It is with great joy that I write the Christmas message and my message is all about Joy. We Methodist have a saying; Jesus, Others, Yourself aka Joy. So how can we be joyful at Christmas, how can we put others and Jesus first?
Well dear reader you can be joyous by being like Jesus, by reaching out to others. We are all faced, with people whom we have little time for or who asks a lot from us. It is all too easy to turn from them; to just send them some empty gift in shiny wrapping but I want you to give of yourself, give them some forgiveness, some mercy or some of your time. In short gift the gifts of true value.
It is all too easy to give gifts brought with gold and not give of ourselves. Well give of yourself, be like Jesus, and give the gifts of the soul; the gifts of his love, the gift of his mercy. These gifts seem so costly to us but they are free, they flow from the farther, through the son to us and as freely as we have received so freely we must give. So this Christmas don’t give joy live Joy
Wednesday, 9 November 2011
Sunday, 23 October 2011
Theory of love
The economic theory of love:
Before we start I need to dispel a myth and that myths name is true love, we live in a global community of over six billion people 3 billion of whom we would choose to cohabit with. This equates to odd of three billion to one against of you ever finding your singular true love and yet when we look around we see couples all proclaiming true love or love.
Once we dismiss predestination, when considering the concept of love, we are left with something more splendid and that is rationality, often, slanderously referred to cold and harsh rationality but I wish to argue not only is it prudent to choose a partner based on a rational economic approach but that we do without thinking.
Unit of economy:
If we choose to see a relationship as a rational trading relationship (trading as it exists between two parties) we must ask what it they are trading is. Of course in the real economy we know it is labour value but what of the social economic sphere.
Well there to my mind seem to be two; there is a sexual element (one are society has always placed a fiscal value upon… old profession and all) and a more invisible unit of value that of the need for company or fear of loneliness.
Take for example a person who values sex highly but loneliness lowly; they would be free to pursue sex at all cost and on every occasion, as they would not care if this pursuit left them occasionally alone. Opposed to this person would be someone who values the fear loneliness highly; they would willing cohabit with someone who either is unwilling or unable to provide them with sex merely not to die alone (think about the elderly marrying).
Talk for yourself bub:
Thankful most people seek both – they seek sexual value and company return from their relationships. Mad, you say, not me, I am some secular Saint. I seek nothing from my relationships but the joy of my partner, who I pertain to love above and beyond myself. Really? Well then you are foolish. You are providing another with utility without return, which is unsustainable and eventually emotionally crippling. Think on this, if you sought no return on your trading relationships, you would be very unlikely to enter into one or emotionally bankrupt yourself.
No the model described below is not a one sides expression of selfish self-interest but the core of all human interaction; enlightened self-interested behaviour that creates a social good. We all seek certain returns from these relationships and are partners expect an equal return.
So we are face with a new conception of relationships, we are not lost, rudderless on a sea of “love” but empowered traders with something to trade in return for social commodities we ourselves have chosen to seek and glory to God that this is the way it is.
Given that all people seek the two essential commodities we must ask why aren’t all people attracted to each other, beyond and unequal valuing of sex and loneliness? Well the answer is simple; in the love market place not everyone is worth the same. In the human world the housebound, rude, unemployed person have a lower value from the stunning, socially adapt business person.
How much am I worth?
We all have a social worth and this of course differs from place to place, the ill-behaved business owner may be lauded in their own organisation but will never be wanted (though may attend) the diner party held by their peers. That is because though the business owners business skills make them tolerable in the one setting they are of less value to their fellow dinners.
Thus it is true in the economics of love; beauty is not an absolute value (as there lack a global market value) but a value derived by the local market. Thus western person attractiveness is derived by their fellows and by the media. In poor countries corpulence is valued and in wealthy nations thinness is valued. We should not be surprised by this. For it is a universal truth; that which is scares is valued and so it is with beauty that which is scares is beautiful and that which is common not so. So each participant to the market of love is assigned a “beauty” value a value which is wholly derived by geographical location.
Beauty makes up just part of our personal value; there are multiple factors which form the “personal” value; for example wealth is another important aspect. We all want accesses to resources, to possess to the latest doo-dad and ideally we’d not have to strive to do so. So it is to expect that the lonely business person would trade his economic value to another; who not only gains a direct commodity return from there trading relation but sex and loneliness relief.
Another and very important factor is social standing; via a trading partner one partner of low birth (who may be wealthy) you gain the status of their high birth (but poorer) partner. Indeed the aristocracy has partially sustained there position by trading there social status for wealth. There is, however another aspect of social standing. Historically it was seen as unnatural or sad to live along and you were expected to marry. Indeed to be accepted into certain social circles or obtain certain social standing marriage was required.
Thus people off set there loneliness value twice over (one offset by their partner and one offset by acceptance into a wider social circle). Indeed when we see the phenomena of homosexuals entering marriage. Obviously these trading relationships cannot fulfil their sexual need but did resolve there need for company and ensure there social standing. This relationship is not an equal one for either partner and it is of no surprise then that we see them dying out when the social stigma of homosexuality diminishes and a similar decrease in life long partnership as there social value equally diminishes.
There is a final and probably core aspect of a person’s value, that of an ability to care or conceive offspring. It is a fact that most humans seek to create offspring, it is part of are animal inheritance thus it should not be considered strange that someone able to easily conceive and willing and able to bring up and sustain children would be valued more than some on who is unable and unwilling to care for children. I sadly know of many women (and I believe it is mainly women) forced into unequal trading partners simply to fulfil their need for children (which is just another form of loneliness offsetting) and to assuage their biological needs. Again we should not be surprised at perfectly equal trading partnerships which are liquidated after this need to bear and raise children has been fulfilled as it suddenly devalues one of the parties and thus become unequal.
Individuality and your value:
Unlike labour value there is no real market place for love as I said at the start the idea anyone will ever find a perfect trading arrangement stands at odds of 3 billion to one against. Even given this the actual value we have at an individual level differs from person to person. At a top level the four aspects of personal value; looks, money, social standing and child rearing are held at the same level, however one person may care more for money then social standing or even hold reverse social standing (the trader who seeks the criminal). So that actual value are partner holds us in is solely determined by them and dose like all values alter over time.
The point is that we hold a value to our partner and this value is the deciding factor in a successful relationship. Thus the beautiful, social adept, fertile businessman will not marry the penniless, disfigured barren social reject even if (and I doubt this greatly) they had the same loneliness value. They would not forge a relationship because it would be unequal, the first partner would realise very quickly that others valued them greatly and would provide them more in return then there current partner.
It is also unlikely because there loneliness value would be unlikely to be the same the beautiful bui98sness person is attractive to a larger market share then the disfigured popper; thus all thing being equal would find it far easier to find a mate and thus value there loneliness or likelihood of prolonged periods lower than the disfigured pooper. In this way the four core aspect of personal value feed back into the two economic units.
So the ideal relationship
Well that is simple two people of near enough equal personal value (preferable who are poor in two aspect but rich in the two, the other partner is lacking)and who value sex and loneliness at a similar rate; for no relationship can last if one partner could do far better or on is more invested in it then another or one seeks more sex then the other, it will lead to partner whose need are not fulfilled to seek them elsewhere.
In the ideal relationship people need for companionship is fulfilled by trading there equal focus on loneliness and sex for company and sex and neither could easily or quickly find a better match. Both may perform different roles and bring different thing to the table but in the end the equate each other . No other form of trading relationship can survive and even when formed is not stable as I have said each of these values alter over time and so must be actively maintained by each partner.
Concluding remarks:
If we act like self-interested parties before we formed relationships it seems clear to me we will make better, stronger and more reliant relationship. We should not be ashamed or censored for are unwillingness to trade a substantial part of life for pitiful or lesser resources then we invest, no business would ever remain in this position and no rational person either.
The key is before we enter the trading relation, unfortunately we far too often rush into these relationship and then only once inside the trading relation discover that the ideal of love is scant compensation for a fulfilling equal trading relationship and divorce or break up soon follow; So dear reader think before you leap and for the sake of yourself and other think hard before you enter into any type of relationship contract.
Before we start I need to dispel a myth and that myths name is true love, we live in a global community of over six billion people 3 billion of whom we would choose to cohabit with. This equates to odd of three billion to one against of you ever finding your singular true love and yet when we look around we see couples all proclaiming true love or love.
Once we dismiss predestination, when considering the concept of love, we are left with something more splendid and that is rationality, often, slanderously referred to cold and harsh rationality but I wish to argue not only is it prudent to choose a partner based on a rational economic approach but that we do without thinking.
Unit of economy:
If we choose to see a relationship as a rational trading relationship (trading as it exists between two parties) we must ask what it they are trading is. Of course in the real economy we know it is labour value but what of the social economic sphere.
Well there to my mind seem to be two; there is a sexual element (one are society has always placed a fiscal value upon… old profession and all) and a more invisible unit of value that of the need for company or fear of loneliness.
Take for example a person who values sex highly but loneliness lowly; they would be free to pursue sex at all cost and on every occasion, as they would not care if this pursuit left them occasionally alone. Opposed to this person would be someone who values the fear loneliness highly; they would willing cohabit with someone who either is unwilling or unable to provide them with sex merely not to die alone (think about the elderly marrying).
Talk for yourself bub:
Thankful most people seek both – they seek sexual value and company return from their relationships. Mad, you say, not me, I am some secular Saint. I seek nothing from my relationships but the joy of my partner, who I pertain to love above and beyond myself. Really? Well then you are foolish. You are providing another with utility without return, which is unsustainable and eventually emotionally crippling. Think on this, if you sought no return on your trading relationships, you would be very unlikely to enter into one or emotionally bankrupt yourself.
No the model described below is not a one sides expression of selfish self-interest but the core of all human interaction; enlightened self-interested behaviour that creates a social good. We all seek certain returns from these relationships and are partners expect an equal return.
So we are face with a new conception of relationships, we are not lost, rudderless on a sea of “love” but empowered traders with something to trade in return for social commodities we ourselves have chosen to seek and glory to God that this is the way it is.
Given that all people seek the two essential commodities we must ask why aren’t all people attracted to each other, beyond and unequal valuing of sex and loneliness? Well the answer is simple; in the love market place not everyone is worth the same. In the human world the housebound, rude, unemployed person have a lower value from the stunning, socially adapt business person.
How much am I worth?
We all have a social worth and this of course differs from place to place, the ill-behaved business owner may be lauded in their own organisation but will never be wanted (though may attend) the diner party held by their peers. That is because though the business owners business skills make them tolerable in the one setting they are of less value to their fellow dinners.
Thus it is true in the economics of love; beauty is not an absolute value (as there lack a global market value) but a value derived by the local market. Thus western person attractiveness is derived by their fellows and by the media. In poor countries corpulence is valued and in wealthy nations thinness is valued. We should not be surprised by this. For it is a universal truth; that which is scares is valued and so it is with beauty that which is scares is beautiful and that which is common not so. So each participant to the market of love is assigned a “beauty” value a value which is wholly derived by geographical location.
Beauty makes up just part of our personal value; there are multiple factors which form the “personal” value; for example wealth is another important aspect. We all want accesses to resources, to possess to the latest doo-dad and ideally we’d not have to strive to do so. So it is to expect that the lonely business person would trade his economic value to another; who not only gains a direct commodity return from there trading relation but sex and loneliness relief.
Another and very important factor is social standing; via a trading partner one partner of low birth (who may be wealthy) you gain the status of their high birth (but poorer) partner. Indeed the aristocracy has partially sustained there position by trading there social status for wealth. There is, however another aspect of social standing. Historically it was seen as unnatural or sad to live along and you were expected to marry. Indeed to be accepted into certain social circles or obtain certain social standing marriage was required.
Thus people off set there loneliness value twice over (one offset by their partner and one offset by acceptance into a wider social circle). Indeed when we see the phenomena of homosexuals entering marriage. Obviously these trading relationships cannot fulfil their sexual need but did resolve there need for company and ensure there social standing. This relationship is not an equal one for either partner and it is of no surprise then that we see them dying out when the social stigma of homosexuality diminishes and a similar decrease in life long partnership as there social value equally diminishes.
There is a final and probably core aspect of a person’s value, that of an ability to care or conceive offspring. It is a fact that most humans seek to create offspring, it is part of are animal inheritance thus it should not be considered strange that someone able to easily conceive and willing and able to bring up and sustain children would be valued more than some on who is unable and unwilling to care for children. I sadly know of many women (and I believe it is mainly women) forced into unequal trading partners simply to fulfil their need for children (which is just another form of loneliness offsetting) and to assuage their biological needs. Again we should not be surprised at perfectly equal trading partnerships which are liquidated after this need to bear and raise children has been fulfilled as it suddenly devalues one of the parties and thus become unequal.
Individuality and your value:
Unlike labour value there is no real market place for love as I said at the start the idea anyone will ever find a perfect trading arrangement stands at odds of 3 billion to one against. Even given this the actual value we have at an individual level differs from person to person. At a top level the four aspects of personal value; looks, money, social standing and child rearing are held at the same level, however one person may care more for money then social standing or even hold reverse social standing (the trader who seeks the criminal). So that actual value are partner holds us in is solely determined by them and dose like all values alter over time.
The point is that we hold a value to our partner and this value is the deciding factor in a successful relationship. Thus the beautiful, social adept, fertile businessman will not marry the penniless, disfigured barren social reject even if (and I doubt this greatly) they had the same loneliness value. They would not forge a relationship because it would be unequal, the first partner would realise very quickly that others valued them greatly and would provide them more in return then there current partner.
It is also unlikely because there loneliness value would be unlikely to be the same the beautiful bui98sness person is attractive to a larger market share then the disfigured popper; thus all thing being equal would find it far easier to find a mate and thus value there loneliness or likelihood of prolonged periods lower than the disfigured pooper. In this way the four core aspect of personal value feed back into the two economic units.
So the ideal relationship
Well that is simple two people of near enough equal personal value (preferable who are poor in two aspect but rich in the two, the other partner is lacking)and who value sex and loneliness at a similar rate; for no relationship can last if one partner could do far better or on is more invested in it then another or one seeks more sex then the other, it will lead to partner whose need are not fulfilled to seek them elsewhere.
In the ideal relationship people need for companionship is fulfilled by trading there equal focus on loneliness and sex for company and sex and neither could easily or quickly find a better match. Both may perform different roles and bring different thing to the table but in the end the equate each other . No other form of trading relationship can survive and even when formed is not stable as I have said each of these values alter over time and so must be actively maintained by each partner.
Concluding remarks:
If we act like self-interested parties before we formed relationships it seems clear to me we will make better, stronger and more reliant relationship. We should not be ashamed or censored for are unwillingness to trade a substantial part of life for pitiful or lesser resources then we invest, no business would ever remain in this position and no rational person either.
The key is before we enter the trading relation, unfortunately we far too often rush into these relationship and then only once inside the trading relation discover that the ideal of love is scant compensation for a fulfilling equal trading relationship and divorce or break up soon follow; So dear reader think before you leap and for the sake of yourself and other think hard before you enter into any type of relationship contract.
Tuesday, 18 October 2011
Missing prophets
I read it is a student of ideas. It seems clear to me that the earliest Yahweh only thinkers were followed by others each altering the ideas first set down. Namely that Israel’s woes were due to social inequity and pantheism and regardless of its theological meaning the puzzle I have remains.
Event as I see them
The people of the lands of Israel have a chief god call Yahweh – intermixed worth other gods.
A small sect of Yahweh only thinkers establish themselves
Israel in continually conquered the profits are the results of the Yahweh alone movements response to this
Missing bit
Then somehow, somewhere Israel become Jewish (as in monotheistic and adherent to the laws)
This is historical fact
So my question is this why does the Yahweh alone movement not celebrate the king who brought this about, why do they not proclaim the events and causes that brought about this revolution?
This has no real ramification of the highly dubious theological value of the prophets but is to my mind a very interesting question.
My thought is that the Yahweh alone movement did something it was ashamed of in order to achieve its ascendency.
Event as I see them
The people of the lands of Israel have a chief god call Yahweh – intermixed worth other gods.
A small sect of Yahweh only thinkers establish themselves
Israel in continually conquered the profits are the results of the Yahweh alone movements response to this
Missing bit
Then somehow, somewhere Israel become Jewish (as in monotheistic and adherent to the laws)
This is historical fact
So my question is this why does the Yahweh alone movement not celebrate the king who brought this about, why do they not proclaim the events and causes that brought about this revolution?
This has no real ramification of the highly dubious theological value of the prophets but is to my mind a very interesting question.
My thought is that the Yahweh alone movement did something it was ashamed of in order to achieve its ascendency.
Monday, 12 September 2011
Glass and Stegal
After world war two wise senators set about to prevent the economic instability which has blighted the American economy and which had made any reconstruction of German impossible and thus has sped up the Second World War.
They sought to separate out the consumer banks (those which provide our loans and accounts) from those they called casino capitalist, the short sellers and share dealers. Indeed they very correctly argued that loaning people money to “invest” in short term share gain causes share bubbles and very shortly afterward cause share crashes leading to massive economic conflagrations; which in turn led to social disharmony and occasionally war.
It is a pleasing accident of history that the names of these two senators so closely parallel the era of glass and steal towers which there division brought in. For as Capitalism can benefit from war, it is true to say it flourishes under stability.
Glass and Stegal stood as long as the Keynesian economic model was dominate; as long as government direction of macroeconomic policy was widely accepted, however, in the 1970 this dominance ended. Western material economic progress ran to a halt and western economies were left becalmed by stagflation and the “red menace” was still on its relentless march.
So the opponents of Keynesian grew stronger and strong and as they gained more and more influence, they slowly very slowly dismantled the protections offered by glass and stegal. They in short followed Marx’s prediction that capitalism can bear not limits and sought to remove all limits to its own free movement and one of those targets was the glass Stegal act.
It was not difficult to erode the boundaries, it was always odd that a companies which owned both retail banking division and higher risk divisions (and they all did) would operate without collusion between the two parts of it. Unless you disallow any connection between the two parts it is invertible, regardless of regulatory bodies that the organisations will erode these boundaries internally; even with a total division the economic interest of the high risk bankers would be to buy out the retails banks, so they can better flog their products and gain accesses to their funds.
I have no issue with the banking reforms, its seems wholly prudent to me to separate out retail baking from higher risk financial services, however, unless it is international it will fail, unless it is total it will fail; even then it will fail. Not because it is a bad idea but because it is an obscure limit on capitalism which the majority will never concern themselves with in the good times and only partially care about in the bad.
They sought to separate out the consumer banks (those which provide our loans and accounts) from those they called casino capitalist, the short sellers and share dealers. Indeed they very correctly argued that loaning people money to “invest” in short term share gain causes share bubbles and very shortly afterward cause share crashes leading to massive economic conflagrations; which in turn led to social disharmony and occasionally war.
It is a pleasing accident of history that the names of these two senators so closely parallel the era of glass and steal towers which there division brought in. For as Capitalism can benefit from war, it is true to say it flourishes under stability.
Glass and Stegal stood as long as the Keynesian economic model was dominate; as long as government direction of macroeconomic policy was widely accepted, however, in the 1970 this dominance ended. Western material economic progress ran to a halt and western economies were left becalmed by stagflation and the “red menace” was still on its relentless march.
So the opponents of Keynesian grew stronger and strong and as they gained more and more influence, they slowly very slowly dismantled the protections offered by glass and stegal. They in short followed Marx’s prediction that capitalism can bear not limits and sought to remove all limits to its own free movement and one of those targets was the glass Stegal act.
It was not difficult to erode the boundaries, it was always odd that a companies which owned both retail banking division and higher risk divisions (and they all did) would operate without collusion between the two parts of it. Unless you disallow any connection between the two parts it is invertible, regardless of regulatory bodies that the organisations will erode these boundaries internally; even with a total division the economic interest of the high risk bankers would be to buy out the retails banks, so they can better flog their products and gain accesses to their funds.
I have no issue with the banking reforms, its seems wholly prudent to me to separate out retail baking from higher risk financial services, however, unless it is international it will fail, unless it is total it will fail; even then it will fail. Not because it is a bad idea but because it is an obscure limit on capitalism which the majority will never concern themselves with in the good times and only partially care about in the bad.
Saturday, 13 August 2011
The economic conflagration and you.
So you dear reader are like me; employed in what seems a prosperous and thriving company, your income has not fallen and if you have any debts the rates you are paying to service them will have most probably dropped. So what is there to fear from the global economic conflagration and why is everyone so upset about it anyway.
There is an excellent book / poem (yeah you read right poem) called the grumbling hive, in this piece the author describes the entire economy like a hive of bees, millions of individuals bees labour and strive and the outcome of all the millions of individual action is the market. I sometime think that the global economic system looks to us as the hive must look to the bee. Oh we sort of know we are a part of it but when we look upon it we see something gigantic disorder and almost wholly detached from us.
So why should us lowly bees care about the giant economic hive. Well let’s start with are employed status. We receive money for are labour, we buy things with this which in turns provides other with their labour and the whole labour circle is entered in. The trouble is we only buy, when we feel it safe to do so. I.e. if consumer confidence is low people don’t like to buy stuff.
Yes, yes, all fairly basic stuff so what causes a recession, well first what is a recession. Every nation calculates the amount of business they generate called GDP, if GDP falls for 6 months (2 quarters) then you’re in a recession and they are common. Now there are many causes for recession; if we look at the most recent it was caused by massive levels of debt.
The current economic conflagration is caused by national government effectively buying this debt from the banks. Nations which were already in debt, incurred more debt to buy these banks and their bonds. Therefore national debt increased and the amount government paid for this debt effectively rested on their credit rating. As you know the better your chances of paying back the cheaper you can borrow; well it’s the same for nations.
So the amount nations had to pay (an amount funded by tax) increase at the same time due to lack of credit in the economy and decrease demand due to falling consumer confidence, unemployment level rose and thus tax take decreased. The worse this paradox was the worse a nations credit rating and the more likely they be unable to pay their debts (some owned to foreign banks) and thus the more likely these banks where to fail and thus the worse consumer confidence and higher loan rates.
This circle of contraction is normally slowed by the birth of new businesses and a expansion of government spending. The expansion of government spending is impossible as they have increasing problems merely servicing there debt and the growth of new business have been effected by the banking crises, which lead to a glut of credit in the system and a lack of consumer demand caused by economic uncertainty and high employment.
There is an excellent book / poem (yeah you read right poem) called the grumbling hive, in this piece the author describes the entire economy like a hive of bees, millions of individuals bees labour and strive and the outcome of all the millions of individual action is the market. I sometime think that the global economic system looks to us as the hive must look to the bee. Oh we sort of know we are a part of it but when we look upon it we see something gigantic disorder and almost wholly detached from us.
So why should us lowly bees care about the giant economic hive. Well let’s start with are employed status. We receive money for are labour, we buy things with this which in turns provides other with their labour and the whole labour circle is entered in. The trouble is we only buy, when we feel it safe to do so. I.e. if consumer confidence is low people don’t like to buy stuff.
Yes, yes, all fairly basic stuff so what causes a recession, well first what is a recession. Every nation calculates the amount of business they generate called GDP, if GDP falls for 6 months (2 quarters) then you’re in a recession and they are common. Now there are many causes for recession; if we look at the most recent it was caused by massive levels of debt.
The current economic conflagration is caused by national government effectively buying this debt from the banks. Nations which were already in debt, incurred more debt to buy these banks and their bonds. Therefore national debt increased and the amount government paid for this debt effectively rested on their credit rating. As you know the better your chances of paying back the cheaper you can borrow; well it’s the same for nations.
So the amount nations had to pay (an amount funded by tax) increase at the same time due to lack of credit in the economy and decrease demand due to falling consumer confidence, unemployment level rose and thus tax take decreased. The worse this paradox was the worse a nations credit rating and the more likely they be unable to pay their debts (some owned to foreign banks) and thus the more likely these banks where to fail and thus the worse consumer confidence and higher loan rates.
This circle of contraction is normally slowed by the birth of new businesses and a expansion of government spending. The expansion of government spending is impossible as they have increasing problems merely servicing there debt and the growth of new business have been effected by the banking crises, which lead to a glut of credit in the system and a lack of consumer demand caused by economic uncertainty and high employment.
Sunday, 7 August 2011
Prophets
I awoke before the lord of host sat before, with all nations bowing before him, he was sitting as a judge before them sorting the wheat from the chaff.
The lord spake:
I have held my judgment from the tribes of the earth for my eon, my son convinced me to hold my hand for they had been saved by him and by the work of my grace but I look upon the tribes and I cry bitter tears, I have freed then, I have saved them and they cut me to the bone with their sins. Look child, look at the wounds they have inflicted upon me.
Two angles spake
“I am Guantanamo and I am Some , we have been exiled from your world, we have been taken and whipped, we were rapped and tortured to satisfy the lust of evil men. No man looks upon us, not even with shame for what they have done to us”.
“Lord what do you want of me, I have innocent against your angelic host. I have never seen them or heard there cries; I am blameless for your injuries for I have kept your laws and venerated your son as you commanded Lord. What do you need of a mortal man like me
And thus the Lord spake.
You have walked in the desert for too long, you have been your own master for too long, you have blinded yourself and left the people to their own fate. You have closed you heart to my word and close your hand to me and I have burned you for it, I have burned you with the flame of the sprit to make you pure, to reform you as my vessel so I give the word to give to my people. You will leave the desert and enter the world of man once more.
I awoke once more in the world of men with the news of the word within me and it burned like the sun within my soul, even if I had not wished to shine this light unto the people I would have or yhr flesh cage would have weekend and burned off.
This is what the lord said unto me:
The lion has fallen, the great beat of the west has finally fallen, it has been rotten from within, it has been poisoned by the Lord. Look oh Israel, look at your great guardian rot and fall, look how he is laid low before the earth because he has forsaken the law.
Oh Israel he roared his fealty, he erected temple unto me but he never worshiped there; he worshiped in shrines to himself. To has erect shine upon shrine to himself, he has made a mockery of the shines he erected unto me, yah he has made them a physical sign of his hearsay and faithlessness .
You oh faithless Israel have placed you faith in bows and horses, in the ore of the earth and not in the maker of the earth. I have lifted my vengeful hand from you and gifted you food so bountiful that no man could go without and yet the poor are still with you the wealthy man still lords over them and you still horde your earth gains as proof of your lack of faith in me.
I will make you weep Israel your lion will be consumed by ants, your neighbours who you have turned into enemies will sweep you into the sea, they will sweep way your insetiouse leaders and blinded priests. Your nation was born in blood and has wallowed like a pig in blood and it will be swept from the face of the earth in blood.
I found my voice and spake thusly.
Lord there our good people, people who care for the poor and house the homeless; there are those who have carried the cross of Christ before them and whom have kept your laws. There are more than fifty good men in every town of every tribe on earth. I beg you lord of Host spare us for these men.
The lords final judgement:
Good men! Do not speak unto me of good men! There are none, they serve evil men; they serve evil forces and corrupt leaders. Age after age after age of the poor and the disposed all caused by the whim of evil men and whom do you blame me. Your good men visit their sins upon me, not only do their sins scare me but they perjure me.
They dress as innocent men but dress there temple to me like whores, there children dress like whores and there whores like children. The good men, the evil men who am I to tell them apart, even the good men worship themselves m, worship their own false wisdom, even these men make my gospel the whore of man. Nay there are no good man, there is no decent man, nay I say.
So my hand will be withdrawn, my spirit will be withdrawn from the world of man least you treat it like my angles and make a whore of it. My judgement will be seen though the tribes who have forsaken me, without the lion they will consume themselves, they will be like savages again, evil will build upon evil, dead body will pile upon dead body. You will see it and proclaim surely the holocaust was but naught compared to this.
Yeah on Israel you will lament at this cannibalism, you will reap the fruits of the evil and greed that you have sown and tended in lieu of my temple and regarding my law. Woe oh Israel as you see your inescapable fate. This is the judgement of the lord.
The lord spake:
I have held my judgment from the tribes of the earth for my eon, my son convinced me to hold my hand for they had been saved by him and by the work of my grace but I look upon the tribes and I cry bitter tears, I have freed then, I have saved them and they cut me to the bone with their sins. Look child, look at the wounds they have inflicted upon me.
Two angles spake
“I am Guantanamo and I am Some , we have been exiled from your world, we have been taken and whipped, we were rapped and tortured to satisfy the lust of evil men. No man looks upon us, not even with shame for what they have done to us”.
“Lord what do you want of me, I have innocent against your angelic host. I have never seen them or heard there cries; I am blameless for your injuries for I have kept your laws and venerated your son as you commanded Lord. What do you need of a mortal man like me
And thus the Lord spake.
You have walked in the desert for too long, you have been your own master for too long, you have blinded yourself and left the people to their own fate. You have closed you heart to my word and close your hand to me and I have burned you for it, I have burned you with the flame of the sprit to make you pure, to reform you as my vessel so I give the word to give to my people. You will leave the desert and enter the world of man once more.
I awoke once more in the world of men with the news of the word within me and it burned like the sun within my soul, even if I had not wished to shine this light unto the people I would have or yhr flesh cage would have weekend and burned off.
This is what the lord said unto me:
The lion has fallen, the great beat of the west has finally fallen, it has been rotten from within, it has been poisoned by the Lord. Look oh Israel, look at your great guardian rot and fall, look how he is laid low before the earth because he has forsaken the law.
Oh Israel he roared his fealty, he erected temple unto me but he never worshiped there; he worshiped in shrines to himself. To has erect shine upon shrine to himself, he has made a mockery of the shines he erected unto me, yah he has made them a physical sign of his hearsay and faithlessness .
You oh faithless Israel have placed you faith in bows and horses, in the ore of the earth and not in the maker of the earth. I have lifted my vengeful hand from you and gifted you food so bountiful that no man could go without and yet the poor are still with you the wealthy man still lords over them and you still horde your earth gains as proof of your lack of faith in me.
I will make you weep Israel your lion will be consumed by ants, your neighbours who you have turned into enemies will sweep you into the sea, they will sweep way your insetiouse leaders and blinded priests. Your nation was born in blood and has wallowed like a pig in blood and it will be swept from the face of the earth in blood.
I found my voice and spake thusly.
Lord there our good people, people who care for the poor and house the homeless; there are those who have carried the cross of Christ before them and whom have kept your laws. There are more than fifty good men in every town of every tribe on earth. I beg you lord of Host spare us for these men.
The lords final judgement:
Good men! Do not speak unto me of good men! There are none, they serve evil men; they serve evil forces and corrupt leaders. Age after age after age of the poor and the disposed all caused by the whim of evil men and whom do you blame me. Your good men visit their sins upon me, not only do their sins scare me but they perjure me.
They dress as innocent men but dress there temple to me like whores, there children dress like whores and there whores like children. The good men, the evil men who am I to tell them apart, even the good men worship themselves m, worship their own false wisdom, even these men make my gospel the whore of man. Nay there are no good man, there is no decent man, nay I say.
So my hand will be withdrawn, my spirit will be withdrawn from the world of man least you treat it like my angles and make a whore of it. My judgement will be seen though the tribes who have forsaken me, without the lion they will consume themselves, they will be like savages again, evil will build upon evil, dead body will pile upon dead body. You will see it and proclaim surely the holocaust was but naught compared to this.
Yeah on Israel you will lament at this cannibalism, you will reap the fruits of the evil and greed that you have sown and tended in lieu of my temple and regarding my law. Woe oh Israel as you see your inescapable fate. This is the judgement of the lord.
Sunday, 31 July 2011
Conservative Vs fascism
My dear brothers the ideals (limited as they our) and the practices of conservative are under attack. They are under attack from the embittered, power crazed neo cons who instead of respecting money they worship it. From the other side a new threat to civilisation has arisen, one so huge that the last time it arose it dimed the light across Europe this threat is the far right.
The far right is are bastard son; the market worshipers like to fain they have nothing to do with us, that they our left wing. This is based on their “left wing” economics. Well whilst I concede there economic stance is not that of the market worshipers this does not make them left wing. The far right is not collectivist nor is it international in any meaningful sense. Indeed the fascist often reduces politics to us or communist dichotomy, or in there modern from it’s either us or the end of western civilisation (effectively the same argument). Given this choice brothers we know, whose side we would fall on but this dichotomy is false.
A nation run on fear and repression is a broken nation; it has failed. Oh it my stagger on as a Zombie nation held together by fear and blood but one day that will not be enough, one day there will be no one left who will fear death because death would be sweeter than life in the zombie nation. On that wonderful day what is left of your nation will consume itself and if you have been co-opted by the almighty state you will live just long enough to see the noose being place around your neck.
So why dose fascism our bastard child cause such harm? Well instead of respecting the central tenants of conservative thought, perverts and destroys them. The first conservative tenant that fascism perverts is love for one’s nation. We promote this because the nation is colourless, it is classless, it is natural to love and to serve and die for. Anyone who is willing to die for his nation is by their blood your fellow in that nation , anyone who suffers or strive to make that nation greater by the meanest of means is your brother under God and under the flag you pertain to serve.
The fascist pervert this clean and saintly love into a hate a hate not for the real enemies of the nation, those who would incur upon her sovereignty and impose upon it but imaginary internal enemies. They make the nation exclusive for a certain type of person, they base nationality not on loyalty or the truth held in the heart of men but on blood but brother blood is cheap, blood is not loyal. Indeed so deeply held is this insanity that they would harm their own nation by killing or expelling people because of their race treason but I say brother no such thing exist. It is treason to weaken your nation through hatred, it is treason to kill those who like you enjoy the simple love of the nation they are the traitors.
The Second tenet of conservative thought is the centrality of God and of the weakness of man. It is the most central of central conservative principles that man is only saveable by the blood of Christ and that he remains unredeemed in this life and only is made perfect in the life here after. Now I am well aware we no longer live in faithful times, however, even the atheist who lives by morals not elected by him can be said to be living in proper accordance with Conservative principles.
The fascist believe that the state and thus man can and should determine its own morality. Man is debase and what sane man would follow morality written by the most debase, the most double dealing aka those obsessed with power and would renounce God to do so. It is clear to any man of good sense knows that any morality coming forth from such a source will be self-serving and only serve to empower the demi-god that has issued it forth. Indeed once the hand of man is freed from the golden chain of God’s law it can never lead to freedom or reason but to fear and anarchy.
The third principle is the idea of balance – Conservative ideals are based on the four pillars see http://piemandmu.blogspot.com/2010/09/principles-of-conservative-thought.html for a longer exploration of these pillars, these pillars keep the state, economic, community and morality interconnected but separate from each other. Fascism destroys these pillars and seeks to replace them with just the one, the pillar of the party. The free pillar of the community is taken over by party organisers, the free pillar of the market is hijacked by central planners and even the church is brought into line.
So what you may ask, where is the harm in this, unity is strength. Well division is weakness but that is not the same. Man wants to live at peace and in freedom, he wants a gap between him and others but the merging of all the pillars of civilisation into the party robs him of that, it robs him of his freedom to think beyond the party, believe beyond the party or even exist beyond it. Indeed you could ask what is the point of existence within such a stifling atmosphere, you could ask your selves what would become of your nation, your community your soul if you give everything over to one man, one ideal one party.
The far right is are bastard son; the market worshipers like to fain they have nothing to do with us, that they our left wing. This is based on their “left wing” economics. Well whilst I concede there economic stance is not that of the market worshipers this does not make them left wing. The far right is not collectivist nor is it international in any meaningful sense. Indeed the fascist often reduces politics to us or communist dichotomy, or in there modern from it’s either us or the end of western civilisation (effectively the same argument). Given this choice brothers we know, whose side we would fall on but this dichotomy is false.
A nation run on fear and repression is a broken nation; it has failed. Oh it my stagger on as a Zombie nation held together by fear and blood but one day that will not be enough, one day there will be no one left who will fear death because death would be sweeter than life in the zombie nation. On that wonderful day what is left of your nation will consume itself and if you have been co-opted by the almighty state you will live just long enough to see the noose being place around your neck.
So why dose fascism our bastard child cause such harm? Well instead of respecting the central tenants of conservative thought, perverts and destroys them. The first conservative tenant that fascism perverts is love for one’s nation. We promote this because the nation is colourless, it is classless, it is natural to love and to serve and die for. Anyone who is willing to die for his nation is by their blood your fellow in that nation , anyone who suffers or strive to make that nation greater by the meanest of means is your brother under God and under the flag you pertain to serve.
The fascist pervert this clean and saintly love into a hate a hate not for the real enemies of the nation, those who would incur upon her sovereignty and impose upon it but imaginary internal enemies. They make the nation exclusive for a certain type of person, they base nationality not on loyalty or the truth held in the heart of men but on blood but brother blood is cheap, blood is not loyal. Indeed so deeply held is this insanity that they would harm their own nation by killing or expelling people because of their race treason but I say brother no such thing exist. It is treason to weaken your nation through hatred, it is treason to kill those who like you enjoy the simple love of the nation they are the traitors.
The Second tenet of conservative thought is the centrality of God and of the weakness of man. It is the most central of central conservative principles that man is only saveable by the blood of Christ and that he remains unredeemed in this life and only is made perfect in the life here after. Now I am well aware we no longer live in faithful times, however, even the atheist who lives by morals not elected by him can be said to be living in proper accordance with Conservative principles.
The fascist believe that the state and thus man can and should determine its own morality. Man is debase and what sane man would follow morality written by the most debase, the most double dealing aka those obsessed with power and would renounce God to do so. It is clear to any man of good sense knows that any morality coming forth from such a source will be self-serving and only serve to empower the demi-god that has issued it forth. Indeed once the hand of man is freed from the golden chain of God’s law it can never lead to freedom or reason but to fear and anarchy.
The third principle is the idea of balance – Conservative ideals are based on the four pillars see http://piemandmu.blogspot.com/2010/09/principles-of-conservative-thought.html for a longer exploration of these pillars, these pillars keep the state, economic, community and morality interconnected but separate from each other. Fascism destroys these pillars and seeks to replace them with just the one, the pillar of the party. The free pillar of the community is taken over by party organisers, the free pillar of the market is hijacked by central planners and even the church is brought into line.
So what you may ask, where is the harm in this, unity is strength. Well division is weakness but that is not the same. Man wants to live at peace and in freedom, he wants a gap between him and others but the merging of all the pillars of civilisation into the party robs him of that, it robs him of his freedom to think beyond the party, believe beyond the party or even exist beyond it. Indeed you could ask what is the point of existence within such a stifling atmosphere, you could ask your selves what would become of your nation, your community your soul if you give everything over to one man, one ideal one party.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)