Divorce. The children suffer so that an adult can demand individual ‘rights’.
Around twelve-thousand-years ago, humans learned to make food come to humans rather than humans going to food. Around twelve-thousand-years ago we changed from a nomadic hunter-gather life to a village community life. This is not very long ago. It is less than one percent of the time that we have existed as humans. As hunter-gatherers, the relationship between female and male was likely to have been multimale-multifemale where males and females each mate with multiple individuals. Thus we were promiscuous. Having watched the monkeys in the trees and various modern human promiscuous behaviour, the sex was likely to have been consensual. I watched a female monkey in Borneo wiggle herself around in front of a male, then what appeared to be consensual copulation occurred on the branch of the tree. It was what would be called “doggie style”. Girls currently pull the same stunt in nightclubs. Some promiscuous girls have told me that they stand and survey the male nightclub patrons and say to themselves: “Who shall I sleep with tonight? — Mmmmm. That one.” They then go and stand or dance in front of ‘that one’ and finish going home with ‘that one’ for a romp. I have talked with nineteen-year-old girls that talk of having slept with twenty-five men. I met one male on the train in California that stated that he had intercourse with fifteen hundred females. “Even on a train”, he said. I met a Canadian in a hostel that told me during ‘man-talk’ that he had ‘slept’ with six thousand women. To talk to, he was a perfectly ordinary male. Under the circumstances, he had no reason to boast. At one point, I was discussing the problem of ‘women banning sex’ in marriage. He came back to talk with me the next evening and asked: “Can they do that?” He was quite shocked that women can enter a marriage contract an then progressively ban sex until it was eliminated from the relationship. He had assumed that he would get married one day and got a shock that a woman would accept a marriage proposal and then restrict sex. Thankfully, very few young men know of this problem mainly because married males condemned to this celibacy do not broadcast the issue. They tolerate in silence. This is the tyranny of marriage from a male point of view. If it became widely known, marriage rates would fall farther. Married males would previously overcome the situation by demanding their “Conjugal Rights”, but the women can now scream: “Rape!” There used to be this term called: “Conjugal Rights” which supported the right to sex within marriage, but it is now largely disregarded. Even though both sign a contract for an arrangement where sex is expected, she can shout: “Rape!”, even though she agreed to the marriage. Women now have legal support to continue the ban on sex. A vindictive wife has the upper hand. The male would prefer not to break the family and tolerates the situation. Common thinking would be: “She has had five children. Not to worry if she goes a bit ‘funny’!” Unfortunately, for the younger girls, this tyranny by middle-aged women over their males is discouraging the males to undertake what is becoming ‘wife slavery’. Scream at this page if you wish, but men will continue to avoid marriage whilst this middle-aged wife tyranny continues. If you want males to accept marriage, they need to be better treated.
A few months ago, a male acquaintance told me that his life had “fallen apart” and his marriage had broken up. When I asked the reason, he said: “I had an affair.” He answered in a tone that implied that he was the party at fault. I asked: “How long had she banned sex?” He looked at me with quizzical eyes and after a prodigal pause answered: “About two years.” I shrugged my shoulders and raised my hands in a gesture that matched my words: “What did she expect?”. Their young child now lives in two houses. He did not hate his wife. The subsequent conversation showed that he still grovelled to her demands. Interestingly, he has now learned to be a middle-aged gigolo. He is all over town being welcomed into different women’s wombs. “Have to go!” He said. “Or I won’t be in the sack tonight.” I gave a cheeky grin and he said: “Andy. At forty-two, I’m getting more sex than I have ever had.” So we have a male getting no sex for two years from a wife with whom he has a legal marriage contract who then gets treated harshly by a court system and then moves on to invites to share the bed with numerous separated wives with whom he has no contract. This male has plenty of sex from ex-wives — except from his own ex-wife. This is lunacy. This male had no problem sleeping with women provided the woman was not his wife! This idiocy leaves a trail of distrust and children living in damaged environments. Why would a man enter a contract?
Individual rights become someone else’s responsibility. Another case of illogic overriding logic. You cannot divorce a child. Laws have been set up to ‘protect’ woman’s rights without considering the child. I don’t actually care too much for the men. Men will bend with the wind. To end the slave rebellion, we need to tidy the laws. For the male, the relationship is voluntary until such time as he signs on the dotted line or ‘oops’, she gets pregnant. He is then financially shackled for life. Males will accept this until it becomes too draconian. Males will happily get married if he is reasonably protected. He gets to believe that he is head of the family whilst she controls his thoughts, actions, and emotions. He thrives under responsibility. His mother ensured that. He well under load like a pack horse. He was trained to be a worker and support wife and family. His mother trained him well. He became emotionless because his mother trained him that way. He was sold a concept of happy marriage under the slogan: “Happy wife — Happy life!” He seeks to please you. His happiness comes from your empleasurement. We are now talking slave abuse and slave rebellion. In my website on ‘Advice for Boyz’, I tell a different story. I tell them that everything is against them but, if they want offspring, this is the ‘shit’ they have to put up with.
I have another acquaintance in his middle age that ‘plays the game’. He goes around, brightens their day, boosts the trade of restaurants and bingo. He says that they ask him for a relationship but he avoids that. He said to me: “No way. Stuff that. Who would get married these days?” The problem is compounded by the existence of false rape accusations against husbands by vindictive wives. A man’s life can be ruined by one malicious lie. But it is not just the man that suffers. The institution of marriage suffers which makes it more difficult to encourage males into marriage. So young women suffer the consequences of males being discouraged from marriage. I am hinting that ‘anti-male’ and ‘pro-female’ legislation and attitude can actually be a negative for females. I have seen similar in other legislation. When the authorities make laws that make it difficult to throw out troublesome tenants, landlords push up rents, charge high bonds and become exceedingly fussy to whom they lease. Laws in favour of tenants did not help tenants. Minimum wage laws can wipe out employment opportunities for some people. Unfair dismissal laws can destroy employment opportunity. Strict ‘equal pay’ rules wiped out employment opportunities for aboriginals in Australia. Many girls say to me that they can’t find males prepared to marry. Some wish to but have given up.
Back to the topic: “The Origins of Marriage”. The hunter-gather scene may have been similar to the small time one-night-stand scene occurring today. Food, a little company, and protection in return for sex. It may have involved the male ‘falling in love’ and hanging around for four years. I have observed that males tend to become infatuated with a girl that attracts them. When a male meets a girl, if the male sleeps with her on the first night, he treats it as a ‘notch on the belt’ and says: “Thanks and goodbye” and gets out as quick as he can. However, if the girl makes the male wait a few days, the male starts to get a ‘caring’ attitude. Shortly afterward, he calls her: “My girlfriend”. The male becomes besotted. An icon image of the girl pops up the front of his mind every twenty minutes during the day. After four years, the male takes a long look at the girl in a puzzled manner and says to himself: “How the fuck did that happen?” Then he has to work out how to live with the girl in a more practical manner. There are a lot of relationship breakups in modern society at four years. Divorces also spike at four years. I don’t know how long this takes in girls because I don’t get the answers I want. I believe it to be eighteen months when the girl starts to be ‘more practical’ about the relationship. She gets irritated that he leaves his coffee cups in strange places, but he is basically alright. She will stick with him. The four-year besotted male is clearly an effect occurring in our reptile brain so I have every reason to believe that is was common for a male to have hung around with the hunter-gatherer girl for four years. This would also match the time taken for pregnancy and the stabilization of the young offspring. Here is a typical comment:
“The best way to avoid becoming a hook-up is to not sleep with the guy unless he makes a bit of a commitment. ... The girls who sleep with me right away and expect me to wife them up always end up disappointed because I simply can’t bring myself to respect them enough.”
One night stands give the wrong message to a male:
Man: “We slept together. After that, we never spoke again and I had no interest in seeing her again.”
Another sorry male:
Man: “Looking back, I regret the one-night-stand. I very much liked the girl. I felt as if I ruined the possibility of a quality relationship by banging her on the first night.”
You need to make the man go through an emotional obstacle course before you bed or wed him to ensure that he is besotted in you enough to last through the rigours of childbirth and child rearing. He must be ‘into you’ in a big way and he has to be controllable by your cunning emotional skill. This requires that he had a good ‘training’ by his mother. A training that made him cower to women, worship women, and be addicted to your sexuality. But more on that later.
I have to elaborate on this as many girls quiz me on this when I mention it. Many girls say to me: “I have just split up with my boyfriend of four years.” Four years is is a very common timespan for a breakup. I have clear memories of the change in my thinking at the four-year mark. This would be why, in the old days, the parents would tap the male on the shoulder after a couple of years, and say: “You have been going out for a couple of years now. Don’t you think you ought to get married?” Friends would ask: “When are you getting married?” Society, thus, put pressure on the couple (the man) to get married. The solemnity of the big day with the presence of the extended family and friends, put pressure on the male to make the marriage work when he went through the above four-year practicality test. He had to work out how to make the relationship work after his brain ceased to be besotted. The relationship was for the benefit of the whole society not just for his amusement. This is why society gets involved in the marriage. Stable families are needed to bring up the next generation into a stable society. This is why it is tradition rather than biology. Sex is biology whilst marriage is a tradition. Marriage was an invention that enabled civilisation. No families — no civilisation.
Marriage is much bigger than the sexual appetite of the besotted young couple. You exist because your grandfather had the ‘hots’ for your grandmother. He wanted to ‘dip his wick’ with the most beautiful girl that he had met. You are the result of three minutes of passion. You are the result of an orgasm. You are the grandchild in the Beatles song: “When I’m Sixty Four”
Unfortunately for you, adults are instructed to “Butt out!” of your affairs. The young are told that these are new times and you should forget the old ways of your grandparents. A bit like Communism. Throw out the old order. Screw who you want. Forget families. Rely on your friendly state alone. Ignore your religion. (but only if you are an idol worshiping Christian.) We have ‘communism late’ adapted for democracy where you choose a government that supports the debt banking system and is riddled with ‘lobbyists’ with deep corporate pockets ‘assisting’ politicians with their decision making and their campaign funds. Oh so generous!
You need to re-engage with your happy smiling grandmother to learn how she got your grandfather over the line using every sneaky trick in the book. How she got him to work six days a week to buy the house she wanted and how she finished up with ten children and forty grandchildren and maybe some great grandchildren. You need your grandmother to teach you how to manipulate men with a smile. She does not argue with him and he does everything she wants and more. She did it all with a smile, a hug, and a sandwich and she never had to work in a depressing office. You need your grandmother’s skills to tame the man.
Divorces have a peek at about the four-year time. I give a few statistics:
A five-hundred couple survey by Professor Lawrence Kurek found that couples experienced a decline in the quality of their marriage in the first four years. The perceived quality stabilized. It then declined again around year seven. This also supports a common observation with a title: “Seven-year-itch.” [1] I give you some random quotes so that you can weigh up the situation. Your relationship is likely to go stale at four years. As a girl, you will have to be tolerant as he phases from a state of besottedness to his acceptance of you on a more practical basis. He may stray in any number of interpretations of the word ‘stray’. If he does stray, he will very likely wake up that you were the best thing he ever had. He may think that there are better opportunities elsewhere and he will realize that the opportunities are elusive. He will then come running back. So, sit tight and wait a few months. Do not do anything stupid like sleeping with other men, particularly ones that he knows.
“After four years together, he left and I never heard from him again.”
Another:
“Those who have had a relationship break up after 5+ years, why? Why did it work for so long and then suddenly just...?”
And another:
“Me and my boyfriend of six and a half years just broke up.”
And another:
“This month, I broke up with my partner of five years. I’m twenty-four so that’s almost a quarter of my life.”
And another:
“Five years and it all literally went away in a day.”
And another:
“My EX now left me and I could not figure out why.”
And another:
“We met when we were in our late teens. We were very much in love and had a great relationship. The last year or so of our relationship we both began to realize that we as individuals were stunted in our personal developments because we were holding on to a relationship that had lost its spark.”
And another:
“Once we broke up he made all of the changes I had been begging for years for him to make ... but it was too late.”
Silly girl. It wasn’t too late. You did not sit in the wings waiting for him to come back on his knees begging you for servility. Another:
“Even if someone does cheat, that’s rarely a spur of the moment thing. It usually starts when one person is unhappy and their eye starts to wander etc. etc.”
This is the school of hard knocks otherwise known as ‘life’. It is often in the late teens and early twenties, when the male is low on the desirability scale. Unfortunately, it takes a male towards his more desirable years, and takes a girl towards a position of less desirability. Girls are highly desirable at eighteen and significantly less desirable at twenty-eight. Males are obnoxious at eighteen and very desirable at twenty-eight. Male desirability at twenty-eight is not a male-generated skill, it is because a big range of girls find twenty-eight-year-old males desirable. Whereas, a big age-range of males find eighteen-year-old girls particularly desirable. Do the maths — get him knotted before he becomes desirable to other girls. Actually, get him knotted before he realised that he is attractive to a wide range of girls. It is why they got people married young. Male attractiveness rises from eighteen to twenty-eight, whilst a girl’s attractiveness falls between the ages of eighteen and twenty-eight.
The ‘biological clock’ starts earlier than you are led to believe. You might as well say it starts at fifteen. I am a sixty-six-year-old male and I have only had three proposals from girls in their twenties this year! Girls will be pushing to get any interest, let alone proposals, past twenty-eight.
If you do a web-search for ‘I just broke up with my girlfriend’, you will find ‘four years’ as a common timespan. You must be very careful at the four-year mark. In your web-search, you will find quite a few want her back, so, hang fire, wait a while, and let him back in on a new set of conditions. I can’t be explicit about how long but one or two months sounds sensible, but it may be more. Your female intuition far surpasses my male logic. I only learn this stuff by getting ‘down and dirty’ with conversations with switched on girls. They still lead me on and confuse me with my own logic all these years later. Although, I invite them to do so, because it is such fun being emotionally befuddled by a smart female. I think that I emotionally communicate that I am strong in character but weak to their willy ways. It may be a year or two of living apart before he comes back on bended knees. It should then be a quick trip to the altar where he will swear to a lifetime of subservience. Having been trained in responsibility, he should stick to his word provided he is not mistreated. As long as he gets a bit of sex now and again, a hug or two and his ego is stroked, he will follow obediently. He will even believe that he runs the show. The show, of course, is that he is a wonderful husband that looks after his wife in every way. And sex, by the way, is not what he showed you in a porn video where a girl spent five minutes servicing his fantasies. Sex is him taking you to heaven and back. In my website on ‘Advice for Boyz’, I explain how to satisfy a woman — with the hint that he will get more sex. In reality, he is servicing you. The techniques are explained later.
It takes work to maintain a relationship. You both need to work on yourselves and your relationship to keep it alive. It will go through stale stages. You need to work on communication. Communication is not just words. Words are the most useless part of communication. Rub your hand across his backside as you walk past him in the kitchen. When out with friends, always go across to touch him every few minutes. Grow together, not apart. If you go find another man, you could be in the same predicament in another four years. You need to win this man back, but he needs to make his mind up. Just keep being your magic self. Do not turn on him because he is being ‘difficult’. It is biology that is causing the problem, not disrespect for you. Sorry honey, you have to suck dirt for a while. This girl talks about change in the relationship:
“I met my partner when I was nineteen. I’m thirty-one now and everything’s still brilliant. We’ve both changed a lot but we’ve both changed in the same ways so it’s all good!”
And this one is a rebirth after four years:
“It happens! My girlfriend and I were together for about four years and we split up in January of this year. Took some time off and came back at it a few months later. We’re stronger than we’ve ever been and communication has increased exponentially. We still have things we’re working through but the split was the catalyst we both needed in order to realize that we didn’t want to be without the other and make the changes to facilitate that.”
Read that as ‘he could not bear to be without her.’ and ‘He got rid of the bad habits she did not like.’ He buckled to her wishes. Here is a girl waiting for him to come back after the breakup:
“been six months and neither one of us will reach out to the other. It takes a lot of self-control to not call him up, though!”
The clever girl is playing the game. He has to come back to her on her terms — on his knees, of course. Breaking up is tough. Make it a soft landing for your boyfriend. Do not make it impossible to re-kindle if you change your mind later on or if he changes his mind later on. Spending some time apart may enable a new start under a changed mental atmosphere. (i.e. on your terms.) You may even need to move out for a while to see if he comes running back to you. You now know why he is going through this mental upheaval over the relationship. His reptilian brain and his neocortex are having a right royal fight and it is tearing him apart. He is readjusting his biology. If you loved him, it is a lot easier than starting the same procedure all over again. Refrain from jumping into bed with any man that winks at you. There will be a lot of men trying because the male knows that girls in this situation are an easy lay. Refrain from jumping into bed full stop. Keep in touch with mutual friends so that the emotional tug strings are tearing him apart inside. You can accidentally be seen to further tear him apart inside. Live nearby, singly as possible and be ready to put on a big smile when he wanders back to you with his head between his knees. You are well onto grandchildren on the knees on the Isle of Wight. Don’t worry, your grandmother used the same tactics on your grandfather. She may even have ‘accidentally’ got pregnant and all hell broke loose that ‘he’ had caused the problem by his wicked ways and that he should cover for his ‘wicked ways’ by taking her to the altar. You never realized that your sweet ‘innocent’ grandmother was that sneaky. Check the wedding and birth dates. But do not tell any male.
Look at the smiles in the picture above! How often do you see smiles like that? Real smiles are not usually captured on camera.
So back to the chapter topic. Pair formation may have occurred in hunter-gatherer times with strong loving bonds. Consent may have been consensual. Mutual help was likely. I don’t believe that club-wielding men were marauding having their wicked way with force and dragging women around by their hair. Small hunting groups with a level of decorum seem more likely. The level of exciting facial communication that we are capable of suggests that the relationships could have been extremely exciting. Excessive promiscuity may have caused devastation through disease. Current promiscuity can only occur because hospitals fix the ‘nasty little diseases’.
Our hunter-gatherer ancestors lived in small hunting groups of possibly around twelve adults plus children, during which time they spread across the world. We developed features that made us different from other creatures. We appear to have gotten on well with other groups of humans. We have a very high reliance on information passed from the previous generation of adults rather than traits handed to us through DNA. This enables rapid adaption to different environments. We did not need to wait a million years to become hairy, we just stole the skins off other animals to keep warm. We also rely heavily on the support of the fellow members of the group. Thus, the current trend to demand individual rights does not match the procedures that made us a successful species. We have always relied on cooperation for survival. This includes cooperation for food acquisition, food allocation, childcare, land or accommodation allocation or maintenance, and transportation. We have always relied on cooperation and learning. It is quite likely that we punished those that did not comply with expected normal behaviour. Kinship has been essential to our survival. We did not wander around as individuals. We lived in clans which would be closer to our extended families. The closest today would be an extended family living under one roof. In these groups, either the recently matured females moved off to another tribe or the younger males moved off to live with a distant tribe. My money is on the males moving as they are natural wanderers. If you watch the way that grandmothers, mothers, and daughters work together in the extended family, it seems possible that this grouping was the core. Males die off a bit sooner. Fresh males are allowed to move in if they behave themselves, and they are rewarded with plentiful nooky. You can see this as mother and daughter gang up against a father and how males tell ‘mother-in-law’ jokes. No one makes father-in-law jokes. He is just a harmless nice old bloke. The mother-in-law grabs her husband by the ear and waggles him if he steps out of line. Or she whispers: “Tut. Tut.” and he instantly shuts up. You can watch it happen at family dinners or in restaurants.
At a family gathering, have a look at the social dynamics. Males acknowledge each other, but the women work together to keep the female domination in place whilst giving a façade that males are in charge.
The next puzzle is how many sexual partners did the average hunter-gatherer female have and how many partners did the average male have? Was it as many as the current promiscuous youth have? Were they having nooky with anybody that walked through the forest? If not, where did the habits of the current promiscuous youth come from? If our ancestors lived in small hunting groups, they had limited access to suitable mates. As their hunting skills had to be passed from generation to generation, it is likely their cohabitation arrangements were also similarly controlled. I don’t think they were going through as many bed partners as some of the youth at present. Reports seem to suggest that males and females were of equal status in hunter-gatherer societies and stayed that way until farming altered the balance. Farming also caused us to eat lower quality food. It is highly likely that institutionalized pair bonding (marriage) occurred in early human life. The mechanics of this may have varied significantly between different regions. The arrangements appear to vary from arranged partnerships to unregulated courtship. The upbringing of the children may have been a community system where every child was considered to be a child of the group. There are still discussions about polygamy, polygyny, and polyandry. These terms refer to the number of spouses that an individual may have. Although it does not refer to the number of mates that an individual may have over a lifetime. As described by ‘The Grammarist’, polygamy refers to the practice of having more than one spouse. It is broader than polygyny, which refers to situations where one man has multiple wives, and polyandry, which refers to one woman with multiple husbands. It may be that humans have never had the level of promiscuity now present. It may be that promiscuity could not survive because of ‘nasty little diseases’.
As we became civilized, the tendency was toward ‘one man one woman’. In Genesis, God created Adam and Eve, which encouraged one man and one woman, and suggests that the two become ‘one flesh’, although Jacob takes two wives and two concubines with no suggestion of illegitimacy. ‘One flesh’ implies that they form one family in an unbreakable tie. In the Old Testament, God lays down laws and regulates who men can take as a wife — not a niece or a sister, but he did not prohibit polygamy.
With the arrival of Jesus and the support three centuries later by the institutionalized religion of Christianity, monogamy became mainstream. Christianity developed within the Roman Empire and the Romans were fiercely monogamous. The Old Testament permits polygamy. Christianity moved from being a Hebrew sect, to being an entirely separate and independent religion within the Roman Empire. It was a religion adopted primarily by Gentiles and then became the Roman Empire’s official religion. The English word ‘gentile’ derives from the Roman word ‘gentilis’. The term refers to a person who is not a Jew or a person from a nation that is not Jewish. The term Jew referred to those who were members or descendants of the Kingdom of Judah. The first time the term Jew is used in the bible is in Esther 2:5, which was written a little before 400 years BC. In the days of Christ, anyone who was not a Jew was considered a Gentile. Bible Study Tools describes Gentiles (Hebrew: Singular: goy. Plural: goyim.), meaning in general all nations except the Jews. Thus Christianity developed amongst the nations and people that were not Jewish. Christianity took hold in places where the people had not originated from the Jerusalem district. Smith’s Bible Dictionary describes Gentiles in this manner: “All the people who were not Jews were so called by them, being aliens from the worship, rites, and privileges of Israel. The word was used contemptuously by them.” In other words, the Gentiles were held in contempt. In old testament times, the Gentiles came under separate rules in a partial form of apartheid. So, whatever the origins and status of Jesus, Christianity developed amongst non-Jews. Christianity was not Jews converting to Christianity. It was non-Jewish persons converting to Christianity. This contempt for ‘Gentiles’ lives on today in the teachings of the current rabbis.
Rabbi Yitzhak Shapiro 2010: “If we kill a Gentile who has sinned or has violated one of the seven commandments - because we care about the commandments - there is nothing wrong with the murder.” [2]
Rabbis Shteinman and Kanievsky: “getting close to Gentiles is a sore evil”
Shahak: “ Jesus will be punished in hell by being immersed in boiling excrement.
Jewish tradition teaches pious Jews to burn copies of the New Testament and curse the mothers of the dead when passing non-Jewish cemeteries.
Shahak highlights the famous passage from Leviticus commanding Jews to ‘love thy neighbor as thyself’ and mentions that, according to rabbinic interpretation, ‘thy neighbor’ refers only to Jews. ... one who murders a Jew is subject to the death penalty, one who murders a non-Jew is not.” [3]
Prime Minister Menachem Begin: “Our race is the Master Race. We are divine gods on this planet. We are as different from the inferior races as they are from insects. In fact, compared to our race, other races are beasts and animals, cattle at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. Our destiny is to rule over the inferior races. Our earthly kingdom will be ruled by our leader with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet and serve us as our slaves.” [4]
So gentiles including Christians were despised by people of Jewish faith. There has never been a healing as can be seen from the above quotes. There is no Judeo-Christian joint value commonality.
Here is an excerpt written by:
Winston Churchill 1920: “From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognisable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last, this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.” [5]
Much of the Old Testament is anti-Gentile. The Old Testament must be discarded. Being anti-Semitic is mistakenly believed to be the same as being anti-Jewish. Semitic and Jewish are quite different things. Semitic people are Semites which includes Jews and Arabs. Anti-Semitism is a misnomer. The hidden history of Bolshevik Russia may become the reality of America.
Leo Strauss: (Jewish) “Our worst enemies are called “anti-semites,” a word which I shall never use, and which I regard as almost obscene. I think that if we are sensible we abolish it from our usage. I said in a former speech here that it was coined by some German or French pedant: I smelled them. But then I learned, a few weeks ago, that it was coined by a German pedant, a fellow called Marr. The reason he coined it was very simple. ‘Anti-Semitism’ means hatred of Jews. Why not call it as we Jews call it? It is rish’us, ‘viciousness.’ ‘Hatred of Jews’ is perfectly intelligible. ‘Anti-Semitism’ was coined in a situation in which people could no longer justify their hatred of Jews by the fact that Jews are not Christians. They had to find another reason; and since the nineteenth century was almost as proud of science as the twentieth century, the reason had to be scientific. Science proves that the western world consists of two races, the Aryan race and the Semitic race; and therefore, by speaking of anti-Semitism, our enemies could claim that they acted on a spiritual principle, not from mere hatred. The difficulty is that the Arabs are also Semites. One of my Arab friends was occasionally asked in the Chicago suburbs, ‘you are, of course, an anti-Semite.’ and he would say, ‘I cannot be that.’ ”
We should be asking questions about anti-Gentilism and anti-Christianism. The Babylonian Talmud teaches that Jesus is in hell “sitting forever in boiling excrement.” One popular meme has the following words:
Yet, no one mentions the 66 million Christians killed in Bolshevik Russia.
Christians are easily fooled because they believe that Christ’s love for humanity would guide the affairs of state. Decency does guide things — until Satan intervenes. It is impossible for Christians to believe that such devious mechanisms would have been set up in Bolshevik Russia that destroyed the basis of civilization by destroying the family unit, putting the females to work, and murdering up to sixty-six million Christians.
We need to adjust Christianity to realize that evil can occur when we are not on our guard in a country based on decency. Jesus taught common decency but was overtaken by the forces of evil who nailed him to a scaffold. Jesus stood up against authority when authority was in the wrong. He was a big-time troublesome rebel who got nailed to a scaffold for trumped-up offences because he stood against corruption of money and morals by the Pharisees, who were colluding with the Roman occupation. The Romans gave the support to the oppressive and corrupt rule by the Pharisees. Just like those that control American politics from behind the scenes support corrupt foreign governments that oppress the people.
We must be aware of the forces that split our society and divert it from decency. Belief in religion must be accomplished by some intelligence. Common-sense is needed.