If we look at the evidence and only at the evidence without making biased assumptions about the nature of reality, negatives can be proven.
There is small point asking why five cities dominate the entire north American continent if a solution is not possible. If a solution is possible there is no need to permit large urban areas to dominate the rest of the nation.
Life is an experiment with only two possible outcomes. Either God is a superfluous idea or intrinsic to life. But how do we determine scientifically, which it is? The Experiment explains the process. But it does more, it proves that if we wish to solve social issues we need the experiment to have a positive outcome.
Atheists claim one cannot prove a negative. The claim is that no one can prove aliens do not exist as there is always the possibility they might. We cannot prove the sun will not disappear because there is always a chance it might. We do not know. And so atheists claim it is not up to them to prove God does not exist, yet this is precisely what they have attempted to do. Thinking they have made it impossible for God to exist, they demand Christians prove the opposite, that God exists. But what they mean is prove God exists under the conditions they postulate. However, atheists have made it impossible for God to exist; but only if the conditions they postulate hold true. But their ploy has a weak point. No one can prove a lie and their arguments are grounded in a lie. It is easy to prove a negative if you are not trying to prove a lie. One can prove a negative, just do not lie you might end up proving what you never wanted to.
Diversity is not all inclusive. The promotion of diversity is the promotion of every feature and factor but one. The excluded group are Christians, but white, male Christians are the main focus for exclusion. Remember, the most liberal creature in the universe is Satan. The least judgmental being in the universe, is Satan. Satan accepts everyone and tolerates everything, everything and everyone that is other than faithful Christians.
It does not matter if we wish to discuss law or capitalism, the justice system or atheism, in the end the focus of a secularist is how to get rich without working. This is why what they do is inherently necromancy and connected with the Black Arts. It is impossible to get rich without working without being a practitioner of the Black Arts and a secularist.
What is the difference between adult and child and why is it the crucial difference? If we understand the point at which men mature, we will understand liberalism and the politics of intersectionality and victimization. We will understand why racism has become the lightening rod of our time. The Logical Positivist is a picture of what it means to be an adult and by implication and logical deduction, what it means to be a child. The division between adult and child is real and has eternal ramifications.
Atheists claim they lack belief, both absolutely and specifically as regards metaphysical elements. But is it then true to say that they can abjure all belief without consequences? We make the argument everything we associate with secularists can be traced back to this single decision in their life, the moment they choose to deny faith in God.
This may not seem to be a question with a real answer. Most people treat people the same. We do not trust them, but we do not assume they are career criminals. But there is an answer. It both justifies, to some degree, the conventional response we have when meeting a stranger, and provides an answer to the question of who we can trust. There is a group of people who can be trusted and at the very least it ought to be questioned if you are among them.
he House Church is not just a small conventional church. As heir to the 1st Century Church, the house church is a social hub and centerpiece of a way of life diametrically opposed to the Babylonian world view and the mainline church. This short broadcast explains why the future of Christianity is linked to the house church rather than the mainline, established church.
We live in the complex economy, but we do not understand it. It works but we know if does not work up to the limit of its possibilities. We struggle but very few get ahead in a meaningful way. It is almost as if an evil force was at work, behind the scenes, sapping our strength and opposing us at every turn. Find out what the anchor is that holds the economy back and what can be done about it.
This is a truncated overview of the Apriorian organization to give the reader a rough understanding of how the church is constructed. It is not designed to answer all questions nor to serve as a template on which a working model of the church might be constructed. But it will give the reader an idea as to what they will end up when one is formed.
There are two ages associated with two distinct races that have diametrically opposed world views. One world view is analytical and the other relativist. The former is moral and spiritual, and the latter is ethical and lives by the flesh. We call the first age, the Age of Liberalism. The Second Age which is the age to come, is the Age Of Faith. We have not yet matured enough to enter the second age.
The church is not bricks and mortar nor bodies in pews. The church is defined as much by what it is not as what it is. What it is not is the world. The church is not flesh nor the works of flesh. The church is built from faith. No matter how we engage one another or sit with one another, if we do not have faith in one another, we have not built the church. The works of faith remove and replace the works of fear. The is the work of apologetics. We are a church that loves because we are a church that has faith and this changes everything.
There are five fundamental truths.
All truth is one,
there are two paths we can take when seeking the truth,
three kinds of fruit that the truth produces,
there are four pillars of truth and
five errors to which the truth is susceptible.
If truth exists it is coherent and if coherent then the study of the truth ought to be possible as a single, all encompassing activity, which we would naturally refer to as a science. Indeed, logically, if science was done right it would be from a single perspective. But we can predict deeper truth still. If there is truth in this world and it can be studied as a single scientific program, the study of the world would be part of a single experiment and those engaged in this experiment would form a Test Group, whereas those who remained attached to the conventional view of things, would serve as a Control Group. If this makes sense to you then you may well qualify to be part of the Test Group, if not there is no need to worry about any of what was mentioned above.
If you have rights to your property, there is no God. If you claim you own at least part of the physical world, you occupy the seat of the Creator and at minimum, hold a lien as an equal, to the property owned and claimed by God. If you still wish to be a Christian and part of the church, there is a need for separation from a world that thinks it ok to claim what belongs to God.
Atheists can be good in the same sense we can drive according to the rules of the road. We could, but we do not and why would we? What is in it for us?
What is the difference between a subsistence culture and an advanced one? What factor do progressive civilizations have that tribal societies do not? The world attempts to civilize and industrialize without understanding how it happened in the first place. If what you do lacks meaning, will you do it? Will you persist in living a meaningless life? If economic development is meaningless to most people, how do we make it matter to them? How do we motivate people who thinks the programs and policies we offer, lack meaning? Until we understand what gives life meaning we are likely to live a life without meaning and what we do and offer, will similarly, lack meaning.
If there are two groups of people with different values and priorities and who inhabit different ends of the political spectrum, is it not possible they might look at citizenship differently; the author argues that this is the case.
The World has only one necessary truth, a truth. The necessary truth is one that cannot be denied, refuted or defeated. Unlike logical truths that are tautological and are true only because they are true by definition, the necessary truth is moral in construction. The necessary truth is true because it is a moral principle that our very nature rebels against denying.
The MAGA Movement refocused the attention of many Americans on better times. But there is no time machine to take us back into the past or magic amulet to reverse what has occurred. We need to move forward and yet not on the trajectory we have been on.
It is accepted by atheists and Christians that not only is it impossible to prove the existence of God, it is wrong to even try. This essay sets out the 25 steps that irrefutable demonstrates the Bible is a reliable witness to the existence of God.
Do you find it curious that the Bible says the man who will not work neither shall he eat, when every problem in the world is due to those who feed off the work of the good and who can best be defeated by cutting off their sources of sustenance? When human rights are linked with intersectional merit work becomes of less important than the physical accident of your birth. Apriorian Apologetics describes a new source of rights that rids the world of parasites.
This is not an attack on some notable persons, it is an attempt to place the establishment of the US firmly within a theoretical framework that demonstrates from Eden to the present, the same system has been employed to create theories and nations and despite superficial differences, the fundamentals remain common to every human creation throughout the last 6,000 years, at least in the West. Lets be honest, if the U.S. was perfect it would not have problems and accepting it has some quite serious problems, the framework on which it was built was imperfect, meaning it has error. This essay simply claims there are five main ones common to all Western nations.
What if secularism was not an intellectual problem but an problem of accounting? Christians attempt to prove by means of reason that God exists. What if atheists were not open to reason? What if logic was little more than noise to their ears? Not even telling them that their position was inherently contradictory and self-refuting, would lead them to re-consider their position. Atheists demand to see God. What they need to see is the cost of secularism and this requires the formation of a new nation, under God. Only then will we have the accounting the demonstrates the true cost of secularism.
God Created man but God is not man and man is not God. Man is made in the image of God but we are not of the same substance as God. We are the image not the reality. What does this all mean to us, as men? What does it mean to the reality we inhabit?
When Christians argue with secularists about truth as in so many other things they argue two different things. But then they inhabit two quite distinct realities and so this division of thinking about what truth means, ought to be expected. In fact the opposing ideas about what truth is, helps confirm the Two Reality Hypothesis. Secularists think truth claims ought to provide the listener with a picture of reality. Truth, according to secularists, ought to be akin to photographing reality with ones mind. But the Apologist position is that the picture is all there is. The picture is information but the question then becomes, if there is no objective reality to test the picture against, how do we bring the picture of information into clearer focus?
There are two questions Christians do not ask and it is likely they are not asked because they do not wish to know the answer. Interestingly one cannot ask one without the other nor ask them together without having answered the questions. One question originates in Genesis and the other in Revelations.
Progress is the result of specialization and specialization cannot exist without businesses that both permit people to focus single mindedly on one facet of the supply chain and gives them the ability to exchange the fruits of their labor with the products and services produce by other, similarly single-minded producers. So, any barrier to creating a business hurts us all. This podcast explains how motivation, defined as the desire to focus on one thing and do it well, is enough to start a business if the right framework is established.
There is a natural order to things that man desires to overcome by means of legal strictures and regulatory structures. But we cannot thrive going against what is natural, defined by what is empirically demonstrable. Life is ultimately an experiment, the Test Group are those willing to live empirically in a way that can be demonstrably validated, versus those who continue to live under the law.
Is it possible to believe in God and follow Jesus and not have it impact our lives? If God Created the entire universe would denying this not have an impact also? If faith and doubt both have their own impacts are these only subjective? Does it not make any difference if you are an atheist or Christian to how you live and the kind of life you will have? If the impacts are not subjective, cannot they not be measured? The topic of this talk is faith and its empirical validation. No matter what you believe, we must assume if belief is justified it will produce better life results than a denial of what is true. And if the impact of faith on our life is real, there is no reason to assume it cannot be empirically measured and experimentally validated.
There is only one question Christian need answering. Are Christians perfectible, or not. If not, we are forever in our sin. If we are, it is through grace that we are saved but it is works that bring our perfection to fruition. But as reasonable as this sounds, it misleads us into a wrong kind of thinking that can easily lead to a loss of faith, and the erosion of whatever gains we had made.
There is no need to prove the existence of God, which we need to question is our faith. The proof of God is not a test of God it is an investigation into our own integrity. Have we picked up our cross and are following Jesus, because without this step having been taken, God may as well not exist.
Secularists are considered adherents of naturalism. But this position is untenable when dealing with their own nature. No one thinks of himself as a meat machine. He cannot because machines do not think or identify themselves. We cannot even understand time and space as physical elements. What is physical somehow creates that which has no physicality.
If the world is logical and if truth exists, “logical paradox” as a term is an oxymoron. No statement ought to be both logical and paradoxical. So why do logical paradoxes exist? Or, do they?
Britain’s success cannot be attributed to genetics or its geography. To put it another way, if Britain did not invent the tools of greatness, then the roots of Britain’s greatness were established from the beginning; 6000 years ago, in Eden, to be precise. If what Britain was and is, can be attributed to a one-off unique event never to be duplicated, this essay would be an exercise in jingoism, of no interest to anyone not British. But if Britain only did what everyone ought to be doing, then Britain becomes an experimental case study. Everything we need to know about building civilization can be learned from a study of the events of Eden. The proof of this is found in the success of Britain.
We are expected to help the needy but what do we do if the need is self-inflicted or even manufactured for the sole purpose of manipulating our help and our compassion? Is it still charity when we are being subjected to emotional blackmail by free loaders and parasites? At what point do we get to pass by on the other side? Apriorian is an experiment to demonstrate the superiority of the charitable path. The Control Group is this present system built by freeloaders. We are forming the Test Group. Which group are you in?
Politics is a process of transferring power and property to a central authority. The ballot box, divine rights, and martial prowess are all political processes that lead to the same result. Meritocracy is the alternative to democracy and these other forms of politics.
Taxation is made necessary by capitalism and capitalism cannot exist were it not for the regulatory power of the state. One cannot get rid of one without getting rid of the other. But getting rid of one is made to look impossible given the existence of the other. It is time to stop justifying the need for public spending because of private ownership and justifying private ownership because of the needs of the state.
When the rights of labor are not respected the community becomes distorted, one of the worst systems of societal corruption is homelessness. Another sign that things are not right where you live, is crime. They are very different things but both share the same etiology and can be treated concurrently.
Do you believe taxes are inevitable? In this short video Apriorian does not argue the point but does provide a path towards the disciplining of the public revenue program. Many municipalities provide options as to where ones property taxes go, this program can be extended with great benefit to the state and other levels of government.
If there is no line between Good and Evil, there is no good and evil. If good and evil are relative concepts, neither one actually exists. But this world has a problem with absolutes. The best it can manage is better and best or better and worse. To conceive of something that is actually evil is beyond secularists. They know, if evil is proven to exist, there must be good also, and the only good we can conceive of is God.
The Apocratic Church is a spiritual church built by works of faith. It has no physical correlates. It does not own property; it has no pews. It is simply an expression of the believer’s faith in his Creator. We are the stewards of His Creation, not the owners. If you are a mature Christian and ready to leave the Primary School version of a church, not to mention the demonic evils of democratic liberalism, this is the alternative designed for you. The Apocratic Church eliminates social parasitism and all of their diseases including unemployment, debt, poverty, inflation, pollution, waste, taxation, homelessness, war, property crime and the cost of the state generally. These are human problems. The church can eradicate them.
The problems of America are not the problems of the rest of the world. This is an investigation in why the American Problem is peculiar to America.
There is only one question that all persons must ultimately answer, regardless of how they may seek to hide or avoid it. Where they stand or moral issues determines how they answer the question. This question is tied to our maturation and is only asked of adults and is the sole factor determining if a person is an adult or not. Incidentally, it is the question that confirms one is a Christian or a member of a religion. At some point, the moral substance of the individual is confronted by an issue he would not confront as a child. A situation brings him or her face to face with a dilemma and he is required to answer to himself and his God, where do I as a human being, draw the line? What you answer defines you for the rest of your life.
Religions do not need a god in the Christian sense. Religions are ethical systems based on law. Religions require a law giver and a mechanism for enforcing the law. But the law is always enacted in a way that makes it unlawful to oppose the law. The more authoritarian the system the more draconian the punishment for offending the law. Treason and apostasy is where the lawgivers legitimacy is questioned. The law regulates therefore the law defines identity. The law must identify what it regulates. But is this the natural order of things or the way God designed things to be?
People want something to hold, when they give up their labor or other forms of property. To hold gold coins in their hands or paper currency, gave them a sense of security that they were not being defrauded. This understandable reticence to give up real property for an IOU seems reasonable. However, the fear and risk that makes the behavior understandable means we lack a formal economy. What we are trying to do is to maintain a barter relationship in a complex modern economy. There is a world of difference between a means of exchange that allows us to tranche assets. Some assets are naturally modular, like cigarettes and others, such as gold, can be quantified by weight. This makes them good candidates for a medium of exchange. But money in its pure state is a unit of account, a far different thing.
Evil cannot exist if reality is physical. Evil would need to be a malevolent physical force capable of impacting in a destructive way, physical things, if reality was as atheists claim it is. There fore, there is no evil or reality is not a sufficient explanation for all visible phenomena. The devil did convince man he does not exist, but convincing man physical reality was sufficient as an explanatory device to explain all observable phenomenon. Meaning, evil is not required to explain man’s inhumanity to man. If evil is superfluous then a source of evil is no longer required. But the truths of the bible are not that easily eliminated.
Christians have given up on this system and seemingly, on the church. Christians appear to have given up on each other. Yet, there is no hope in this system of things or succor from those who are frenziedly attempting to pull down thousands of years of civilization. What hope is there and where can we find it?
Christians are apathetic because they feel threatened by things they do not have an answer to. The government does not permit honest discussion and the problem and so it seems impossible to come to any agreement as what ought to be done. But this is just one more case of God proving how powerful He is. There is a simple solution but it is technical and its specifications are defined by God. His design does not permit deviation.
We fight not against flesh and blood but against principalities and powers and spiritual wickedness in the highest places is evidence we fight against a conception of things which is intrinsically destructive. But if faith is the spirit of the faithful, what is the spirit of evil? In this essay the argument is put forward that evil is energized by fear. Fear is inherently a top down power used by the few to control the many.
No one it seems fully understand faith as a technical term. However, it can still be tested empirically and as an empirically testable proposition, faith can be shown to exist and have variable results according to the level of its implementation.
The Pastoral Church is a spiritual church built by works of faith. It has no physical correlates. It does not own property; it has no pews. It is simply an expression of the believer’s faith in his Creator. If you are a mature Christian and ready to leave the Primary School version of a church, this is the alternative designed for you. WARNING: milk is not available.
The vast majority of people think the law is created to prevent violence and other illegal activities. But people could do this before the law and still do to some degree. The law is designed to reassure those who do not need the law, that the illegal activities will be kept within tolerable bounds. The law was primarily a way to prove to the serfs that the King would not make destitute his subjects. The army was primarily used against the citizen to ensure taxation was maintained. It was turned outwards against others as a way to tax foreign peoples by means of rapine. Violence as a threat keeps the payments coming and as a reality, keeps the people divided. The breeding of fear in the people legitimizes the power of the state.
The nation seemed one of the highpoints of western civilization but like so much that arose from liberalism the good things are largely an illusion. It was conceived of as an effective way to protect subjects from the predation of other nations. But of course, were there no nations this argument would make less sense. What we rarely look at is the cost of electing a despot to the most powerful position in the state. Governments are elected on their ability to protect our freedoms, but they appear to remove far more freedoms than they can protect, especially when the thing they are protecting us from is another government identical to them.
No one asks what it means to be normal because liberalism has taught us to equate normalcy with what is popular, a belief helped along by the liberal belief in democracy as a way to determine merit. Is it any wonder that influencers have an influence; call it the Kardashian Effect. Popularity generates normalcy. If someone can make it popular then it is said to have become normalized. But is it truly normal to live in fear?
From the dawn of time people have used some form of money to assist with economic exchanges. It was not always money as we envision it, but mankind has always traded goods and services and always had a way to facilitate these trades. Most of the time currency has been just another barter item, like gold, given mercantile value. But money does not have value it is just a unit of account. Creating money out of barter goods creates the economic problems we are more than familiar with, such as unemployment, inflation and debt. By learning what money is and how to create it without digitalizing a commodity, we can eliminate the social costs created by barter forms of money.
Diversity in community helps the state and the Globalist Elites. It is just a way to normalize divide and conquer. How can one increase diversity without contributing to the forces of chaos? There is no greater lie than the claim that communities become stronger as they are made more diverse. No one even claims this outside of the West. And by every measure the West has grown progressively worse and weaker with the rise in diversity. There is not a single metric that justifies the destruction of Western culture by the admixture of cultures from failed states.
Armageddon no longer looks like an impossible horror; it feels as if it is standing just around the corner waiting to emerge from hiding. What changed if anything and what is that insignificant little matter that culminates in the destruction of the Created order, simply because humans do not wish to live right. There is honestly no excuse for bringing the world to this point. The church is as culpable as the liberal.
Citizen Rights are not Legal Rights as they are not intersectional benefits bestowed on one intersectional group at the expense of a subject group. Citizen Rights are the product of faith and are part of a community of faith works.
The author does not just prove demons exist but explains also how they can be removed from the church making us spiritually perfect.
The only people who seek to censor you are the people who hate you. The only people who censor you are the people who have power over you. Censorship is by its very nature an act resting on hate and power. The censored are the losers in history, the ones whose story is not heard because the powerful do not wish it to be heard.
The power of the people is only made manifest at its weakest point, when the people come together to vie against one another to appoint one of their number to high office, the purpose of which is to negate and make redundant the said power of the people.
Democracy is an idea that everyone has equal rights because we are all human. This is not empirically provable. There is no way to test if we are all human nor an experiment that could prove we all have the same rights individually. Nor does it make logical sense. If we are all human with the same rights we have no rights. It would be like saying we are all rats so we have rat rights. Without a means of delivery, one cannot have a right to what is promised. Democrats more than conservatives are subject to these facts. Democrats more than conservatives rely on the power of governments for their benefits. The state provides legal benefits not human rights. The state can only provide benefits to those under the law, according to the law, not to all persons. The state has no means to provide humans with human rights and because legal rights are as easily revoked as invoked, they are not rights at all.
Its not by accident science in its modern sense was begun by Christians nor that Christians and Jews have remained the most effective researchers. The rise to dominance of White culture is not because of luck or some racial superiority, it is simply Whites embraced the empirical enterprise more than any other peoples which in turn opened them to the Christian message. Empiricism confirmed them in their Christian faith. But Christianity never matured with science, and it has been left behind. The Apriorian Empirical Church is a church for mature Christians able and willing to take up the whole armor of God and to employ it in proving by means of empirical science, it makes sense, as objectively determined by means of quantified methods of verification, to be a believer.
It is the White Western Nations that are multicultural. It is not something found anywhere else on the Globe, and yet the left has abandoned the concept of many nations living in peace as they strive towards a globalist and uniformitarian future. Multiculturalism is not something that fits in with the agenda of the left and so they strive to create racial strife in areas where it is found.
Being conservative has not transformed into power, in fact the right is being countered and defeated at every turn. Liberalization and the idea of freedom is a powerful message, what has the right got to defeat this powerful message of liberation? How do we turn the vast spaces under our control into victories?
This is a very short summary of The Guild System so the reader might understand the importance of restoring the glory of the Guilds, back to labor.
There are two ways of seeing and understanding the world. This might be unimportant were it not for that one way of understanding truth leads to a system of existence in which a small cadre of elites rule and the other way of understanding reality supports the natural rights and power of labor.
Every evil consists of someone doing something they do not pay the costs of. Every system that is destroyed is brought to ruin by people who free ride. Free riding and freeloading consist of people benefitting from the work of others. Every act of evil externalizes costs onto society and future generations, aided and abetted by the state. The state is the worlds more prolific free rider. There is hardly a freeloader who does not owe the success of his free riding to something the state did. But free riding, even by the state, can be ended and ended by means of a Craft Union. Its not difficult and it is not risky. The program spells the end of free riding and freeloaders.
Liberal Progressive Derangement Syndrome (LPDS) = (1) The playing out of the history of man. (2) A progressive disease that leads to a break with reality. (3) A disease marked by the use of phenomenology, the inductive method, and skepticism leading to widespread doubt and compromise which ultimately leads to a compromise with reality itself.
This is the most damning rebuttal of the inductive method ever written. The Apriorian Union explains why liberals are as they are and how they cannot be any other way. Its also proven it will only get worse as they will get worse. Liberalism is a recipe for creating emotional trauma and a break with reality. If you have ever wondered how and why liberals continue to deny God regardless of the preponderance of evidence, you will no longer.
Liberal Progressive Derangement Syndrome (LPDS) = (1) The playing out of the history of man. (2) A progressive disease that leads to a break with reality. (3) A disease marked by the use of phenomenology, the inductive method, and skepticism leading to widespread doubt and compromise which ultimately leads to a compromise or break, with reality itself.
Doubt seems a reasonable position to take, faced with the utter complexity of the universe. But is there any other endeavor we begin based on the assumption, not only that we will fail, but that to even think we can succeed is irrational? The institutionalization of doubt leaves us open to every and any possibility, including far left propositions such that children are sexual beings almost from birth, if not at birth. Being doubtful about somethings maybe good practice but when it comes to moral truths doubt makes us vulnerable to the most liberal of ideas and doctrines.
War seems simple enough. People want what others have and which they will not give up without a fight. Given enough people on both sides we have a war. In this sense a war is simple a mugging with lots of people involved. But understanding ought to go beyond a mere description. But if we cannot understand the dynamics of a mugging, how are we to understand war. In this video we demonstrate that the desire to have what others have is the key to understanding muggings, war and indeed all acts of harm.
Ecclesia are the biblical church which is designed to exclude the demonic lies of Satan. As such it is not a club or a building but an actual alternative management system without the state or other social costs. In operation it is tantamount to a utopia. If you do not believe utopia is possible you do not understand how the actual church as described in the Bible was to work. It was never meant to function as a social club.
Do you understand why wars happen? It ought to be easy to understand war. It is if we think like an animal would. Animals engage in physical confrontations over territory. Liberals are not animals but they think like animals and so when push comes to shove they respond as animals do, just with more violence. The need for a new race of man is because liberals have so corrupted the original chassis on which humanity was built, that reform is impossible. What cannot be achieved by law, backed up by physical force, must be achieved by animalistic playing out, or what are called display behaviour. These displays by liberals, include emotional outbursts and screaming fits seen when liberal initiatives are questioned. But these displays can easily transform into seemingly unprovoked attacks. The point is, if we want peace and prosperity and an end to the animalistic aggressive displays of liberalism, we need a new race of man. It is not as problematic as a liberal might think.
Matt. 6:21 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
Is this a tautology? Does it express a conflation of treasure and emotional attachment? Or is a causative principle expressed in the idea that what you consider to have value is what you will prioritize?
Utopia has always been considered at best an abstraction and at worst a fantasy of unsophisticated social theorists. But the Bible as the Word of God is claimed to be infallible and therefore, without error. It claims mankind can be perfected. If these things are true then it ought to be true that God would have designed a perfect system, a utopia, that we have fouled up but yet which ought to be discernable both in logic and in the pages of Scripture. This small essay proves this is indeed the case.
This is a much longer video than is standard but it compresses a great deal of information into a remarkably small time period. In this talk the author logically derives the need for the Biblical church and demonstrates why there is no other possible organizational model that will solve social problems.
Proofs of God generally pander to the bigotry of atheists and their narrative. But if we forgo their agenda and simply look at the issue of faith and it substantiation, it makes more sense to look at God as a serviceable hypothesis, that is as a hypothesis that produces real results. Saying this it is important to remember, we are talking now of solving human social problems, not solving atheists epistemological issues. We are not trying to justify the prejudices of atheists. The objective of this essay therefore is a proof that mankind’s social problems have real solutions if we assume God exists. Indeed, it is by assuming there is no proof of God because we adopt the perspective of atheists, why these problems are so resistant to being solved. Indirectly, atheism has been the cause of mankind’s failure to solve simple things like unemployment, inflation, poverty and debt.
This is a short talk on the structure of the Christian church as a place of people formed of the people of faith. It is a spiritual concept and metaphysical entity, not a physical thing. One cannot see it but it can be describe by its component ideas and elements. Naturally we have to use words with physical correlates like Councils, but these words ought to be viewed as applying to a different sort of idea. While an Ecclesiastical Council will have people that make it up, it is not a group of persons sitting around a grand table making up rules for the proletariat to follow. The Ecclesiastical Council is an association of saints replacing all other civil units and is a comprehensive solution to human social problems.
Many guesses as to the kingdoms mentioned in Daniel have been made but the guesses have been marginally wrong but wrong enough that when it got to determining the identity of the kingdom portrayed by the feet of iron and miry clay the guesses were off by several orders of magnitude. But if we remember we are speaking of spiritual things even when the Bible uses physical things as illustrations, a better understanding is possible.
Atheists do not understand evil and so do not understand Satan. The church has no clear and divisive monograph on the nature of evil. People get the mistaken idea that God and Evil are equal but opposites, or that Good and Evil are relative ideas instead of analytical and logical absolutes. Many in the church also confuse Evil with Satan, thinking they are synonyms. Many Christians talk of evil as if all that evil is, can be found in the person of Satan. Thus, there are many people who come away believing if Good and Evil are equal but opposite, Satan and God must likewise be equal opposites. This is very poor analytics never mind exegesis. Evil is a separate thing which must be looked at on its own terms.
Defunding the police is not an absolute good. It is important to defund the police only within a wider program of costs cutting. What is not acceptable is lowering costs for one sector by downloading costs onto other sectors. This is often what a police budget does. Its time the church moved on from the schemes and scams of a fallen world.
Atheism is not wrong the same way it is not wrong to hate rap or claim modern art is not real art. Atheism is emotional and subjective and is no more wrong than and preference. No one can force someone to believe what they do not wish. Atheism is not wrong because it is the atheists choice as to if he or she choose to go elsewhere than heaven. Not being wrong is not synonymous with being wise.
When we look at a gold coin we see a face value but what we are more interested in, is its nominal or bullion value. When we accept a dollar we do consider its face value but in times of inflation its real or potential value is of greater concern. Commodities have value. Money has fiat value because of the law but it also has a market value, and this is because liberal currencies are always a commodity. Conservative money has no value, it is simply a unit of account. For liberals this is a bizarre idea. For conservatives the idea of using a modified commodity as a medium of exchange, ought to be strange but too many conservatives have embraced liberal modes of thought. No where is this more true than in the way we think about money.
Ephesians 6:12 is a key and often quoted passage. It is easy to understand what it means, generally. It is difficult to understand what it means, specifically. Especially in need of understanding is the phrase, “spiritual wickedness in high places”. No doubt it refers to seats of power but if so, in what way do we confront and fight them if the fight is not against flesh and blood?
There are many injustices in the world but one of the worsts, that does not involve serious injury of death, is the value that a housewife brings to society that is not remunerated. We sing praises to motherhood and write poetry about the virtues of women yet we cannot pay them a cent for what they do for our families. If the work outside of their home they are considered paid labor but if they do it for the family it loses all commercial value. We do not think this is fair or even sensible. Those who produce wealth ought to be recognized for the value they create. In this short piece we prove the logicalness of such a program or recognition for both wives and students.
Democracy is the best of all possible systems other than the one which is better than it. But rather than slinging insults and innuendo around lets first of all consider what evil is, because if democracy generates evil it cannot be good, and if there is a system that does not do this then democracy is not only evil but costly. Evil acts do create costs. How evil the act is depends on the intensity of the costs they create. To be good acts must cover their own costs. To understand this we need to understand what motivates our actions. We attempt to remedy scarcity. Democracy changes the incidence of scarcity by means of redistribution. Redistributing scarce resources does not reduce the absolute level of scarcity. Therefore democracy creates costs in the act of redistributing scarce resources without reducing the absolute level of scarcity. The use of democracy is not logical as it does not reduce scarcity nor do good by eliminating social costs. But there is a system that does reduce scarcity absolutely and does not externalize costs onto society and future generations. Proving, conclusively that the utilization of democracy is not logical.
The biggest problem people have is in accepting things can get better, because if things get better then it opens the door to visions of utopia, and we all know a perfect system is not possible. If the perfect system is not possible then the path towards perfection must also be an illusion. But if is possible to prove, by simple logical argument, that utopia is not a utopian dream and that it is a feasible option, in fact a perfect system makes more sense than what we are doing now, which is working to create insurmountable problems.
A utopia is perfect and in the mind of liberals perfection is an attribute of metaphysical environments, impossible in a physical reality. Yet, Apriorian Logical proves a perfect social system is possible and it does not need to be located in some hidden mountain retreat or island isolated by deadly storms and jagged rocks. If we think of a perfect system as the most simple of all possible ways to organize society, then a social system such as ours is problematic because it has had is simplicity and elegance corrupted by evil forces. Remove the evil, get back to the root characteristics of a society, and we end up with elegant perfection with very little work, or even disruption. In short, utopia is what we have now with all of the systemic issues removed.
It is not possible to understand the nature of humankind if we do not understand the natural division that exists in the species. Mankind is not one race but two. As with so much attached to our species we managed to hide the truth under an absurdity. It is impossible to define what makes us human by looking at the body of man, but people want to create races out of a few minor genetic differences. Even if the genetic differences were fundamental and even if the races were the equivalent of species, would it matter if we all shared the same culture? Nobody really worries about skin tones but that does not mean there is not an even deeper difference separating us.
The rejection of Jesus is not just about atheism, Jesus was capable of rejecting a range of things, himself. Most notable was his rejection of an offer put to him by Satan, during the Temptations of Christ.
Being Green is an emotionally charged identity, and being emotional precludes being logical or having objectivity. If you need a better argument than that for rejecting environmentalism, you are looking to have your feelings validated and that will not happen here.
What to know why the right drifts to the left and wins all the arguments but loses the fights over policy? Ninety percent of the problems we have rests on one issue, Christians have forgotten how to establish Ground Zero, or an objective base on which to operate.
Its not that atheists are not intelligent, they just think different, in a different way, than analytical and logical people do.
Faith is logical, not because it is syllogistic but because it has benefits. By the same token, faith has benefits because a lack of faith has costs and many of them serious. Indeed, to understand the costs of losing ones faith, look around your environment and at the news, these are events created by people who felt so betrayed, they lost their connection to the rest of humanity.
Confused by the doctrine of saved by faith, not by works, when the Bible tells us that the works of men counted as faith? Scripture tells us it is by our works we are known. Why would our faith save us if salvation is by Grace, ie unearned merit. Does faith not give us merit? Are we missing something in our exegesis? Do we even understand what faith is? In this video an interpretation of some well-known Bible verses are consolidated into a doctrine that will shatter our view of the role of the church and indeed, the doctrine of saved by faith and make James much easier to understand.
We the people is not just an abstraction; it is an evil deception. The only way all the earth could be one is by the earth being given over to evil. There is no path to unity in Christianity. It is just not possible. Those who talk of We The People are talking of a fallen earth in which the light has gone out.
To eliminate crime, society has to first eliminate unreconciled accounts. An unreconciled account is a debt outstanding. In short, a society with debt is a society that is nurturing crime. Logical jurisdictions reconcile all accounts preventing crimes from occurring.
It is impossible for God to exist in a physical world or universe composed solely of matter energy space and time. Physical reality is not Good and the world God created is Good. It is irrational to imagine we can deduce or observe, the existence of God in a world that operates solely by the laws of physics.
The divide between liberal and conservative is nowhere more visible than the position they take regarding guns. Liberals express a phobic reaction to them whereas conservatives exhibit a positive affinity for them. What does a liberal actually see when they see a gun?
Does anyone think it odd that normalcy is not considered a desirable state for man to be in, and that many people deny such a condition is possible? But we do not see abnormal animals. Why have humans embraced the abnormal, even the abhorrent? Why has the abnormal become normalized and what can we do about it?
Does it take science for us to define what it means to be normal? Must this science be tied to a proof of the existence of God. If so, and it seems it is so, it means that only those actively engaged in a process that leads to the experimental proof of God are proven to be normal in the scientific sense.
If free will does not appear compatible with the idea of an omniscient and omnipotent God, it is certainly consistent with a Satanic evil that does not care what anyone chooses so long as they do not choose Christ. But how does mortal man know if he is exercising his free will courtesy of Satan or abiding by the Truths of God?
We are saved by faith, or we are subject to the absurdity of a whimsical fate. We cannot control reality and so if our will has no impact on outcomes then we are nothing but a leaf blowing in the wind. What is our mind and spirit but illusions, if they have zero impact on outcomes? Only faith can save us, if we have it. But what does it mean to have faith? What does it mean to be saved by faith and not by works?
There is a battle going on but it is impossible to see or understand it if you do not believe truth exists. If there is no truth, there is no basis on which to fight wars. Battles are always about the truth. Commonly wars are fought with fists and tools that complement and enhance the physical power of the fighters. But this is little more than the philosophy of the jousting field where truth was decided by a trial by combat, taken to the extreme. But violence does not vary proportionately with the truth. For people who truly fight for the truth we need to learn to fight with truth. This is the battle for Aprioria. It is a war of science over bigotry and hate, not a fight with the tools of hate.
Barabbas was a liberal democrat, a lover of democracy and a intersectional victim who benefitted from the hate of the mob for conservatives.
The world has no meaningful response to unemployment. The best the world does is decrease the rate at which prices are rising so to encourage companies to hire more workers. This at least generally creates real jobs producing real goods and services. However, the government often expands the public sector, whether in a capitalist or communist state. Public employment merely hides unemployment it does not really eliminate it. To eliminate unemployment there must always be greater pressure on job creation than on job reduction. For this we need the church.
Nothing seems to be more misunderstood than the hypothesis of two distinct realities, despite it being the most obvious truth, not just in The Universal Theory of Apriorism, but absolutely. We all talk as if there were two realities. Our various political, economic and religious theories all address the idea and incorporate it to some degree, in the body of their claims. The only real aspect of this is where the line between the realities is drawn.
However, we need to address relative versus absolute divisions. The divisions between left and right politics and economics is artificial and relative. The differences are more quantitative and cosmetic and real. It is more about marketing an option than highlighting a real distinction.
But this idea that all of our distinctions are truly just points on a continuum is part of The One Reality Hypothesis. If you reject The Two Reality Hypothesis, which you more than likely do, you think everything is relative, truth is contingent, and good and evil are polar opposites separated by an infinite continuum of gray.
Which means every concept and idea about reality can be contained within The One Reality Hypothesis. Differences between how people think about reality are merely cosmetic and point to nothing substantial, except in one case. One reality cannot be contained in The One Reality Hypothesis, and that is the idea that truth is absolute and there are diametrically opposed ideas that have no path to reconciliation.
We cannot reconcile that which by definition, is unreconcilable. A reality based on absolute Good and Absolute Truth, cannot be part of a reality in which all truth is contingent and what is good is what is legal. Those who subscribe to The One Reality Hypothesis can claim those who believe there is an absolute truth, are wrong or even insane. But that is all they can do, but this is a confirmation there is a reality that cannot be contained in The One Reality Hypothesis.
So, in fact, The One Reality Hypothesis (ORH) is a contradiction of terms, since it says, all ideas about truth and reality are contingent and relative, except one and that is the idea that absolute truth and absolute good exist.
The Two Reality Hypothesis is nothing more than a non-contradictory version of the ORH. The Two Reality Hypothesis acknowledges most people believe truth is relative and contingent and reject those who claim otherwise. The Two Reality Hypothesis (TRH) affirms there is a reality that the ORH rejects. And so we of the TRH reject the ORH because there is this other reality in which truth is absolute and what is good is not contingent.
The choice is to be an adherent of the ORH and claim all of reality is relative and probabilistic and reject there are absolute truths or accept there are absolute truths that are not contained in the relativistic scheme of things. Even truth claims such as the one that all of reality is composed of relative truths, which is an absolute truth claim, refuting its own terms of existence. Which means the ORH is inherently self-refuting, leaving as the only possible absolute truth, The Two Reality Hypothesis.
Are you confused about why God is God instead of the other guys god? Do you wonder what gender is and why God, though sexless and without DNA, is male? But why is God the God of Christianity and not that of a religion based on law? There are reasons for this. Perhaps you think these questions cannot be answered because liberals say they are personally incapable of devising a solution to these problems. But perhaps liberals are attempting to hide intellectual weakness under a general claim about the unfathomable mystery of such questions. Maybe the solutions are simple, but not as simple as an atheist.
When man was ejected from Eden that was not the end of Eden, it still exists but as a test group. The world outside of Eden became a Control Group in the worlds first and largest and longest running experiment. Over the last 6000 years we have discovered that despite considerable advances in the hard sciences, the soft sciences or humanities have proven sterile and at times destructive. No major human problem has been solved in the entire 6000 years and many more have been created. Not an inspiring record. What has been missing is a test group to compare the sorry record of the Control Group with. The Apriorian Church is the test group and premiers as The Third Denomination.
The church fights principalities and powers. But where is this fight? Where is it centered? How does the devil work in this world? Why does he appear to be winning?
Everyone knows that Satan rebelled against God. But rebellion is not a specific class of things, in fact it is a response more than a particular action. Rebellion comes in as many forms as compliance. So it behooves us to understand what Satan specifically did not just in the Garden of Eden but in his corruption of mankind. The devil is working in the world. But what he is doing is subtle and nuanced. He is not going around killing people though we think this is the epitome of evil. Satan does not want dead people he wants spiritually damaged people.
What is the fruit as in the Fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil? The answer depends heavily on if you see the story as historic or symbolic. Did the tree ever exist, did it have fruit on it? But the answers to this rely heavily on what we think Eden is and where we think it might have been located. This short video comes to answers not available anywhere else.
Belief is too often compared to doubt, as if doubt was a thing. This has left believers open to accusations of belief having no foundation. Simply due to the capacity of the other person to doubt your claim. This is an absurd comparison. No one can achieve a threshold of prove that leaves all persons incapable of doubting the claim. A better comparison ought to be between types of belief. Is belief based on strategy better than a belief based on fate, other wise we are trying to compare applies with oranges.
Conventional theology tells us we are saved by faith. The Bible tells us clearly, the doers of the law shall be justified. We are also told that it is by works we are known. There are passages in the Bible that interpret the works of Abraham and Noah and other Old Testament persons are interpreted as acts of faith. In other words, it is not just about a wetting and prayer of repentance that opens the door of heaven. There is more going on here. If there will be those who cry Lord, Lord at the last days to be told by our Savior he never knew them, it seems wise to unravel these passages and acquire a clear understanding of what it takes to be saved. In so doing we realize, Christians need a third denomination. Catholicism and Protestantism have both fallen short in their exegesis regarding salvation and the nature of the church.
Evil is not optical, it does not exist as a visible thing you can video or create a gif of. There is no horned being in a red body suit to show to the unbeliever. Evil is far more real than what can be touched or put in a jail cell. Indeed, evil is so real you are probably begging it to help you fight all of the bad things that threaten your life and property. What is more, evil is so real it is more than happy to help.
Evil is not optical, it does not exist as a visible thing you can video or create a gif of. There is no horned being in a red body suit to show to the unbeliever. Evil is far more real than what can be touched or put in a jail cell. Indeed, evil is so real you are probably begging it to help you fight all of the bad things that threaten your life and property. What is more, evil is so real it is more than happy to help.
WARNING: If you listen to this podcast to the end your world view will change in a substantial and life altering manner. For 6000 years we have been lied to about who man is, what divides us, what competition is about and many other things. You will learn there is no identifiable human race, there is no common identity or factor that defines what makes us humans. Human beings are a divided kind. The divide is deeper and more permanent than you can imagine. Every problem you can think of was created because of this division and cannot be ended until this division is recognized for what it is. When finished you will understand where the division is and why it exists and why it cannot be bridged; what has caused our human problems and how to eliminate them without risk or threats of loss, how to put into place the Labor Theory of Value, how to build a church that replaces the political system and all of its laws and associated problems, how to end poverty, unemployment, inflation and mankind’s other social problems, all of this is doable and more and all during a fifteen minute video/podcast.
The war against evil is a war of division, a war of separation. Evil is a contaminant, a poison that infects the church. There is no evil in the world of Satan. Evil is when this world of corruption is permitted to infect the world of the church. The war against evil is about blocking evil from invading our space that is called the church.
Most Christians think they know what the story of the Rich Young Man is about, but we are not sure and perhaps a lot of us hope we have misunderstood what it is telling us. To think it is saying that people who will not sell what they have and give it to the poor put their physical property before a God who demands we not even put family in front of Him, is an unpleasant topic to dwell on. But things are not as bad as we think, or maybe worse. Because while the story is not precisely about making ourselves destitute, the fact is that it is far more easy to follow what Jesus wants us to do than we hoped. At least if obedience looked next to impossible we had a reason for disobeying him. But if obedience is as easy as this author suggests it is, our disobedience really is without excuse. For people who are not willing to obey God this many not be a production you will want to familiarize yourself with. Knowing you could obey God without suffering dire consequences while failing to do so may not be a situation you wish to find yourself in.
There is no commonality, no common cause or common purpose. We may share a common physical appearance but that does not make us all of one mind or purpose. We are divided and the division is fundamental.
To have a human right there has to be, at minimum, a creature called human, and it must have at least one commonality shared among all members of the group to make it a kind. There is a physical creature that is considered to be part of a category or class of things called human. This class is composed of creatures with a wide range of physical attributes. The question is if there is sufficient reason to give all of its members a common or class identity. If a commonality cannot be established throughout the kind, then no right can be affixed to the entity. It is common to look at mankind as a physical creature. If we are a physical creature, we are an animal. But animals do not have rights other than those given to them by humans. To give humans a human right requires something higher than human. Unless rights are derived from nature. If there is a right not natural, the right is not attached to our physical being. Either way, human rights are not a viable concept. The right cannot be attached simply to an accident of birth. The idea of a human rights must be abandoned for a more sophisticated understanding of what rights are and to whom they pertain.
It seems a reasonably comprehensive list of social problems that the Bible solves would be useful to my listeners. These problems are all created by humans and their institutions. They are not part of the social model devised by God. It is our refusal to follow the Bible that has left us in a condition that gets progressively worse by the decade.
The greatest error in calculation an atheist was thinking rejecting God was substantially the same as denying the existence of Santa Clause. But what does a person do after they have burned their bridges and then realize the road is blocked? It is an easy thing to do to deny the existence of God but a great deal more is eliminated along with their faith. Atheists cannot substantiate their own reality exists once they abandon faith. All chance of discovering what is true is on the road to finding God. Reject God and Truth is rejected. Reject God and moral truth cannot be found. But if you cannot manage the leap to faith or the rocky road to salvation, take the other path. Anyone can manage to become an atheist, though compared to the alternative, it does not promise much.
Atheist claim nothing Christians say or do is sufficient to overcome the threshold of doubt they have established for themselves. This is true. Christians need to understand there is no path to certainty in the atheist frame of reference. No matter how may tests are done, nor what arguments are contrived, there must always be the possibility of doubt. Similar to a court of law, if the guilt of the accused cannot be proven beyond the shadow of a doubt, the accused must be given the benefit of the doubt and be deemed innocent. But the atheists ploy of setting the threshold of proof so high it cannot be breached leaves them with nothing that can be proven. In short, atheists by the tactics they have employed, leave themselves nothing to believe in but their own opinion. In short, Christians are at the very worst, are on par with an atheist. We are free to have faith in our own opinion, as they are. On the other hand Christians are free to be convinced by the logic of their arguments and evidence knowing all atheists have, is their opinion.
The devil has ben dogmatic in his insistence that atheism is not a religion, which might make sense to humans but from a metaphysical perspective there is no common elements found in a religion and Christianity. Even the claim that Christianity is one of the three theistic religions does not make much sense when the same people who argue this, note the differences between the portrayal of God in the Old Testament and his guise as a Trinity in the New. But there is more. Islam and Judaism are law-based religions. Atheism has nothing to do with faith and takes pains distancing itself from any association with faith. Which leaves it no where to go but to the law. As part of this discussion a list of attributes shared by religions is provided.
This is an account of seven miracles I experienced. Those who assume I am lying will not be convinced. If you think I am lying or misrepresenting what happened or twisting the story in some way have no point to questioning a liar. Regardless, nothing is going to change from what is relayed here so believe or leave. The point is, if you correlate these narratives with my universal theory, you will have strong proof miracles happen. The theory could not exist without these miracles and these miracles are just stories about a few weird experiences, without the theory. If you can disprove the theory then you disproved these miracles have a supernatural origin.
Evil is a real thing and it can be identified and made visible, in a non-evil reality. This system we are in, the sapiens system or alternatively, the liberal system, is a way of thinking and understanding that is 6000 years old. It is a provably evil system. But liberalism cannot be proven evil until we understand what evil is. Evil can be anthropomorphized into Satan and Satan is evil, but that is not the point here. Even though we live in a Satanic system we cannot point to Satan as the embodiment of evil and expect to derive an algorithm for dealing with evil from this or similar postulates. Satan does something more than just tell lies to make him the picture of evil. What is important about understanding Satan as the father of lies, is that lies hide evil. There is nothing complicated about evil, there is nothing particularly sinister, about evil. If it seemed alien to us, evil would not be universally embraced by human beings. However, while we cannot stop people from embracing evil, it can be identified and a systematic way can be formulated for eradicating it, at least from among those who choose to reject it.
The Apriorian Conservatives
A theory of everything is a claim to answer all human problems with the use of a single hypothetical or explanatory element. In this case the explanatory factor is God or what is called The God Hypothesis. Apriorian claims God Exists and that because He Exists as God He is the author of all things. There remains only one option available to us, add value to the things of God, or create enmity between Him and us. If we are against God we are against the things of God. This is witness as competition. To compete one or two persons must compete with the rightful owner or with another false claimant to what does not belong to either. To solve human problems is simply a matter of not creating them. Conservatives are organizations that reward cooperation and prevent competitions from occurring. Thus all human social problems are simultaneously eliminated.
Theocracy is the rule of God but it is also the people organized to serve God by protecting the sanctity of the things of God. This requires we add value to the assets created by God and put under our care. This is especially so for that which God values most and which is His highest and most perfect of all creations, His Church. Conservatism is the belief that the purpose of man is to protect the integrity of Gods Created universe.
The question as to the meaning of life is a perennial question of philosophy and religion. Even politics and economics discuss the problem but in more circumspect ways. Political parties main bone of contention is that other parties do not understand the central questions of life, including what gives purpose to existence. For most people liberalism has provided the main source of our values. Free speech, liberty, freedom and so on are all the products of liberal thinkers. Conservatism on the other hand has remained largely in the background. If anything conservatives seem to be the main hindrance to humans obtaining their freedom and full liberties. But property understood conservatism is the first order principle, for it alone understands that competition cannot supply a foundation on which purpose and meaning can rest. Conservatives belief life has value and it is this preservation of the value of life that is important. When we begin to devalue human life, we eliminate life of purpose and meaning.
For most people and public employees, the most difficult thing they can imagine is either starting a business or providing the means for starting one. It is, in everyone’s eyes, an extremely risky business, a proposition borne out by the record of failures. And of course, virtually every business fails or is bought out. This is in the developed economies. When we are talking about undeveloped areas or underdeveloped economies, the situation becomes even more risky. But this is not a natural phenomenon, it is purely a result of our politics and economics. There is no risk facing business that is not human in origins. We can remove these human created threats to business start ups. We can build up a business based on faith. This short production does not go deeply into the operation of the faith-based business model, these details have been explored in other podcasts and videos. This short production focuses on why a cooperative based business model can be set up without risk, with only what is available to you.
The world seems a very chaotic place. It seems there are no simple solutions. But if we cannot find solutions that eliminate problems, we are looking in the wrong place. This world we live in is the wrong world and the wrong reality to be looking for solutions in. In this world we live a lie and it is an old, old lie. Sane people do not live in insane asylums. Competitions give us winners. We all see the winners but not many see the many losers. Life is not a race nor is economic development and progress a contest. In life there are enough races and enough contests for everyone to be a winner, because when we all win no one is made a loser. All it really takes is for us to be honest about the race we are running and how we are running it.
Taxation is an adjustment made to correct the impact of evil on our lives. But it is itself an evil. Without honesty there will always be evil and with evil there will always be a need to artificially make adjustments to the market. But if we learn to be honest with our selves it is possible to create a cooperative social model that does away with competitive markets and the need for the regulatory state and its taxation. It is in fact socialism that permits capitalism to survive. One cannot be eradicated without eliminating the other.
There are good reasons for the elite to fear deflation more than anything else. There is a good reason why they treat debt and inflation as just minor inconveniences, that need to be kept from getting out of control. But they are not telling you these reasons, we do.
Satan is a liar and the father of lies but there are ten lies that are central to much of the worlds thinking today. In this presentation Apriorian sets out these lies in list form and expounds on each one in turn, showing how they are interrelated and why individually and collectively, they do not and indeed, cannot rise to the level of a credible truth.
Tired of the self-serving, agenda driven explanations for police violence against Black youth? There is an explanation, and it has to do with race, youth and the culture of law enforcement, but nothing to do with the simplistic interpretation provided by the media and various ‘experts’. Unfortunately, the more we understand the problem the more we realize there is no quick fix addressable by new training and new racial hires. Nor is a more liberal approach to policing going to work. In fact, policing in its present form, is incapable of addressing the problem. The prognosis is not good. The prediction is these types of incidents, as seen in Memphis, are likely to continue and get worse. There is a need to totally re-think policing and indeed how we construct a community.
If we have faith and live in a community of faith there would not be competition. Why would we seek an advantage against those who trust us and whom we trust? If there is faith there is cooperation. Most people will shrug this off but the point is, if we are living in a competitive environment, we live in a place where faith is absent. We have no church if we do not have an environment based on cooperation.
All the crime, poverty and stress creates a sense of disappointment in us. For whatever reason, we expect more from our politicians and other leaders. We expect crime to be taken care of and there be medical care when we need it. We do not want to hear excuses and promises. We need a home, food and help now, its not a future need, it is a present day need and when our needs cannot be met by all of the highly paid experts whose job entails providing us with these needs, we are disappointed.
In this production we will be talking specifically about creating a new nation under God. This is a nation that does not require regulatory frameworks, or laws. Its all a matter of the market one uses. Free markets require some regulation due to the contingent nature of their ownership model. Apriorian Markets or Exchanges permit people to own only what they create. Exchanges do not permit people to own what they con others out of, or steal.
What does being awake, mean to you? Is it an awareness of the oppression of the left, do you understand the inherent bigotry of the equity movement and its fascination with intersectionality? But where is the line between them and us if we are all under the same law?
If reality is physical and the only means of understanding it is inductive reasoning leading back to some mythical event such as the Big Bang then our highest aspiration is to discover from where we came. A First Order Principle flips our perception towards the future. We start to understand where we are going and why. But is there a First Order Principle and if so, what is it and what does this tell us about how we have got to where we are now?
For a five page essay outlining the problem of Africa and the workings of a solution, the details are impressive, but minor issues are not gone into in great detail. Most of these things have been explored at great length in other videos and podcasts. The main point is that the system Africa is in is intrinsically divisive. African can only survive by winning in a competitive market. Cooperation in this system is likely to end in disaster, because all the other players are seeking an advantage. The main argument of this discussion is the need for a new platform on which a cooperative culture and market can be erected. This five page essay is divided into two parts for the convenience of the viewer. The first part deals with the problem of competition and the second part explains how to circumvent and ultimately erase the problem.
Most people realize correlation does not prove causation. So, it might not come as a total surprise to learn that while printing money and expanding debt is accompanied by inflation, we can find inflation in other places, even when there is no money or bank debt. Money is a common factor in an inflationary economy but it is not a causative agent because inflation exists independent of our monetary systems. It hardly needs to be said reining in the ability of a state to print money or increasing interest rates to stop borrowing, is not going to hit inflation where it needs to be hit.
Those who live in the flesh are not just in a different political party or embrace other economic ideas. The difference between those in the flesh and those in the spirit cannot just be seen late Sunday morning when we see who goes to church, and who does not. Christians have not embraced the life of the spirit because we have not understood the life of the flesh. We my enjoy the company of our unbelieving friends more than we do the time we spend with believers. But this confusion is ill-advised. The division is not philosophical, cultural or even ideological. The division is total and absolute like the difference between + and – and if you think there is a grey area and a spot where you can straddle the difference I suggest you look more carefully at where the line is and just how deep, wide and unbridgeable it is.
We keep hearing the accusation. More needs to be done. There is unmet need. As if need itself was an evil that had to be eradicated at all costs. There is conflict between needs. I cannot give you more time without reducing the time I spend on myself. I cannot give more to charity without that money being taken from my children and wife. The accusation is a lie. There is not more we could do, there is only different. We could do things different. But, at what cost? It is not that we could do more, it is a question of if we are making the best use of what we have. And remember, if we must ask this question of ourselves, so ought others ask it.
If human beings truly had a right to life how is it possible for a state to declare war? Human life is something of value, and all things with a value can be turned into property. Property can be and is, owned. In our case our identity is property that belongs to the state. The right to life is a contingent entitlement guaranteed, with qualifications, to subjects. Social justice is a globalist attempt to engineer society according to an agenda in which everything is owned by a central authority. Whether this is considered public or private is moot. It becomes a One World Government/Company. Our right to life will be that of a domesticated animal.
There are two races and two realities attached to the Biblical narrative of those who are saved and those who reject Jesus Christ. These are not one people with different characteristics, they are two people with irreconcilable differences. There can be no common ground between them and no peace and no negotiated settlement. This is a war and what is more, it is a race war. But it is not a war in which each side is defined by a physical feature such as skin tone or phenotype. Each race is defined by how they think and understand reality and truth.
Democracy is a rite that confirms one’s subjugation to the state. The state is an institution of social justice. Social justice is simply human rights applied or the idea that humans are entitled to certain things or conditions. Social justice is the payoff. By creating subgroups, one become entitled to additional rights. The provision of these entitlements is what is called social justice. The key feature is not the rights or the entitlements, it is the obligation of others to earn and supply the entitled with what they never earned and provide no compensatory value for. Which makes social justice the justice of parasites and conartists.
The fight for social justice appears to be the only just fight and few oppose it yet the fight never appears to be won. It is a simple matter to blame the failure of the social justice agenda on a stubborn enemy. We can claim the hate is so virulent it is impossible to overcome. But where is it? The hate often appears to come from those who claim to be on the side of social justice and to be aimed at the most innocuous of questions. Is social justice such a virtuous agenda no one is permitted to question anything it decides to pursue, regardless of how the social justice warrior decides to pursue its objectives?
The choices are not many or we would have an excuse for choosing wrong. There are only two choices and they are fundamentally distinct. One of the more obvious choices we have is whether we are a globalist or locavore. Anyone who is a liberal and supports social justice is a globalist because social justice ultimately leads to the formation of a one world government. The only alternative is to abjure all elements of the social justice movement and embrace fully local rights, local economics and the formation of a local currency. Apriorian coaches prospective locavores in how to divest oneself of the garment of social justice and put on the armor of a person of faith. If you do not have faith in the members of your faith community, how can you claim you have faith in God?
The Tactical General Strike (TGS) is a semi-permanent organization for the systematic reduction and eventual elimination of, social justice agendas along with the state and other globalist institutions.
It would seem the day of the general strike is past. Unions are no longer the power brokers they were. Most are content to wrest small concessions the employer and look forward to retirement. A general strike occurs when several large unions orchestrate a full or complete shutdown of the economy. However, with the decline in union membership and their loss of power the likelihood of holding a General Strike or even getting the major unions involved is on the wane. But a Tactical General Strike is grassroots and tactical using a more targeted approach to fighting the evils of the lefts social justice agenda.
There is nothing that puzzles mankind more than the existence of evil. For Christians the existence of evil is perhaps an even greater paradox. How can a Perfect God create evil and admit that he is the Creator of evil and still be good? But these problems are of our own making. God is not the only creator. It says God created all things and on the seventh day, He rested. But mankind existed by then and mankind did not rest. All we need to understand to solve the dilemma of evil, is to know God does not lie, what God Created is Good and that mankind cannot impact God. Man cannot turn the Good God does, into evil. Once we are clear on that an explanation of evil is easy to come by.
We have seen the enemy and he is looking at us from our mirrors. The world wants us to look outward, to the other. Somewhere out there is the enemy and so we fight one another. But we, not they, are the true enemy. Ephesians 6:12 and the Abomination of Desolation is about our own lack of faith. The evil in this world is not found in the Pope, government, or some nefarious organization. It is in us.
What is the good, that we should pursue it? We know it is the opposite of evil and evil is to be avoided. Thus we know and do not know what good is, because we know and do not know what evil is. We know one is to be pursued and the other turned away from but the details are sorely lacking, or were. The good can be quantified and evil logged. God made it all possible.
The flesh is imperfect and prey to all sorts of weaknesses, but man is perfectible but only in faith. By faith we are saved and by faith are we brought to perfection.
This video is a continuation of The Scientific Proof Of God series. The series as a total sets out to prove that the scientific proof of God is not only possible, it is almost unavoidable, if we wish to fix things. It really would make a lot of sense to ensure one has listened to the previous eight videos before listening to the latest one, they are integrated. The basic argument these videos make is that to have a proof of God requires a test group that is culturally distinct from the control group and that a numerical method of validation be established to verify the results of each.
We live in faith, or we live in fear. If we have faith, we embrace love and community. We are more trusting and forgiving. If we live in fear, we need laws and regulations to protect us from others. We need law makers and a judicial system to make and enforce the law. The question is how do those who live in fear learn to live in faith?
The Golden Rule is not a policy promoting reciprocity. We are to do, means just that. It is our highest sense of self that ought to guide our actions. As God is the highest and most perfect conception we are to follow God by seeking to be our best self and live as this version of ourselves in order to inspire others to do the same. This requires a radical faith, a faith that eliminates fear. The works of faith produce the fruits of radicalism. Be radical or be liberal.
Money is not a source of risk. Money is not just a measure of value. Money also measures faith. We cannot reduce risk for others by doing nothing. To reduce risk we have to demonstrate faith in others. To create real money is to create real value through works of faith. Only works of faith produce value for others. Money is not an asset. Money does not produce debt or risk or pose a threat of loss. Money does not measure the inherent value of an asset. If what you use as money contains in itself, inherent value, it is a currency but it is not money.
A shortage of money is always blamed for a lack of economic development, when in fact the scarcity of money has the least impact of whether a region is developing or not. In fact the shortage of money is really an excuse for the absence of faith. The truth is all two or three people need is a tiny seed of faith to begin the process of sustained economic development. If you can find two more people whom you can trust you can begin the process of economic development, regardless of what your circumstances are.
The first third of the essay looks at democracy and capitalism and the idea of meritocracy. But the virtue of man or man in any political party cannot be quantified. The second third looks at the risk the other represents and the ways democracy has sought to give a voice to the minority. Only then do we look in the last third at a different option tied neither to the popular vote or the power of money. The question is asked, who actually has a right to vote?
Faith drives out fear by means of works of faith that build trust. However trust is a fruit of faith that only grows on a vine, in community. Trust is or manifests as, an organizational model dissimilar to the secular, democratic structure that represents liberalism. If you wish to eliminate fear one must have a faith that bears fruit and builds trust. Listen to Part One before you listen to this podcast.
In this speech the demon of democracy speaks about law, to man as a man, providing to man, an argument for democracy and for the rule of law. The demon of democracy speaks on behalf of the state and the regulatory framework within which all nations work. He speaks for the promotion of a social agenda, social justice and the concept of the global village. Freedom, the demon of democracy argues, is mankind’s right. The right to be free, the demon of democracy agues, is a right under the law to be obtained by means of progressive legislation. In the second part faith has something to say.
This essay was titled, five ways the church failed God, but it is not possible to limit the discussion to five points. The discussion has been divided into two parts. This first part looks at the failure of the church to separate from the world, the failure to divest itself of wealth, our failure as Christians to have faith in the future, and the love of money. Part Two will discuss The Golden Rule, The Great Commission, those who do not work neither should they eat, our lack of faith, and more.
A Trustocracy is just a Trust or what is known of as a community of faith built by the people of faith performing works of faith. Works of faith bear fruit and the fruit is trust or as an organizational model, a Trust. Trustocracy is a way to indicate that faith is the greatest power in the universe and it is the fruit of the works of faith that have the ultimate power, which in our understanding comes down to the right to rule. In this essay the focus is on showing why and how democracy is to be replaced by works of faith performed by the people of faith, or in other words, by the trust we who have faith, ought to have in one another.
These five programs are Biblically based and more consistent with the Word of God than much of what many churches do. But because these programs are focused on doing works of faith, they are more concerned with practical matters than doctrine. Let’s just say these programs have relied more heavily on Matthew 25:35-40 than on ecclesiastical writings.
A little understood problem is why Conservatives have largely given up on taking back real power in society. It seems even the most awake are happy if they can just hang on and slow down what seems like an evitable decay into deviancy. But conservatives will not admit democracy is a problem, because they do not know how to defeat it, let alone replace it. Apriorian not only explains carefully in great detail just what is wrong with democracy, at least for conservatives, but how to defeat and replace it with something that is consistent with Scripture.
What is Apriorian as a belief, a practice, a suite of programs, a racial group, a reality, a theocracy, a philosophy, an economy, an economic model, a politics, a religion, a way of life? Why does it differ from everything else created during the last 6,000 years?
There is more than one race of man. The Apriorian race (Homo sapiens apriorian), is a race based on faith, not fear. There is no risk and no threat of loss in Apriorian culture. The mechanisms of the market have been refined. Apriorians have made business start ups routine and job changes as ordinary a thing as changing ones socks. If you wish to see risk eliminated and fear a thing of the past, think about changing your race.
Babylon refers to people addicted to liberal institutions. This includes everyone who votes or lives under a democratic government. A broader understanding would include everyone who lives by the law or under a legal system. Liberalism is ultimately a legal system or law-based culture. Only faith can overcome the fear that exists at the heart of every law-regulated culture.
It seems the modern world is committed to making democracy work rarely giving theocracy a thought, unless it is an atheist ranting against the evil it represents to them. But democracy based on the power of the people has never explained why people have a right to the power they are said to exercise. Theocracy, on the other hand, has suffered due to the fact there are two quite distinct kinds as there are two distinct conceptions of god. A Western Theocracy is a far different kind of thing than an Eastern Theocracy, which incidentally, is the source of mankind’s ideas concerning democracy.
The Founding Fathers erred in their design. The people have no greater right to power than monarchs. This is obvious in everyday life. For the most part we spend the money we earn and operate the businesses we create. When considering an operation or which house to purchase we do not ask a random group of people to vote on the issue. There is a group that has earned the right to exercise political power and a way to systematically transfer power back into their hands.
If there was a Golden Age or if there is to be a Golden Age there is an evil that seeks to divert us from it or destroy it.
This is a concise summary of a universal economic development project applicable to all persons in all places regardless of their situation.
Is there such a thing as normalcy? What does it take to possess the condition of normalcy? When is a person a deviant?
Every social problem known to mankind has been created by mankind and only exists because humans insist on doing the same things over and over again. However, not that all persons expect there will be a different result. Some may do but there are a lot of persons that benefit from the flaws in this system. If your land was watered by irrigation and the pipes leaked where they crossed your land, the community might complain about the cost of water but you would be less inclined to fix the problem than they would. So it is with unemployment, crime, taxation, inflation, and even war. As problematical as these systems are there are people who profit from them. Perhaps this is not you. If you are not interested in perpetuating the problems of man, this is information geared to your interests.
What are liberals after? What part do minorities play in the over-all strategy? What lays behind feminism and why have white women proved to be the voice of liberalism. Why the disorder and the confusion and what has this to do with liberalism and the decay of conservatism? These questions and more are answered in The End Of Conservatism.
As a conservative you probably have noticed liberalism does not make sense. Those who identify with it cannot justify their attachment to it nor intellectually defend it. Conservatives are met with screams, chants and cancellation when liberal policy is questioned. Yet, if anything typifies a liberal it is their passionate commitment to the cause. Can this be explained? A Deeper Look At Liberalism suggests that if we look at liberalism as a type of addiction akin to alcoholism we can understand liberalism and their tendency to engage in the more common forms of addiction.
What is this war we are in? Everyone claims there is division, and it continues to grow. It becomes more difficult to carry on a dialogue. But what fuels the division and why cannot the two sides reconcile for the differences are intractable.
The ideas and attitudes of the East are infiltrating West, what with increasing levels of migration and the adoption by liberals of ideas and attitudes prevalent in Babylon and found in many communist countries, the West becomes ever more despotic and dominated by theological ideas from the East.
Deviancy is a problem only if normalcy is a real thing. We have been taught it is largely an illusion. If normalcy is an abstraction and perhaps a bias, then deviancy is not a real thing. A deviant is just a label hateful people paste on people they do not understand. Naturally, if normalcy is not a real thing, then anyone who opposes anyone for anything is a hateful person. No one can claim they are better than anyone else on account of how they live or because of the things they do not do. But you can claim the other person is more hateful than you if they oppose something you are willing to permit. Deviancy becomes in fact a measure of how tolerant you are and how hateful the other person is for opposing the choices of other people. But normalcy is a real thing.
Some say humanity and human civilization stands at the brink of extinction. The normalization of pedophilia and bestiality is well on its way. Humanity has become an empty space which clients furnish with their own customized features. Freedom is said to be not free usually with reference to the sacrifices our armed forces pay. But in the context of liberalism freedom without boundaries has repercussions and these are toxic. For example, a person cannot lie as if the truth was composed of falsifications without encountering serious repercussions. But if liberalism is toxic how do we establish what a normal state looks like?
Knowing that liberals are parasites who expropriate wealth from the productive sector helps us understand liberalism. But we all would like to live free, if we could. This essay looks at why some people choose to become parasitic and others, despite the hardships, work for what they get. But it is more important to understand why transgenders and migrants take priority over Seniors and Veterans. To understand the dynamics at play here and why liberalism went from a civil rights movement to a toxic poison that destroys western civilization we need a better way to understand socialism.
What a citizen and what are his and her rights? A citizen is not a subject. The rights of a subject are provided by the state. The rights of a citizen is not guaranteed by the state and not predicated on the existence or corroboration of the state. Citizen rights are inviolable and attached to the very nature of reality. In other words the rights of a citizen cannot be given or alienated they are, in every sense of the word, natural.
One of the most pervasive lies of Western society is that there are no normal people. In the liberal world view, all persons are to some degree mentally damaged or harmed. But this begs the question. If there are no normal people, what defines a sick person? To be sick is to deviate from the norm. It is incoherent to claim normalcy does not exist. Conservatives believe there is a moral norm and there are normal people. Conservatives seek to define and protect it and to resists attempts to dislodge and discredit it. The New Conservatives agitate for normalcy to be made the accepted social norm and empirically demonstrate it is normal to be normal and normal to desire normalcy be the moral norm guiding all political policy everywhere.
We all line up to vote as the occasion arises and most of us consider this our civic duty. But are we co-conspirators in a scam played upon ourselves? We the people vote in a political representative confident that this is the right thing to do and perhaps the only thing to do. After-all, someone has to be in charge. We are confident the person who takes political office is a legitimate candidate and a legitimate office holder, but is he or she justified in taking office. There is a question we are never asked and until answered we cannot confirm or deny the person ruling us truly is justified in taking office.
If one listens to a liberal everyone who is not a liberal is consumed with hate. The focus of this message is frequently, the avowed racism of Whites. This is confusing to conservative because most liberals are Whites, and it appears to conservatives that liberals are consumed by race-hatred. But there is a much simpler explanation.
Citizenship is not the state of being the subject of a state. The state cannot confer citizenship unless they make citizenship a legal status of being a subject. Meaning, that the state by the enactment of legislation correlates the status of subject with the status of a citizen. But are the terms equivalent? A subject is an owned corporate entity under the legal jurisdiction of the state. This cannot be a citizen otherwise a citizen could not exist without the authorization of the state. This is not a tenable position to hold. If a subject has no existence apart from the regulatory authority of the state, the citizen and subject must be separated by this very feature. Citizens are owners of their political jurisdictions. Citizenship is in fact a form of ownership divorced from the regulatory apparatus of the state. It is the precursor to what is usually called the free market but which is better considered a citizens market as it is operated by citizens without the intervention of the regulatory apparatus of the state.
Liberalism have become identified with socialism and with the intersectional left. Group identifiers have become the significant factors in a person’s identity, not individual markets. Yet, every created thing is unique. It is our very uniqueness that makes time and space possible. Were we indistinguishable the very nature of time and space would be altered.
Faith and the rule of God are not an invariable combination. There are two kinds of theocracy and it is the Eastern version that predominates, even in the West, which for various reasons, has moved away from Western Theocracy as a model of government. All law-based systems of government are related to or versions of Eastern Theocracy. Eastern Theocracy is all ethical based systems which utilize the rule of law. The Bible refers to these systems as the way of the flesh, as ethical systems rely on physical force for enforcement and respond to the physical needs of mankind. Western Theocracy is a far different thing. But in the modern world we have lost sight of this fact and the church has adopted the Eastern model of theocracy and put itself under the legal jurisdiction of secular governments, which also are offshoots of Eastern Theocracy. This talk re-introduces the idea of Western Theocracy to Christians.
If mankind is guilty of intellectual laziness, it is his tacit assumption that theocracy is a simple concept and a monolithic idea, namely that a theocracy is a system with religion at its core. In an artificial and superficial sense, one might get away with this level of sloppy thinking, but it hardly advances human wisdom beyond that of the dilettante. In this piece the core distinctions between the two great bodies of thought are delineated and following this, a lengthy list of characteristics is laid out for the Western model. You will never see reality in the same way again.
Anomie is a sense of defeatism, and it is one of the most common ailments infecting the West. Interesting both the right and left are infected. There is a pervading sense of hopelessness sweeping our people and our institutions, as if nothing can be done, as if the battle is already lost. We have been conditioned to think of ourselves as victims and to rely on the state to rescue us. It is the state that is the problem and the more we depend on the state the more dependent and hopeless we will become.
What if neither was what you figured it was? What if ‘the will of the people’, was a fiction and theocracy far more about enhancing progress than about slavishly following rules and regulations laid out in a religious text? What then? What is your next move?
Do you wonder how mankind has the ability to choose? Regardless of whether the universe was created by blind chance or an omniscient God the existence of free will has always been a paradox? Western Theocrats explains how man has a sphere of influence in a universe in which the end is known. But there is more, What Is Western Theocracy explains in detail the origins of polarization and why it can only increase. At the very minimum, you need to learn who it is we are fighting. Who are The Eastern Theocrats?
Liberalism is not understood. Too many of us listen to their rhetoric and attempt to understand the hate of the left. But we use their analysis of themselves, as our starting point. Liberals portray themselves as the champions of liberty. But they hide the truth from themselves. To fully understand liberalism one must understand the primacy of human emotions in the left. The liberal world is an emotional world. The one emotion a liberal cannot stand to feel, is hate. They seek to destroy everyone and everything they hate.
Democracy is not a way to God. No election opens the gates of heaven. No majority decides what the truth is nor what is moral and good. Democracy is the path of the Lowest Common Denominator. It is government by the masses. In and of itself the average person and conventional understanding is not evil. It is the need for an arbitrator to oversee the direction society will take that guarantees poor results. Democracy is ultimately the church abdicating responsibility for its direction. The abdication is not just wrong, it comes at a high cost. Those who wish a human master must pay the price of government, this in itself starts the church on a slippery slope into dependency on secular institutions. The church loses its connection with God and the people of God lose their connection with each other. Democracy does this, it provides us with a path to socialism and apostasy.
God did not create the universe because He was bored. God is not the author of confusion, therefore there is an implicit reason in what He does. Not because God is constrained by logic but because we are and He created us in a way that through logic we can formulate a why for things. This why directed at God becomes a reason for His Creative act. This essay looks at the nature of God to discern the Purpose of God because the last thing a rational human would wish to do is run afoul of the Divine Purpose.
There are no partial solutions. There are only local problems. That is, only problems are local and limited. A solution has to be radical and universal or it is just a modification of a problem.
Do we have a real identity? If so, can this identity be branded? It is far from being an idle or meaningless question. Think of us as a commodity that has a patented formulation. We are unique, defined by a particular set of features, but if these characteristics can be hacked, or plagiarized and our identity stolen, then we can be taken over and destroyed as a people. There is nothing more important than protecting ones identity. This is so not just for individuals but also for businesses and for any group of persons who want to remain as an identifiable group. But Christians have always been open to new members and wolves have crept in. Christianity is being destroyed from within by lux warm attention seekers and crucifix-wearing hypocrites as well as those who have entered our sanctuaries to spread dissention and hate. Christianity needs an identity that can be protected. We need a wall around our faith.
The West is radical. The East is extremist. The ideologies clash which is why the cultures clash, but extremism has entered the West in ways radicalism failed to make inroads in the East. Do you want to understand the history of man and the problems of the present? Without being immersed in the narrative of extremism and radicalism as tied to two great races and cultures, your understanding of the issues and events will always be superficial. Good and evil walks among us and they are visible.
There is a difference and it is a difference that is well worth the time it takes to understand the distinction.
Democracy is the best of all possible options is a phrase that is true relative to the options considered. Such broad-based comments say more about the person making the statement than reality. Democracy is better than autocracy but saying this opens the door to the question of whether there are other ways of combatting and avoiding autocracy. Surely, no modern nation supports fascism but then we ought to ask whether the issue is even about politics and the best political system, or something else entirely. Democracy might be the best political system ever, and still not be a desirable solution to the problems that beset us. In short, is a political solution to our social problems even possible? The author suggests democracy fails not because other political responses are better, but because there is no political solution possible to humanities social problems.
One of the worst things that can happen to a gambler is to visit a casino for the first time and win. It is difficult to resist the urge to go again. But win or lose the impulse will be to return and get even or win some more. So it is with conservatives and democracy. An election win for Conservatives is not a good thing. It merely encourages them to stay in a game they cannot win, not in the long term. Democracy is a game of chance and a contest between two parties. It is bad enough knowing the gambler will always lose to the house in the long run, but it is worse when you realize the other party owns the casino. Democracy is a game of chance in which the odds always favor the house, in this case, the liberals and democrats. The Radicalization Project changes the odds by changing the game.
The Golden Rule is a universal moral dictum or injunction that asks us to only do what we would want others to do to us. Kant saw it as a guide to good behaviour based on assuming our actions would be universalized and our example would be a model for all other persons. This idea was weakened by comments that sociopaths were not concerned with modelling good behaviour. But perhaps the analysis done did not understand the true scope of the Rule. In this essay we look at The Golden Rule as an expression of a fundamental social truth. No one wants to be forced to bear the burden belonging to another. No one wants to bear the guilt of another, not even sociopaths. It takes a God to do this.
The question asked implicitly by this essay is how few words does it take to explain, in a way that enables us to fix the problems, why social problems exist? How concisely can the dilemma of man be transmitted to other human beings. In this 1200-word summary the origins and explanations for mankind’s social problems is condensed for ease of transmission, and then further summarized in one short paragraph. The reader will discover more about what got us here and how some of us can get out of this eon long dilemma by reading these 1200 words than by reading 120,000,000 words written by conventional authors, who only serve as apologists for the liberal system. For this system we are in is not broken. It is designed to do what it does.
America has a Trump problem but the problem is not Trump but what Trump represents to the left. To understand the left and the problem is does not help to look at Trump. He expresses the problem but not perfectly. In some respects, he is part of the problem as is anyone who embraces political solutions. To understand why Trump is such a problem we must look at the Great Cultural Divide, it is deeper and more significant than you think.
Radicalism is not the same as extremism though people confuse the terms. To be radical is to be different not in a quantitively way but qualitative. A radical is a person set apart in that they do ask for more or less of what exists but a new option. The Doctrines of Radicalism sets forth the points at which radicals differ from the current system. Christian Radicals believe the current system is the problem and making one or two factors less or more prevalent only alters the relative proportions not the total impact the system has on our lives. Defunding the police surely reduces the impact policing has on our lives but it permits criminal activity to become more troublesome. Radicals take a different approach.
The church is either of this world or radical. If the church is not radical it is undifferentiated from this system of things. To be radical is to be totally distinct and separate from what is the standard. Radicalism is inherently a purpose as it contains within itself the desire to differentiate itself from the herd. The idea of a light on a hill encapsulates the idea of a radical church.
Hate exists as a personal attitude, but hate as a useful legal category is intrinsically divisive and unjust. There is no legal basis on which to label people racists, or xenophobic as these are not objective terms. Nor can there be any legal requirement to like, love or embrace another culture or race let alone a member of that race. Why was it not racist to hate Japanese and Germans in the war and then racist to hate Nazis as a group after the war. Except that this hate is considered justified and legal hate. The law has arbitrarily decided one side of the political debate is the good side and the other side is the evil side and people are demonized relentlessly and without legal recourse as were many other hated groups throughout the centuries. Hate soon turns into genocide when the state and the judiciary back it and condone it. Hating groups is never the solution whether done under the law or not.
There are few things we can all agree on and if there is agreement it is often only about the incidentals. We all agree that gravity exists if there is a lot of disagreement about what it is. There is one statement or proposition that no one can refute or deny. Which ought not be an issue were it not for the fact that the world has pretty much managed to quell its appearance or modify it in such a way as to render it all but unrecognizable. That is because mankind has been more interested in acquiring power over property than he has in doing what is right.
A solution is only as good as the ease of its implementation. To reform the world or to even correct a single problem seems to be almost impossible, that is because of the costs associated with fixing a solution using the very system that produces the problems. Apriorian has a solution that costs nothing and requires only what you have. The Free Nimby Franchise simply asks you to stop making problems. That is the irony of it all, we have problems because we make them. To fix the problems of mankind only requires we stop participating in the system that generates these problems.
Canada and many other Western nations are in a race to add to their populations as they struggle to reduce their resource use. It’s a strategy that has only one outcome, failure. If the present population cannot pay current costs, increasing the population does not eliminate the problem, it merely delays it at the cost of making the situation worse, even while adding to the difficulty of reducing the stresses put on the environment. The question of if we ought to scale back population growth is not answered by yes or no but by a date stating when this will take place, because ultimately it will occur. It is time to begin the discussion about when we stop this unlimited growth.
Part Seven is not directly related to the experiment but it is a way to demonstrate the claim that a proposition about God cannot generate predictions. Here are twenty-five of them, all empirically testable, all verifiable using a quantified method of comparison.
NIMBY's are generally mocked, the acronym is essentially a pejorative. But there is nothing so strong in higher creatures than the desire for territory. Even jealousy is a form of NIMBYism. Nations go to war to protect their borders and moral outrage is a result of someone sensing their principles have been overstepped. If you are one of the many who feel they have a right to what they worked for, it may interest to know even NIMBY’s have inalienable rights.
The power or rule of the people as an ideal, hides an elephant and with it a dirty little secret. An election held by a prison is unlikely to generate a stable government. In this case, the prisoners and their guards, are not a people.
At the same token an immigrant population and a group of settlers from totally different cultural groups cannot be seriously considered a people. But nor can a group of progressives who want to enjoy the present and a group of conservatives who wish to focus on making investments for the future.
The childless and the parent cannot have the same interests or values. The people are not a uniform group. Which we all know but when the differences do not somehow cancel each other out in a shared national interest, democracy cannot be said to exist. There is a point at which democracy dies.
The key to the experiment is the separation of the Control Group from the Test Group, unless this can be done with quantifiable precision, the experiment will not be conclusive. But the line, conveniently, is not a physical one but a conceptual one and placed precisely where the line can be the most convenient and precisely located. The line is an accounting device, as precise as the line between profit and loss and between your accounts and mine. The most clear and distinct thing possible to conceive is the line between believer and the unrepentant sinner.
To prove the existence of God requires a Test Group and a Control Group. The Control Group is largely undifferentiated containing all those not in the Test Group. But to operate the experiment, the Test Group requires protection from the Control Group. Policies and programs that are suitable to the operations of the Control Group will be incompatible with the operation of the Test Group. Therefore, the Test Group must have the means to protect itself against the Control Group and any policies and programs pushed by the Control Group, a condition known as NIMBYism. Ultimately the Test Group must embrace the concept of NIMBYism to function as a credible alternative to the operations of the Control Group.
Are you tired of the high cost of justice? Justice is so expensive we cannot get justice for tagging, shoplifting, intimidation, and littering. In many cases we cannot even get justice for drug dealing and prostitution despite the impact it has on communities. We need highly paid, highly trained police officers to take down murderers, gangsters and so on. We do not need or want armed policemen dealing with teen age shoplifters or the ne’er-do-well’s kid dealing drugs at school. There is no need to pay for a $100,000.00 unit to sit in an alley waiting for a errant youth to deface a businesses loading dock. There is a cheaper and a better way for a community to mete out justice when dealing with petty crime.
If we are to conclusively proof God exists, the experiment must prove all those ideas and beliefs that conflict with the existence of God, are invalid. This is tantamount to claiming that a proof of God must be a Theory of Everything. The weakness of conventional attempts to prove the existence of God do not attempt to prove all that which is inconsistent with God has been discredited. To prove God we must disprove all which conflicts with God which means the experiment that proves the existence of God is a comprehensive and all-inclusive, Theory of Everything.
The experiment to prove the existence of God poses certain problems not present in the ordinary formal experiment. These issues are gone into here. What we discover is that a proof of God is not a proof that the secular world and its propositions and assumptions are valid. The proof of God is not evidence that secular sinful man can serve as proof that God exists. There must be a Control Group but the existence of a godless control group indicates that the Test Group is superior to it. If Gods Existence cannot be proven within the Control Group then the Test Group must be perfected in some way by the experiment and the evidence and the faith that the proof invites. We do not need to see to believe but we do need fruits to have faith. This experiment provides them.
Something is not wrong because it feels wrong nor is it right because it fits in with our agenda. Exploiting the good will of our neighbors may well be wrong but we not only need to know why it is wrong but to what degree. Objectively if we are believers in right and wrong and in science we need to quantify and verify the good and bad in society so that if we are changing things, we know in which direction we are going and how fast. Otherwise the left hand soon forgets what the right hand is doing and we are making a lot of noise and commotion without going anywhere. The reality is that most of the ideas on which our civilizations are based are 1000 of years old. The tragedy Of The Commons looks at an old story to introduce a science-based response to an age-old problem.
Most people if pressured would agree mankind exists for a purpose, whether known or unknown and, they would agree human beings have rights. If pushed further no doubt they would admit that beside rights men have duties. The problem with this conventional and widespread position is that having a purpose is not consistent with having rights and to have rights is not compatible with having duties. A duty might be considered the same as a purpose, but duties are more likely to be monitored and defined by other human beings than a purpose is. Duties are not compatible with a purpose given to us by God and integral to our very being. Rights give people authority they were never meant to have. The right to be happy becomes the right to take drugs which becomes the right to get drugs even if it means alienating other people’s property rights. Then the right to escape punishment becomes the right to kill those who are attempting to hinder their right to escape justice.
In this second part the problem of using the church or Christianity, as the test group, is discussed. It may seem odd, but the way the church has been formed and Christianity established makes them ineligible for participating in the experiment or serving as an element of the proposed scientific investigation. Objectivity is the key to any scientific test and the church and Christianity are simply too subjective in how they are formed to be tested or even measured. How would one go about defining which church is Christian and which not and which Christian is of the flesh and which of the spirit. The way they are formed there is no way to tell the sheep from the wolves. And so we devise a different test group that can be delineated from the control group, how this is done and why it is so important is the subject of this essay and video.
The Scientific Proof Of God has always been something of an oddity within the fields of science. Atheists do not think it is possible to prove the existence of God anymore than it is to prove the existence of Santa, scientists generally do not think experiments to prove the existence of God are fundable or will lead to tenure and Christians often consider it a redundant exercise. But these reactions are based on an misunderstanding of what the process of proving the existence of God means. If God Exists the entire edifice created b y secular thinkers during the last 6,000 years, collapses. Indeed, as we demonstrate in the following few pages, it is impossible to prove the existence of God without also demonstrating the secular world view called the naturalist world view, is inherently flawed and untenable. When we discover, as we have here, how to prove God exists without simultaneously supporting the liberal narrative, then we will not only prove conclusively God does exist but the naturalist world view has run its course and must be discarded.
Mankind is a category that encompasses all human beings but if one group has duties to another group the concept is fractured. It is only when we eliminate duty that man as category of being, emerges. If our humanity is to have priority over incidentals, we cannot permit incidentals to divide us. My rights cannot be permitted to erode your humanity under the burden of a duty. A duty cannot supersede or devalue, a person’s humanity. What is an absolute monarch or autocrat? He is a man with rights and no duties. Who is a slave but the person with duties and no rights.
The following discussion is metaphysical, ontological and epistemological. It discusses what can be known and what can exist. The author begins by claiming there is a class or category of thing that is knowable. If a class of things are not knowable, this class of things cannot fulfill the conditions of existence. God is the only knowable thing and the only thing that fulfills all the conditions of existence. All other knowables that exist must be derived from the one knowable thing. The propositions discussed here must be understood and accepted to move forward and understand what we can know to exist and what is illusory and false.
What was the original sin and how does it impact us today? What was Eden? Was it a physical place on earth and if it was what was this tree Adam and Eve were not to eat from? What is the meaning of all of this and why would the Bible tell us: Eph. 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. How does what happened in Eden translate into a spiritual war against the rulers of darkness? This is information and insights you will not find elsewhere.
Inflation and economic development cannot be understood if we do not understand there are two distinct classes of money. Inflation and all our other social ills are attached to only one sort of money. If the money you use is manufactured, if you can hold it, touch it, the money in use is a commodity manufactured and issued for a profit. If you can lose this money, if it can be stolen, eroded in value or is at risk of loss you are using a monetized product. The use of stones, cigarettes, buttons, vouchers, gold, bank accounts or any other commodity is an example of the monetization of a commodity. Regardless of the commodity used, monetized commodities are always at risk of loss and governed by the laws of Supply and Demand. All products are subject to changes in value, meaning the value of a monetized asset will inflate and deflate according to market conditions. The only remedy for this problem is to stop monetizing assets and using the product as a currency. But this requires we understand how to create a new kind of money that has no market value and is not manufactured.
Two things economists got wrong. The market does not have to produce profits and neither the private or the public sector has a legitimate claim to anything that exists on earth. But if economists have ever been so wrong that they would have won a gold medal had being wrong been an Olympic contest it is in the way they talk about money. Money is not a thing. It cannot be created out of assets. The idea of tying the currency to a physical asset only benefitted the one doing this. In fact one could take all of these mistakes economists have made and roll them all up in one gigantic bundle and call it our conventional understanding of money. In short, everything economists have told you is a lie and that is why they cannot even eliminate unemployment or inflation. An occupation that cannot solve problems ought not charge anyone for their services.
It is an absurdity to claim Peter is the head of the church or the rock upon which the body of Christ is built. The author systematically goes through all the Scripture that contradicts the one possible interpretation that supports the Catholics position.
There can only be one or two realities, there cannot be less or more. The contest then is between these two possible scenarios, only one of which can be right. The one-reality scenario is a claim there is only one reality and it contains all possible qualifications other than the belief truths are absolutes and metaphysical statements are valid. The one-reality hypothesis contradicts itself. If true it is false and only if its claims are false can it be a true representation of what reality is.
It is easy to assume there is but one reality, we see it all around us, yet it has small significance for humankind. Our reality plays in our heads and in the things we devise and build. There is little in nature that has value for us without extensive modification. Think of a house and the raw materials compared to the home we live in. But even houses with no people is a different reality to a sustainable community. We can live in a reality of things, a reality that is transient and easily destroyed, or a reality that has permeance and is full of meaning. The choice is ours.
It is easy to spend money. Economic development that relies on spending large sums of money create new businesses, but not necessarily the right business and certainly not sustainable businesses. As hard as it may be to finance a start up this is the easy part. Trailer Park Economics is the economics of poverty, it does not rely on the exceptional or the fortunate few. It is a model for the masses of poor persons without capital, who cannot risk investing in anything that might fail. Yet, the significant feature is not the business model introduced here, it is the monetary system that is created based on a deeper and complete understanding of the nature and purpose of money. If you have an interest in economic development particularly in areas without capital or access to money markets, you need to listen to this podcast.
Does going Green mean eliminating humanity, technology or the tools of civilized living. Is human life incompatible with going Green? It is the opinion of this author that going Green has little or nothing to do with nature. Primitive cultures are not Greener than us, they are just less technically advanced than we are. To be Green has value for human civilization, but it does not preclude it. The future can be Green and in can and must include high levels of technical advancement.
The epidemic of violence in the US is an epidemic of hate. All crime is a desperate attempt to combat fear. The more horrendous the crime the deeper the fear. Without faith in the future there is no future, there is only fear. The less faith in the future, the greater the fear of the future. At some point fear of the future turns to a hatred of the future. Hate begets violence against what caused the fear. Violence is directed against that which destroyed the persons faith in the future.
The community church is not a church in a community, the community church is the community believers occupy. The community church exists as an alternative community model to the conventional community of non-believers. They stand in opposition to one another; the one is not an institution or product of the other. They vie for the same space and the same ecological niche.
If the criminal is not reconciled, he remains a criminal. The justice system is unconcerned about reconciliation though they pay lip service to the idea of rehabilitation. But if the criminal was never reconciled, rehabilitation is an oxymoron and the process a waste of tax dollars.
There are two races and two realities, one is reconciled the other is in arrears. Civility is a process that leads to civilization through the means of reconciliation. Only when our accounts are balanced can civilization reach its apogee. All human issues can be traced back to an unreconciled account.
Children are dependents some people, even rich and powerful ones, remain that way. It is not just the vagabond that depends on the benevolence of others to provide his food and clothes, bankers, politicians, portfolio managers and their ilk are in the same boat. They produce nothing of value and certainly nothing that compensates the rest of us for what their existence costs the planet. The world would be far better off getting rid of this system that makes them important, and putting them all on welfare.
Faith is not a feeling that pops up out of nowhere, for no reason and persists despite there being no justification for its persistence. Faith only exists where there is no risk. Faith is extremely fragile and easily destroyed, ask any jilted lover. In this video we look at the essential element that must exist for faith to arise and persist.
Politics is the mob selecting a leader to give their will legitimacy. Thus, the popular leader will speak in terms of what his constituency deserves and has a right to. Politicians merely due what is right in the eyes of the mob without having to inconvenience the mob. The Mob gets its way without having to bother with riots. We need a better way.
The most normal thing anyone can do is believe the reality they see is real. It is not that we think what we see is always a perfect representation of what exists independent of our observation; we think that what we see is part of everything that exists. What is more, we think that all of the people we see are all part of one race of human beings. We have coined the term, The One-Reality Hypothesis to denote this conventional way of thinking about the universe. But what if the person you are talking to actually exists in a parallel universe totally alien to your own, though they look the same (human). Where you see things in a permissive way that is inclusive and all encompassing, (the human way of seeing things) this other person looks at situations as black and white. Could you understand them or negotiate with them?
The Invisible Civil War is a war between church and state that no one sees, but it exists, and is visible in the conflicts that attract the attention of the daily news channels. Few understand the root of the visible wars in the spiritual war that continues between church and state.
There are two sources of authority in this world, one is the control of property the other is the control of information. Authoritarians and dictators control property. Civil Authorities control information. Authoritarians work from the assumption that might makes right and the end justifies the means. Civil Authorities are predicated on the idea that right makes might and the end will be defined by the means. In the view of a Civil Authority, the truth must always prevail.
Is a machine part of the animal kingdom? Can a machine be classified as an animal? Are humans’ part of the animal kingdom? If a machine thought and acted in the same way humans do and was aware of itself and was in everyway identical to a human being, other than being manufactured, would it be human? If so, then why would it not be part of the animal kingdom as you say humans are?
There is either one reality or two, no more and no less. The Two Reality Hypothesis may appear to make no sense to most people, but The One Reality Hypothesis disproves its own claims and is logically incoherent, which is why The Two Reality Hypothesis appears flawed to people who think reality is but one.
The larger the population the more difficult it is to reduce the total amount of resources consumed per unit of time. So, why do so many nations that have a stable or declining birth rate promote immigration and green energy policies at the same time? Most nations believe the more people, the more prosperous the nation will be. The fear is that a decline in population will mean lowered standards of living. This essay answers the question, can a jurisdiction reduce carbon emissions by permitting a decline in population and still be prosperous? The issue is not can we reduce energy use, the question comes down to can we remain prosperous without having a perpetual increase in population levels? Experts think we need to reduce population levels but then assume this means a severe economic downturn. Experts then suggest we add to our population and compromise our energy use targets. Our green energy policies are not compatible with our economic policies. This essay demonstrates how prosperity is possible given a declining population.
Modern peoples treat evil with a disdain that is interesting. We claim to be alarmed at mass shootings and those who begin wars, but the reactions have taken the form of a pantomime, politicians especially parody horror as they have always played out the actions of someone who is grief stricken. But how is a society ignorant of what evil is supposed to understand what good is? If we cannot recognize evil how do we know who is good?
If human rights were a valid concept your neighbour would have a greater claim to something you own, than you do. What do you have to which others have the pre-eminent claim? If your answer is nothing; your neighbor has no rights and neither do you.
There are two classes of consciousness and these types of consciousness correspond to two races each with their own contrasting reality or world view. These consciousnesses cannot be reconciled. One wins victory over the other. There is no negotiated settlement. If you wonder what has led to the division in society it is the underlying reality of there being two different races with two divergent ways of understanding truth and what is real.
There are only two possible states for mankind to exist in. The common state is one of primitivism. The other is the state of civilization. Civilization is not defined by technology. Technological expertise is a symptom but not the cause of civilized living. Correlation does not indicate causation. To be civilized is to be civil. The community that permits incivility to happen without it having a cost to the perpetrator is a society in which incivility pays. Civilization cannot endure incivility. If society rewards and does not penalize incivility, it faces economic and social collapse.
What is hate and why do liberals obsess with what can never be more than a claim leveled against someone they hate? What is more hateful than to accuse someone of being a hater? Why do liberals do it and do it with such vehemence?
The problem is not that difficult to solve, if we stop lying to ourselves. The problem is not hate. Hate is an explanation from the perspective of the victim. It simply begs the question and yet in such a way that it prevents an answer. If we cannot blame the victim for the hate of the criminal, then we have no answer to the problem of mass shootings, at all. Hate only demonizes the criminal. It is time we understood him and precisely why men kill.
The postulate of racism is a key component in the modern narrative, meant to help us understand historic and current events. As an explanatory concept it is fundamentally flawed and indeed condemned to worsen what it purports to study. But without a more sophisticated analytical tool, the destructive impact of the racism narrative is sure to increase.
Democracy is the goto concept whenever problems in the West get bad, there is a call for more democracy (whatever that means). What if the problems in the West were created by too much democracy? There is nothing dumber than a mob and yet the West has come to the conclusion that if the mob is given the right to vote, an unknown reserve of pure intellect will be tapped. What the majority decides is always the best possible choice, as if truth was decided by the popular vote. Yet, the majority appear obsessed with porn, drugs and being entertained. To compare democracy with tyranny is neither fair nor rational. Right and wrong is decided neither by the power of the state or the power of the ballot box. If we want good government, we need to start with a better source of truth than the wants of man.
Apriorian is a theoretically perfect organization, it might be called a utopia, unlike utopias however, Apriorian does not deal in an abstract form of humanity. Given perfect human beings reform is unnecessary. Capitalism and Communism both would work perfectly given perfect human beings. It is sin that destroys frail systems. Given that humans will destroy anything they can exploit how does one create a perfect system? Technically, this is not possible. One has to create an organization given to organizing. This might be called an organic or a self-adjusting organization, one that automatically blocks evil from doing harm. Obviously, this means Apriorian is different from the institutions we are all familiar with. In fact, it re-writes 6000 years of history. Apriorian wipes the slate clean and begins again, on a new foundation.
There is no victim without an oppressor. The general tendency is to blame oppressors for the existence of the victim, but what if the oppressor is the creation of the victim? Naturally, victims tell us we are not to blame the victim. Being the victim means we are blameless and 100% of the fault must lie elsewhere, if not with the oppressor himself then with society. Some might find the argument self-serving. But regardless, the dilemma is this, only the victim can decide if he or she is a victim or not. A person totally dependent on the decisions of others will always be a victim of the ones making the decision.
How easy it is to have faith when one believes one’s faith cannot be judged? If faith is such a personal thing that it is between us and God, who can call us to account regarding our claim? What is easier than claiming to believe in God and claiming to repent and desire to serve God? If this is the price of admission, no wonder many join or have joined. What is a work in faith; something we do on account of our unverified faith? Let’s be honest Christians and admit we have not challenged others because we do not want them to challenge our faith. We mock secularists for claiming to be a woman despite having no idea as to what a woman is, so they cannot be challenged. But what of our definition of Christian and church? Who can challenge us? We are because we say we are, is this the best we can do, is this all that God requires of us?
How powerful are we as humans, what power do we really wield? Are we sufficient unto ourselves and so powerful in fact we change reality by the power of positive thinking and a determination to be what we will regardless of what objective reality tells us?
What is the difference between works of the flesh and the works of faith? There are two systems in this world, one we understand well, this is the system of laws and regulations, and things we must do to stay right with the powers that be. There are things we must do and things we must not do. There are authorities who observe and regulate us and ensure that the things we must do, are done, and the things we must not do are punished if done. But what is the alternative? The life of faith is less well understood. It is this life we explain in detail in this production.
Men have been the authors of this world. The institutions and systems and practices were all the products of men. The influence of women, though immeasurable in some areas and meaningful on the individual level, were insufficient to change the character of our civilizations.
The ambivalence concerning the Alpha personality is best understood by dividing Alphas into two groups, one positive and the other negative. The true Alpha is a model of self-control, confidence and leadership, but there is a darker version that manipulates, exploits and is highly narcissistic.
A mission is a vision with a standardized measure of validation. Missions work must have a quantified measure of validation so that credits and debits are properly recorded. Missions build up the church by adding value to assets, without a clear accounting the process cannot proceed in a logical way. The church cannot be built without work and work cannot exist unless it adds value to the assets it modifies. It is our missions which fulfill these conditions and build the kingdom of God on earth, otherwise known as a theocracy.
There is a right and a wrong and the right is predictable and quantifiable. Those who choose right, choose what can be quantified and validated. The wrong way is chaotic and destructive and ultimately parasitic. Those who choose wrong do not create the means by which they can pay the costs they create; they must be subsidized. Therein lays the division we see in the world and the reason why left and right cannot be reconciled. Only one side comes out of this still standing and it is not the side that lives on debt.
Conservatives have a world view that cannot be adopted by liberals. This ought to be obvious but when conservatives opine about the division in society, the only way that this division can be eliminated is for conservatives to cease being conservatives. There is no path for liberals to adopt conservative values but there is also no way for conservatives to align with liberals without losing their conservatism. The division is real, one side or the other will win for there is no possibility of reconciliation.
Most people imagine a pharaoh when thinking of a theocracy, or the Vatican or perhaps Louis XIV. These are one form of theocracy but really, they are nothing more than leaders justifying their power by claims to Divine Intervention. But what does a church look like when formed as a body directly under the authority of God, without human intermediaries?
It may not be politically correct to identify a woman on the basis of her body, but the inability to define a woman by her physique, or job, or physiology may not mean there is no definition. The failure of biologists to define us using the taxonomic procedures used to define other taxa and species, may mean taxonomy is inadequate.
The state has a lot of good answers regarding the gun violence perpetuated by its subjects, including incarceration, capital punishment, and depriving us of our right to ownership and self-defence, it has no answers to its own violence perpetuated on its citizens. Society needs a solution that addresses the concerns of law-abiding citizens, not those of criminals or autocrats. The reader is asked to embrace two assumptions, as outlined in the following discussion. If a proposal has no mechanism of implementation debate concerning it will be endless and divisive, meaning nothing will be done and the criminal wins. If the mechanism devised serves only to block those with evil intent from carrying out the act of carnage the criminal is determined to inflict upon us, the block will be overcome, the carnage will take place, and the criminal will win. If the reader can accept the validity of these assumptions, we can move on to a mechanism by which gun violence is finally removed from us.
The Apriorian Way is a scientific model for transitioning primitive places to civilized ones. The Apriorian algorithm establishes a clear and quantifiable way of defining a civilization and determining why civilizations are an advanced and preferable way of living. The only thing that might cause the reader to pause a moment, is finding out what civilization is.
Diversity is a key component of intersectional thinking. Democracies and eager to claim they are unreserved supporters of diversity. But it is one thing to claim this and incorporate highly diverse ideas and values into a policy platform. To be fully diverse is to be fully apathetic. Those who support everything support nothing. It is difficult to be diverse and democratic, when the majority voice holds the reins of power. This talk looks at how the demands of diversity groups grow increasingly at odds with the winner take all philosophy of democracy.
We all know liberals live in fear. We are all aware of their over-the-top responses to certain words and ideas. What most of us do not understand is this fear that grips liberals? Where does it come from, why cannot it be assuaged by kind words or the assurance we want nothing from them? Why would just the image of Trump create trauma, but images of starving children be used callously for political ends? What triggers this outrage on one end and apathy at the other? What is the source of liberal fear? But also, what is the source of liberal apathy to the things that ought to bother them?
Everyone extols the virtue of democracy, and we all abhor the idea of mass movements and the destructive power of mobs, but it is difficult to know what differentiates them, or how to stop one from morphing into the other. A democratic majority whose will is thwarted has no problem reverting to mob rule and forming into a mass movement. Though we often remind ourselves that truth is not a popularity sport and peer pressure does not make things right, we still believe that a majority can decide policy. Even were this true, what policy can be simplified into a slogan and what policy that cannot be simplified into a sound bite has a chance of defeating an idea that can be promoted as a pithy aphorism? In this discussion we look at the implications of democracy and how it has made nations worse.
The mission of Apriorian is to convert democrats into theocrats. This is a project easily misunderstood both to its purpose and need. Democracy is the sine quo non of governments. Even dictatorships claim the status of a democratic government. The Will of the People is a force as mighty as if not mightier than, the Will of God. What is this will of the people and why do so many think it matters, when it as often as not contradicts their values?
Conservatives have a world view that cannot be adopted by liberals. This ought to be obvious but when conservatives opine about the division in society, the only way that this division can be eliminated is for conservatives to cease being conservatives. There is no path for liberals to adopt conservative values without a total reversal of all they believe in.
After each shooting the claim is made that guns kill people along with an alternative claim that it is people who kill people. Have we tired of the competing narratives and the lack of solutions? If so, we ought to move onto a look at the real problem. If we do not use the right language we cannot arrive at the right solutions.
Abortionists do not have an opinion so much as a worldview. Without this perspective on reality it is not possible to be ProChoice.
It is politically correct to blame the gun. We are the victim. The gun is the bad guy. Humans cannot be blamed. Sometimes we may just be in the wrong place at the wrong time when a gun shoots a lot of people. Then we get blamed, but it is not really our fault. The only other possibility, it seems, is to blame people. People kill people but are we to ban people? Or is the truth and the solution, somewhere else entirely. Perhaps it is not the gun’s fault but saying this does not mean it is people who are to blame. There is a more common sensical way of analyzing the issue that does not just consider guns but other tools of harm.
There is an inverse relationship between faith and hate. When the child loses faith in others, when he understands there is no one whom he can trust, he feels betrayed. The child hates as he loses faith. To understand mass shootings, look at the failures of trust, the decay of faith and the level of betrayal. In the persistent decline in faith, in people and things the child can believe in, one will observe a consistent increase in hate. It is family and friends in a faith-based community that model trustworthiness, not experts in the pay of the state. We ought not claim to have faith in God if we do not have faith in the people of God and we cannot be deemed trustworthy members of the community of believers.
Political stances are considered to be features we adopt later in life. However, it is common knowledge that youth tend towards activism and socialism whereas the more mature one becomes, the more likely it is that they will have shifted right on the political spectrum. In this essay it is argued that this is as much about biology and the maturation process itself, than about intrinsic value structures.
Conservatism has often been linked with capitalism. It has been linked to libertarianism even more frequently. It is true that conservatives prefer small governments as do libertarians, but conservatives are champions of merit, not greed. Economic power is not equitable to merit anymore than political power is an indicator of merit. When we forget freedom is not a right but must be earned, we forget libertarians love of power and disregard for merit, is a cause for concern.
It is easy to sell or exchange a cow for money. It is more difficult to turn the cow itself into currency and do this in a way that produces economic development. Once we discover how to turn a cow into currency, we discover we can use any asset as a source of economic development. Anyone, anywhere regardless of their situation can begin the economic development process, regardless of whether they have access to a bank or government grant.
It may seem an unnecessary question with only one possible response. But then we are faced with a slew of past technologies modern man is unable to replicate. Despite the technologies we have developed we are also aware that the roots and foundation of these technologies were all developed by our ancestors. What we moderns do is make incremental improvements to the fundamental inventions that were created by people long dead. But these are subjective impressions. Even were we to believe the ancients had superior genes and organs how would we measure the intelligence of people who are no more and cultures that have little in common with out own? Perhaps our ancestors knew how which is why they set us up for success, a success we moderns with our lowered abilities are compromising.
The abortion debate is not about rights it is about power. The struggle is over the amount of power the woman has over her body. The law cannot give rights it can only give power. A legal right is the legal power it has nothing to do with natural rights or with natural law. But humans cannot live by the dictum of might makes right. The power to do does not give anyone the moral legitimacy to do. The question is not if the mother has the legal and physical power to end a pregnancy. The question is can moral legitimacy cover the abortionists activity? To answer this we need to understand natural law.
Only the West embraces democracy and the East uses it to crush and exploit the West, even in our own nations. The worries about divisive politics are worries about the impact democracy is having on our communities. When your livelihood relies on having one party elected rather than another, when you see your culture dependent on elections going a particular way, conflict is going to escalate.
The time to be nice is past and gone. This is not a garden party we are in a fight for survival. Those who read the bible ought to know this, those who see the seriousness with which the left views a setback, ought to be aware that these are no inconsequential battles. The left is not in this to tie or suffer a gentlemanly defeat. The left has only one objective and that is to win and they are not about to compromise. For those on the left the end justifies the means and might does make right. The only thing that defines right for the left is a total victory and for us this only means a total loss. We do not need to play by the rules of the left but we had better start playing as if we intend to win.
Why are abortionists not charged with a capital offense if the fetus is a child? Society is unable to deny the fetus is human yet few of us equate abortion with murder. However, the legal and moral explanation why an exception ought to be made in this case has never been made. The claim that the fetus is not a human life is an easy out. It is not a position rational persons wish to embrace. How then do we reconcile two irreconcilable positions, such as abortion is not murder, and the fetus is fully human? Natural law can and does provide a clear and reasonable explanation for the confusion.
The abortion debate goes nowhere, because the debate does not consider what is lawful, or legally plausible. It is one thing to make abortion lawful, it is another to tie it to precedent or a legally defensible position. A draconian ruling can be implemented by a fascist regime willing to impose an opinion using totalitarian measures, but such measures only highlight the injustice of the law.
The needs of locavores and Intentional Community are different from the needs of globalists and free markets. Accessibility, security and ease of use are important considerations, but so is accountability. Costs must be accounted for accurately in the accounting system we use. The thing which plagues globalism and capitalism is externalized costs. These are costs externalized onto society and future generations. Externalization is visible as pollution and other social costs. It is the lack of proper accountability in the economy that causes so many of us to turn our backs on conventional economics and look for an alternative. Prefers are a cryptocurrency alternative that eliminates accounting inaccuracies. Stopping the externalization of costs eliminates social costs with all of their injustice and social problems.
If poverty is not due to a lack of money poverty cannot be alleviated by giving people money. We need something more substantial and basic. A solution to the problem of poverty is not somehow related to the problem of how to make more money or how to print or issue more money. In fact solving the problem of poverty has nothing to do with money whatsoever.
Faith is not hope. If all you are living on is a hope that has no substance, you lack faith. Faith is the substance of things hoped for. It possesses realness. The hope one will graduate after years of study is based on faith in all the work one has done. If all you have is hope without substance you are likely to fail. Does this mean our salvation is based on works, surely no. But this is why we need the church. To have faith in Christ without works is to omit the church. The church we have tells us the faith we have.
What is reality, we can see it but we cannot find it. The more we look the more it chaotic and fragile it becomes. What looks solid and unmovable from a distance when seen up close and highly magnified becomes a little more than potential changes that may or may not happen depending on what our expectations are.
The story of The Rich Young Man who met Jesus, but could not sell his many possessions and give the proceeds to the poor, and follow Jesus, has always been problematical for Christians, not the least because for atheists, it represented the hypocrisy of Christians. But what if the story is not understood? What if the advent of cryptocurrency permits us to better understand what Jesus meant?
Western civilization like western science has succeeded because it is based on objective, quantitatively verifiable data. Western civilisation can be quantified, and its progress validated, unlike other cultures. By understanding the scientific nature of western civilization, it is possible to vastly improve its performance. Like any other activity, by establishing an objective measure of comparison we can work in a systematic and concerted way to enhance outcomes.
Kant was an influential moral philosopher who would have us all live as if our actions were to be a pattern for all men to follow. This might be considered to be an early form of the What Would Jesus Do movement. But the implications go deeper than this. Not only does acting as if we might be a model for other humans to emulate put us in the place of God, modelling good behaviour, makes us prey to every shyster and con artist around. Has anyone anywhere ever used Kant as his ideal? The model to follow is Jesus.
Capitalism is the cornerstone of Western civilization but has been infected by liberal assumptions about money, the free market and ownership. There is a conservative version of these ideas that not only changes the fundamental form of a commercial enterprise it prevents both socialism and communism. With a better understanding of what capital is and how it operates the creation of liabilities is prevented and without this weakness, socialism is no longer possible.
Equality and diversity are contradictory ideas. The only way men are made equal is by eliminating diversity.
There is no such thing as hate-speech because hate has no objective existence, it is an emotion. Imagine a speaker calls for the murder of Christians and another speaker calls for the culling of geese. One phrase is considered hate speech and the other is an issue of property rights. Both are calls to action leading to death. The statements are grammatically the same and contain identical information. What is different is our reaction to the subject. Our reaction is entirely dependent on our relationship to the subject. There is a better way to understand hate and a better way to deal with it.
It is impossible to solve the problem of poverty unless we take the steps we need to follow to enable people to produce goods and services. Civilization is not built on compassion and decency, it is built on the backs of laborers and with the hands of workers. If you want to enjoy the fruits of man’s power you need to give him something to work with. Its that simple.
This very short podcast is a step-by-step illustration about how a group of citizens could set up an equitocracy and eliminate unemployment. To fully understand the process access these podcasts and the Apriorian channel on Youtube.
We can strive for equality or equity but not both. This world of the flesh desires equality because the flesh prefers standards that are visible. If we all have the same wealth or the same position or the same level of education, we can all think we are equal. But in fact this still does not mean we all have the same value. The church does not believe we are equal or can be equal. Even if in the church we are not above one another and we do not view the contributions of one of more value than the contributions of another, this position is predicated on all working together for the good of the church. The church is the equity the believer produces when we are all working to support one another in faith. The church is in this sense, an equitocracy. We are governed by the desire to be of value to one another, not the desire to be equal. There is a real difference, learn what it is.
The left has adopted the bizarre idea that equity means a social agenda focused on making everyone in a contest or competition arrive at the finish line neck and neck. This is as unreasonable as it is undoable. When compared to naturalism and survival of the fittest, it merely takes the end of the race with all of its inequality and transfers this inequality to the start of the race, in reverse. The one with the biggest lead is given the greatest handicap and the one who comes in dead lasts, is provided the longest lead. This is not equity in the way conservatives understand it. We explain why the difference in definitions is important to understand.
There are three ways to share. We can share what we have equally, or equitably or justly. That is each person can get the same amount as all others, or we can give each person what they need or we can provide a share based on what we think is right.
This is not so hard to do with real pies. The economic pie is far more complex. Dividing a peach pie gives each person a treat. But dividing the economic pie can mean the difference between subsistence and civilization.
What we might think just or fair or equal may not make sense from the standpoint of results. Picking a General to command an army needs to be based on merit. When having an examination or conducting a test, equality is required otherwise the results will not mean much. But what about when we are dealing with economic factors such as jobs and other economic resources. Is it best to do what we think just? Do we give everyone an equal chance at every job? Or do we seek to guide the most able into the most suitable spot?
Moderns look at their civilization and gauge their intelligence by how much technology they possess. Is this an accurate or reliable indicator of intelligence or even progress?
Freedom is an oxymoron. Everyone claims to want freedom but in practice, we want it only for us - we fear the freedom of others. This means that freedom has become a prize to be fought over. People say freedom is not free because of this. Mot of us see other people as the enemies of their freedom. Other people are a force to be fought against in the name of freedom. This is not freedom. The truth is people do not understand freedom. It is not something to be wrested away from others. One thing is certain, until we learn what freedom is, we will not be free.
All persons are governed by one of two forces; we are logical or emotional. These two options run deep and have far-reaching implications. The groups are so divided and so distinct they form two races each with their own distinct idea as to the nature of reality. The political and religious divisions are shadows compared to the racial division. Race is not about skin color it is about how we think.
Slavery was as common in ancient times as war. It is mentioned in Scripture along with eating, marriage, war, disease and other events and situations that existed in ancient times. But people are lazy and too eager to skim text for phrases that support an agenda which is important to them. The New Testament provides 16 different verses on slavery, which can and are assembled into five different blocs of verses, each with something different to say. Its time for atheists to take their attention away from one bloc of verses and learn what is said in the other four. We have done the work of copying and assembling these verses. All you need to do is to read them.
Mankind is not perfect, we are prone to error, but what five things are the greatest mistakes mankind has ever made? The list is going to surprise you and you will not agree with it unless you listen to the end.
The only justification for taxation is if there is no other way to provide social goods than through a regulatory state. Given that this assumption is flawed the need for taxation is eliminated.
Ought we to try to outdo Jesus? Kant suggested we live as if our behaviour would serve as a model for all human beings. This sounds suspiciously like something God the Father might have said to Jesus. Jesus is the guide to human behaviour and no person is likely to serve as an alternative guide, or even a supplemental one. No one, in my opinion, ought to try and live as Kant lived. He had his good points, but what he lived, was certainly not a model life. What ought we as sinners and mortal men of flesh, strive for? What is the True Categorical Imperative?
What is a saint? What is the difference between a saint and a sinner in the real world? What makes a person a citizen and how does a citizen compare to a saint? Why is true citizenship such a rare thing and in fact all but eliminated. States create subjects. They do not tolerate citizens. Find out why and what it takes to create a true citizen with the true rights of a citizen.
We eschew violence to some degree yet embrace it in other times and places. We condemn Russian violence yet laud the great destructive power that comes with the resistance of Ukraine. Which suggests a simple response to the violence of Will Smith can only miss the point. We may dislike violence but in the end we subscribe to the belief we have a right to be violent. The question is when and why do we have a right to be violent?
Only logic can resolve the crises surrounding gender identity. People do identify relationally with others and these relationships are important. Relationships have meaning. Only logic can resolve the crises.
The truth cannot be open to a negotiation and honesty cannot be compromised without producing hypocrisy. Only lies can be resolved by means of a negotiated settlement. Only what is stolen can be divided by means of a debate.
Most of the disagreements that other races have with the white race can be attributed to a perceived lack of empathy on the part of whites. Racism, xenophobia, greed, selfishness, consumerism and so on are all examples of a people who do not spend a lot of time identifying with victims.
The White Race must have done something right, it could not be wrong in everything. This essay looks at what was done right by whites to give them the edge they have in so many areas.
Do you find the division between left and right is not always instructive or useful? Do you find that looking at the world as composed of religious and nonreligious people misleading? The world is divided but the keen observer discovers that the division misleads as much as it instructs. The fact that a person is conservatives does not guarantee he is Christian and the fact that he is Christian does not always mean he is saved or doing works of the spirit. So where ought we to draw the line. Who is with us and who is against us? Is the world even divided or are we as the liberals would have us believe, all in this together?
We The People have more power than we suppose. If We The People took back our power and our right to our property, which includes our political jurisdictions, we could eliminate petty crime, and eventually, all or most crime. Learn how.
There are good reasons why the left are such good negotiators and why they are always ready to debate an issue, with those willing to re-think their position.
What if all of mankind’s problems stem from race? What if mankind is a racialized species and that different races do not just hate each other they are naturally incompatible? What if a race war could not be avoided and that indeed the growing problems are just the beginning? The races are starting to identify each other and realize there is a deep and irreconcilable division between them? But what if there are only two races and neither has anything to do with skin color? What then? In this discussion Apriorian looks at CRT as a valid way of critiquing history but a flawed way of identifying the groups involved.
It is 2022 and we have the same social problems we had in 1700's, the 500's and before this, in fact society suffers from everything it has suffered with. Perhaps we do not know what we are facing or we are using the source of our problems to solve our problems. Regardless it is obvious we need to re-evaluate who is leading the reform movements and the methods used. One thing is certain, without a new approach our ancestors will still be dealing with the problems the past and present tried to find a solution to.
Why is there war, what is the essential component of war, the feature or event that makes war inevitable? Conventional histories and critiques of war are highly superficial and rationalistic. They are more about exercising hindsight than engaging in an analytics that provide some predictive value. The following is an introduction to the why of war that provides a launching pad for a predictive analytics that can be used by those seeking to understand the why of war.
There is a problem mankind has not solved, the problem is we do not know if our problems all come from the same source or are disconnected and can be solved using individualized solutions. But if we have not even solved this issue do we even understand what a problem is, and if we cannot explain what a problem is how can we solve any of our problems? This fact explains why mankind has been adept at solving technical problems relating to the physical world while his social problems only seem to get worse. This short two page essay changes everything, including the way we arrive at solutions.
Race Is Reality. We are of two minds, as a species. Two minds form two realities and two realities form two distinct races. The division between peoples is real. We think differently. We value things differently. These two world views are not interchangeable, they are not compatible and they cannot be morphed into a merged reality embraced by all. This is why political parties always fall on one side of the other, even in this corrupt system of things. People are conservative or liberal. We are more traditional or progressive. Politically these positions are imperfect because people think they can bridge the gap, but in the end they cannot and such programs always tend to favor the left and never the right. This is because of the nature of the two realities. Negotiation and compromise always shifts us further left. Race is defined by the reality we embrace. The corruption of the right is the left, a diseased and distorted reality is what typifies the left. This is why compromise favors the left and ultimately destroys the truth. To fight the insanity we have to fight the lefts attempts to reconcile. There is no reconciliation with insanity or with evil and the left is both. Race is reality and only one reality is coherent. Protect your race, fight the insanity
No doubt we need police reform, but what kind? If we take away some of their powers or replace some of their duties with specialized units, what happens to policing? It is not as if people become more honest, moral or reliable when they take off their police identity and put on some other units uniform and duties. Even ministers and politicians can be corrupted and incompetent. It is unlikely reducing the size of the police force to create room for some other agency will result in much more than added cost and confusion. This essay looks to make policing far more effective by changing its focus at the bottom end without impacting the top end of policing. This creates a staggered, staged and progressive approach that is easily ratcheted up or down according to conditions.
If there is anything considered inherently good, it is equality. The concept is however so imprecise it leaves little room for criticism. People agree that equality is good because it means whatever the person wants it to mean. Regardless, it is not a good or desirable condition whatever the hearer thinks it means. In this ground breaking essay the argument is put forward that equality is not a desirable condition regardless of how it is defined.
Are your tired of the petty crime that eats away at the decorum of your community? Misdemeanors are the steppingstone to every recidivist’s career. Are you interested in a justice system that is less militaristic and more civil? Common Law is the ancient and traditional response tribal communities relied on to deal with malfeasance and social misfits. There is a tribal alternative to a policing model grounded in military justice and policing methods. Military justice applied to civil society turns misfits into felons. There is a tribal alternative.
We all want free speech until we hear what others are saying about us. But how can we eliminate or put boundaries on the speech other others without running afoul of this restrictions ourselves?
Liberal democracy has been the order of the day throughout the history of Canada. It is well known that Canadian conservatives are a nervous lot, more comfortable with carefully scolding their liberal counterparts than in developing policies that eliminate the state from the public square. So long as the state looks for places to occupy it is not a serious contender for conservative votes. There is a need for a new conservatism, one based in those who produce real goods and services. A populism, not of the people, but a populism of the wage earner, the small business owner and those who desire to push the state onto the smallest footprint possible.
Christians and conservatives argue there is only one race, the human race. This understanding of race is not shared with materialists and those who believe in evolution. Darwin’s theory of evolution suggests there is a hierarchy of races. Darwins theory of race kicks wide open the door to racism. In simple terms racism is the theory of evolution applied phenotypes. The Bibles position is there are two races. One race is the race of the flesh. The other race is the race of the spirit. These races have their own set of rights and their own understanding of reality.
Lately there have been calls to defund the police. These calls were unreasonable, or so everyone thought. In this discussion the alternative to draconian policing is considered. Not in terms of criminals but from the perspective of citizens who may just be in opposition with government mandates. In light of the unreasoned and unparalleled (for Canada at least) demonization of citizens by the authorities, it is obvious that as much as we prefer to support the police, reforms have to be made. We cannot risk allowing another absolutist shift towards establishing a police state be made, whether in Canada or elsewhere
Yes, finally someone who will tell you the truth about inflation. It is not just about the money. Inflation is caused by expanding the money supply, in the same way whisky is made weak by the added water. Yes, water is being added to the whisky and money is added to the supply, but the real problem is that the amount of whisky is not growing relative to the dilutant. We will explain who adds the water and why, but as a bonus, this discussion explain how the distiller can force the thief who sells the watered down whisky, to find another way to make money.
The Truckers Convoy is the single most important event in the history of man since the Second World War, and it may even be of greater significance than this. The Convoy started from humble beginnings but from its inception there were people who sensed there was more to this gathering of truckers, than was being said. What is the underlying issue that has united regular workers all the world over and has caused governments to overreact? Have our leaders sensed how significant this revolt is?
Canada has always been a very liberal nation. Its political priority has always revolved around freedom. This has benefitted the liberal and socialist parties. Conservative parties have always acted more as an anchor on radical progressive reforms than a true alternative. More and more people are realizing unbounded freedom with unrestrained spending means destruction of the middle class and small businesses. There is also a growing realization the right needs to move beyond a counter to liberalism and develop a new version of conservatism. If you are ready for a new conservative vision, discover what awaits in this short but exciting video.
This is a mental experiment. It presents an imaginary scenario. The stylized and allegorical nature of the presentation is required to ensure you are not actually triggered by the presentation. The idea is to ask a potentially highly charged question without infuriating, triggering or offending anyone. This is an academic exercise. If you are not able to engage is speculative thought or analyzing imaginary scenarios, if you cannot grasp the purpose of allegory, it is best you stop reading at this point. If you are a liberal and are interested in exploring a moral question and investigating a moral scenario, your participation is sincerely invited.
There is a great division in the world, though it could be illustrated in different ways the major divisions are even more fractured. If we look at what we do as being based on a dissatisfaction with the present, then all our divisions, whether large or small, are differences of what we ought to do next. The left and right are primarily disagreements over whether our next move ought to decrease or increase the role of the state. Even if this is a simplification it is only because of the many diverse ideas as to what ought to be done next within these two major groupings. But has anyone looked at what problem we are actually trying to solve? Because if we do not grasp the real nature of the problem we will be torn apart by a thousand competing voices all demanding something be done that will not move us closer to a resolution and will more likely than not, only increase the number and depths of the divisions that we already struggle with.
Trigger Warning: This is an essay of the nature of evil. Due to circumstances beyond the control of the author, Robert was forced to deal solely with man and woman as biological sexes. No attempt was made to include a wider spectrum or any gender identities, these fall way, way beyond the purview of this discussion. If you are of a gender other than the one specified by your sex this discussion will not address your identity and has nothing to say to you about the nature of evil. Consider that so far as this discussion is concerned, for you evil does not exist.
For those whose identity is locked in by their sex, the author has some surprising things to say about the nature of evil in connection with your sexual identity.
There are two forms of Good. Evil cannot be fully understood unless we firsts understand the two forms of Good.
Liberals argue gender identity is a real thing and not determined by biology. But during debates on intersectionality there are no other fluid characteristics, indeed it is considered poor form to claim intersectional status that is not natural to the person. To even claim victimization as a woman, when one is a transgender woman, is frowned upon. To identify as a race, religion or size that cannot be backed up by objective verification is likely to get one cancelled. In this discussion we look at what is missing from these narratives.
Is business more than a method of making money? Is there a higher purpose that business is obligated to adhere to? The profit motive while it gives business owners an objective measure of success fails to capture what business is about for most business owners. Most businesspeople are not comfortable with thinking of their employees as an expense. Where has business theory gone wrong. Why does business exist and what ought those who are in business be concerned about?
We all notice the advance of hate through our social discourse. The vitriol has settled preferentially in the area of politics, but it is everywhere we look. Social media has been especially hard hit. But what is hate? Where does it come from? More importantly, what can we do to eliminate hate? Once we analyze the nature of hate and its source, the solution is not difficult to discern. In this video we make a deep dive into the nature of hate and come up with what is a shattering and indeed, a disturbing realization.
What if all of our social problems are all due to an accounting problem some 6000 years old. Meaning, solve the bookkeeping and the problems of war, crime, poverty, taxation, inflation, unemployment, poverty and inequality are all wiped out in one swipe of the pen. The pen is indeed mightier than the sword
There is a war over how we live and regarding which system we do business in. We are given two options. During most of history the only option has been to live under a state. We have been offered two kinds of state but regardless of if we veer left or right we remain under the regulatory power of the state. The real war is between this right of the state to govern us, through its regulatory authority over business, and the right of business to operate free of any other regulation than that of supply and demand. The arguments are well known, what has never been solved is how do we get from here, to there. Apriorian has devised a path for libertarians to take, that leads to the abolishment of the state.
A Citizen Republic is an association of citizens who have separated from the state to take possession of their political jurisdiction. In this discussion we look at the characteristics of a Citizen Republic, which is different from a Constitutional Republic and different again from democracies and other conventional political structures. Citizen Republics are an amalgamation of commercial operations, political structures and church. They have no overlords and so no taxation, inflation, unemployment, poverty, inequality, debt or injustice.
Apriorian grows citizens from subject. Subjects are like weeds and the state is allegorically akin to poor soil. Faith is earth from which crops spring. The crop is citizens, the garden is a political jurisdiction. To grow citizens, one needs a political jurisdiction in which the soil is planted with the seeds of citizenship. Citizens do not grow in unfertile soil or without seeds being planted. This video explains what to do. Think of it as gardening tips for people who would love to see citizens grow in place of subjects. If this makes subjects appear as weeds, they are. Be a citizen, do not be a weed.
Can evil be quantified? Can we measure the impact of evil on individuals and society in a way that would make it an entry in a ledger? Evil is a concept mostly associated with Christian Theology. As such it is assumed to be at best a meaningless term, subjective and useless scientifically. Evil is a term in metaphysics but so is honesty and this is measured, at least by bankers. Lets take another look at what evil is, remembering, nothing is more metaphysical than quantification.
Human rights are an absurd notion if one is an atheist, and they are inconsistent with Scripture. Human rights appear to be a good will gesture, a gift to the unfortunate from the privileged. In fact human rights serve as a claim on the resources held by the West. It is a claim that cannot be debated, rescinded or modified. Not everyone pays, but everyone benefits.
There are only two words you need to know to understand human history. These two terms are freeloading and accountability. These two terms encompass the events of human history. All sin and evil and crime are examples of freeloading. All good is the result of accountability. The more accountable people are, the greater the faith we have in God and in each other, the more the church is built. The more freeloading there is, the greater the division and fear, the stronger Babylon becomes. There is no middle area. One is either paying one’s way and adding to the value of the world, one is being accountable for the costs one creates, or one is freeloading. There is no third option. If one has faith in God and the people of God, one builds His church. This is the equivalent of building the church. It also means civilization is being built. If one is freeloading one is accumulating debts and being a burden on others. It is as simple as that.
There is an absolute morality of human progress is impossible. If progress is not guided by an absolute right and wrong then civilization has no direction and cultures are all just ways of life with no value or meaning. The issue has aways been that a categorical moral virtue must be objective and the same for all persons, places and times, and this was not considered possible. This position implies the person holding the opinion understands what an absolute morality looks like but rejects it as a guide for him or her. There is an absolute morality and it can be quantified and there is an immoral even evil reason why there are people and places who refuse to follow their moral conscience.
When fear takes hold an irrational anxiety pervades a person’s mind. Fear immobilizes a person and makes them incapable of the simplest task. A person sufficiently terrified no longer performs tasks needed to maintain life. If the terror is widespread communities and whole nations can become paralyzed with fear. But fear is not well understood. Its antidote is even less appreciated. In this production fear is discussed with the intent of providing the antidote.
The struggle between the political left and right is never ending because it has been largely a civil war without a battle front or a clear line between those combatants. It is easy to infiltrate and mislead the forces on the other side, where no one wears a uniform and insignia are sold on the open market. This discussion provides a clear line of demarcation between left and right. More importantly the author explains why conservatives are on the winning side. There is an objective and measurable distinction between the two camps. There is clear and visible way to know one from the other. Those on the right can explain to those on the left, why their side is irrational and separated from reality.
This Video is an introduction to the videos and to the services provided by Apriorian Consulting.
Apriorian Consulting is a service provider specializing in the rights of investors to the equity they create. Apriorian produces videos and other materials related to the rights of investors. Our videos and other material looks at the logic of faith, and the application of faith to investing. Without faith no one invests. The goal of Apriorian Consulting is to increase faith-based investing.
In this introductory video Apriorian explores faith and the relevance of faith to investing.
Narrator: Jennie Lynn
The devil does not think logically as we understand logic, and yet Satan must do what makes sense within his agenda. We look at what the devil does to shift our thinking towards his objectives. The discussion looks at where the line is between logic and the false logic of Satan and his demons.
Progress can be quantified, the path to civilization can be predicted. It is possible to start from any place socially and economically and progress forward in a calculated manner. We can look at two cultures or communities and measure the progress of each. The Apriorian Index makes it possible and it makes it simple.
Atheists are unable to comprehend the truths of the bible. This is illustrated in the most dramatic and extreme manner in the atheist’s arguments about slavery in the Bible. Unfortunately, this systemic ignorance is perpetuated by the atheist’s refusal to look at what the Bible really says when provided in a clear and rational manner as is done here. Hence, they will continue to regurgitate their mistaken views regarding slavery in the Bible. However, if you are a Christian and want to see what the bible says about slavery in a clear and concise way the verses on slavery are provided in four blocs, each focused on a specific aspect.
Those who do not understand what is wrong with democracy will continue to encounter unresolvable problems. Question if you would, if given the option, permit a group to decide how you would spend your time, money and other resources. If you had the choice, would you decide how your money, time and other resources were used, or would you poll a random group of persons? If you prefer the former to the latter you are not honestly an advocate of democracy. We will tell you why and what to do about it.
Conservatives do not get along with liberals. Each slings accusation at the other. Both accuse the other of being immoral and irrational. But no one has come up with a clear standard of normality so the interested party could rate them on their pathology or normality. In this essay we look at what normality is and how it can be identified. The reader is introduced to a clear and quantifiable way to describe normality and measure when it is missing. Liberalism is exposed for what it is, a serious mental disorder (meaning divergence from the norm) that needs to be labelled as such.
Essays on crime prevention create programs targeting serious crime. This approach fails to realize crime has a history. Serious crime matures with the individual. Both tend to start out small. The mission of Civil Court is to stop the crime and the criminal before either matures.
A better form of this question would be: Why do liberals hate guns in the hands of law abiding citizens?
Guns are one of the most iconic images of freedom loving people. The Wild West has had a lasting impact on the American psyche because the man with the gun and horse represents ultimate freedom for many Americans. Yet, liberals express a deep and lasting antipathy for guns absent from past generations.
Legal gun owners have an interest in ending gun violence by illegal gun owners and in stopping the trafficking of illegal guns. Governments ought to approach the problem in the way the deal with the issue of road safety. It is in the interests of all legal gun owners to demand they do, and do it now.
What is the fundamental difference between the political and economic left and right? What fundamental quality divides liberals from conservatives? Most people think the political right and left exist on a single continuum. Despite their differences the difference is just one of degree. Most people believe a centrist party could exist and could be created by merging the policies of the right and left. This is actually impossible to do. The right and left are divided qualitatively and these differences cannot be reconciled. Find out why.
What are civil rites and why do they matter so much to the right, rather than the left? This insightful essay looks at a deep and fundamental difference that divides right from left.
Are your tired of the petty crime that eats away at your community, and which serve as the steppingstone to every recidivist’s career. Are you interested in a justice system that is less militaristic? Common Law is the ancient and traditional response communities relied on to deal with malfeasance and social misfits. Discover a community-based alternative to modern policing. Militaristic policing turns misfits into felons and creates a greater need for its services. There is an alternative.
People are more comfortable with freedom, even when it comes to their relationships. People see monogamy as restrictive and ultra-demanding, so they often reject it. This is not proof monogamy is not natural. No one can argue convincingly that polygamy is anything but an aberration which exists only because of oppression and power disparities. No one can look at serial monogamy or promiscuity without having to deal with the collateral damage of these choices. If monogamy is not natural, nothing is.
Whites have privilege, but why and how do those without privilege build a culture that privileges them. Or, are the unprivileged condemn to forever come hat in hand asking the privilege for a share of their power and wealth?
When racism became a political cudgel to beat the heads of Whites and Blacks on the Right, it lost its meaning and usefulness, worse the lefts focus on racism contributes to a widespread disillusionment with the left and has resulted in a covert distancing of Democrats, from the liberal agenda. This failure of the left to gauge public reaction to their agenda is not attributable solely to tactical blindness. The left had to wage this war regardless of the outcome. The racist narrative is a greater part of the liberal psyche than even they realize.
Community’s need to be self-governing. There is no free market if communities are subject to external regulatory authorities. Free markets are a self-governing community. Self-government and self-regulation are not possible until communities have solved the problem of ownership. Self-regulated free markets means no one can claim what someone else produced. If there are external claims being made on the property created by a sovereign citizen self-government is impossible. Self-government starts and ends with the individual. There is only one route to separation and that is through self-regulation by sovereign citizens with absolute suzerainty over what they have created.
Taxation is made necessary by the existence of the state and public ownership. Without the regulatory power of the state taxation is neither possible nor required. The market is able to provide social goods and administrate their use. If other alternatives are possible taxation is as evil as any other form of extortion. Learn how to create a market free of the regulatory expropriations of a tyrannical state.
The good news is that poverty can be eliminated. The bad news it can only be eliminated using one specific strategy or Magic Bullet. If we do not approach the problem of poverty in precisely the right way using the right tools in the proper fashion, we will probably make things worse. The good news is these tools can be used by anyone, anywhere, regardless of the situation they find themselves in. The Magic Bullet that eliminates poverty is free to use but only by the right people willing to use it in the right way.
Socialism is a pyramid scheme. The top of the pyramid may make considerable gains, but this income comes from the base. The more the top flourishes the more the bottom is impoverished, because governments do not create wealth, at best they redistribute it at worst they redistribute it but only into their own pockets. The community never wins in a zero-sum game. Democrats see the economy as a fixed amount of wealth that must be redistributed. In so doing they create division and conflict. The more Democrats take and redistribute the more people helped and the more people alienated. In the end Democrats sow the seeds of their defeat with any wins they make. The bigger the win, the greater the probability they will alienate the voter by the win.
Capitals are self governing political jurisdictions. Capitals exist independent of any government or regulatory body. They are free of encumbrances and pose no risk to investors. This short podcast lays out the simple steps that lead to the establishment of a risk free Capital. Steps any group of residents of Bracebridge or other political jurisdiction can take.
Conservatives cannot win the cultural War if we keep thinking like liberals do. The left believes the public sector is required to solve social problems. Conservatives believe in private sector-based solutions. Why do so many conservatives resort to political actors and public regulations to push their way of thinking, when the conservative way of thinking is diametrically opposed to this? Let me demonstrate to you there is a conservative way to think about social problems.
The world is divided and full of social costs such as unemployment, taxation, debt and inflation, that ought not to exist were the world civilized. Then why do these holdovers from a barbaric age in which inequality abounded, still not just exist but predominate in every supposedly civilized place on earth. Learn what is wrong with the world and why barbarians still run rampant throughout the supposedly civilized world.
A self-governing enterprise is unregulated. The ability to create a commercial entity that has no need of regulation is to supercharge capitalism. Supercharged Capitalism proves it is possible to operate commercial property without oversight by the state.
Capitals are self-governing political jurisdictions that do not pose risk to investors being without social costs such as taxation, debt, unemployment, inflation and poverty.
Capitalism is not regulated. Capitalism when it is regulated becomes socialism. Capitalism does not contain public or semi-public ownership models. It is easy to demonstrate that if a businessperson does not know how to operate a business, without resorting to government oversight, his or her understanding of what capitalism is, has been given to them by the regulators and is not grounded in a clear understanding of the matter.
This episode questions what self-government is and if self-government is a policy a political party might support.
Racism is just another failed trope of liberalism. The arguments they make for it are so extreme they stopped making sense and in fact are inconsistent. As usual liberals are so intent on painting the darkest picture possible they forgot to make it believable.
If murder is unjust, we cannot be free to murder. If we have the freedom to live off of the charity of others freeloading cannot be considered unjust. If free speech is a freedom but aspects of free speech are considered unjustified then we do not have a clear understanding of either freedom or justice. This essay seeks to clarify what freedom is, what justice is and why at their roots they are not reconcilable concepts.
Freedom is not free. Liberals have turned the word into another meaningless trope. The liberal idea of freedom is used as a way to describe freedom from the need to work; the freedom to freeload.
The law is a product of the state. Law is manifested power founded on the two principles of power, might makes right and the end justifies the means. There is nothing just or righteous about the law. Following the law does not save us nor make us moral. The legalist is not a moral person and is often tiresome at best and despotic at worst. If we are said to be demon-possessed when we lose control of our physical self, what condition are we in, socially, when we lose control of our communities?
We all know right from wrong and yet no one can say why they know this or where the knowledge comes from in a way that could be verified. We claim to know what is just but we cannot prove what is just, so how valid is the claim? Justice Described puts our sense of justice on an objective foundation. Justice is described in a way that can be quantified and scientifically validated.
Liberals have a long history of supporting freedom and democracy. There is not as much evidence of them defending justice. From the MeToo Movements assertion that due process was not an appropriate response to woman’s claims to abuse events, to the barbarism of Cancel Culture and the wholesale enabling of BLM, justice for liberals has always been too closely allied with political agendas to be taken seriously.
The world has a division. Different people attempt to draw the line in various ways and places, the Bible divides the world into those who believe in God and those who do not. Atheist attempt to convince us this line means atheists are on one side and all believers in something more than reality are on the other. This is a bizarre and ultimately fruitless attempt to draw a line where it cannot exist. On one side are people of the law and on the other are the people of faith. Those who believe in the law live by legal systems and works. Because of this ownership is based on power whereas for Christians ownership is based on authorship. In this essay it is demonstrated there are two ways of interpreting reality and only two and the line divides the world into those who think the world operates by law and those who believe it operates by faith.
Ownership is based on authorship. It is the ones who create wealth that have the right to dispense and allocate wealth. The person who produces equity has the only valid claim to that equity. No one else has a claim to what is created other than the being who created it. In other words, all claims to things of value are fictitious and unfounded and cannot be reasonably validated, other than the claim made by the one who originated the thing of value. Therefore, owners have a right to justice and this justice must in all times and places validate the claim by the owner to the wealth he or she produced. All actions of claim by any other than the author of the wealth is an injustice, all such external claims must be justice, be impugned and discarded.
Justice is incompatible with liberty. Justice applied cannot do anything other than reject liberty. Freedom requires someone pay the cost. Paying the cost of freedom gives us justice only if we obtain the freedom that we fought for. Those who fight for freedom and do not reap the rewards they fought for do not receive justice. This happens only because we are not permitted to fight for justice. If justice was the ideal fought for, we would have justice, we would have what we fought for. The fight for freedom permits justice to be withheld. Freedom is a pie someone else baked.
Can evil be quantified? Can we measure the impact of evil on individuals and society in a way that would make it an entry in a ledger? Evil is a concept mostly associated with Christian Theology. As such it is assumed to be at best a meaningless term, so subjective as to be useless in the scientific sense of the word. It is true, evil is a metaphysical term but honesty is a close parallel and we seem not to have much trouble measuring this, at least in banks. So, lets take another look at what evil is, remembering, what is more metaphysical than quantification and accounting?
The Golden Rule is the only rule we need. The Golden Rule has the ability to replace all human law and in fact law exists only as a failed attempt by man to make The Golden Rule redundant. The left hates The Golden Rule because applied it creates a Church that forms a community. For a Christian there is nothing outside of the church when the church operates according to The Golden Rule.
The left includes socialists and communist elements. Both infringe upon people's private property rights. The politics of the left are based in a particular morality that views private property as inherently evil. They do not always voice this in an articulate way, however, the politics of the left requires them to see the right as the problem and private property as inherently problematical. Ultimately, they cannot permit property rights because at the deepest level property rights conflicts with their moral agenda and their very legitimacy. If the left learned to respect private property they would realize the lefts claim they or the state has a right to infringe upon or nullify property ownership has no moral legitimacy.
This is not a misprint nor a contradiction. Capitalism is an institution normally considered on the right but in fact it cannot exist without the intervention of the state. Any organization, institution or ideology that produces social costs is of necessity a left-leaning operation and deserves to be pigeon-holed on the left. Any movement to produce a more conservative nation must think twice about trying to build on the foundation of capitalism. The elimination of socialism requires the elimination of capitalism and only a business model based on a free market that works without the existence of the state can do this. The alternative economic model is discussed as an Exchange. Based on the Labor Theory of Value and producing a true free market, Exchanges eliminate all social costs or what is called freeloading or what economists refer to as externalized costs.
Sovereign Community is a free-standing community or any size that permits any group from 3 persons up to separate from those whom they do not wish to associate with. Sovereign communities are resilient and stable. The administration acts as a brokerage. Sovereign communities promote an economy based on high value labor. Ownership is based on authorship, there is no freeloading or parasitism, there is zero unemployment, no inflation, pollution, taxation or debt. Sovereign businesses do not go bankrupt. Unused or underused assets are reassigned to higher value areas.
A discussion arguing that by virtue of the Declaration of Independence and other founding documents it is technically impossible for the people to engage in insurrection especially and particularly in what is termed a Populist Insurrection.
The reality of atheists is synthetic. Atheists believe everything they observe can be related to something real in nature. Atheists believe their observations represent something that is inherently and objectively real. But they cannot prove this. Empiricism specifically excludes the possibility of proving the existence of an objectively real universe. Logic does not work the way atheists think. Logic is analytical. Atheists do not subscribe to analytical logic. Analytical logic defines truth by how coherent our concepts are. Logic proves itself. Logic validates its own premises and axioms. Analytical logic leads to God. Analytical logic proves the premises of Christianity and atheists do not want to go there.
Democracy is a failed paradigm. Politicians are just another form of freeloader. Democracy needs replacing with an ethical system that does not permit freeloading or encourage the adoption of a victim mentality. We need an ethical alternative, a system in which those who create costs pay the costs they create. If you are tired of freeloaders whether they be businesses, politicians, criminals or unruly elements support the ethical alternative to democracy. If we are not prepared to eradicate liberalisms ideologically, we will never have peace. There has to be accountability and socialism is all about freeloading aided and abetted by democracy.
It is too easy to explain away socialism by claims the left suffers from a mental disability. Its too easy because it allows and even encourages the left to explain away conservatism using the same argument. The right requires a more substantial argument than conservative responses have been to date. Telling people they are mentally disabled because they disagree with our point of view, is not a good way to convince them to convert – do we want to recruit mentally disabled people to the right?
Accountability is not a subjective exercise. To be accountable we need an accounting, that is a record of costs created. Christians require accurate accounting if we are to be accountable. God designed the church to enable Christians to be accountable to one another. If this is not possible in the terms an accountant would use your church is not designed in the way God described.
Democracy gives power to the majority but the majority may not have the interests of their society in mind when they assign politicians to represent them. A majority of poor persons on the left will be interested in obtaining as much support from a rich minority. This may not be the best course of action but because no one on the left is directly expected to pay the costs of their decision, the course of action seems reasonable to them.
The central issue we all face is security. Security of person, security of possessions, security of place, security of culture are just a few of the areas security impacts. If governments cannot secure markets, they cannot provide security in a meaningful way. Logical Positivists believe only markets are able to provide security particularly regarding market operations. It has become more obvious that governments have not been able to respond to concerns regarding security of the person, including the security of the fetus, and they have been even less effective in dealing with questions about the security of property? Indeed, the public sector is not benefitted by securing the private sector. There is a free market solution to the issues of security? Visit the Logical Positivist website to learn more. If you do not have security what do you have?
Can we change the world in a predictable way? We know the world changes, but it changes often in chaotic ways. It seems human beings are not fully in control of the change that occurs. Can we change things in a predictable way? Can we decide what changes we want and then bring them about? The answer depends on if we can secure our markets so as to pay for the changes we want and not have our designs usurped and corrupted by liberals and freeloaders.
There are two different paths separatists can take. The conventional path is the legal route and the one usually taken. This path has been mapped out by the state. The legal route requires convincing a sizable percentage of the population to support separation. Then comes negotiating the terms of separation. A process in which the state has the advantage. The legal route to separation is time consuming, expensive and fraught with legal and organizational difficulties as it was designed to be. The other option is founded on security and property rights.
Atheists can claim God does not exist. On what foundation is this assertion made? The problem is not one of doubt about God but the total absence of alternative frameworks. The natural world paradigm is rife with inconsistencies and paradoxes. It is only maintained for one reason and one reason only, and that is because if one did not continue to support the failed conception of reality as composed of matter, energy, space and time one would be forced to admit God does indeed exist. No amount of unresolved problems will be sufficient to force atheists to relent and admit that the God hypothesis is the only feasible option.
Democracy has a dirty little secret it has kept hidden. It is a secret that permits socialists and fascists exploit democracies. We reveal what this secret is and we explain how democracy is corrupted and twisted and pushed left to favor both socialists and fascists.
What is a conservative or those on the right compared to liberals? The question is important because imprecise definitions lead to confusions and can easily lead to collusion with the enemy. In fact the left has managed to trick many on the right to make deals with the devil. The right need not be characterized as people stuck in the past, unable to deal with progress. It is not whom we are.
Have you wondered why liberals hate God but love law? Have you noticed how they oppose free speech yet engage in slander, lies and defamation? These observations suggest that freedom means something to liberals it does not mean to conservatives and vice versa. In this discussion we discover why freedom at least the conservative view of freedom, is not consistent with liberalism. Liberals seeking after freedom is like Superman looking for kryptonite.
Genesis man is made in the image of God but man is sexual, mortal, and limited in understanding and power. In what way is our image even remotely similar to that of God?
When we see someone hungry, naked or homeless do we blame God? Do we ask why God created this problem or why He has not eliminated this problem? Does it take a miracle to feed, or clothe or house a needy person? Are these problems not solvable by us, using the means given us? If we are not using the means and wealth given to us by God to do these things how is this the fault of God? Are we not responsible for our actions and inactions and if so why are we claiming these actions or inactions are God’s responsibility? Why are we attempting to make God accountable for what we are doing or not doing?
Liberalism is a lie machine. It is a lie that produces more lies, the lies therefore are many. Many are in the form of words and concepts that are misleading. We look at many of our ideas that have been corrupted by liberal manipulation.
Why has gender identity become such a divisive issue? The video debates the two sides of the issue and establishes the pros and cons. The evidence proves gender identity is a double issue. Gender is based on how one wishes to express one’s sense of self. Sexual identity is based on sexual identity. Gender identity has the same importance as all of our other personal preferences.
Affordable housing normally forces individuals who cannot afford to purchase or maintain a home to congregate in the same geographical area. A large group of homes that cannot be paid for or/and cannot be maintained is by definition, a slum. When affordable housing programs are established that are not affordable slums are created. If the individual cannot afford to buy and maintain a house by himself, putting him in a development in which many persons who are in a similar situation live, does not make his or her situation any better, if anything it worsens it. There is a better way to create housing that is actually, affordable.
People are not determined by genetics or by nature but by spirit. We are what we choose to be.
The loss of the presidency and of the senate appears to strike a serious blow against the right and against the supporters of Trump. However, the view may not be as dark as it seems. There may be a different way of looking at these events that shows, whether the Right won these elections or loss the result may still come out as a win
Asking who or what created God is incoherent since time was created by God no prior creation event is possible. If God is in time God, what ever it is that wish to talk about, the one thing it is, is not God. God by definition is the Creator of all things. If God or it, is or was created, he or it is, by definition not God because the created thing is not the creator of all things, specifically anything created is not the creator of time. God, as the highest, greatest and best of all possible conceptions, cannot be equated with anything that is less than utter sublime, perfection. Space and time and all they contain are imperfect in the sense that they are contained in something that is greater and more perfect than what they are. This perfection is God.
Our civilizations contain many errors, some are more serious and central than others. The errors discussed here were chosen because of the impact they have had on society. Socialism, anarchy, hard currency, democracy, liberalism and more are shown to be problematical because of the problems and costs they create. It is for this reason we need to transition to a positive model based on logic. Positivism is a system based on the Principle of Subsidiarity and The Golden Rule. The creator owns the created and no one has a right to impose costs onto anyone else, including onto society and future generations.
Profits are not real, they are a figment of your accounting. Profits have nothing to do with starting a business or investing. Profits do not compensate for risk. Profits are the reward for the use of a particular form of accounting and nothing else. Those who work for profits live in a world of illusion and make-believe. Its time to join the real world.
Freeloading is taking things of value without any corresponding return being provided. Freeloading is a problem because is means the loss of what was owned without any corresponding benefit. We need a comprehensive response to freeloading. Piecemeal solutions do not work. It may appear to be the case that theft only impacts the individual but freeloading impacts us all and only helps the freeloader. People must be held accountable for the costs they create. No one ought to be required to lose what they formed or worked for without compensation. Without accountability we have socialism. The intrinsic feature of socialism is that it allows or even encourages, freeloading.
Unemployment, bankruptcy and debt benefits no rational system. Only the most morally corrupt person could benefit from these things. In a sane or moral or rational system anyone creating these things would be imprisoned. Yet, these are some of the most visible features of a capitalist economy. Is socialism any better or worse? How does mankind go about ending these manmade abominations?
What is reality? How do we know what is real from what is not? How do we distinguish truth from lies? Is there a real, reality or is life an illusion? If it is not all illusion where do we draw the line between what is real and what an assumption? If we cannot understand the nature of reality, we cannot determine the nature of truth. Solipsism has been discounted and so it seems as if the only alternative is to conceive of a reality divorced from human consciousness. However, if reality is not a product of the mind, how is the mind, a product of reality? The dilemma is a relativistic problem which is just as paradoxical regardless of from the perspective we have. This video proposes a unique solution that not only solves the mind/body dilemma it discredits the naturalist position.
There is no objective reality in a reality that has no objectivity. That is unless you have defined your reality as being objective it cannot be considered, objective. In this sense we define the nature of our reality. Atheists define their reality as natural, meaning it is composed of those things they define as elements of the natural world. Anything that is not natural does not belong in their reality. That which is not natural is considered supernatural. We cannot prove supernatural elements are part of the natural world because that would contradict the nature of their reality.
Atheists want evidence for God but what for? How will this help them, they have no evidence for the reality they want to put God into. Synthetic truth requires an objective reality to be consistent to. But empirical verification provides at best, only contingent truth and higher rates of probability that a given outcome will occur. The belief that empirical experiments will produce truth cannot be verified, empirically. Synthetic truth as a source of reliable information rests on an analytical base. If analytical truth is not a source of truth synthetic truth is rendered incoherent. Empirical experiment, in fact, simply help to confirm that analytical truth is coherent. However, if analytical truth has any validity at all, God must exist because analytical truth is founded on the coherency of concepts and this necessitates a source of concepts independent of the human mind. This source can only be God. What this video demonstrates is that there is no reliable evidence that physical reality exists and the only reliable conclusion we can come to is that God must necessarily exist.
The left is not just wrong they are evil and because they are evil they hate God. However, they do not hate God because of a manufacturing defect. God did not slack off on His quality controls when forming liberals. They are in fact the consequence of their own free will.
Unemployment only exists when unemployment benefits those who are in a position to invalidate the worth of labor. Unemployment does not exist when labor is valued in the way it deserves to be. In a community which values labor debt is also not permitted. In a community which gives labor its real value unemployment and debt do not exist.
Which is it, are we saved by faith or by works? If by faith what is the need for works? If we need works why are we not saved by being good? What does it mean to do good works and does this give us additional rewards or is it just once saved always saved and no amount of sacrifice will add one bit of value to our salvation? These questions and many more are answered in the compact but very exhaustive discussion? Don’t let your questions remain unanswered.
What happened to us, on our way to becoming civilized? Why have things not improved in the way and to the degree we think they should have? We are materially better off, no one argues this, but this is the point. Our material prosperity has not improved our lives in the way we think it ought to have. Have we not traded relationships and love and charity for goods and services? We are the church and we have sold our promise for what turned out to have little value. Learn what can be done.
Where is Babylon? Where can we find it? How has it lasted so long? How do we of the church come out of what we do not seem to be able to see? These are vitally important questions for those with faith. The answers are simpler than people seem to realize.
God is that which is better and higher than any thing or everything else. God is beyond logic and cannot be constrained by or contained in logic. Logic is a reality God has put us in. It is not a set of parameters He is limited by.
Trump is probably the first person to have a psychiatric condition named after him. Doubtless he is the first individual who could be considered an allergen. Regardless, no one can dispute the impact Trump has on others. Interestingly, the only other similarly potent element is faith. Leftists react similarly to displays of faith and to Trump.
We all have a sense that there is a better or right way to live. It would be difficult to find things wrong if we did not have a sense of how things ought to be. This suggests that things did go wrong. But what do we even mean by this? Do we not need to grasp what the right way to live means before we can delve into what has gone wrong? In this video we demonstrate our feelings are not wrong. We show what it means to live in a just and ethical way. Because this analytical depth is possible, we can then explain just what did go wrong and where and when. Do not fail to take advantage of these insights.
How to create money is not just a video on the methodology of producing capital it explains why the gold standard did not work and can never be made to work. No commodity or asset can be used as a medium of exchange without causing serious economic disruption. How to create money is not just a video on how to create money in the absolute sense, it is a video on how to end the use of currencies based on debt. End inflation, business cycles and many other economic ailments by creating a customized local currency.
Atheists have systematically assured God claims cannot be validated. The hypocrisy and this dishonesty of the methodology employed by atheists is staggering in its monumental venality. Their actions easily wins them first place as the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on mankind.
Atheists may have successfully precluded natural science from validating God claims but they have not made it possible to have their own claims validated and without this first step their own machinations are moot and justifiably ignored.
The tragedy of the commons is a mythical event about what happens when a Commons is exploited by a member of the community. The story is mean to discourage communities from discussing socialism. But the story is highly stylized and odd in its characterization of human behaviour. The story line is reminiscent of a movie plot filmed by college students. Even given the claims made about what happens to commonly owned property it is not a given that privatization is the best or only alternative. It may well be true that if a nonconformist will exploit land in the common domain, but it may also be true that the nonconformist will exploit what is in the private domain for short term gains. We must be careful not to jump in the fire because the pot seems to be getting hot.
Reality is not physical it is information. Being information things acquire existence as ideas. Find out how it is done.
There are two realities, one spiritual, one natural. One reality is centered on charity, the other is centered on greed or avarice. The bible talks about the latter as the love of money and the desire to fill ones barns with all one needs in the expectation this guarantees ones future security. Spiritual persons are governed by a Spirit of Charity. These two realities are connected to two varieties or types of truth. Naturalists think truth is synthetic whereas Christians have an Analytic view of truth. Which worldview do you subscribe to?
Trump is considered a populist leader yet many persons who one might assume to belong to the lower class, failed to be captured by his message. Many elites, who one might think, ought to be alienated by his support of the lower classes, supported him. Either people are not as populist think or the idea of populism as espoused by Trump is analytically flawed. But both possibilities tell us populism as commonly conceived is not analytically sound. Can the concept of populism be rescued to make sense of the fact Trump, by his own terms, is part of the elite and that he lost the election primarily because many poor and lower class voters preferred Biden.
Socialist feed off and despise private ownership. The ambivalence exists for a good reason.
The swamp is deeper and darker and more nefarious that people understand. This episode takes you into its heart. Here is your opportunity to better understand what Trump faces.
Democracy is a liberal invention that collectivizes the emotions of the mob so as to manifest them in an idol. The democratic leader is the embodiment of the mobs voice.
The Curse of Liberalism is discussion on the inability of liberals to give freedom or accept freedom. Liberals are condemned to be forever enslaved by their love of self. Freedom is either for all persons or an illusion. We cannot take freedom it can only be given.
Reality is understood by Progressives as being composed of contingent and relativistic truths. Progressives know reality only through the five senses. Reality is limited to what can be seen, felt, heard, or tasted or smelled. Mind, truth, reason, consciousness, love are just a few of the things our five senses are blind to. Logic is absolute truth. Logic is not a product of any of the senses. Logic provides us a gateway not only to absolute truth but a different conception of reality, one that is predicated on the possibility of absolute truth.
Liberalism promotes freedom. Liberals do not explain what they want to be free from. Freedom for a liberal is like a get out of jail free card, a carte blanche permission slip that permits anything. What they do not say and most do not know is that the freedom they long for is freedom from justice. Yet, without justice we have nothing of our own and no future.
Money is a measuring tool, or a unit of account. Currency is used as money and often thought synonymous with money but currency is an asset used to facilitate exchanges. The problem with currency is that assets are owned. To use the domestic currency the customer has to buy or rent units. This is akin to having to pay for inches to measure a box, or pay for miles to go on a journey. The Logic Of Money explains how to operate an economy using money, that is units of account that have no cost and are created by the person adding value to the economy. A market that uses money has no inflation, no debt, and no unemployment or taxation. Learn how it is done because Logical Minds Only know how to create real money and eliminate the private currency markets.
Men are best on all sides by those who not only claim the identity of men is a social construct but a bad and unwelcome social construct at that. This podcast sets out to demonstrate being a man is a logical necessity for men. To be otherwise is to be irrational and to set oneself up for failure. If a silk purse cannot be made from a sow’s ear then surely a girl cannot be made from a man, or vice versa. What we need to ask is what are the social costs of rejecting fundamental, logical truth.
In many ways the call to get the economy back to normal, is misplaced. Normal was never that good. The fact that governments are having to create a dozen different programs to deal with a multiplicity of impacts demonstrates how granular the normal economy was. Too many had nothing and others so little they will not likely survive the downturn despite the help. Even with the help the future costs of this help are going to create death by a thousand cuts in place of what would otherwise have been a speedy demise. If we learn anything from this let us learn that if main street wants to survive it needs to develop main street, based solutions. Globalism and statism only add to the problems local economies face. In this podcast LOGICAL MINDS ONLY looks at a new way to create economic development, without use of the financial or public sector.
Health Care has been a problem without a resolution due to the politics associated with the two main options. The United States is no longer looking for a solution to the issue of health care, it has reverted to a country trying to find a way to get past the barriers erected by the opposing political party to the solution supported by the party in government.
Unfortunately, the solution appears to have come down to finding better ways to get around this opposition. It is as if the credibility of the party hinges on getting their own particular solution enacted in a form that proves the other parties’ suggestions were just politically motivated. The truth is, the attachment of the parties to their version of what health care looks like proves both programs are more political than remedial.
The resolution to this deadlock is not a cleverer presentation. We need a new delivery vehicle. Private enterprise and the public purse are both failed paradigms. Discover the Christian option to the provision of health care.
Liberalism is a synonym for evil and evil the creation of costs one does not pay. The church destroys liberalism because it is not compatible with liberalism because Christians are instructed to live lives in a way that prevents freeloading. Simply by existing the church eliminates liberalism. If you see liberalism or are being infected by it you are not building the church. You want to rid the world of liberalism start living as instructed to live by God. Its that simple.
To understand reality and the problems of man we need to understand how people think. To understand evil, we need to understand the Alpha mind. Alpha is not a persona or personality type; it is a specific way of thinking and dealing with issues that produces outcomes we do not think are good. Once adopted the way we think dictates how we will act and solve problems. If we do not understand how people think we cannot grasp what leads to the decisions made. War and crime and political conflicts of all kinds disrupt society. These are not natural events they are events produced by human reasoning. To know how to end these kinds of events we must understand the thinking that thinks these events ought to exist. They serve a purpose for some people. What this podcast tells us is that there is not just a generic kind of thinking and problem solving, there are two specific modes of thinking leading to two unique ways of dealing with problems. These two modes of thought create two totally separate realities each model of reality looks at problems in a specific way, from a specific angle. Each mode of thought means problems will be solved or not from one particular perspective. A whole range of possible solutions are rejected by each group because these solutions do not fit in with how they think about reality.
Christians and atheists do not think alike. Their realities are not compatible. The claim God Exists and the assertion His existence is not compatible with the materialist worldview, are mutually exclusive world views. Only one position can be logical. If there is no evidence for God, He cannot exist. It is illogical to suggest God is the Creator and yet there is no evidence. But it is just as illogical to claim the universe is composed of matter, energy, space and time but being unable to explain what these things are or how they came into existence. Only one position can make sense. The question is not which position is true, but which truth is logical. There are two types of truth, synthetic truth and analytical truth. Those who subscribe to the synthetic form of truth think the way the devil does and this can be proved logically. Only those who accept the existence of God are able to think logically, because logic is linked to the form of truth, we call analytical. Analytical truth is the truth written in our hearts and is the truth that leads to God. These truths cannot be logically refuted. Logical truths are true by necessity.
Populism has steadily gained ground against the parties of the left and even when compared to conventional parties on the Right. Populism is not about mobs or middle-class opinions. Nor is Populism about traditional conservative values. Populism has become a reaction both the to the attacks of the left on property ownership and the failure of the Right to remain committed to the protection of property rights. Capitalism and conservative parties have abandoned the central concern of the majority of people. As a consequence, property rights have been steadily eroded. Not only the property rights of individual owners, but also the rights of the public to their lands and political jurisdictions. Populism is a reaction to the disempowerment that is part and parcel of the Globalist agenda. In this podcast we not only look at the reaction of those in the Populist movement to the loss of property rights but at ways to turn back this tide and reclaim the property rights that are part of our legacy of human rights.
Atheists claim they are only rejecting statements made about God. The seemingly innocuous position hides a secret. Without this right to refuse to discuss God, they risk the destruction of their entire worldview. To discuss the issue of God's Existence, is to question the basis of their rejection of God. The rejection of God is not causal, it is reactive, it is the consequence of a deep-seated irrationality that leads to an inability to accept God. If you understand the irrationality, the inherent illogicalness of atheism, you will understand why they cannot accept God and why they ought never to believed about anything, ever.
The church is not people in pews nor buildings whether ornate basilicas or structures less imposing. We know that, but are we aware it was not designed as a club nor to express cultural preferences? There is no reason to assume God hoped it would form a kind of spiritual gathering place. As Christians we were never meant to be united by shared statements of faith. Indeed, there is good reason to ask why creeds and doctrines are needed if the church reflected the design provided in the New Testament. Are we using human devised documents to protect our human fabrication from competing marketing ploys? What does, one body under Christ, mean to you? It does not sound as if it as meant to be complicated or divisive. So why the division? What really is the church? Find out now before you find out you were part of something else.
The world cannot make sense to us unless the world is logical. If the world is logical it can be understood logically by us. If we can understand reality as a logical construct what is reality composed of but truth. Logical Populism is a logical look at reality. Logical Populism is founded on a logical understanding of truth. If you are not logical this is probably not an episode that will speak to you.
Pollution is a man-made additive to the natural world that adds expenses to those who would use the world's natural resources. Pollution adds costs to the marketplace, this is why it is a problem. It is absurd to create costs over and above what is required to produce what we want produced. No one actually wants pollution created because it always increases the cost of the things we do want. So, why is pollution created? The answer is in our bizarre way of producing goods and services. If we produced what we do want in a logical way we would not produce what we do not want, namely pollution. In this episode of LOGICAL MINDS ONLY, we look at how to produce goods and services logically. Logical activity does not produce pollution and it encourages the clean up of existing pollution. Discover a more logical way to live before the window of opportunity closes.
Contrary to what some experts appear to think or at least suggest, unemployment is created by human beings making choices that suit their needs and promotes their agenda, it is not a force of nature or a natural result of living in a civilized world. Unemployment can be eliminated and by this we mean it can be eliminated by the creation of real jobs that produce meaningful goods and services that people need and generate real value for the community. Full employment is a choice like unemployment is a choice, it is just a choice that makes more sense to more people than the alternative choice. Unemployment is created by some people reducing the risk their employees represent. It is possible to create employment without increasing risk, in fact employment can be created without encountering any risk at all. Risk is the one thing that prevents jobs from being created and reduces economic activity. Discover how simple it is to create economic development without risk or threats of loss. LOGICAL MINDS ONLY guarantees that the process is far easier than you think. Logical Populism holds the key.
The political and economic left do not just create error, it is not just wrong in some of its ideas, the left is based on incoherent premises and is so fundamentally flawed it cannot provide a logical reason for its existence. In fact without the right to feed off and give it some substance, it would self-destruct. Learn what this means for you regardless of if you are on the right or left.
What is ownership? If you think ownership is two forms of authority one labelled private ownership and the other public ownership you do not understand ownership. If your politics is governed by this vision of ownership you are wasting your energy in a meaningless fight against shadows. Learn the truth about ownership.
There are three distinct ways to separate. The conventional way is to use legal proceedings and the court to try and argue ones way out of the union, a less practical but still often used process involves protests, civil disobedience and even outright armed violence. This rarely leads to a desirable result if for no other reason than the people able to lead a rebellion are probably not the best people to support a decentralized system of government. But there is a third way, the logical way. The third way speaks logic to power. In this method small groups use a grassroots process to create charities that work to systematically strip central governments of the power to tax. The process is cumulative and unstoppable because it is both infinitely scalable and customizable.
A logical market is a free market or what is sometimes referred to as an Exchange. Free markets provide goods and services logically, that is without any costs that do not make sense, or that does not create real value. A logical market produces exchanges that would be made even if the buyer and seller had absolute knowledge. Free markets cannot logically create unemployment, debt, taxation, inflation, depressions, pollution, economic instability, risk or threats of loss, because these are costs no one wants to pay. Such social costs are not logical and if not logical cannot logically be part of a logical or free market. Only Dextarian Investments (the producer of the LOGICAL MINDS ONLY podcast) has the technology for creating a logical market. The basic information you need to know and what your politicians need to know, is included here.
Any place anywhere can create businesses without risk by starting a charitable institution called an Exchange. All that is needed is people who are willing to help one another. The rest is easy. Even Africa or any financially stressed economy has people and if these people will open their hearts to the needs of other they can create economic development easily and safely without risk or threat of loss.
The history of man is the conflict between logic and liberalism. The loss of Eden gave rise to liberalism. The rise of liberalism was mirrored in the rise to dominance of Babylon. The Babylonian culture gave rise to all of our modern institutions. They are all predicated on tyranny in some form or other. Only logic has the power to overcome the institutions of this world and restore the practices ordained by God. Liberalism is not only incompatible with the ways of God it is incompatible with the Logic that defines the rule of God. We not only lose salvation when we live under the rule of Babylon we lose our rationality. Logic and liberalism are not compatible. Only those who deny the former adopt the latter and those who adopt liberalism do so only because they have rejected logic.
Capitalism when looked at logically, is a logical absurdity. Its elements do not fit together but conflict with one another and even the ideas it uses to explain what it is do not make logical sense. If capitalism did make sense it would not be turning into globalism at one end while socialism threatens its basic elements at the other. Capitalism is part of an ideological continuum composed of enemies that can neither reconcile nor win the competition. For logic to defeat capitalism requires the abandonment of the entire continuum on which socialism, capitalism and globalism find a home.
Native land claims are beset by logical errors as are the claims made by nations. To resolve these jurisdictional problems the logical errors on which they are founded must be resolved. Only when our position is founded on logic and truth can we reconcile our differences.
Faith is either logical or logic does not exist.
Christians cannot prove God exists in the relativistic contingent reality of the synthetic world view that atheist subscribe to, but this does not matter because empirical science cannot prove synthetic truth is anything other than contingent, probabilistic and subject to modification. Synthetic reality is an inherently flawed conception and cannot be confirmed as it is conceived to be. Empiricism cannot be a feasible explanation of our observation and experience. Therefore, the naturalist position that reality is objective yet can only be understood contingently, is not a logical argument. The only other conclusion open to us, logically, is that analytical reality is the best descriptor of what is real. To embrace analytical truth as the only logical form of truth, is to open the door to the absolute necessity for God. The only logical option open to human beings, who choose to think logically, is to embrace faith because analytically speaking, faith is inherently and in-arguably, logical.
The left rarely defines terms. It is not possible to have rational discourse if terms are not understood. Privilege is of two kinds and ought not be confused. There is the privilege to extend the hand of charity to others. This is an earned privilege granted by God. It permits us to express love through acts of charity using the property gifted to us by God. The only other kind of privilege is the kind that says one is entitled to what others are in a position to grant; but may not wish to grant to you. The second sort of privilege is fabricated and designed to make null and void the first privilege; the God-centered privilege. If I am required to benefit you then I do not have the privilege to be charitable to whom I please with that which was given to me by God. If charity is doing the will of God with the things given to me by God then privilege that denies me this right abrogates to the one privileged the supreme right to over turn the Will of God.
There is little logic on either side of the debate on gun violence. The very expression, gun violence, betrays the emotional level of the discussion. If anything demonstrates the tendency to divide issues into sound bites the tendency to divide violence into discrete categories has to be illustrative of what has gone wrong with social discourse. Gun violence cannot be packaged into a political issue for ease of consumption and marketing. Indeed, it is not even violence that is the real problem or criminals themselves. The problem is much wider and more embedded in our societies to permit these kinds of comforting narratives. The package may be neat, but it is empty. Please Stop Trying To End Gun Violence creates a less pretty result than conventional narratives on crime, but it has something we can actually use, inside.
Liberals ace in the hole is capitalism. Liberals believe that regardless of what happens politically no one will ever challenge capitalism as the pre-eminent wealth generating idea. Yet, capitalism is exposed to logic to an unsurpassed degree. Any logical person is able to overcome capitalism and do this in such an over-whelming way, the contest is akin to that of a tornado demolishing a house of cards, capitalism being the logical equivalent of a house of cards.
How hard is it to set up a business and create economic development, really? In this episode LOGICAL MINDS ONLY demonstrates business start ups can be one of the easiest things to do and economic development is only as difficult as we choose to make it. If you prefer logical business development to irrationally produced poverty and hardship this is the podcast you need to hear.
Insurance is one of those things that seem to make a lot of sense when one is immersed in a situation that requires it, but when thinking of the nature of reality insurance loses its meaning. A logical society does not use or need insurance. Indeed, insurance is probably one of those things that define a non-Christian the best, meaning that no Christian can reconcile his or her faith and what Scripture says. If we need insurance we are not living in a way that can be reconciled with either logic or Christianity.
If land has a carrying capacity, then how is immigration a sane response to an aging or/and declining population? Do we expect the new migrants not to age, or do we expect to find more immigrants to come and care for the previous immigrants as they age? At what point does the process end or self-destruct as it eventually must, unless we adopt a different approach to aging populations other than increasing the size of the population.
Reality is logical or it could not be understood by us. It is symbolic or it could not be symbolized and communicated by us. We cannot create information out of that which is relative. Truth requires absoluteness or logical coherence. We cannot derive sense out of nonsense nor symbology out of that which conveys no meaning.
The idea of reality as a thing in itself which our truth can approximate but our minds never grasp nor our senses directly perceive creates a logical conundrum that cannot be rectified.
Truth cannot be contingent and if truth is not relative then reality if it is to exist at all has to be logical because only logic is absolute and only analytical truth eliminates contingent and relativistic theories of reality.
Frustrated when arguing with someone and you realize no amount of logic will convince them their position is flawed? Why do irrational persons never give up their position once it has been adopted. The answer is simple and it has everything to do with why they do not respond to logic.